Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 16, 2016, 02:34:19 PM
Lucky for them that it wasnt a BILL...
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: mthrockmor on October 16, 2016, 08:16:33 PM
That's how you do ig, sortof. They were exposed for 16 seconds. In the M1A1 we'd consistently pull up, shoot and back down in 5 secs or less. Advantage of the sight being on top of the turret.
Boo
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: pipz on October 17, 2016, 05:36:07 AM
That was close!
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: save on October 17, 2016, 06:37:54 AM
The swedish Bill system is a strike-down HEAT ATGM, like Zimme83 say it would have hit where it hurts.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 17, 2016, 06:23:02 PM
BMP with not quite the same luck....
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: save on October 18, 2016, 05:25:16 PM
They must have got a lucky ammo hit, normally you get time to get out before you being incincerated.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 19, 2016, 04:44:54 AM
No, not these days. If there's fuel and ammo in the vehicle it is typically instant death with modern ATGMs.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 19, 2016, 08:56:02 AM
I don't agree that it is something new, and it's far from a rule that the ammo explode direct when the tank is hit. Based on the vids ive seen its more common that the ammo doesn't explode directly when the tank is hit. Often it will eventually catch fire and destroy the tank though.
That BMP was for sure packed with ammo, it was not just the ammo for its own gun that caused that explosion. Guess they were bringing supplies to the troops...
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 19, 2016, 10:31:21 AM
Zimme, even if that BMP miraculously had not exploded everyone in it would have been dead from blast overpressure in the crew compartment. You can't compare the damage of early/light AT weapons to modern ATGMs like that TOW II used against that BMP. An RPG-7 for example has a warhead of 0.5 kg to 0.7 kg. Early ATGMs typically had warheads in the 1-3 kg range. That TOW II has a 6 kg tandem warhead. It has more explosive content than a 155 mm artillery shell. Penetration with such a weapon into the crew compartment will invariably kill everyone in it and set off any ammunition present.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 19, 2016, 10:42:58 AM
Some pretty gruesome footage from Syria. Most of the tanks blow up or brew up instantly after ATGM hits.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Serenity on October 19, 2016, 11:05:18 AM
Zimme, even if that BMP miraculously had not exploded everyone in it would have been dead from blast overpressure in the crew compartment. You can't compare the damage of early/light AT weapons to modern ATGMs like that TOW II used against that BMP. An RPG-7 for example has a warhead of 0.5 kg to 0.7 kg. Early ATGMs typically had warheads in the 1-3 kg range. That TOW II has a 6 kg tandem warhead. It has more explosive content than a 155 mm artillery shell. Penetration with such a weapon into the crew compartment will invariably kill everyone in it and set off any ammunition present.
So, I've never seen a TOW in slow-mo before... It's detonating ABOVE the tank? What's up with that? Wouldn't you want to impact the tank directly?
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 19, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
It's a top-attack warhead. It fires an explosively formed penetrator down through the roof of the tank.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: EskimoJoe on October 19, 2016, 04:28:17 PM
No, not these days. If there's fuel and ammo in the vehicle it is typically instant death with modern ATGMs.
In that Javelin vid, they packed the turret and everything with explosives to 'simulate' (I use the term loosely) having ammo in the tank. I gained that knowledge watching the same vid in a Javelin class given by two old dudes who have been using, enhancing, and teaching the system since it's predecessor the 'Dragon'.
One thing to keep in mind is that the T-72s and BMPs are far from modern tanks. Yes, the TOW is a design from the same time period, but has been improved for use against reactive armor and (probably) better wire-guidance systems, while the tanks you see being blown up typically have no ERA. Another design flaw with tanks like the T-72 is that (iirc) a lot of the ammo is stored in and right beneath the turret, so any penetrating hit to the center of the tank will more than likely set off all the ammo as well.
It's a top-attack warhead. It fires an explosively formed penetrator down through the roof of the tank.
I think only a certain variant of the TOW missile is air-burst. It's weird to me that it would be, because I would think there would be a little voodoo magic involved in getting the shaped-charge to detonate in the exact right spot. That being said, even with a large enough warhead the blast-overpressure can make jelly out of a crews' brains.
The Javelin is a also top-attack warhead, capable of defeating ERA. They're both totally different systems, but I guess the main concept of hitting them where the armor is the weakest is the same.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 20, 2016, 06:14:24 AM
Yes it's only the latest F-series that use the fly-over top attack warhead. Most of the TOWs in the Syrian video are Es or perhaps even old Ds.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Serenity on October 20, 2016, 09:10:02 AM
It's a top-attack warhead. It fires an explosively formed penetrator down through the roof of the tank.
Eskimo said it right, that's some voodoo magic to make that thing work...
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 20, 2016, 11:20:52 AM
Modern MBT:s have so strong frontal armor that an ATGM would need to be ridiculously big to be able to punch trough, top attack warheads solve the problem and allows for the missile to be small enough to be carried by infantry and even shoulder launched.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Gman on October 20, 2016, 03:46:21 PM
These self forging warheads make top down ATGMs deadly vs anything, including M1s, Leopards, Challengers, and all the Russian and Chinese tanks too. Stopping 15,000 feet per second just isn't happening even with reactive and high tech composite armor combined. The real show stoppers IMO are the sensor fuzed multi round bombs, 32 sub munitions per bomb with some of them, or more, and each forging a 10,000fps+ projectile going straight down on the weakest part of most tanks and APCs. A single F16 4 or even 2 ship can deliver enough in one bomb drop to wipe a brigade off the map now. The Javelin would be an awful weapon to face as a tanker IMO. There could be dozens of them in front of you, you'd never see them in time, and due to their flight profile are very hard to defend against, the Russian tank defense systems are good against wire guided missiles, but the Javelin with that almost vertical attack...not so much I think.
A ton of footage of ATGMs in Syria and Yemen now, there is one video of tank vs tank that I've found with a couple T72s fighting at close range, say 500 yards. That's it. Almost all of the tanks being destroyed on video are from infantry fired ATGMs. I wouldn't feel all that safe in a tank of any nation these days, imagine going up against swarms of well trained combat veteran troops as opposed to guerillas using them now to great effect.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: save on October 20, 2016, 03:48:49 PM
Even the big ATGM uses only HEAT afaik, ie a different size melting copper cone, but if the missile dont send explosive inside the tank, it should not insta-explode.
Looks to me like the export version of the T72 took over the Ronson title from the M4.
The only thing that saves modern tanks are the new developed anti-tankmissile defenses, they are however unsafe for own troops in close vincinity.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 20, 2016, 04:19:36 PM
There's already plenty of explosives in most tanks. A HEAT warhead does not just send a jet of molten copper into the target, but also a lot of pressure. If that pressure is great enough it will kill the crew and set of ammunition.
Here's a Saudi M1 Abrams getting hit:
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 20, 2016, 04:22:41 PM
M60 Patton insta-killed:
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Vulcan on October 20, 2016, 06:39:21 PM
I used to be pretty handy with ATGMs in Arma/DayZ :)
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 21, 2016, 04:03:36 AM
Even the big ATGM uses only HEAT afaik, ie a different size melting copper cone, but if the missile dont send explosive inside the tank, it should not insta-explode.
Looks to me like the export version of the T72 took over the Ronson title from the M4.
The only thing that saves modern tanks are the new developed anti-tankmissile defenses, they are however unsafe for own troops in close vincinity.
T-72 has an auto loader and thus always ammo exposed in the turret. The effect inside a vehicle from a HEAT depends on a lot of things but if there is a hatch open and there is no direct hit in any ammo the crew have a chance of surviving. But its really nothing new, it was the same during WW2, difference is that both the armor and Anti tank weapons have been a lot stronger.
One of few T-90:s being hit, direct hit in the turret, no explosion. hard to tell if the missile penetrated the armor or not.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 21, 2016, 05:28:12 AM
And still you see at least one crew member running away
I didn't notice that at first. Lucky SOB. Still... three bodies left in the tank.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 21, 2016, 05:48:56 AM
The reason the S-tank looked the way it did was the conclusion that most tanks are killed by hits in the turret and turret ring. Having crew and ammo mixed inside was and is a great danger to the crew so the solution was to remove the turret and place the gun and ammo in a compartment separated from the crew.
Also having the engines in front of the crew also greatly increased survivability, even if the front armor was penetrated it would kill the engine and not the crew. Tank might be lost but the crew can get out.
Modern tanks have the blow off panels so the blast from exploding ammo is directed up and not into the crew compartment (if you have the door closed...) so there would be a lot less instant cooking of the crew. (again, if they keep the door to the ammo storage closed..)
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 21, 2016, 06:19:07 AM
Didn't look like anyone got out of that Abrams despite its blow out panels. The Leo 2 also has blow out panels for the turret magazine, but nothing for the hull magazine. So a penetration into the fighting compartment is likely to set that ammo off.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Zimme83 on October 21, 2016, 09:19:10 AM
If the door to the ammo storage is closed is the key here...
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: 10thmd on October 21, 2016, 10:47:34 AM
I shot a car with a Javelin :devil
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: GScholz on October 21, 2016, 02:05:07 PM
Cool! Practice shot or real world?
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: MiloMorai on October 21, 2016, 02:47:15 PM
I shot a Javelin but it was many years ago.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: DaveBB on October 21, 2016, 03:30:37 PM
Trophy system has shot down atgm with no problems.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Mister Fork on October 21, 2016, 03:54:38 PM
While visiting the battlefront of the Iran/Iraq war, we inspected lot of tanks - T-50's, 60, and American M-47's, 60's and Chieftains from Iran. We would personally inspect these items to make sure they were not in use and were indeed hulks - not appearing 'abandoned' for a skirmish once the Canadian peacekeeping force went away.
What surprised me was that most of the tanks that did get penetrated were nothing but molten aluminum inside yet looked pristine on the outside. Once a tank cooked off - you rarely found remains inside as it was a molten-metal mix.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: DaveBB on October 21, 2016, 04:03:49 PM
T-72 cooking off violently.
Title: Re: Tank vs ATGM duel
Post by: Wolfala on October 21, 2016, 09:55:11 PM