Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why did we switch from the M72 to the AT-4?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why did we switch from the M72 to the AT-4?

    I really hate weapon systems in any arsenal that seems like it's in some sort of purgatory. Oversized and overly capable for some light jobs, but not heavy enough and not capable enough for heavy duty work. Like the F-16, I think the AT-4 is really the wrong weapon for the two general combat situations we are most likely going to encounter. The first combat situation is against some 3rd world country which would have a very low number of capable armored divisions with equipment that is T-62's at the very best. The AT-4 is very capable of dealing with these tanks that would be BMP's, M113's, T55's, and T-62's, but the M72 is also capable of punching through these vehicles as well, considering the heaviest of the bunch the T-62 only has about 250mm of RHA, where the M-72 has up to 375mm of power.

    An arguement can be made that the M-72 is incapable of defeating the larger peices of armor such as the T-72. But due to the lack of a tandom charge from the AT-4, it is also incapable of punching through the ERA of a T-72, T-80 or T-90 tank. For these targets, I believe the only capable individual weapon system is the Javelin missle system.

    So we opted for a weapon that is almost 3 times heavier, and costs a lot more yet is overly capable dealing with low-intensity targets, yet not proficent enough to take on modern day tanks. It can be argued that the AT-4 has 100m greater effective range, but is that worth 3 times the weight? The M72 is almost light enough that it could be a standardized weapon in every rifleman's equipment. The AT-4 is basically only carried by one soldier per squad. Is the M72 better than the AT-4 at taking out bunkers, buildings, and entrenched positions? No, but's it's no slouch at it either. If given the choice I think I would go with the weight savings of an M72 over the AT-4 any given day.

    What's your opinions? Am I wrong that the AT-4 is too heavy for today's jobs, but not capable enough for future large scale battles?

    Edit: I kinda wanted to add that for 2 kilo's more (which is substantial I understand) You can opt for a Carl Gustav which is reloadable and has the capability for a Tandam charge warhead that could at least defeat a T-72 and perhaps even a T-80/90 if hit in the right spot (side, rear).
    Last edited by roffelskates; 10 Nov 09,, 22:07.

  • #2
    Well, they bought the AT-4 during the last years of the Cold War. The Soviets had plenty less-than-modern weapon systems like upgraded T-55s in storage that they were certain to throw at NATO after their Category I~II units died so it wouldn't hurt to put a bigger tank-killing weapon in the hands of the infantry, even if it was not significantly more effective than its predecessor in dealing with the best enemy tank. Actually by 1988 70% of all Soviet tanks were older types like the T-62 and T-55 so AT-4 would have plenty of targets.

    In terms of actual use, I doubt they would field only 1 AT-4 per squad. I recall they had two tubes of AT-4 a squad in Mech Infantry TOE though I am not sure. Either way, units expecting real fighting hoarded those weapons--one ODS vet on this forum said he must have looked like a Christmas tree from hell because the ridiculous number of AT-4s he carried.
    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

    Comment


    • #3
      I heard that the M72 LAW was coming back, probably to the Marines, but I'm not sure. The new model is maximized for bunker type targets rather than for armor. Sounds ideal if true.

      Comment


      • #4
        The AT-4, like the LAW, is a round of issue. Like a bullet its not limited to 1 per squad nor one per person.

        Advantages of the AT 4 are the higher penetration, a dual purpose warhead and confined space capability. Also much easier sighting system.

        The big disadvantage is that they snag on everything.


        If your going after a T-80 with a AT-4 something has gone really wrong.
        Last edited by Gun Grape; 08 Dec 09,, 01:32.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ZSARU View Post
          I heard that the M72 LAW was coming back, probably to the Marines, but I'm not sure. The new model is maximized for bunker type targets rather than for armor. Sounds ideal if true.
          Marines and soldiers were issued LAAWs a few years back. Shortage of AT-4s and they work for opening doors.

          There was talk of making improvements and putting them back in the system. Don't know where that went though

          Comment

          Working...
          X