The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 8, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: RPG Vs. AT-4
Kodiak    6/20/2003 10:40:26 AM
I've seen several comparisons between RPG's and 40mm grenade launchers on this site. IMO this seems to be unfair, comparing a rocket-motored munition with a smaller powder charge round. Of course the RPG will have more punch in this situation, but it is larger and not able to be put onto an M-16 (or I guess Kalishnikov would be applicable with respect to the RPG, still, can't be gone). If we are talking about comparing personal rocket launchers, then I submit the AT-4 is superior to the RPG in almost every aspect. Better accuracy, portability (it's shorter), range, and closing speed. And, of course, the standard high explosive warhead outperforms RPG's easily. Thoughts?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
doggtag    back to the basics   9/4/2004 4:11:30 PM
ahhh, spotting rifles: an anachronistic sighting system if ever (although fine for the day). Basically, a single-shot, clip fed "weapon" fitted alongside main armaments, with a ballistic trajectory matched to the main weapon's ammo: where the spotter round (a nice bright tracer, and some have a flash head) hits, ideally, so will the main round. Recoilless rifles, and the Chieftain MBT in some early variants, used spotting rifles. But their inherent problems are: 1) it's fires tracer ammo. So your enemy knows where you fired from. 2) if you're not using a stable mount (tripod or vehicle), it takes a lot of battlefield/fire discipline to remain calm enough NOT to twitch even the slightest when firing first the spotting round, then the main round. What's ironic though, the M136/AT-4 WAS developed ("Americanized") off the C Gustaf weapon system, back in the mid/late 1980s. And the system troops have at their disposal now is considerably different than the M136 model I was trained with at Leonard Wood in 1990. There is also the one-shot/throw away launcher AT-8 weapon, which also fires the dual-purpose "smart fuze" round of the AT-4. What's interesting though, during the "Americanization" of the system (from FFV of Sweden, then bought out by Bofors, but built by ATK in the US), the weapon's capabilities were "adjusted" to US standards. There was/is a very lethal front-loading round for the Swedish M2-550 weapons, an "over-caliber" round (comparable to the RPG-series rockets) that could punch through 900mm of armor (something on the order of 120-135mm diameter). The system I was trained with at US Weapons in Army basic was indeed the re-usable model, and we trained with 9mm tracer training inserts. It is strange that in today's environments, it has been decided to return more to the original model as opposed to the one-shot US knock-offs. The HEAA High Explosive Anti Armor round of the USMC SMAW, using a tantalum (some have suggested DU) liner instead of copper was designed specifically to front-kill a T-72 (prior to the days of ERA on everything), suggested performance was about 27-28inches (about 700mm) penetration. The "smart fuze" round was mentioned years ago in Popular Mechanics magazine. It features an interesting fuze which "knows" how to detonate against various targets: if it hits hard armor, it works like an HEDP round, offering external detonation and creating an armor-piercing molten jet. But if it hits soft fortifications (sandbags on bunkers), it penetrates a bit first, then detonates internally. It still amazes me that US doctrine, especially with the increase in MOUT, still chooses to rely on dedicated systems that specific soldiers of a squad must be carrying (AT-4, SMAW), as opposed to some of the newer, more capable rifle grenades which would afford considerably safer enclosed-space firing and short-range work in urban areas. Olin Ordnance, years ago, developed the RAAM Rifleman's Anti Armor Munition, which fired off standard NATO 5.56mm weapons' flash supressors, supposedly capable of defeating 400mm of armor. There was also the US (X)M-132 Viper, a 70mm "product improved" LAW (actually, a new weapon). It offered a promising concept round in a reusable launcher, and had it incorporated the same liner technology of the SMAW HEAA, it could have offered about 21 inches (about 530-550mm) of penetration (Brazil claims an anti-armor round for its 70mm AVIBRAS rocket family can defeat, with a copper liner, ">400mm"). But it appears that it was dropped in favor of the M136/AT4 family. The Viper was obviously lighter, roughly a tad bigger than the LAW, so technically every soldier could have carried one. The Viper was essentially a guided LAW round, but the electronics and warhead tech of the day (early 1980s) wasn't up to par for the job. It used fire-and-forget IR homing, based loosely off the old Redeye SAM (precursor to Stinger), but was not proven effective in trials as was hoped for. With the capabilities of today's electronics and warhead technologies, it is feasible that the US may choose to adopt lighter and more portable, yet still lethal, weapons. And a soldier in a second- or third- story window firing a RAAM down onto the top of an MBT downtown is plenty sufficient (less collateral damage) for the job than a soldier carrying a big SMAW or AT4. The UK has already proven effective guidance systems in the cluster of three 35mm "darts" in the Starstreak HVM MANPADS, a laser guided system. Certainly rounds with the lethality of 60-81mm mortar ammo are sufficient, if placed in the right spot, to kill any AFVs encountered on the modern battlefield. Incorporating precision guidance into these weapons is a logical, and practical, step. Even single 30mm rounds are quite lethal against a wide variety of targets, so including precision guidance into small rounds does make sense. Spotting rifles have seen their spotlight/heyday (such as in the UK's BAT series weapons), but certainly it is time to relegate them to the annals of history alongside the trebuchets, flintlocks, and towed AT guns..
 
Quote    Reply

Firkin47    To be fair    4/10/2009 6:13:51 PM

You mention at-4 by name but only refer to the rpg as rpg. i think you should compare the at-4 to at the very least, a rpg-29. the at-4 still is newer but there isn't as much of a time gap.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy