| Zephyr Net http://jkpeterson.net/forum/ |
|
| Maverick Missile warhead sizes... http://jkpeterson.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2005 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Sun Dec 19, 2010 00:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Considering that the AGM65G,H,J, & K have bigger warheads to deal with uparmored tanks, would one then consider that it would take more than one of the original Mavs (AGM-65B or AGM-65D) to knockout a modern tank with the latest reactive armor added? |
|
| Author: | KAPTOR [ Sun Dec 19, 2010 01:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Since even the early Mavs nearly turned a tank inside-out I would guess not! The F is more optimized for anti-ship and they both have a delayed fuze. Hellfire is very effective yet a much smaller warhead. I would say even an early A would get a function kill on a modern tank. WHERE an early Mav hit, would likely make a large difference on a reactive armored tank. |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Sun Dec 19, 2010 03:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
You responded before I could edit my message... (Damn you!  )The new Hellfire warhead is like ITOW and either has 2 warheads to defeat reactive armor (gen III) or it uses a top down diving attack profile... While the early Mavs have a good warhead, I do not know if it could achieve a kill against, say, an M1 with added reactive armor... |
|
| Author: | KAPTOR [ Tue Dec 21, 2010 04:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
I just recently became aware of a wireless version of TOW, always sumpthin new. |
|
| Author: | ForsakenOutlaw [ Wed Dec 22, 2010 19:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Cag with the Mav's remember the older ones A-D had a 125 lb. shaped charge warhead for tanks. The E went to penetrating blast-fragmentation of 300 lb. so different warhead sort of since the larger one is better for all around use. The Navy loved it because it did nasty things to small ships and the USAF always loves big bang bang. Has anything happened with the H-K Mavericks? I couldn't figure out one way or the other. Remember the Israelis used Mavericks without warheads to knock out trucks because there was so much kinetic energy and accuracy behind them. KE is the biggest thing to the tank, those Mav's have a lot of it and the warhead just makes things nicer. Mavericks also hit the tank almost always from the top because they were diving on them so I doubt even an M1 could take a hit from an older Maverick and still survive. |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Wed Dec 22, 2010 23:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
KAPTOR wrote: I just recently became aware of a wireless version of TOW, always sumpthin new. If its wireless what do they call it? the TO?
|
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Wed Dec 22, 2010 23:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
ForsakenOutlaw wrote: Cag with the Mav's remember the older ones A-D had a 125 lb. shaped charge warhead for tanks. The E went to penetrating blast-fragmentation of 300 lb. so different warhead sort of since the larger one is better for all around use. The Navy loved it because it did nasty things to small ships and the USAF always loves big bang bang. Has anything happened with the H-K Mavericks? I couldn't figure out one way or the other. Remember the Israelis used Mavericks without warheads to knock out trucks because there was so much kinetic energy and accuracy behind them. KE is the biggest thing to the tank, those Mav's have a lot of it and the warhead just makes things nicer. Mavericks also hit the tank almost always from the top because they were diving on them so I doubt even an M1 could take a hit from an older Maverick and still survive. Actually older Mavericks hit at a 48 degree angle... A diving attack to it would depend on what and where it hit... Nice video of one... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w81mYvho9cE If you hit reactave armor and its multilayered like the new armor you are not going to penetrate as the copper jet will not be allowed to form due to the blasts, and if you hit on depleted uranium on certain parts of the M1 hull you will not penetrate with a standard HEAT warhead... But then again, we are not shooting at M1s with Mavericks... 
|
|
| Author: | KAPTOR [ Thu Dec 23, 2010 03:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
CAG Hotshot wrote: KAPTOR wrote: I just recently became aware of a wireless version of TOW, always sumpthin new. If its wireless what do they call it? the TO? Tube launched Optically tracked Wirelessly guided
|
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Thu Dec 23, 2010 06:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
KAPTOR wrote: CAG Hotshot wrote: KAPTOR wrote: I just recently became aware of a wireless version of TOW, always sumpthin new. If its wireless what do they call it? the TO? Tube launched Optically tracked Wirelessly guided Good one! |
|
| Author: | KAPTOR [ Fri Dec 24, 2010 02:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
TOW was a tremendous innovation but geeze you gotta employ it right to not get yourself killed. |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Fri Dec 24, 2010 08:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Isnt that true of just about every battlefield weapon? If you use it wrong either the weapon itself will kill you, or the enemy will when they see your mistake and isolate your position after you failed to employ your weapon... |
|
| Author: | KAPTOR [ Sat Dec 25, 2010 01:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
I just mean it's so friggin slow. Tank gunners have shown that they have time to slew and kill the launcher AFTER the TOW is fired but before it hits if they are fortunate enough to see where it came from when launched. Still, it's been damn deadly for what 40+ years? |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Sat Dec 25, 2010 03:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Yes, its been around for a very long time... Entered production in the 1970s... |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 02:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Maverick Missile warhead sizes... |
Received a PDF that shows info on what it takes to destroy an M1... It took 2 Maverick missile hits to the hull, and a Sabot round from another M1 to totally knock the tank out. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|