Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Multi-purpose rocket launcher
jastayme3    11/15/2007 7:42:09 PM
Has anyone attempted to make a launch tube that can fire both handheld SAM and anti-tank(as well as sundry other types)? As a tube is a tube, the main need would be to standardize the shape of the missle fuselage enough to fit, but still retain their particular guidance and warhead.
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
murabit821       11/15/2007 8:16:11 PM
maybe BOLIDE is near this concept used one missile against various targerts (but i am not sure it also against MBT)

i to propose
system like with one launcher for all tasks, maybe used standart common missille system and from this missile creat various missiles
most common types
missile  against aircraft , light armour vehicles , etc
missile with tandem anti tank warhead,
guide and unguide HE or thermobaric  rocket , agaist bunkers, soft targets
rocket with different warheads  but with GPS guide , firing to air 4-5km than GPS guide glide to target.

Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/15/2007 8:16:20 PM
The British HVM uses the same launcher and missile to engage vehicles and aircraft, in a man portable system, and the Canadian ADADTS does the same in a vehicle mount.

I don't know how good HVM would be at taking out a MBT, but three mach 4 darts can't do too badly. 

Quote    Reply

WarNerd       11/16/2007 3:18:23 AM
The British Starstreak HVM warhead is 3x metal darts which are supposed to be able to penetrate of RHA, so it should be effective against IFV, but not tanks.  The explosive charge in the darts is only enough to cause them to fragment after penetrating the target.
The ADATS (Air Defense Anti Tank System) was design from the outset as a dual purpose system with a shaped charge fragmentation warhead, and both impact and proximity fuses that can penetrate more than of RHA.  Probably not sufficient against the frontal armor of current MBT's.
The problem with dual purpose system lies in the difference in the targets and the missile design philosophies that result.
Aircraft are fast, fragile, and nearly unarmored.  You need a fast missile agile missile, with a lot of engine relative to the warhead.  And do not be surprised if the missile needs to be able to chase the target.  These requirements favor a long thin missile.
Tanks are slow, massively armored, and ground hugging.  You want the biggest warhead (and the largest diameter) possible to smash the armor, but do not need as much engine to get it there.  Most anti-tank missiles tend to be short and squat.
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       11/16/2007 3:06:46 PM
I can see a multi-mode firing unit and missiles that are either decent at attacking aircraft and excellent at attacking tanks, or else excellent at attacking tanks and decent for low speed aircraft. About the only way I can see to make something that is a nearly optimal solution for both is something like the Startstreak that is programmed to make a high velocity top attack against tanks. That might well be even better than the best current generation missiles because it would be basically immune to conventional reactive armor, the top of the vehicle probably won't carry heavy reactive armor, and the three penetrators would be very difficult for an APS system to shoot down.
Quote    Reply