Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
Mar 19, 2023 โ€ข 27 tweets โ€ข 13 min read โ€ข Read on X
Here comes the thread about anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) guidance systems ๐Ÿงต:

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 Image
Let's begin with the Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight (SACLOS) missiles, which we have to divide in two groups:

Direct attack:
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ TOW, TOW-2A
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Milan, Eryx
๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ Konkurs, Metis-M, Metis, Fagot

Overfly top attack:
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ TOW-2B
๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช BILL, BILL 2
2/n ImageImageImageImage
Simplified explanation of Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight:

โ€ข "Semi" = the gunner has to aim at the target / keep it in his line of sight from launch to impact.
โ€ข "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 Image
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 Image
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 ImageImageImageImage
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 ImageImage
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
This is especially useful against an enemy that has built fortifications, behind which tanks can hide in hull down position like this Leclerc:

Fire at the visible part and SACLOS will steer the missile 1 m above the line of sight until the sensors detect the tank below.
12/n Image
Another way to destroy hull down tanks are top attack missiles:

Fire & Forget:
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Javelin

Fire & Forget / Fire, Observe & Update:
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Spike (MR, LR, ER)
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Akeron

The Javelin is the only pure Fire & Forget anti-tank guided missile. Once the Javelin's Command Launch Unit
13/n ImageImageImageImage
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 Image
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 ImageImageImageImage
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 Image
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 Image
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 ImageImage
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 Image
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 ImageImage
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 Image
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 Image

โ€ข โ€ข โ€ข

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
ใ€€

Keep Current with Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @noclador

Mar 17
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 Image
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 Image
Read 10 tweets
Mar 8
These are the ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง 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 Image
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 Image
Read 9 tweets
Mar 8
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง decline: Only one SSN is operational, three are no longer fit for service and got no crews. One carrier has no air wing and has been sent to rust away. The other carrier only has an air wing when the RAF cedes a third of its fighters. Only 1 destroyer is operational. The
1/5
frigates are falling apart. New Type 31 frigates won't get Mark 41 VLS or bow Sonar. The RAF took 48 of its Eurofighters apart, because it got no money for spares. The army has just 14 155mm howitzers. The Ajax vehicle is injuring the troops it carries. The Warrior IFVs are
2/5
outdated and falling apart. They amphibious ships are not deployable / crewed for lack of funds. The UK has not anti-ballistic missile system (e.g.Patriot). There is only money for 12 F-35A, the smallest F-35A order on the planet. The tank force is at its smallest since 1938.
3/5
Read 5 tweets
Mar 4
International Law is worthless paper if you cannot and will not back it up with military power.

Dictators do not care for international law. But they fear the US Air Force. The moment the US signaled it would no longer back "international law" putin annexed Crimea and Assad
1/10
gassed his people. International Law is what defence laggards hide behind to not have to spend for their own security (hoping the US will save them from their irresponsibility) .

European politicians like to grandstand about "international law" but NO European nation has the
2/n
the means (nor the will) to the enforce it. European politicians grandstanding about international law always do so in the belief that the US will enforce their balderdash.
So European politicians lecturing the US about "international law" now are utter morons, because they
3/n
Read 10 tweets
Feb 21
All this "NATO is unprepared for the use of drones like the war in Ukraine" is ridiculous, because:

โ€ข of course NATO is unprepared for the use of drones like the war IN (!) Ukraine,
โ€ข because that is not how a NATO-russia war will be fought. NATO, even just European NATO,
1/4
fields: 244 F-35, 403 Eurofighter, 183 Rafale, 177 modern F-16, 3 Gripen E, and 896 older fighter types.
A total of 1,906+ fighters (without the US Air Force and Royal Canadian Air Force; and with more new fighters entering European service every week).

russia, when counting
2/4
generously can't even put half that fighter strength into the field, and the 1,010 modern European NATO fighters would devastate russia's fighter force.

With NATO air supremacy comes absolute dominance of the battlefield. Every russian moving near the front would get bombed
3/4
Read 4 tweets
Feb 15
Gripen fans keep hyping the Gripen with fake claims & as long as they do, I will counter them:

Scandinavian Air Force officer about the Gripen E: It can either be fully fueled or fully armed or flown from short runways. Never can 2 of these things be done at the same time.
1/25 Image
The Gripen fans keep claiming that the Gripen has a better range than the F-35 and can fly from short runways... then admit that its max. range can only be achieved with external fuel tanks, which weigh so much that the Gripen E can no longer fly from short runways.
2/n
External fuel tanks also mean: the Gripen becomes slower, the radar cross section increases (making detection more likely), the fuel consumption increases,... and even with all 3 external fuel tanks the Gripen E carries 1,340 kg less fuel than the F-35A carries internally.
3/n
Read 25 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(