The entire IDF armor brigade equipped with Trophy active protection system

[500]

Rosoboronexport

Link. I have its brochure there is nothing about 12.7 mm.

It does not say anything, there is no proof, and it was not shown. You still do not understand how to make comparisons, and what actually are technical specifications.

It says it protects against tank HEAT rounds. Something that Drozd cant do.

First to compare, information has to be of value and have a meaning, what you do is compare stupid advertisement which says nothing to official information from goverment trials, not favorable to you.

Spare me of your nonsense. You dont have trials information. We both relly only on advertistments.

From Drozd official tests it was shown it intercept targets from 70-700m/s, this is a valid technical specification. From Trophy there is nothing, so it's not known what kind of targets it is able to intercept.

Second, assuming Trophy can intercept Heat rounds, this would not imply that it will give a reliable protection. From Drozd tests there were given figures of 0.7 success rate against RPGs, and 1 against missiles. There is no information at all about Trophy, so it cannot be assured that it will actually protect against Heat rounds.

These are rubbish numbers. Pentagon made 30 tests of Trophy and it showed more than 0.95 effectiveness.

And is dangerous for everyone nearby as this and this other image show: http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/3828/t12ap.jpg

Spare me of your MS Paint works.

And this again is non relevant advertisement junk. Today's systems automatically detect the location of the launcher, calculate necessary gun rotation and elevation to inmediately eliminate the threat. Nothing of this is realised in "modern" Trophy. It is all up to the crew to interpret the location and to initiate all the procedure, which is a slow manual process with no guarantee of effective counteraction. It is up to you to take advertisement seriously...

All of it is realized in Trophy, I showed you the source. And its not realized in Drozd. No Russian tank have such system.

This is very ignorant and empty statement.

You lost 5000 we lost 29. Thats fact. You lost over hundred tanks to RPGs, we lost zero.

IS-4 was a continuation of earlier series, rroduction lasted only a few years ceasing before 1950, while T-54 was seen as perspective concept, IS series concept got archaic after WW2 and was not continued, neither in the rest of the world.

Fact: IS-3 was based on rich WW2 experience.
Fact: IS-3 had thick sides.
Conclusion: side protection is very important in classic warfare.

Fact: Tiger was based on rich WW2 experience.
Fact: Tiger had thick sides.
Conclusion: side protection is very important in classic warfare.

And facts that even you cant deny:

Side protection is very important in urban warfare.
Side protection is very important in LIC and COIN warfare.

The only way to provide side protection against modern threats is APS. And Trophy is first APS which is doing that.

From there they would hardly get anything modern, less in significant quantities.

There are plenty of modern RPGs gear there.

 

[mnd]

Link. I have its brochure there is nothing about 12.7 mm.

It is from Rosoboronexport. Do not have it now, you can find for yourself.

It says it protects against tank HEAT rounds. Something that Drozd cant do.

As there are no specifications and lack of data, there is no proof at all that Trophy will protect against HEAT, only empty statements.

Spare me of your nonsense. You dont have trials information. We both relly only on advertistments.

I provided official information coming from trials with specific figures showing effectiveness, 0.7 RPGs and 1 against ATGMs, among other technical information. You are discussing with nothing but empty statements. If you do not provide figures for comparison then you have nothing to argue with.

These are rubbish numbers. Pentagon made 30 tests of Trophy and it showed more than 0.95 effectiveness.

Where are details (RPG ? ATGM ? Tank projectiles ?)
Where are specific technical figures, such as I provided ? Where it proves anything about supposed ability of intercepting HEAT ? In no way you can base your claim in that, it says nothing. Provide figures, not your deductions or fantasies.

Spare me of your MS Paint works.

I have real image showing it's actual "efficiency". You have baseless statement.

All of it is realized in Trophy, I showed you the source. And its not realized in Drozd. No Russian tank have such system.

Source is advertisement which says nothing of what I described. In modern systems there is automatized response against threat, this is present for example in Shtora and many others. Trophy does nothing at all, responsive is entirely from the part of the crew, slow, manual. It is up to you to believe in stupid advertisement and fantasize.

You lost 5000 we lost 29. Thats fact. You lost over hundred tanks to RPGs, we lost zero.

What pointless comparison, you could also compare with WW2, equally valid.

Fact: IS-3 was based on rich WW2 experience.
Fact: IS-3 had thick sides.
Conclusion: side protection is very important in classic warfare.

Fact: Tiger was based on rich WW2 experience.
Fact: Tiger had thick sides.
Conclusion: side protection is very important in classic warfare.

Fact: There is evolution in warfare as well as in sophystication of armament.
Fact: Such tank concept got archaic after WW2 and was rejected by all countries. IS series themselves were discontinued and abandoned shortly after conflict. You can make your ignorant deductions, but not use them as argument. I provided technical article on the subject.

And facts that even you cant deny:

Side protection is very important in urban warfare.
Side protection is very important in LIC and COIN warfare.

It is important for urban warfare, and there are many ways of improvement (ERA, add on armour, etc) But when Drozd was designed they did not even considered such conflicts, it was designed purely for conventional manouver warfare so it has nothing to do there. For urban warfare you have also to consider collateral damage, and Trophy is not safe as proved.

For conventional warfare only a specific angle range is in need to be protected, because according to doctrine those are the most probable to be hit, while rest is not. I provided with an article describing all of that in detail.

The only way to provide side protection against modern threats is APS. And Trophy is first APS which is doing that.

Throphy is not fully suitable for urban warfare, while for 3 decades older conventional conflicts existed analogous Drozd. But today Trophy, protecting only against some cumulative threats is not suitable, Drozd was, but that was for decades older warfare.

There are plenty of modern RPGs gear there.

Sure, figure of less than 1 % of Trophy advertisement describes that better, than for Trophy itself.

 

[500]

It is from Rosoboronexport. Do not have it now, you can find for yourself.

No there is nothing about 12.7 mm.

As there are no specifications and lack of data, there is no proof at all that Trophy will protect against HEAT, only empty statements.

You dont have data on Drozd tests, only Rosoboronexport's add.
In case of Trophy there is a big number of interception videos + Pentagon test data.

I provided official information coming from trials with specific figures showing effectiveness, 0.7 RPGs and 1 against ATGMs, among other technical information. You are discussing with nothing but empty statements. If you do not provide figures for comparison then you have nothing to argue with.

No you provided your hallucinations.

Where are details (RPG ? ATGM ? Tank projectiles ?)
Where are specific technical figures, such as I provided ? Where it proves anything about supposed ability of intercepting HEAT ? In no way you can base your claim in that, it says nothing. Provide figures, not your deductions or fantasies.

It says ALL HEAT threats. What other details do u need.

I have real image showing it's actual "efficiency". You have baseless statement.

No you have MS Paint nonsense and u also jhave lack of knowledge in MEFP.

Source is advertisement which says nothing of what I described. In modern systems there is automatized response against threat, this is present for example in Shtora and many others. Trophy does nothing at all, responsive is entirely from the part of the crew, slow, manual. It is up to you to believe in stupid advertisement and fantasize.

Trophy is also automatic.

Shtora does not locate source of fire, it can only detect the azimuth of laser radiation. Thats all. Only very small number of threats. And Drozd does not detect at all.

What pointless comparison, you could also compare with WW2, equally valid.

Both German and Soviet WW2 experience show that side protection is important.

Fact: There is evolution in warfare as well as in sophystication of armament.

Of course. In WW2 u could protect sides with extra armor. Today the only way to protect the sides is APS. And Trophy is the first APS who does that job.

It is important for urban warfare, and there are many ways of improvement (ERA, add on armour, etc) But when Drozd was designed they did not even considered such conflicts, it was designed purely for conventional manouver warfare so it has nothing to do there. For urban warfare you have also to consider collateral damage, and Trophy is not safe as proved.

Drozd was a primitive junk for testing. They could not make a normal APS with 360 grad protection. If they could they were making it.

Sure, figure of less than 1 % of Trophy advertisement describes that better, than for Trophy itself.

Trophy accurately fires MEF projectiles towards the missile.

 

[mnd]

No there is nothing about 12.7 mm.

I provided figures already, search by yourself or ask anyone who knows.

You dont have data on Drozd tests, only Rosoboronexport's add.
In case of Trophy there is a big number of interception videos + Pentagon test data.

Specific figures were provided, in goverment tests, which are used to describe system effectiveness.

In case of Trophy there is no data at all, only baseless advertisements.

No you provided your hallucinations.

These were actual figures, not your empty statements or advertisements. Meanwhile you argue with nothing but with your words, which have no value at all.

It says ALL HEAT threats. What other details do u need.

It means nothing. These advertisement has the same value as other jewels as Trophy, "the first operational APS" lol.

If there are no figures for speed range of targets, showing what targets it is capable to intercept, and corresponding effectiveness figures (probablity) as there are for Drozd, there is no argument.

For example if HEAT interception will have an effectiveness probability of 0.2, this cannot be considered as reliable protection. How do you know ?

It is simple, want to prove, and to compare, bring figures, otherwise you have no grounds and your words against proven facts.

No you have MS Paint nonsense and u also jhave lack of knowledge in MEFP.

I do not believe in empty statements.
You base Trohpy's effectiveness just on silly advertisements with no explanations, I refuted them with image showing it's working method.

Trophy is also automatic.

There is nothing automatic on it, it is said in your advertisement. If you want to contradict everybody then describe the working method in detail.

Trophy is manual response which can be too much delay for such situations.

Shtora does not locate source of fire, it can only detect the azimuth of laser radiation. Thats all. Only very small number of threats. And Drozd does not detect at all.

Shtora detects azimuth, direction of threat, automatically gives signal indicating necessary rotation and gun elevation for rapid fire and neutralisation. Such automation is present on modern APS, but not on Trophy.

Both German and Soviet WW2 experience show that side protection is important.

Sure, you know everything in detail

Of course. In WW2 u could protect sides with extra armor. Today the only way to protect the sides is APS. And Trophy is the first APS who does that job.

Today side protection is necessary only in unconventional conflicts, and only against cumulative threats. Trophy is not the only system that gives such protection.

Drozd was a primitive junk for testing. They could not make a normal APS with 360 grad protection. If they could they were making it.

Drozd was actually in service, the first of such system in the world. You are clearly not familiar with soviet APS developement history.

Trophy accurately fires MEF projectiles towards the missile.

You can see what collateral damage it causes in advertisement images which I showed.

 

[500]

I provided figures already, search by yourself or ask anyone who knows.


Specific figures were provided, in goverment tests, which are used to describe system effectiveness.

In case of Trophy there is no data at all, only baseless advertisements.

I provide official links. You say its propaganda.

You cant provide any official links and want us to believe u.

But even you cant deny the fact that Drozd does not protect the most vulnerable parts and is a collateral manage disaster.

 

[david39553]

Its not operational.

500 can trophy stop rpg 30 ?

 

[500]

500 can trophy stop rpg 30 ?

RPG 30 fires small decoy first before the real round. I think that u can make a simple software modification: when radar see two rounds coming from same direction with very little delay, u should tell the system to intercept the second round and not the first.

 

[Bratva]

RPG 30 fires small decoy first before the real round. I think that u can make a simple software modification: when radar see two rounds coming from same direction with very little delay, u should tell the system to intercept the second round and not the first.

I have seen videos of APS engagement in ongoing conflict. One question arises in mind, the ATGM intercepted very close to tank, doesn't exploding explosives causes damage to skin of tank ?

 

[Adir-mz]

I have seen videos of APS engagement in ongoing conflict. One question arises in mind, the ATGM intercepted very close to tank, doesn't exploding explosives causes damage to skin of tank ?

The shards of the ATGM cause zero damage to skin of tank after it's intercepted.

 

[Informant]

RPG 30 fires small decoy first before the real round. I think that u can make a simple software modification: when radar see two rounds coming from same direction with very little delay, u should tell the system to intercept the second round and not the first.

Wouldnt the decoy be in the same flight path as the main projectile?

 

[Natan]

Out of Trophy and Iron dome, which one is better? On paper Iron dome looks more promising as it could intercept Kinetic energy rounds.

You mean Iron Fist, not Iron Dome.

Wouldnt the decoy be in the same flight path as the main projectile?

Are you suggesting that the decoy would physically protect the main projectile?

 

[Informant]

You mean Iron Fist, not Iron Dome.


Are you suggesting that the decoy would physically protect the main projectile?

If the tank is stationary, wouldn't the decoy be in the same flight path? Or can the Trophy system engage multiple targets simultaneously?

 

[Natan]

If the tank is stationary, wouldn't the decoy be in the same flight path? Or can the Trophy system engage multiple targets simultaneously?

Here you go, the decoy and the main projectile are in the same path. Trophy ignores the decoy and attacks the main projectile:

 

[Informant]

Here you go, the decoy and the main projectile are in the same path. Trophy ignores the decoy and attacks the main projectile:
View attachment 44922

What if it's exactly i straight line with the rocket dispenser/housing/launch system?

My original query as regarding if it's a head on approach to the trophy rocket system?

 

[Natan]

What if it's exactly i straight line with the rocket dispenser/housing/launch system?

My original query as regarding if it's a head on approach to the trophy rocket system?

Imagine it in 3D and you will see that a a head on approach to the Trophy APS is very unlikely. It has be not just straight line to the Trophy, but also the same height above the ground.

In order to have a head on approach the shooter must be able to hit a target of the size of a standard notepaper with an unguided RPG.