I hate to make another vs thread but its something that I find to be a concern. Heavy ERA such as the Kontakt 5 and the newer Relikt are much more powerful than their western counterparts in terms of explosive power and how they kill incoming shaped charges and APFSDS rounds. I understand that the US army significantly increased the power of the tandem charge in the hellfire missile (presumably to defeat heavier ERA) Now what I am asking may as well be classified but how would the newest hellfires fare against the latest Russian heavy ERA's which have advanced beyond Kontakt 5 (kaktus,relikt).Information on (Maybe zraver could answer my question)I would appreciate some feedback given the lack of information of the subject matter on the web.Thanks
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hellfire 2 vs Russian Heavy ERA
Collapse
X
-
I think it's fair to say any anti tank missile commonly fired from a high angle of approach like a Hellfire would, more often than not, hit past the ERA, rendering it irrelevant. But in terms of a direct attack? I'd put my money on the tandem warhead."Draft beer, not people."
-
Originally posted by Shadowsided View PostI hate to make another vs thread but its something that I find to be a concern. Heavy ERA such as the Kontakt 5 and the newer Relikt are much more powerful than their western counterparts in terms of explosive power and how they kill incoming shaped charges and APFSDS rounds. I understand that the US army significantly increased the power of the tandem charge in the hellfire missile (presumably to defeat heavier ERA) Now what I am asking may as well be classified but how would the newest hellfires fare against the latest Russian heavy ERA's which have advanced beyond Kontakt 5 (kaktus,relikt).Information on (Maybe zraver could answer my question)I would appreciate some feedback given the lack of information of the subject matter on the web.Thanks
First heavy ERA doesn't mean more explosive, it means better design and performance against kinetic threats through the introduction of sheer- most with the explosive force contained inside the armor block to reduce the threat to nearby soft bodied objects like people. Against missiles the performance is about the same, a tandem charge will still detonate the block allowing the main charge to act against the underlying armor. Against missiles like the hellfire and maverick- armor is useless. Through the use of varying features depending on missile model and type armor is rendered obsolete- if you can see it you can kill it.
Comment
-
No, the best way to deal with these missiles is a robust air defence including fighter sweep, SAM nets, and AAA, forcing the enemy birds to clear the skies, perform SEAD, and then find your tanks, hopefully giving you enough time to achieve your objectives before they do.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostNo, the best way to deal with these missiles is a robust air defence including fighter sweep, SAM nets, and AAA, forcing the enemy birds to clear the skies, perform SEAD, and then find your tanks, hopefully giving you enough time to achieve your objectives before they do.
Comment
-
I cannot remember the exact engagement during the Iraq Invasion but a flight of Longbows went too far away from ground and fixed wing support and ran right into an Iraqi AD regiment. I don't think any were shot down but most were shot up bad enough that they had to withdraw,
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostI cannot remember the exact engagement during the Iraq Invasion but a flight of Longbows went too far away from ground and fixed wing support and ran right into an Iraqi AD regiment. I don't think any were shot down but most were shot up bad enough that they had to withdraw,"Draft beer, not people."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostI cannot remember the exact engagement during the Iraq Invasion but a flight of Longbows went too far away from ground and fixed wing support and ran right into an Iraqi AD regiment. I don't think any were shot down but most were shot up bad enough that they had to withdraw,
Comment
-
Thanks for the info zraver, appreciate it:) My concern is that the current generation of western armor will become far more vulnerable if the Russians develop and export fire and forget top attack ATGM's . Now given that tanks operate with a larger support structure and allied forces will almost always have air superiority, the only conceivable losses could come from man portable ATGMs and those would not be high enough to render those tanks obsolete but they could still inflict some painful losses. Zraver do you feel that the possible proliferation of such ATGM's would shift the emphasis from heavy composite armor to active protection systems,stealth etc. or will heavy armor still play a large role as it did during ODS and OIF where western tanks slaughtered less heavily armored Soviet tanks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Shadowsided View PostThanks for the info zraver, appreciate it:) My concern is that the current generation of western armor will become far more vulnerable if the Russians develop and export fire and forget top attack ATGM's . Now given that tanks operate with a larger support structure and allied forces will almost always have air superiority, the only conceivable losses could come from man portable ATGMs and those would not be high enough to render those tanks obsolete but they could still inflict some painful losses. Zraver do you feel that the possible proliferation of such ATGM's would shift the emphasis from heavy composite armor to active protection systems,stealth etc. or will heavy armor still play a large role as it did during ODS and OIF where western tanks slaughtered less heavily armored Soviet tanks.
1. Not too make light of the threat but how do you kill a tank with an active protection system? Fire 1 more missile than it can shoot down at a time, fire 1 more missile than it has ammo for, hit it with artillery, hit it with gunfire...
2. How many missiles does it take to kill a tank you can't see?
Black Fox active camo Defense Update Presents: 'Black Fox' Stealth Armor Demonstration - YouTube
BAE adaptiv camo ADAPTIVE camouflage BAE Systems - YouTube
Japanese light bending Optical Camouflage (Invisible Cloak) - YouTube
cuttlefish Cuttlefish changes colors like chess! - YouTube
Comment
-
Zraver I was wondering what you thought about the concept of layered ERA to defeat missiles such as the hellfire. Now the polish ERAWA system only gives you 65-70 % protecttion against medium caliber HEAT rounds like a 125 mm HEAT round or AT-$ but in the near future do you think an updated dual layered ERA scheme could defeat Hellfire/Brimstone and weaker ATGM's?
Army Guide - ERAWA, Explosive reactive armour
Comment
-
Originally posted by Shadowsided View PostZraver I was wondering what you thought about the concept of layered ERA to defeat missiles such as the hellfire. Now the polish ERAWA system only gives you 65-70 % protecttion against medium caliber HEAT rounds like a 125 mm HEAT round or AT-$ but in the near future do you think an updated dual layered ERA scheme could defeat Hellfire/Brimstone and weaker ATGM's?
Army Guide - ERAWA, Explosive reactive armour
Comment
Comment