Better than the Javelin?

[shoshi]

It seems so and seems to have proven effective in Ukraine.

 

[Ringel05]

Meanwhile on the Russian side.........

 

[Concerned American]

It seems so and seems to have proven effective in Ukraine.

I thought you were talking about the AMC Pacer, lol.

 

[para bellum]

NLAW is a very basic ATGM. Short range, simple optics, single stage warhead. It's lightweight and cheap and simple to use, but you have to be very close to the target.

Javelin is a longer range weapon with excellent optics and it has a tandem warhead to take out ERA. The CLU is good for spotting and rangefinding even when you're out of missiles. Javelin obviously a lot more expensive than NLAW, you can probably get 10 NLAW's for every Javelin.

Horses for courses, I like that Stugna-P for it's remote firing capability. Both the Javelin and Stugna have better optics and longer effective ranges than the tanks they are shooting at.

The AFU has demonstrated that all 3 are effective against the T-72/80/90 family- we don't see very many pictures of destroyed Russian tanks with their turrets attached.

 

[Mushroom]

we don't see very many pictures of destroyed Russian tanks with their turrets attached.

That is primarily because of their internal mechanics.

Russia has long loved the automatic loader system for their tanks. But the danger of doing so is that there is almost always a live round inside of the turret, not protected inside the magazine. The fact that so many "blow their tops" has nothing to do with the ability of the weapon, simply how the gun operates.

And that is a major reason why US tanks have always been manually loaded. The next round is not brought into the crew compartment until the gunner is ready to put it into the breech. So even if a US tank gets a similar breech of the hull, it will not be followed by a catastrophic explosion inside.