Here comes the thread about anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) guidance systems ๐งต:
Thursday I did a thread about ATGM warheads & a thread about non-guided anti-tank rockets like the AT4 or Panzerfaust 3 (I will link these threads below); but now it's time for the big ones.
1/27
Let's begin with the Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight (SACLOS) missiles, which we have to divide in two groups:
Overfly top attack:
๐บ๐ธ TOW-2B
๐ธ๐ช BILL, BILL 2 2/n
Simplified explanation of Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight:
โข "Semi" = the gunner has to aim at the target / keep it in his line of sight from launch to impact.
โข "Automatic Command" = the launch unit tracks the missile and automatically sends steering commands to
3/n
the missile to align it with the gunner's line of sight to the target.
The missile is tracked via an infrared beacon at the rear of the missile. In older missiles this was a simple flare activated at missile launch. As flares can be easily jammed by an enemy infrared source
4/n
modern missiles use infrared or electronic-flash lamps, which blink at coded frequencies randomly chosen by the launch unit.
TOWs, like this one used in Syria, use a Xenon beacon as short-wave infrared tracking source & a high-intensity thermal beacon as long-wave tracking 5/n
source.
The steering commands are sent from the launch unit to the missile via a wire: either a thin copper or steel wire, which unravels from the missile during flight.
A short clip of a French Milan training ground, where you can see dozens of wires in the grass. 6/n
TOW missiles use two 3,750m long steel cables (the new RF variant uses a one-way radio link). Wires can't be jammed, but they can be entangled by trees or other obstacles.
SACLOS is a proven design, but with a few drawbacks: in smaller missile designs the wires limit the 7/n
range and for the duration of the flight the operator has to remain exposed to aim at the target, like this Ukrainian Milan operator.
To guarantee a stable line of sight most SACLOS missiles come with a heavy tripod, which is why i.e. the US Army today uses TOW missiles on 8/n
on Humvee, Strykers, and Bradleys. If you look closely at these TOW missiles, you will see they have different cone shapes: direct-attack TOW-2A and overfly top attack TOW-2B missiles.
TOW-2A missiles have a extendedible probe with a precursor warhead to defeat Explosive 9/n
Reactive Armor before the main HEAT warhead is detonated.
TOW-2B missiles have a sensor unit at the front, which uses laser profilometers and a magnetic sensor to recognize when it flies over the target and then detonates the missile's two Tantalum EFP warheads. 10/n
If you have not yet read my thread about HEAT and EFP warheads, below is the link to it:
Overfly top attack missiles like the TOW, BILL, and BILL 2 have the advantage that an enemy target doesn't need to be fully visible for them to hit it. 11/n
The Javelin is the only pure Fire & Forget anti-tank guided missile. Once the Javelin's Command Launch Unit 13/n
has acquired a target the Javelin launches and its gimbal mounted imaging infrared seeker automatically pursues the target.
Meanwhile the Javelin rises to 160m, flies towards the target, and once above it dives onto to it and detonates its tandem HEAT warhead. 14/n
The drawback of the Javelin is that the operator needs to have a clear line of sight to the target before launch, but one of the main advantages of the Javelin is that the operator can immediately get up and take cover once the missiles is launched. 15/n
The Spike and Akeron can be used as a Fire & Forget missile too... but their main advantage is that they can lock on at a target after launch.
After launch both missiles rise in the air and their gimbal mounted infrared/CCD sensors acquire video of the battlefield, which is 16/n
sent back to the launch unit through a unraveling optical fiber cable. (Spike ER missiles have an 8 (!) km cable.)
Here is a video of Azerbaijani Spike gunners flying over Armenian units, picking out the most valuable targets, and guiding their missiles onto these targets. 17/n
That Israel forbids European nations to deliver some of their 20,000 Spike missiles to Ukraine is disgusting and hampers Ukrainian combat capability.
Now to the only true laser beam riding anti-tank guided missile. The russian Kornet. Laser beam riding requires a direct 18/n
line of sight to the target and the operator has to keep aiming the laser at the target until impact.
And it is not really a laser beam, it's more like a laser grid and a laser receiver at the end of the missile determines the missile's position within that grid. The missile 19/n
then calculates the required steering commands to move itself to the grid's center, which aligns with the operator's line of sight to the target.
Supposedly also Ukraine's Corsar and Stugna-P missiles are laser beam riding... but publicly available info is contradictory 20/n
and the missiles' design seems to point to both being laser-guided SACLOS missiles.
All Luch Design Bureau missiles have a laser receiver and an infrared beacon at the rear, as i.e. the 130mm & 152mm Skif/Stugna-P missiles in this photo (right side: upper and lower missile) 21/n
This makes it likely that Ukraine's own ATGMs use the laser (instead of a wire) to send steering commands calculated by the launch unit to the missiles.
If this assumption is correct then neither Corsar nor Stugna-P are laser beam riding missiles. If anyone has more info, 22/n
that can be shared without damaging operational security - please comment below this thread.
Now to our last two guided missiles: the Spike SR and NLAW.
Both are shoulder launched, short range, fire and forget systems. The main difference is that the NLAW is an overfly top 23/n
attack missile, which fires a Tantalum EFP warhead downward, while the Spike SR is a direct attack missile, which uses a tandem HEAT warhead.
Both use optical and magnetic sensors to ignite detonation, with the NLAW having downward looking laser sensors and the Spike SR 24/n
having forward looking infrared sensors. Due to their short range both systems have limited, automatic steering to compensate for the possible movement of a target. Both systems could be described as the Javelin's little Fire & Forget siblings.
This almost concludes my 25/n
my infantry anti-tank weapons threads. If you have not yet read my anti-tank rockets and countermeasures (ERA, NERA, ceramics, etc) thread, the link is here below.
If you want to know more, tonight I will be on the @MriyaReport talking for a few 26/n
hours about artillery, anti-tank weapons, air combat, air defense, combined arms, tank warfare, mechanized infantry tactics, missile artillery, and all other aspects of modern war, which Ukraine will use to liberate the South this spring.
27/end
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In February 2022 putin declared war on Europe & his army marched on Kyiv.
Since then European EU/NATO nations have added and/or are forming these active (!) battalions to their armies:
(Worst 2 countries are of course the two loudmouths)
Europe has to realize that there are two global military powers that it will have to find an arrangements with to safeguard its future security:
๐บ๐ธ the US
๐บ๐ฆ Ukraine
These two have the highest defence materiel production output, and troops from these two are present in the 1/9
highest number of nations around the globe (Ukrainian troops are fighting russians in every nation, where russia has allied with the regime; a will to fight our enemies that is sorely lacking in the rest of Europe).
Minor powers like the UK or middling powers like France,
2/9
can't provide as much security (troops, defence equipment, tech innovation, will to fight, etc.) as Ukraine or the US.
While Ukrainians fight, innovate and produce vast amounts of war materiel, Europe continues to fiddle as the fire of war spreads across the continent.
3/9
Fellow Europeans on here claiming that Europe doesn't need the US to fight off russia are delusional:
Does Europe have enough cruise missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
Does Europe have enough tanker aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
1/6
Does Europe have enough maritime patrol aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
Does Europe have any ballistic missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
Does Europe have enough SEAD/DEAD aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
2/6
Does Europe have enough logistic units aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
Does Europe have enough air defence? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
Does Europe have enough recon satellites? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? A bit.
3/6
On 2 April 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands.
3 days (!) later a ๐ฌ๐ง Royal Navy task force left the UK to retake the islands.
That task force included: 2ร aircraft carriers, 8ร destroyers, 16ร frigates, 6ร attack submarines... a fleet bigger than today's Royal Navy. 1/8
22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships provided logistic support... in total 127 ships sailed, and the Royal Navy still (!!) had enough destroyers, frigates, submarines to fulfil its NATO obligations.
It was an awesome display of military power, professionalism, courage and grit. 2/n
On 28 February 2026, after weeks of tension, the Iran War began... and even though the UK had been asked by the US for bases weeks earlier, the Royal Navy was caught wholly unprepared... and then it took the Royal Navy 10 days (!) to get 1ร destroyer out of port, which after
3/n
To give you an idea, why European militaries prefer US-made weapons to European-made weapons:
Europe militaries urgently need a ground launched cruise missile capability... the US already had such a (nuclear) capability in 1983, then dismantled all of its BGM-109G Gryphon
1/10
ground launched cruise missiles after signing of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
russia of course broke this treaty after putin came to power and after 15 years of ignoring russia lying about it Trump finally ordered to withdraw from the treaty in August 2019.
2/n
Just 16 days after withdrawing from the treaty the US Army began to test launch Tomahawk cruise missiles form land (pic) and in June 2023 (less than 4 years later) the US Army formed the first battery equipped with the Typhon missile system.
And as Raytheon has a production 3/n
These are the ๐ฌ๐ง UK's HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carriers.
First, as you can see in this picture, only one actually carries aircraft. The UK barely had enough money to buy the F-35B for one. For the other the Blairites expected the US Marine Corps 1/9
to provide the required aircraft, because the two carriers were bought so the Royal Navy could fight alongside the US Navy against China in the Pacific.
But the US does NOT want the British carriers anywhere near its carrier strike groups, because the UK carriers would slow
2/9
down a US carrier strike groups, as the UK did not have the money for nuclear propulsion.
And as the UK doesn't have the money for the ships that make up a carrier strike group (destroyers, frigates, submarines) the UK expected the US Navy to detach some of its destroyers and 3/9