junkers Posted December 13 Share Posted December 13 Hello everyone, I just started playing this game. How effective is the TOW-2 BGM-7D anti-tank missile against reactive armor? The game shows that it can penetrate the frontal armor with reactive armor, but Wikipedia shows that it has no series explosives. What is the real situation? (I know that the focus of this game is not on the analysis of tank damage, I am just curious) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Solution Ssnake Posted December 14 Members Solution Share Posted December 14 TOW-2 is a singular HEAT warhead. Tandem charges are indicated in SB Pro nomenclature by adding an Asterisk (e.g., "TOW-2A*"); top-attack munitions come with a Caret (e.g., "TOW-2B^") In your example, the Kontakt-1 reactive armor will degrade the warhead to some degree, but TOW-2 is still so powerful that it punches through regardless. Tandem warheads will not be addected by ERA tiles as the precursor charge would neutralize them before the main charge's HEAT jet arrives. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junkers Posted December 14 Author Share Posted December 14 Thanks for your answer, does this mean that TOW-2 can penetrate everything? Which reactive armor can deal with it in this case? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted December 14 Members Share Posted December 14 There are tanks and locations that will withstand TOW-2. Not many, but they exist. And then there's also active protection systems, but they are a problem for most missiles, irrespective of warhead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iarmor Posted Sunday at 10:16 PM Share Posted Sunday at 10:16 PM (edited) This IDF Magach 6B (M60A1 RISE) was hit by two HOT ATGMs launched from a Syrian Gazelle helicopter. The first missile hit the turret side, where the Blazer ERA tiles degraded the penetration ability of the HEAT jet. It was still powerful enough to make that visible hole in the armor, despite the angle, but failed to achieve a full penetration. The crew then bailed out, carrying the wounded TC (company CO). Immediately after, a second missile hit the hull side, where there was no ERA, and set the tank ablaze. 500th armored brigade near Kafr Nabrakh, June 8th 1982. Edited Sunday at 10:18 PM by Iarmor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted Monday at 01:54 AM Members Share Posted Monday at 01:54 AM In short, reactive armor - explosive or not - will degrade but not neutralize incoming HEAT jets. In the other direction, tandem HEAT warheads will neutralize the (first) layer of ERA elements, but only those. The main (passive) armor still needs to be overcome by the main charge. And, of course, we have mechanisms in place that may yield a less than totally destructive result if previous armor layers have sufficiently reduced the power of the HEAT jet. Even active protection systems won't magically dissolve the projectile; if premature detonation occurs, the round may easily have 50% of it's nominal power left. Without passive armor you'd still have a bad day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted Tuesday at 10:55 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 10:55 AM On 12/15/2024 at 4:16 PM, Iarmor said: This IDF Magach 6B (M60A1 RISE) was hit by two HOT ATGMs launched from a Syrian Gazelle helicopter. The first missile hit the turret side, where the Blazer ERA tiles degraded the penetration ability of the HEAT jet. It was still powerful enough to make that visible hole in the armor, despite the angle, but failed to achieve a full penetration. The crew then bailed out, carrying the wounded TC (company CO). Immediately after, a second missile hit the hull side, where there was no ERA, and set the tank ablaze. 500th armored brigade near Kafr Nabrakh, June 8th 1982. Very interesting historical photos! That's a great example of ERA at work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted Tuesday at 10:58 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 10:58 AM On 12/15/2024 at 7:54 PM, Ssnake said: In short, reactive armor - explosive or not - will degrade but not neutralize incoming HEAT jets. In the other direction, tandem HEAT warheads will neutralize the (first) layer of ERA elements, but only those. The main (passive) armor still needs to be overcome by the main charge. And, of course, we have mechanisms in place that may yield a less than totally destructive result if previous armor layers have sufficiently reduced the power of the HEAT jet. Even active protection systems won't magically dissolve the projectile; if premature detonation occurs, the round may easily have 50% of it's nominal power left. Without passive armor you'd still have a bad day. I think some ERA is better than others at degrading the incoming weapon. Kontakt 1 and Blazer for example work only against single unitary HEAT warheads. Kontakt 5, Relikt, Kaktus, Nozh (either in its own casing or adapted to Kontakt 1 casings as seems common currently), and other similar Heavy ERAs, will probably be even more effective against a single HEAT warhead, and provide some protection against KE attacks as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted Tuesday at 03:54 PM Members Share Posted Tuesday at 03:54 PM Yes, and we factor that in, of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.