ToW missiles go wireless, raytheon to begin production! - Page 3

Catalan · 04-26-2007, 10:58 AM

It's not. They have nothing to do with one another. CKEM, a spiral of LOSAT, shares common technologies, like the fire control. But, it's a completely different and new missile, and probably a completely new launcher.

glyn · 04-26-2007, 12:25 PM

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

Different missile. This is a development of the TOW that uses KE instead of HEAT. Mach 6+ speed.

Chee - Hoo - Zuss, that's brisk!

Decades ago I used to use the French SS-11 ATGW fired from the Westland Scout. It was a good missile for its day, but it was s-l-o-o-o-w. It seemed to take an age as it smokily meandered downrange unreeling its control wires. For a non- KE warhead I imagine a speed of around Mach 1 would suffice.

Sounds nice, although I wonder about accuracy issues. Seems like it would be kind of hard to guide a hyper velocity missile at the kind of range this weapon would be used.

Catalan · 04-26-2007, 12:53 PM

In regards to a HEAT warhead, the speed of the missile is irrelevant to the penetration of the missile. Despite the fact that theoretically HEAT operates exactly the same way KE does, only at hypervelocity, this velocity is produced within the warhead itself (by the explosive liner) and the collapse of the metallic liner (whether it be copper, molybdenum or depleted uranium). The speed of the missile will only effect the enemy's ability to counter it.

In other words, a subsonic velocity would only suffice if the enemy is not able to do the following things:

1. Realize a missile has been fired.
2. Can't knock it out.
3. Can't maneuver.

Since the late 80s tanks have been equipped with electromagnetic warning sensors, so I think that it is becoming more and more commonplace in tanks developed that they are equipped with the ability to sense the fact that there is a threat incoming. Although there is no widely distributed active protection system yet, Arena has been around for a while (not largely employed due to cost considerations, even during the Soviet era) and Israeli Trophy is being widely distributed amongst the Israeli army. Within 5 years most MBTs, IMO, will have some sort of active protection system. The Leclerc 2010 upgrade is said to use GIAT's Spatem. The Italians are developing a 'triple-layer' APS for their Ariete C2s. The Germans and probably most European users of the Leopard 2 will have access to AWISS. The Russians are employing more and more of their Arena system, and even the United States will theoretically have Quick Kill by ~2011-2014.

Israeli tanks were able to outmaneuver older Soviet anti-tank missiles, and with newer sensors reaction times will probably increase, as well.

I think that supersonic fire-and-forget missiles are the way of the future. Even APFSDS developing are loosing the battle against tank protection, and so the key is to design something that can be fired with minimum human operation (fire-and-forget) which will look for and target the weakest area of the threat.

04-26-2007, 10:58 AM	#31 (permalink)
Catalan Regular Join Date: 11-20-05 Location: San Diego [USA] or El Provencio [Spain] Posts: 121	It's not. They have nothing to do with one another. CKEM, a spiral of LOSAT, shares common technologies, like the fire control. But, it's a completely different and new missile, and probably a completely new launcher. __________________ If you enjoy modern military history then join modernwarstudies.net! http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i2...bees/siggy.png

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments	oneman28	International Defense Topics	96	06-23-2008 01:49 AM
UK not part of anti-missile defence plans	Ray	The Western Alliance	53	03-12-2007 14:08 PM
Carrier killers (an article from JED online)	lurker	Naval Forces	172	12-28-2006 00:39 AM
Battleship Tactics	Defcon 6	Battleships Forum	7	12-07-2006 09:10 AM

04-26-2007, 12:53 PM	#33 (permalink)
Catalan Regular Join Date: 11-20-05 Location: San Diego [USA] or El Provencio [Spain] Posts: 121	In regards to a HEAT warhead, the speed of the missile is irrelevant to the penetration of the missile. Despite the fact that theoretically HEAT operates exactly the same way KE does, only at hypervelocity, this velocity is produced within the warhead itself (by the explosive liner) and the collapse of the metallic liner (whether it be copper, molybdenum or depleted uranium). The speed of the missile will only effect the enemy's ability to counter it. In other words, a subsonic velocity would only suffice if the enemy is not able to do the following things: 1. Realize a missile has been fired. 2. Can't knock it out. 3. Can't maneuver. Since the late 80s tanks have been equipped with electromagnetic warning sensors, so I think that it is becoming more and more commonplace in tanks developed that they are equipped with the ability to sense the fact that there is a threat incoming. Although there is no widely distributed active protection system yet, Arena has been around for a while (not largely employed due to cost considerations, even during the Soviet era) and Israeli Trophy is being widely distributed amongst the Israeli army. Within 5 years most MBTs, IMO, will have some sort of active protection system. The Leclerc 2010 upgrade is said to use GIAT's Spatem. The Italians are developing a 'triple-layer' APS for their Ariete C2s. The Germans and probably most European users of the Leopard 2 will have access to AWISS. The Russians are employing more and more of their Arena system, and even the United States will theoretically have Quick Kill by ~2011-2014. Israeli tanks were able to outmaneuver older Soviet anti-tank missiles, and with newer sensors reaction times will probably increase, as well. I think that supersonic fire-and-forget missiles are the way of the future. Even APFSDS developing are loosing the battle against tank protection, and so the key is to design something that can be fired with minimum human operation (fire-and-forget) which will look for and target the weakest area of the threat.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)