Best Infantry Fighting Vehicle

[yiostheoy]

In a modern ground battle, the tanks will be deployed forward with infantry following closely behind them.

The mission of the tanks is to take out enemy tanks and field guns.

The mission of the infantry is to protect the tanks from other disbursed skirmishing infantry.

If you cannot pop the top of the infantry vehicle then it is not much good for anything. Then it might as well be a taxi cab.

Did you learn military theory during WW2?

1974 - 1981 actually.

Were you born yet?

 

[Manonthestreet]

TOW was created in the seventies. Advanced reactive armor came in the eighties. Please tell me how TOW was designed to defeat advanced reactive armor before it ever existed...

There is nothing special about TOW that allows it to bypass reactive armor. It has to wear down the plating just like all other AT missiles.

Maybe you should do more reading....

 

[Onyx]

1974 - 1981 actually.

Well apparently you didn't learn anything. Leave the military talk to the educated, wont you?

 

[Onyx]

Maybe you should do more reading....

I'll take that as your second concession.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Maybe you should do more reading....

I'll take that as your second concession.

I'll take that as your desire to remain ignorant while proclaiming yourself an expert

 

[Manonthestreet]

The TOW 2 has a three-section probe, a more powerful motor and a 6-in (152-mm) diameter warhead. The TOW 2A is similar to the TOW 2 except that it incorporates a tandem warhead to increase its effectiveness against reactive armor. The precursor warhead in the missile probe detonates the reactive armor allowing the primary warhead to penetrate the tank. https://www.militaryperiscope.com/mdb-smpl/weapons/missrock/antitank/w0003228.shtml......ooooooopps

 

[Onyx]

The TOW 2 has a three-section probe, a more powerful motor and a 6-in (152-mm) diameter warhead. The TOW 2A is similar to the TOW 2 except that it incorporates a tandem warhead to increase its effectiveness against reactive armor. The precursor warhead in the missile probe detonates the reactive armor allowing the primary warhead to penetrate the tank. https://www.militaryperiscope.com/mdb-smpl/weapons/missrock/antitank/w0003228.shtml......ooooooopps

First off, your link doesn't lead anywhere. I even fixed the html at the end. What a fucking lame source anyways. Militaryperiscope? Really?

No version of the TOW has two warheads within the same missile. Tandem warheads are not a new concept, and not unique to TOW missiles. Reactive armor doesn't detonate unless you are talking about explosive reactive armor, which has a line of outward facing charges between the tank and plating designed to mitigate impact. I wasn't even talking about explosive reactive armor, which tandem warheads would be useful against.

Advanced reactive armor can absorb the shock from multiple AT missiles without losing effect. It would typically take 3-6 direct hits (depending on the tank) on the same section of armor plating to disable advanced reactive armor and cause internal damage to the tank itself. One or two Sabot shells on the flank or rear of an MBT will penetrate right through.

Arguing that ATGM is more effective at destroying at defeating reactive armor than APFSDS shells is just plain junk science. You obviously have no education in military science, or the slightest understanding of armored warfare.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Your premise is we our primary infantry AT weapon is not capable of doing its mission......

 

[Manonthestreet]

BGM-71D variant; TOW-2A optimized to defeat reactive armor with tandem warheads BGM-71 TOW - Wikipedia no idea why link didnt work........again ooooooooopsssss better do more reading instead of spouting bs

 

[Onyx]

Your premise is we our primary infantry AT weapon is not capable of doing its mission......

No, actually my position was that Sabot rounds are more effective at destroying an MBT than an ATGM launcher. You can disable reactive armor with multiple high impact anti-tank missiles on a section of armor plating, but a 120mm APFSDS shell will cut through like butter.

The TOW is not the primary US infantry AT weapon by the way. That would be the FGM-148 Javelin.

 

[Manonthestreet]

I never said which one was more effective,,,,,nice try though ant changing your narrative that the tow cant penetrate reactive armor.......caught in your ignorance......do the lib twostep and lie about what the other person said....

 

[Hossfly]

TOW Missile vs T-72 tank.

 

[Manonthestreet]

TOW Missile vs T-72 tank.

Did not know that had top strike capability

 

[Onyx]

I never said which one was more effective,,,,

tanks dont use atgms as main round because it limits number of rounds and simply isnt cost effective.

Sure sounded like it. You made it sound like the only reason was cost, which was obvious bullshit.

,nice try though ant changing your narrative that the tow cant penetrate reactive armor

I never said the TOW could not penetrate reactive armor. You are the one shifting the goalposts, like a dishonest idiot I must say.

Although it can't anyways. TOW is designed for impact. Not penetration. It wont cut through the tanks chassis even once the reactive armor is rendered useless. Fail again.

 

[Onyx]

TOW Missile vs T-72 tank.

Just pointing out that the missile was already planted over the ammo rack and the tank had no reactive armor.

Don't want anyone getting confused.

 

[Manonthestreet]

I never said which one was more effective,,,,

tanks dont use atgms as main round because it limits number of rounds and simply isnt cost effective.

Sure sounded like it. You made it sound like the only reason was cost, which was obvious bullshit.

,nice try though ant changing your narrative that the tow cant penetrate reactive armor

I never said the TOW could not penetrate reactive armor. You are the one shifting the goalposts, like a dishonest idiot I must say.

Although it can't anyways. TOW is designed for impact. Not penetration. It wont cut through the tanks chassis even once the reactive armor is rendered useless. Fail again.

YOu are an idiot......again how old are you....you lie more than fake jake........ I said a TOW can rip the face off any tank which it can...........DID you watch the vid posted here ...no contact made.......Gee wonder if the TOW has been upgraded since the eighties LMMAAOOO

 

[Onyx]

Here is actual combat footage of a TOW missile bouncing off T-90 armor.



As you can see, the tanks armor is left completely unaffected.

 

[Onyx]

YOu are an idiot......again how old are you....you lie more than fake jake........ I said a TOW can rip the face off any tank which it can...........DID you watch the vid posted here ...no contact made.......Gee wonder if the TOW has been upgraded since the eighties LMMAAOOO

I just posted actual combat footage of a TOW missile making a direct hit on a T-90. 'It did no damage.

Here is a picture of a T-90 tank with explosive reactive armor that was hit by a TOW missile in its flank. Again, no noticeable damage.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Nobody has claimed 100% kill with any weapon....duh

 

[Manonthestreet]

Nobody has claimed 100% kill with any weapon....duh

Just the facts......perhaps you could point out one that is 100% effective