It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Line of sight anti armour missle...Video clip.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Holy cow look at that bitch travel! This missle uses pure kinetic energy to hit the target and destroy it.

The videos short, but just look at how quick that missle covers the distance to target... You'd have no chance even if you did see it launch! heres the link for you.

www.strategypage.com...

This would make me think twice about sniping from a roof top in Iraq....




posted on Feb, 25 2006 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Already posted, here's some threads with more videos.

LOSAT - Next generation Anti-Tank Missile !! Watch the videos !!

*NEW* LOSAT Videos



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   
MadGreebo.

>>
Holy cow look at that bitch travel! This missle uses pure kinetic energy to hit the target and destroy it.
>>

Exactly so. The only real sadness being that it could easily do 'half as well' at 10km with all that KE and so the real need is not to cancel the program so as not to embarrass the Collective Armor Phallipoda but to develop a system which can reliably use air designation and a smart dive-fuze to snap down into top armor from over the local horizon.

>>
The videos short, but just look at how quick that missle covers the distance to target... You'd have no chance even if you did see it launch! heres the link for you.
>>

I doubt the video shown is to the full 5km range but it is indeed very much a rapid rabbit. The /interesting/ part (back when it was still the HVM) was trying to get the laser beam riding command guidance to accept turn data through the heavy motor plume. For awhile they were doing all kinds of crazy stuff like 40-60` offset turns to make sure -side- mounted receivers could pick up early course correction gather at a useful min-max range overlay (I think they were basically looking to contain the round until motor burnout).

You ain't lived until you've seen a 3,500mph object swap ends in the snap of a finger.

Another too-bad situation because an A-10 loaded with 8 HVM and the guidance electronics in the wing LE would have actually been useful along about 1983-84.

This program has been around a LONG time.


KPl.


>>
This would make me think twice about sniping from a roof top in Iraq....
>>

Nah, there'd be a lot of overpens just like with a 120mm APFSDS. You get snipers by putting up endurant air and sensor towers, along with discrete rooftop monitors, so that junior can't run out the back without having his picture took.

One national biometric ID base later and taking pot shots at another sect or military unit 'just to count coup' would become a very hazardous business indeed.

Assuming you didn't Viper Strike or Counter Snipe his narrow behind where he lay.



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by ch1466
to develop a system which can reliably use air designation and a smart dive-fuze to snap down into top armor from over the local horizon.


The LOSAT doesn't carry a warhead and doesn't need a fuze to arm itself
Also what difference would a top attack make anyway if it has the ability to destroy a tank from any angle ?

What the hell is a smart dive fuze anyway ? IS this a real piece of hardware or an item you've just coined ?



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   
The LOSAT program was more of a concept program than anything else. The information used from it is being used to develop the CKEM. The CKEM is a small version of the LOSAT missile that is ment to replace the TOW in some roles.



posted on Feb, 27 2006 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Rogue1,

>>
The LOSAT doesn't carry a warhead and doesn't need a fuze to arm itself
Also what difference would a top attack make anyway if it has the ability to destroy a tank from any angle ?
>>

I'm well aware of what kill mechanism the LOSAT uses.

>>
What the hell is a smart dive fuze anyway ? IS this a real piece of hardware or an item you've just coined ?
>>

The concept of the smartfuze is simply that which acknowledges a weapon moving at upwards of a mile per second does not need to 'maneuver' or 'track' a given threat. because the likelihood of countermeasure deployment or evasion is so very small given the relative target motion disparity.

What you need is something of a cross between a Forster Sonde/Vebal Syndrom type mass read (magnetometer or MMW) and a LOCAAS 3D 'bump map' so that when _the missile_ sees the change in surface composition or contour, it can independently dive down into the upper surfaces.

Why?

1. The more weigh you put on the tank, for 'all sector' armor protection, the less viable it becomes as a weapons system. Don't give an enemy a chance to protect his forward slope with advanced passive, reactive or active protection systems. Because he WILL prove your 'defeats any known armor' statement wrong. Rather, make the weapon able to kill from ranges at which the choice of /where/ to hit the target (turret, engine deck, high angle front slope) must be the missiles.

2. If you have a target, firing platform, surveillance asset geometry something like this-

............................................................................................................SOTAS
.............Target.............................................................LOSAT Vehicle............

The graze angle for the standoff platform may be very shallow such that, while azimuth read is okay, exact slant is not as certain. Even as the (lightweight = early/forced entry optimized) firing vehicle /never wants/ to be inside the same horizon as it's victim. Only an idiot faces his enemy 'as an equal' when he is riding in a 5-20 ton wheeled vehicle (mobility and armor limited) and his opponent is tooling about in a 40 ton MBT for which 'any building will do' as both protective top cover and alternate breakout maneuver path.

3. Mission Flex. Especially now that we face increasing numbers of MOUT style ops wherein our own, occupational, force routes are completely predictable, even as our LOS weapons are increasingly blocked, there is NO DAMN EXCUSE for wanting to play Gunfight At The OK Corral. Yet the Army, ever one to put things in neat little cubby holes (lest they find even more of their outdated warfighter doctrine rendered completely obsolete and lose even more 'force structure' money) doesn't want to see the inherent utility of a hypervelocity weapon moving OVER a local horizon. Whether that be a building or a treeline or a true curve-of-earth LOS delineator.

Which is strange since CKEM is itself, while only weighing roughly half what MGM-166 did, is listed as a _5-8km_ effective ranged device. i.e. Beyond the range of what even a British trooper expected his 120mm rifled bore Challenger to score in the 'longest kill ever' during DS. How many times do you expect an open-desert fighting condition. If you are on a Hummer or RSTV or Stryker type chassis, how many times do you WANT that?

CONCLUSION:
You have to realize, the term 'conservative' has nothing to do with quality of what is known in the Armed Forces. Rather it is synomously interchangeable with /corrupt/ as a function of preserving roles and missions turf for the _personalities_ of it's top staff. Such is always the case when a peacetime military generates a top heavy officer class solely interested in their own careers rather than butchery on the battlefield which is nominally what they are 'good at'.


KPl.



posted on Feb, 27 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Jetsetter,

>>
The LOSAT program was more of a concept program than anything else. The information used from it is being used to develop the CKEM. The CKEM is a small version of the LOSAT missile that is ment to replace the TOW in some roles.
>>

Yeah right. Tell that to the folks who spent 20+ years nursing along HVM from the 1980's onwards.

CKEM will die 'as soon as convenient' so that the generals may continue to command men whose billets suck up more money than any other systemic cost of war. Yet who perversely /insist/ on a 'chain of command' approach by which they will only follow the orders of those who wear a uniform like they do.

While star-on-shoulder caring not at all how they put their slaughter dog underlings at risk for utter annihilation fighting 'the same old way'.

It's always the truth that success breeds stupidity. Has been since the Spartans. And nobody learns the KEY lesson which is not simply that warriors are inherently incompetent but complicitly _untrustworthy_ so long as they have a 'vested interest' in sustaining a paradigm-as-career-path.

CONCLUSION:
There comes a point where RAW SPEED of onset and tactical development means that no one with a biologic mind or body can compensate for the rates at which their automated killing systems can generate new targeting opportunities. And again, we are scared of facing the fact that we have utterly obsolesced man from the battlefield.

There is no point to courage in the face of an IED because your killer knows not, nor is effected by, the fear in your eyes or the bravery of your gas pedal as you 'drive on by' that which he left behind hours before.

So too is it painfully obvious that there is no point in man fighting man when /the cost/ of his presence on the battlefield reduces the NUMBERED FORCE ADVANTAGES necessary to sustain gambited operations. Because the weapons systems are getting so lethal that protecting any one asset is pointless. USING that asset to infiltrate and overwhelm an opfor while his buddy 2 klicks over gets the attention of the defensive system which is itself 'suppressed' by something bigger, meaner, better, further back, is how you win real wars.

It's not about Chess. It's about Go.


KPl.


P.S. You have to be suicidal to use TOW as a point target weapon against TOW. And just plain silly to want 'followon M901' equivalent to be your ATGW support rather than principal fires vehicle. Because you can put 4-5 M113A4 on a C-17. Vs. 1 M1A2. And while a modern tankgun can engage to just about the same 3,270m range as a TOW II at 3X the rate. The LOSAT can reach twice as far as the tank AND achieve 3X /it's/ rate of engagement. With superior track-to-hit SSPK. Meaning it fires first, farthest, longest, with the shortest TOF, at the fastest ROF, _before the tank gets to try_.

Again, everyone knows it. They are all just so completely self-snowed under the idealist notion of wanting to be killers themselves that they don't understand how much WASTE is inherent to cheering on battle monkeys. When you could merely MULE+CKEM replace them.

[edit on 27-2-2006 by ch1466]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join