Effectiveness of Active Anti-ATGM Defences
- Thread starter f.hind
- Start date
Your guess is as good as mine, since the "Eye-Armour" protective glasses (made by Gargoyles of all companies - the ones that made the sunglasses in the original The Terminator) were designed in the mid to late 1980's. Given that the range-finding lasers that were around then were the carbon dioxide based systems (I assume, but don't know that the device developed by 1981 or 1982 by the US to blind enemy troops was also carbon dioxide based), the qualities of present day lasers (either range-finder or purpose-built dazzler) may or may not be protected against by these glasses.
Incidently, US troops were not issued these protective glasses - whether for budgetary or technical reasons, I do not know.
Pointblank
Senior Member
1. A radar guided ATGM is just that, radar guided. There is no optical sights used in the targeting, a millimeter wave radar (in the case of the AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire) is the targeting system; on the AH-64D Longbow Apache, the primary launch platform the AGM-114L Hellfire, this is mounted on a mast above the main rotor. A laser dazzler is useless against such a targeting system.
2. If infantry use proper cover, they can be undetectable from thermal sensors. Hiding behind hills, under brush, will all hide the thermal signature of infantry. Furthermore, there are types of fabric that can be used to further hide infantry from thermal sights, and infantry often carry them (thermal blankets, for example). By the time you know enemy infantry is around, it is often already too late (remember, max range of the FGM-148 Javelin is around 2.5km), and the infantry have already fired their missiles and left for cover.
Roger604
Senior Member
What I meant was active radar would give away the position of the ATGM operator, and the laser dazzler could be used on the operator.
If you can see them, they can see you. I doubt infantry can set up and aim a big bulky ATGM like Javelin without getting into the line of sight of a sophisticated thermal sensor.
Unless, of course you have an ambush set up with ATGM aimed at the right spot, and you're dug in a foxhole with a thermal blanket around your head.... but those are ideal conditions. And you might get blinded after the ATGM rocket gives away your position still.
And a tank use surroundings to tactical advantage too. Which means it's unlikely a Javelin would ever be used at more than 1 kilometer, unless the tank is just sitting out the open stationary.
Last edited:
Pointblank
Senior Member
1. Apache's use terrain to their advantage; often all that is exposed to the target is the radar itself. All you are pointing your laser at is a radar dome if it is a Apache; it could be a ground attack aircraft carrying Hellfires or the British Brimstone missile (a missile derived from a radar guided Hellfire).
2. You know when a tank is coming. A tank is many times bigger than a person, can be more easily spotted via thermal and optical sensors, and you will feel that a tank is coming as well; the engine and tracks will cause massive vibrations throughout the ground that is detectable from miles around. The opposite cannot be said about infantry carrying ATGM's. If look at the Javelin missile; it is a man-portable system that can be carried by 2 people (1 gunner, 1 ammo bearer). A tank's number 1 enemy is infantry; the reason being that they can easily hide under cover, and have better situational awareness than a tank. A tank has limited vision despite all the sensors you can stick on it.
You fire 14 ton Gun-Howitser without sophisticated thermal sensors detecting it untill it actually fires it rounds. The basic camoflage nets that we used with 155K98 absorded heat quite effectively. We had five of those huge nets, three covering the rear sector and the operational space around the gun and two covering the tube. First we didn't belive their effectivity and always cursed when setting them up and missing the old normal (and cosiderably lighter) camonets that we used with D-30s. Once we had a change to look our section from recce vehicle's thermal sights and all we saw was three small hills blended in the woods in place where should have been three gun-howitsers. Those tubes had just been fired and were extremely high temperature but yet we saw nothing. After that we started to respect the once hated camoflagenets...
Similar material nets in much smaller scale is enough to cover even the biggest ATGMs out there. I agree with those who belive that this Laser-dazzler is just another sales gimick and a system that is taken out of context by those who actually have little understandment of infantry anti-tank operations. I'm not saying its useless system, it may well work in some occasions but against infantry, its efficiency is rahter limited. Elephant cannot see all the ants...thats basicly the case with infantry vs. tanks.
to date the only active anti atgm defense was russian arena and israel trophy, while arean prove to heavy and expensive,israel trophy never seen action in lebnon despite the fact it was offer to US,(rejected by the US army in favor of raytheon "quick kill")
other countries also have similiar program was sweden,germany and China.
Chinese active anti-atgm may have base on arena.while swedish version describe in armada mag. was guided ,appoximately the size of beer can.
other countries also have similiar program was sweden,germany and China.
Chinese active anti-atgm may have base on arena.while swedish version describe in armada mag. was guided ,appoximately the size of beer can.
Roger604
Senior Member
Are you telling me that all future tank versus infantry engagements would happen from several kilometers away? That's where infantry have a relative advantage (being smaller, and harder to find).
Both recent and past conflicts have shown that tanks and infantry often engage within 1 kilometer of each other. At closer range, you can't mask your heat signature, so infantry lose their relative advantage.
At closer ranges, does an infantry team have enough time to prepare a bulk ATGM like Javelin before being discovered? Apparently, it takes several minutes! And let's not forget, as soon as you shoot a ATGM, you give away your position, and you're vulnerable to being blinded by a quick reacting dazzler.
If the ATGMs range and/or the operational terrain will make it possiple then yeas in some cases. Ofcourse not in all situations, but what happens in the actual combat is always hard to tell, its related to so many variables. Better to say it in this way: The increasing range of ATGMs will enable infantry to engage enemy tanks if the terrain gives you clear unobstacle-reach.
Yeas you can. If in 1 km range you can mask artillery tubes that have just been fired, which bit hotter than human bodies, then with the current technology you can maks targets with the same heatgeneration than human body alongside with the heat that leaves to the tube of the ATGM launcher.
Yeas. The basic idea is that your ATGMs are already set to firing mode before the tanks will appear to your line of sight. And if you can set non-modern howitsers to firing mode in few minutes, a small, modern and compact ATGM is set in mere secconds from normal trained troops. And as soon as you fire your ATGMs, if the situation requires, you are out of the fireposition as fast as you can, even if you take the ATGM with you, you can scoop out in mere secconds. You don't just wait in idlle, eyes fixed to the aimingsight and wait untill the tank gets its "Laser dazzler" fixed upon you. These are basic stuff in all infantry fighting...