Actually, it does. The report you listed, well I read it. Then I went searching for additional information. First, the war of 2014 was not fought with Javelins. If they had any American Missiles, it was probably older AT-4, or even LAW’s. Those won’t kill a T-72. Either will an old Dragon system. Those are direct fire weapons. In other words, they fly directly into the reactive armor.
However, there is no Reactive Armor on the top of the tank. And no the Javelin’s weren’t being used. They weren’t supplied to Ukraine until Trump was President, and that was the shipment he held up until they announced that Hunter Biden was under investigation, you remember the impeachment from that don’t you?
What are the Javelin anti-tank missiles that Ukraine's President said his country wanted more of in the released transcript of Trump phone call?
abcnews.go.com
So Javelin’s weren’t used in 2014, when this report was researched.
It would be like claiming that the LAW doesn’t kill tanks, so any and all shoulder fired missiles don’t. We’ve seen it on YouTube, and all over the net.
As I mentioned above, there is no reactive armor on the top, or bottoms of the tanks. I’m assuming that will change. So the NLAW and Javelins are designed to attack those areas. Specifically, the missiles are designed to pop up and then detonate over the tank driving the explosive force down.
The Armor on top of the tank is thin, and again, there is no reactive armor there. Now, we can expect the Russians to start figuring out how to put it there, but this is the old historical battle. Every generation sees it. Armor versus penetration.
Reactive Armor is great against direct hits, but if the missile doesn’t it it, then the reactive armor doesn’t do anything.
So sorry, you’re wrong. And shouting that you’re right when we’ve all seen it, doesn’t exactly mean you’re right. The Ukrainians didn’t have Javelins in 2014. They didn’t have them until about halfway through Trump’s presidency.
