0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Posts: 7549
Vahdat, Moghavemat, Ezzat
*
ir
Colonel (سرهنگ)
And for some people who wonder,the keyword is armoured recovery vehicle:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_recovery_vehicle



They can be shot at with ATGM's can they not? So when one tank is immobalized, they will send this in and then that gets shot too. Then they send in another one and that gets shot too.. now you have yourself 1 tank and two armoured recovery vehiacles and their personnel in the middle of a barrage of gunfire, artillery shells,  and the occasional RPG or ATGM.

My point when i replied to you is ; it doesn't matter if the tank was destroyed or not, as long as you immobilize it you have reached your objective which is to halt the approaching tank.

How effective is an immobilized tank? It still can shoot, but sooner or later you can hit it again and again and again until support arrives. Once support arrives they won't be in the best of position now will they? Therefore it becomes a liability.

So it doesn't matter if tanks are destroyed and then fixed later, what matters is on the field where there is an objective to be met on THAT day in that hour in that minute, the approaching tank is neutralized. Therefore the mission and objective are no longer met and as a matter of fact becomes a liability because it needs to be rescued/recovered.

Since this matter was brought up, and since this is not an American forum, perhaps it is worth it to respond to something that member "mustavaris" brought up>
In late 2006, the Israeli Army released "figures" of Merkava losses, and I am assuming that Mustavaris (and every amateur/professional I see online) have been relying on these figures (x tanks hit, y tanks penetrated, z tanks destroyed). Please, ignore all that: the only source we have on this matter is the Israeli Army, and if you choose to believe these figures, then you have zero critical faculty: A- Armies lie about these matters ALL THE TIME during ongoing conflicts, the reasons are too obvious to state, B- Israel in specific has historically  and consistently lied about casualties and especially equipment losses (since the early days of the conflict in the late 1940s).

Regarding "Hezbollah propaganda": I have personally read every statement that was issued officially by the party, throughout the conflict and afterward, and their reports have always been very level-headed and modest, even during the heat of the conflict. They almost never reported on events that never took place, and their casualty figures were always  closest to truth. It was Israel that reported on hundreds of Iranians fighting in south lebanon and thousands of captured lebanese fighters and a similar story almost every day of the 2006 war.

Lastly, the IDF gave naive westerners the impression that every tank destroyed in Lebanon was hit by a Kornet: if Mustavaris knew the amount of Kornet launchers available in South Lebanon on July 12,2006, he would not be making the assumptions that he made above.


Very well said. Of-course there can't be no reply to sound logic.
Ya Ali, molla Ali (as)

"There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" - Imam Ali (as)

"''melate ma neshan dade'ast ke be hadaf haye khod momen, va dar rahe on, ta nesar'e jaan eestade'ast.. chenin melati, az america va az hiiich ghodrati nemitars'ad, va be yaari'e khoda neshan khahad daad ke pirooz az on' e hagh, va momenan be hagh ast!"

- Rahbar'e moazzam'e Enghlab'e Islami Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei

Logged
+2
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
When an armoured vehicle is engaged, you are really in a need to hurry. It wonīt be alone. When you attack it, you reveal your position. Then you gotta get away... Enemy artillery, tanks, infantry, snipers and aircraft are all hunting you down. You shoot, then you change the position. As an infantryman, you are the one who is more likely to get killed. You had your shot, maybe lucky one, maybe not.. but in order to have the other chance, you have to escape. In the era of modern technology immobile antitank warfare is lethal, you die unless you move. Then you will be of no use. I am placed to FO unit, we shoot no one unless we get caught. When we have engaged the target and the mission is over, we should be on the move within two minutes.

The reality is, that dominating the battlefield is not as simple as you might like to think.

What comes to this YMJ...

"My point when i replied to you is ; it doesn't matter if the tank was destroyed or not, as long as you immobilize it you have reached your objective which is to halt the approaching tank.

How effective is an immobilized tank? It still can shoot, but sooner or later you can hit it again and again and again until support arrives. Once support arrives they won't be in the best of position now will they? Therefore it becomes a liability.

So it doesn't matter if tanks are destroyed and then fixed later, what matters is on the field where there is an objective to be met on THAT day in that hour in that minute, the approaching tank is neutralized. Therefore the mission and objective are no longer met and as a matter of fact becomes a liability because it needs to be rescued/recovered. "


You are just saying what I have already said long ago. No disagreements there. Killing and destroyung are overrated.
“I searched for God among the Christians and on the Cross and therein I found Him not. I went into the ancient temples of idolatry; no trace of Him was there. I entered the mountain cave of Hira and then went as far as Qandhar but God I found not. With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Caucasus and found there only 'anqa's habitation. Then I directed my search to the Kaaba, the resort of old and young; God was not there even. Turning to philosophy I inquired about him from ibn Sina but found Him not within his range. I fared then to the scene of the Prophet's experience of a great divine manifestation only a "two bow-lengths' distance from him" but God was not there even in that exalted court. Finally, I looked into my own heart and there I saw Him; He was nowhere else.”

Logged
-3
Posts: 7549
Vahdat, Moghavemat, Ezzat
*
ir
Colonel (سرهنگ)
You kept talking about tanks being repaired, which i found completely irrelevant.


Logged
+1
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
It is not. Field repair units and the crews can return many tanks to service condition. A light mine can take out track, or an RPG...but that can be repaired in hours. Much more severe damages can be repaired in a day or two once the vehicle is recovered and moved to forward placed repair facility operated by dedicated unit. In some prolonged conflicts there have been tanks that have been disabled many times. Only in the heat of the combat it is irrelevant [whether the tank is just "out of action" or "destroyed"], and in those situations, many MBTs that have been hit actually continue to fight despite of being immobilized or severely damaged (need evacuation from the field).

You kept talking about tanks being repaired, which i found completely irrelevant.

Logged
-3
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
Now we got that genius running again... How about coming to talk about the point, and keeping the neg rep where the sun donīt shine if you (whom I know) cannot debate about the actual matter?

Logged
0
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
YMJ, I guess you missed also this one..

When you see a video where a tank is hit by a missile/rocket you really cannot know what happened.. Those videos also have a training accident and pictures from various conflicts. The smoke does not tell much alone either. When the tank is destroyed, it is destroyed (not repaired, crew killed/wounded). Putting them out of action is much easier. That is what you guys seem to miss: in the field it does not really matter whether it is out of use "for now" or destroyed but claiming that a tank that is later repaired and most of the crew returns to service were destroyed, is nonsense.

Logged
0
Posts: 7549
Vahdat, Moghavemat, Ezzat
*
ir
Colonel (سرهنگ)
It is not. Field repair units and the crews can return many tanks to service condition. A light mine can take out track, or an RPG...but that can be repaired in hours. Much more severe damages can be repaired in a day or two once the vehicle is recovered and moved to forward placed repair facility operated by dedicated unit. In some prolonged conflicts there have been tanks that have been disabled many times. Only in the heat of the combat it is irrelevant [whether the tank is just "out of action" or "destroyed"], and in those situations, many MBTs that have been hit actually continue to fight despite of being immobilized or severely damaged (need evacuation from the field).


Repairing a tank during a gun fight must be smart and repaired with in hours? I wonder how many RPG's, mortars, magazines you can empty in an hour while they are trying to 'repair' a tank.

Maybe you can repair a tank when facing a guriella force which hit and run anyway, but against an army which has back up, helicopters, aerial support and entrenched artillery locations repairing a tank in a middle of the field is suicide and stupid.

Therefore like you said, for the 'heat of the battle' its completely irrelevant.

Yes during a prolonged war you can repair tanks, Iran did exactly that during the Iran-Iraq war but during a more decisive battle (say the 33 day war) you can't possibly repair a tank safely and the fact that you have immobilized the tank you have stopped its encorchment and taken away its main objective and created a liability for the enemy.

You jump around from one thing to another, we first were talking about the 33 day war then you jump to a prolonged war and say it has been done. Who cares?

Shot down airplanes have been repaired too, so what? It didn't fly when it mattered and the tank didn't move forward when it mattered. Therefore completely irrelevant if it can be repaired or not, as long as it was neutralized and its objective/mission rendered obsolete is all that matters.

Now we got that genius running again... How about coming to talk about the point, and keeping the neg rep where the sun donīt shine if you (whom I know) cannot debate about the actual matter?

hehehe i had to give you a negative rep on top of that, just for fun and so you know it wasn't me..

 
YMJ, I guess you missed also this one..


no read that, but you kept talking about this many repaired, this many penetrated..etc.. which i find completely irrelevant.

What is relevant is how this ATGM was used to neutralize approaching tanks in a very very effective manner. This is what matters.

Logged
0
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
YMJ: I did not suspect you, because if I did, I would have just said it. You have never cast some foul insults despite of strong disagreements unlike certain scum here who like to disagree but cannot talk... but thanks anyway. You should study basics of modern warfare and how the mechanized units work in the field. Besides, even in 2006ś short conflict tanks were RTDed after having been put out of action...






Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 12:27:25 PM by mustavaris

Logged
0
Posts: 12696
*
Major general (سرلشگر)
Quote
نسخه چاپيارسال به دوستان
گزارش فارس از جدیدترین دستاورد دفاعی کشور

"دهلاویه" پایانی بر اسطوره آبرامز و مرکاوا




خبرگزاری فارس: دهلاویه با توجه به نمونه های قبلی، اولین موشک ضدزره ایرانی است که با سامانه هدایت لیزری نیمه اتوماتیک، توان اصابت دقیق به اهداف متحرک و یا ثابت را دارد.

به گزارش گروه امنیتی دفاعی خبرگزاری فارس، سالها پیش و در اواخر جنگ جهانی اول، سربازان آلمانی در خطوط نبرد در جبهه "ویلر برتونو" فرانسه با ماشین جنگی جدیدی روبه رو شدند که مشابه آن را تا آن زمان در هیچ کجا نه دیده و نه شنیده بودند؛ ماشین زره پوشی که مجهز به مسلسل های خودکار در دهلیزهای کناری خود بود و سلاح های متعارف آن روز قادر به انهدام آن نبودند. این غول آهنی انگلیس، زره پوشی به نام "mark-2" بود که توانست در اولین گام، خطوط دفاعی آلمانی ها را بشکنند.
زره پوش انگلیسی مارک-2



اگرچه به سرعت و بعد از وارد شدن این سلاح توانمند انگلیسی ها، آلمان ها نیز تانک های ابداعی  خود را برای مقابله با رقیب انگلیسی وارد میدان کردند، اما از همان زمان تفکر توانمند کردن پیاده نظام برای مقابله با این سلاح جدید جزو یکی از مشغولیت های ذهنی متفکران نظامی قرار گرفت، تا اینکه با فروکش کردن منازعات جهانی در فاصله دو جنگ اول و دوم هم تانک ها و به طبع آن سلاح های ضد تانک برای مدتی به فراموشی سپرده شدند.

با از آغاز جنگ جهانی دوم و تشکیل ارتش های زرهی که با تفکر افرادی همچون لیدن هارت انگلیسی و هانس گودریان آلمانی به طور جدی پا به عرصه نبردهای زمینی گذاشته بودند، بار دیگر سلاح هایی که توانایی انهدام تانک های رقیب را داشته باشند و توسط پیاده نظام نیز قابلیت استفاده را داشته باشند، مورد توجه قرار گرفتند و در این میان راکت های قابل حمل با نفر، اصلی ترین گزینه طرف های درگیر بود.

* رقابت بازوکا و پانزرفاوست؛ اجداد راکتهای ضدزره

راکت انداز "بازوکا M9" اولین راکت انداز ضد تانک قابل حمل توسط نفر بود که در سال 1942 میلادی توسط آمریکایی ها وارد عرصه نبرد شد و دو سال بعد نیز یگان های ارتش لوفت وافه، موشک ضد تانک "پانزرفاوست" را در مقابل بازوکا ارائه کردند. گرچه بازوکا هیچ گاه به اندازه پانزرفاوست نتوانست در میادین نبرد حضور پیدا کند، اما این دو را می توان اجداد اصلی موشک های ضد تانک قابل حمل با نفر امروزی نامید.


سلاح دوش پرتاب ضدزره بازوکا

"پانزرفاوست" بعد از شکست آلمان نازی به دست روس ها افتاد و نمونه کپی برداری شده از آن با نام "RPG-2"  اولین نمونه  از نسل درخشان موشک های "RPG"  بوذ که در سال 1949 وارد خط تولید شد و در سوی دیگر نیز توسعه موشک بازوکا به ارائه نمونه های درخشانی همچون موشک انداز "لاو" و " BGM71 TOW"  در ارتش ایالات متحده انجامید.


سلاح دوش پرتاب ضدزره پانزرفاوست

پس از جنگ جهانی دوم، مهم ترین نوآوری و پیشرفت در ساخت نسل های جدید این سلاح، هدایت پذیر کردن آنان بود؛ هدایت از طریق امواج رادیویی، انتقال اطلاعات سایت هدف گیری به موشک از طریق سیم، استفاده از سیستم های لیزری فعال و غیر فعال و در جدیدترین نسل این موشک ها استفاده از سیستم فعال هدایت راداری برای کشف هدف، مهم ترین پیشرفت هایی است که در این عرصه ایجاد شده است و کشورهایی همچون بریتانیا، فرانسه، ایران، چین و رژیم صهیونیستی محصولات درخشانی همچون سامانه های "FGM-148 Javelin "، "اسپایک LR"، "eryxe" را ارائه کنند.

* نبرد موشکها ضدزره ایران با تانکهای اهدایی شوروی به عراق

تا پیش از پیروزی شکوهمند انقلاب اسلامی اصلی ترین سلاح ضد زره ارتش، راکت دوش‌پرتابی بود که از ایالات متحده خریداری و وارد سازمان رزم ارتش شده بود.

البته در کنار اینها، تعداد محدودی سلاح دوش پرتابRPG-7   نیز از طریق بلوک شرق خریداری شده و در انبارهای تسلیحاتی ایران موجود بود.

پس از پیروزی انقلاب و تحریم تسلیحاتی ایران از سوی کشورهای غربی به رهبری آمریکا و همچنین تجاوز عراق به مرزهای کشورمان و استفاده گسترده این کشور از نیروهای زرهی، موشک اندازRPG-7  در کنار موشک های آمریکایی " تاو" که از طریق خریداران واسطه به دست ایران می رسید، تبدیل به اصلی ترین سلاح ضد زره نیروهای ایرانی به خصوص نیروهای مردمی و سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی شد و تا پایان جنگ، هزاران تانک عراقی در عملیات های مختلف توسط همین تسلیحات به آتش کشیده شدند.

با وجود این در اواسط جنگ تحمیلی و از سال 1365 با ورود تانک T-72 که ارتش عراق نام "شیر بابل" بر آن نهاده بود و با مساعدت اتحاد جماهیر شوروی در اختیار این کشور قرار گرفته بود، عملا سلاح RPG-7  توانمندی خود را به دلیل زره های واکنش گر این تانک از دست داد و از سوی دیگر ایران با محدودیت تعداد و منابع خرید موشک های آمریکایی تاو روبه رو شد.

* "طوفان" ایران در عرصه تسلیحات ضدزره

ایران برای رفع این مشکل تلاش وسیعی را برای خودکفایی در این زمینه آغاز کرد که یکی از آن ها ساخت موشک نمونه بومی موشک تاو و دیگری بهسازی راکت های خانواده RPG-7  و افزودن پروفیل های نفوذی چند لایه در خرج گود این موشک بود که توان نمونه های بهسازی شده را برای نفوذ به داخل زره های واکنش گر به بیش از 25 درصد و توانایی نفوذ به زره های واکنش گر را تا عمق 700 میلیمتر می داد.


موشک ضدزره طوفان

ساخت نمونه های انفجاری شدید و همچنین مجهز به کلاهک ترمو باریک از جمله برنامه هایی بود که پس از پایان جنگ در مورد بهسازی راکت انداز RPG-7  به عمل آمد.

در کنار این پروژه ساخت نمونه داخلی موشک تاو، مسیر دیگری بود که از سوی ایران برای رسیدن به موشک های ضد زره قابل حمل دنبال می شد.

این پروژه که می توان آن را نقطه آغاز دستیابی ایران به موشک های هدایت شونده ضد تانک عنوان کرد در سال 1365 و در صنایع "یا مهدی" آغاز به کار کرد.

اگرچه این پروژه در زمان جنگ تحمیلی به پایان نرسید، اما پس از جنگ و در قالب یک پروژه داخلی به نتایج درخشانی رسید و هم اکنون نمونه تولید داخلی این موشک با نام "طوفان" در صنایع موشکی "منتظر المهدی" تولید می شود و نمونه پیش رفته تر آن با توانایی نفوذ عمیق در زره های واکنش گر و مقاومت در مقابل تدابیر متقابل در دست ساخت است.

* "دهلاویه" پایانی بر عصر غولهای زرهی

اما در این میان موشک "دهلاویه" را که خط تولید آن روز گذشته سردار احمد وحیدی توسط وزیر دفاع و پشتیبانی نیروهای مسلح افتتاح شد، می توان جدیدترین محصول صنایع نظامی ایران در عرصه موشک های هدایت شونده ضد زره عنوان کرد.

موشک دهلاویه با توجه به نمونه های قبلی، اولین موشک ضدزره ایرانی است که با سامانه هدایت لیزری نیمه اتوماتیک، توان اصابت دقیق به اهداف متحرک و یا ثابت را دارد و همانند اسلاف خارجی خود همانند AGM-114 هلفایر می تواند به کابوسی برای ماشین آلات  نظامی تبدیل و حتی بر ضد اهداف پرنده ای همچون بالگردها نیز به کار رود.


جدیدترین موشک ضدزره ایرانی با نام دهلاویه

استفاده از سیستم هدایت لیزری علاوه بر توانمندی هدف گیری بسیاردقیق نسبت به سیستم های مشابه نظیر هدایت با سیم و هدایت رادیویی در مقابل استفاده دشمن از تدابیر متقابل الکترونیکی بسیار مقاوم بود و با توجه به سرعت بالای این موشک کمترین زمان ممکن را برای کشف نشانه روی لیزری به دشمن می دهد.

سامانه نشانه روی این موشک که  بر روی پایه قبضه قرار گرفته است، با استفاده از حسگرهای مادون قرمز و همچنین دوربین های نور مرئی امکان کشف هدف را به خدمه داده و سپس با قفل شدن نشان گر لیزری بر روی هدف و تعقیب آن از سوی حسگر در نوک دماغه موشک، هدف مورد اصابت قرار می گیرد.


موشک ضدزره دهلاویه

این سیستم لیزری بکار رفته در موشک دهلاویه در تمام شرایط عملیاتی و آب وهوایی قابلیت استفاده را دارد.

موتور محرکه موشک یک راکت سوخت جامد است که می تواند بردی بیش از 5000 متر را به این موشک داده و با دادن سرعتی نزدیک به 2 ماخ امکان نفوذ عمیق موشک را در داخل اهداف از جمله زره پوش های دشمن به وجود می آورد.

موشک دهلاویه دارای چهار باله در عقب موشک و دو باله در جلوی آن است که هدایت موشک در هنگام پرواز به سمت هدف از طریق بالک های جلویی امکان پذیر می شود.

در سیستم برخوردی، موشک دهلاویه دارای یک سر جنگی دو مرحله ای است که توان بالایی برای نفوذ به زره های واکنش گر با مقاومت بالا محسوب می شود.

با این تفاسیر و با توجه به سرعت و توان این موشک، می توان قدرت نفوذی به میزان بالای 1000 میلیمتر را در زره های واکنش گرا برای این موشک تخمین زد.

چنین توانی برای انهدام طیف وسیعی از تانک های دشمن از جمله تانک های سری آبرامز آمریکا، تانک های مرکاوای رژیم صهیونیستی، لئوپارد 2 آلمانی و لکلرک فرانسوی کفایت خواهد کرد.


تانک مرکاوا، نماد نیروی زمینی ارتش رژیم صهیونیستی

 


تانک آبرامز، نماد نیروی زمینی ارتش آمریکا

هرچند بسیاری از این این زره پوشها در مناطق عملیاتی خود توسط تسلیحاتی به مراتب پایین تر از موشک دهلاویه از پای درآمدند مانند آنچه در جنگ عراق و افغانستان بر سر تانکهای آمریکایی "آبرامز" آمد و یا در جنوب لبنان وقتی مجاهدین حزب الله با راکتهای در اختیار خود بلایی بر سر نماد ارتش اسراییل یعنی تانک "مرکاوا" آوردند که رژیم صهیونیستی مجبور شد برای مدتی این تانک را از چرخه تولید خارج کند.



نمایی از تانک منهدم شده اسرائیلی توسط نیروهای حزب الله لبنان در جنگ 33روزه

به طور حتم نصب سر جنگی ترمو باریک برای مقابله با تاسیسات مهم زمینی و انهدام پناهگاه های دشمن نیز از مهم ترین برنامه صنایع نظامی ایران برای موشک دهلاویه محسوب می شود.

به نظر می رسد در آینده نزدیک موشک دهلاویه علاوه بر توانایی استفاده توسط پیاده نظام، نقش مهمی را نیز در خودروهای نظامی ایفا خواهد کرد، همان گونه که نمونه های غربی و شرقی آن اغلب بر روی تانک ها و نفربرها سوار شده اند.

به هر حال "دهلاویه" آخرین دست پرورده صنایع نظامی ایران محسوب می شود که می تواند شمشیری برنده بر ضد تانک های غربی باشد و شاید فرماندهان نظامی غرب از هم اکنون باید خود را آماده مقابله با این موشک در نبردهای آینده کنند.

گزارش: مهدی پورصفا

http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13910418000234
[/size]

Logged
0
Posts: 109
*
Private (سرباز عادى)
I wonder why the missile only has 2 forward fins! I thought you need 4 fins to allow the missile to move in the 3 planes. Is that consistent with the original Kornet-E?

Logged
0
Posts: 3290
Best devotion to Allah is not to make show of it.
*
ir
Major (سرگرد)
I wonder why the missile only has 2 forward fins! I thought you need 4 fins to allow the missile to move in the 3 planes. Is that consistent with the original Kornet-E?

Yes all Kornets have two fins.

Logged
0
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
The missile is rotating when it is launched in order to stabilize it, so two fins are more than adequate, besides the little pieces in front of the moving frontal wings are likely used to affect the flow of air in order to reinforce the effect (my guess).

See this video:

anti-tank system KORNET -E (противотанковый комплекс Корнет -Э) Small | Large


I wonder why the missile only has 2 forward fins! I thought you need 4 fins to allow the missile to move in the 3 planes. Is that consistent with the original Kornet-E?


Last Edit: July 11, 2012, 05:13:13 AM by mustavaris

Logged
0
Posts: 183
Allah is the Greatest
*
us
Private (سرباز عادى)
Iran Inaugurates Production Line of New Anti-Armor Missile System
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi on Saturday inaugurated the production line of a new home-made anti-armor missile system named 'Dehlaviyeh'.




"The Dehlaviyeh missile is one of the most hi-tech anti-armor missiles designed for destroying different advanced tanks which are equipped with reactive armor," Vahidi said at the inauguration ceremony of the missile system.

He also reiterated that the missile has been equipped with a special guiding system (which is resistant to different types of enemy's electronic warfare), a warhead and a missile-launcher and a portable engine-propeller.

"The missile system has been designed in a way that it can hit both fix ground targets and mobile armored targets," Vahidi said.

Last August, the Iranian Defense Ministry started mass-production of 73-mm anti-armor rockets capable of piercing and destroying armored vehicles from a 1,300-meter distance.

"The weapon is mobile and due to its low weight, it can be carried by an individual trooper," Vahidi told reporters on the sidelines of a ceremony held to launch the production line of the rocket at the time.
Persian Pride

Logged
0
Posts: 1850
*
au
Chief Master Sergeant (استوار)
When an armoured vehicle is engaged, you are really in a need to hurry. It wonīt be alone. When you attack it, you reveal your position. Then you gotta get away... Enemy artillery, tanks, infantry, snipers and aircraft are all hunting you down. You shoot, then you change the position. As an infantryman, you are the one who is more likely to get killed. You had your shot, maybe lucky one, maybe not.. but in order to have the other chance, you have to escape.

Apparently Hezbollah soldiers used Camouflage Nets to hide firing positions. If enemy Tank was disabled Hezbollah soldiers would keep their position.

If enemy Tank was not disabled Hezbollah soldiers would use underground tunnels to hide and resupply.

Camouflage Nets were heavily used to hide ATGM Infantry. So ATGM warfare was not about lucky chance but about good Camouflage and well dug in positions that could protect ATGM Infantry from Tank and Aircraft fire.
Last Edit: July 11, 2012, 10:07:16 AM by Numbers

Logged
+1
Posts: 109
*
Private (سرباز عادى)
Thank you 1979 and Mustavaris. I can now clearly see that all Kornet models have only 2 forward canards. However, I still don't understand how 2 moving fins would allow the missile to be guided in the X,Y and Z axis. I don't know if the missile spinning has any bearing on that or not. However, as can be seen, the missile is quite accurate. So it's intriguing to me! But hey, I'm not an aerospace engineer. So I plead ignorance.

Logged
+1
Posts: 109
*
Private (سرباز عادى)
Apparently Hezbollah soldiers used Camouflage Nets to hide firing positions. If enemy Tank was disabled Hezbollah soldiers would keep their position.

If enemy Tank was not disabled Hezbollah soldiers would use underground tunnels to hide and resupply.

Camouflage Nets were heavily used to hide ATGM Infantry. So ATGM warfare was not about lucky chance but about good Camouflage and well dug in positions that could protect ATGM Infantry from Tank and Aircraft fire.


I tend to agree with Mustavaris' analysis. I'm quite certain that Hezbollah fighters are masters at the art of stealth and camouflage. But when you take a shot at your enemy with an ATGM from around 1-2 thousand meters, you've basically announced your presence in a very loud and spectacular manner. So at this point, your enemy knows you're there, they know your general direction as well as your approximate distance. You can be sure that as soon as they recover from the initial shock of the explosion, all kind of eyes will be looking your way to pinpoint your location and take you out. Now consider that your enemy has unchallenged mastery of the sky and enjoys overwhelming superiority on land in terms of soldiers, guns, tanks, artillery, missiles... most of which you don't even have in your inventory. Your only true advantages are the element of surprise and intimate knowledge of the terrain. Therefore logic would dictate that you do not tempt fate after you have compromised your advantages by taking additional shots at the enemy from the same position. I would use up the few seconds of confusion after the hit to pack up and relocate to a spot as far as possible. And then rinse and repeat.

I suspect this is what allowed Hezbollah to contain the Israeli onslaught without incurring a massive amount of casualties. Remember that the loss of one soldier was numerically more significant for Hezbollah than the Israelis. So I'm sure they would have been quite averse at taking avoidable risks.

For me, all of this further illustrates the significance of Hezbollah's success in stopping the Israeli military in their tracks. It was a stunning and amazing performance by them.

Logged
+2
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
Suicidal. Hezbollah fought in very disciplined and professional manner and I am certain that they did not make themselves sitting duck targets. Camoflage and field fortifications are standard stuff though while in this case they had more time to prepare them than in most conflicts there will ever be, but that makes the changing of positions more likely, not less likely...

Apparently Hezbollah soldiers used Camouflage Nets to hide firing positions. If enemy Tank was disabled Hezbollah soldiers would keep their position.

If enemy Tank was not disabled Hezbollah soldiers would use underground tunnels to hide and resupply.

Camouflage Nets were heavily used to hide ATGM Infantry. So ATGM warfare was not about lucky chance but about good Camouflage and well dug in positions that could protect ATGM Infantry from Tank and Aircraft fire.


Logged
0
Posts: 1196
Brother Skylark
*
fi
T. Sergeant (گروهبان دو
I am in 100% agreement with this. And the results speak for themselves. Hezbollah fought well, they were disciplined and not taking unnecessery risks.

I tend to agree with Mustavaris' analysis. I'm quite certain that Hezbollah fighters are masters at the art of stealth and camouflage. But when you take a shot at your enemy with an ATGM from around 1-2 thousand meters, you've basically announced your presence in a very loud and spectacular manner. So at this point, your enemy knows you're there, they know your general direction as well as your approximate distance. You can be sure that as soon as they recover from the initial shock of the explosion, all kind of eyes will be looking your way to pinpoint your location and take you out. Now consider that your enemy has unchallenged mastery of the sky and enjoys overwhelming superiority on land in terms of soldiers, guns, tanks, artillery, missiles... most of which you don't even have in your inventory. Your only true advantages are the element of surprise and intimate knowledge of the terrain. Therefore logic would dictate that you do not tempt fate after you have compromised your advantages by taking additional shots at the enemy from the same position. I would use up the few seconds of confusion after the hit to pack up and relocate to a spot as far as possible. And then rinse and repeat.

I suspect this is what allowed Hezbollah to contain the Israeli onslaught without incurring a massive amount of casualties. Remember that the loss of one soldier was numerically more significant for Hezbollah than the Israelis. So I'm sure they would have been quite averse at taking avoidable risks.

For me, all of this further illustrates the significance of Hezbollah's success in stopping the Israeli military in their tracks. It was a stunning and amazing performance by them.

Logged
0
Posts: 3130
*
ir
Major (سرگرد)
a sniper never fires from the same position twice even if he has the opportunity to perform chain-snipes and take out easy kills.
Well this is the general rule for sniping unless you are US fighting an already dead nation like in Iraq, massacring( not fighting, US has not fought a real war since vietnam) unorganized  insurgents running around like headless chickens.

The same is true for precision-based ATGM crew. Never fire from the same position twice. Indeed Hezbollah used this rule in their engagement with IDF in summer 2006.
"You will never achieve righteousness until you give away (in the way of God) what you love the most" Quran 3:92
The wisdom in this verse is used in star wars:
"Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose, for the fear of loss is the path to the dark side"- Master Yoda advising young Anakin.
Last Edit: July 11, 2012, 11:28:39 PM by maydayfire

Logged
0
Posts: 506
*
au
Private 1st Class (سرباز یكم)
Is it possible to place 1 or 2 of these on one of the smaller speedboats?
And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. Quran (3:103)

Logged
0
Posts: 7549
Vahdat, Moghavemat, Ezzat
*
ir
Colonel (سرهنگ)
Is it possible to place 1 or 2 of these on one of the smaller speedboats?

I would think so and on helicopters too.

But the problem is the laser; i would assume it needs to be stable and illuminating the target.

Logged
0
Posts: 12696
*
Major general (سرلشگر)
Quote
But the problem is the laser; i would assume it needs to be stable and illuminating the target.

Much like Iranian small Katyushas on board small boats, and tank turrets, such technologies are available to Iranian armed forces and should be no problem to make them available for Kornets!

In fact, if IRIN or IRGCN will ever design small A/D systems for their fast attack boats, such a dynamic stabilizer platforms are a must!


catsoo

Logged
0
Posts: 1850
*
au
Chief Master Sergeant (استوار)
But when you take a shot at your enemy with an ATGM from around 1-2 thousand meters, you've basically announced your presence in a very loud and spectacular manner. So at this point, your enemy knows you're there, they know your general direction as well as your approximate distance.

It was reported that Hezbollah used undeground bunkers and tunnels. ATGM positions were supplied with bunkers and tunnels. Entrances to bunkers, tunnels and positions of ATGMs were hidden by camouflage nets.

After Anti Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) was shot, Infantry operators would hide in bunker. Infantry will wait if enemy shoots otherwise surface up to reload and shoot ATGM again.

That was Hezbollah strategy in 2006 War.
Last Edit: July 15, 2012, 05:02:35 AM by Numbers

Logged
0
Posts: 12696
*
Major general (سرلشگر)
Dehlavieh uses for control surfaces in the rear. Looking at pictures, every singe of these wing lets are wider than the diameter of the missile. My question is, how these wing lets fit in the launching tube even folded? take a look:






Catsoo
Last Edit: July 22, 2012, 01:50:13 PM by Catsoo

Logged
0