Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

-77689755705287080691.jpg

-7768975570528708069.jpg

Ural_Taifun_V-day_parade_Yekaterinburg.jpg

Kamaz_Taifun_at_trials.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Shoulder Launched Anti-tank How effective?

This is a discussion on Shoulder Launched Anti-tank How effective? within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Does any one know the penetration cpability of a Javelin...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 12th, 2010   #16
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
T.C.P da Devil's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dhaka,Bangladesh
Posts: 595
Threads:
Does any one know the penetration cpability of a Javelin
T.C.P da Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #17
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,131
Threads:
It would be a lot more helpful to keep the subject in the thread already designated for it. I'm going to merge this with the other thread.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #18
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 19
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.C.P da Devil View Post
Does any one know the penetration cpability of a Javelin
This is unimportant cause it is a top-attack missile.
If it hits the target it is gone.

But this is Off topic.
A Javelin is also a ATGM.
And one missile cost about 80000$.
Saiga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #19
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
Spetsznaz's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 220
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmahawk View Post
RPO RPO-Z Schmel Systems ( YouTube- Broadcast Yourself. ) are not designed to be an anti armor weapon, best way to describe them in simplest terms is a flame thrower in a can.

Thus if a tank is shot with a Shmel and it starts burning this can damage a tank, however, a thermobaric explosion outside of a sealed armoured vehicle is not likely to do much damage to its occupants.

however, if someone were to leave the hatch open and a round were to go into the tank and detonate inside or someone managed to shoot a round inside the compartment of an APC and it were to detonate inside yes that would be death for the crew.

RPO type questions is more of an anti personell/infantry thread type question.
Plas

Cool video of the RPG 3x, its in russian, pause at 1:06 to see the damage to a steel plate
YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.

Wow I speak Russian and I have to say that the RPG-32 sounds like its going to blow the AT4 and the Javelin out of the water

The whole thing on how it fires more than one warhead to make penetration even better is amazing
________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #20
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 19
Threads:
Well i don't thing so.
It could certainly not outperform the Javelin, but that is also an other weapon class.
And i would also not rely on such TV-shows.
They love to overplay a little bit
It is a good weapon but in fact the RPG28 is a better one.
Saiga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2010   #21
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
Spetsznaz's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 220
Threads:
This may seem kind of stupid, but the whole firing two warheads, one for the explosion and one for the penetration in a split second, is that a new thing?
________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2010   #22
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant General
kato's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,730
Threads:
Tandem warheads were introduced in the last round of Cold War developments, i.e. usually developed in the mid- to late 80s and deployed in the early to mid 90s. Usually in heavier systems first, first systems in the West to introduce them were TOW-2A in 1987 and Eryx, developed in the 1983-85 (and deployed in 1993). The SU introduced the PG-7VR in 1988, and 9M113M around 1992-93, Western Europe got the Milan-2T around the same time (though i think most went straight to Milan 3 three years later).
For the most part, tandem warheads - other than perhaps PG-7VR, Eryx and TOW-2A - weren't really widespread until the late 90s, when other systems were upgraded. And even those three would have been "rare" at the time.
kato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2010   #23
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
Spetsznaz's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 220
Threads:
So are all future Anti-tank rocket launchers going to have 2 warhead capability, or are they going to stick to the good old one shoot tube?
________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2010   #24
Junior Member
Private First Class
plasmahawk's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 94
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spetsznaz View Post
So are all future Anti-tank rocket launchers going to have 2 warhead capability, or are they going to stick to the good old one shoot tube?
tandem / warheads can fit into a single tube,

good ol tube is just a tube, it matters what you put into the tube, anti armor, anti personell, thermobaric etc
plasmahawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:26 PM.