MGM 166 LOSAT anti-tank weapon

Cel mai mare si peren inamic al oricarui tanc modern nu este racheta AT sau sub-munitiile specializate ci tunul de pe tancul inamic.

In fata atacurilor cu rachete, grenade auto-propulsate sau sub-munitie se mai gasesc portite de scapare, sisteme active de protectie, contramasuri, bruiajul rachetei inamice, etc, dar atunci cand un tanc inamic te-a luat in colimator si a fixat tunul pe tine, sigur vei fi lovit, sansele de supravietuire fiind mult mai mici.

descărcare

Desi exista mai multe familii de proiectile AT (HE sau cumulative) mama la toate si inamicul numarul unu pentru orice tanc este proiectilul de tip sageata, in orice configuratie vreti voi. Dupa cum stim deja proiectile de tip APFSDS sunt de fapt foarte simple, constand intr-o sageata fabricata dintr-un aliaj metalic foarte dens/ greu – tungsten sau uraniu saracit – propulsata spre tinta cu viteza supersonica.

APFSDS “ucide” tancul inamic datorita violentei impactului, a energiei cinetice degajate, si pana acum nu exista nici un mijloc activ de protectie impotriva unui astfel de inamic…

OK, pana aici nimic nou pe site, dar cati dintre voi stiati ca americanii s-au gandit inca din anii “80 sa construiasca o arma bazata pe impactul cinetic la mare viteza impotriva tancurilor, dar care sa fie accesibila infanteriei?!

descărcare (1)

LOSAT Line-of-Sight Anti-Tank Weapon este un sistem AT dezvoltat si fabricat de catre Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control la cererea armatei americane si care a generat o arma de foarte mare velocitate, sub forma unei rachete intubate montata pe un vehicul 4×4 Humvee.

Kinetic Energy Missile (KEM) a intrat in teste de poligon in 1997 iar in 2002, LM a primit si prima comanda ferma pentru din 12 vehciule si 144 de rachete  KEM, iar in 2003 au fost livrate primele sisteme. In timpul testelor extinse racheta AT cinetica a reusit sa distruga un tanc M 60 aflat in miscare (cu o viteza de aproximativ 45km/h), perpendicular pe directia de lansare, de la o distanta de 2300m, iar intr-un atac frontal, asupra unui tanc care ataca direct pozitia tragatorului, tinta a fost distrusa la o distata de 2400m, iar in timpul nopti, un tanc in miscare a fost lovit de la 4300 metri.

In urma testelor s-a hotarat ca LOSAT sa nu intre in productia de seria, insa Lockheed Martin a primit un alt contract pentru o dezvoltare in spirala a KEM catre Compact Kinetic Energy Missile (CKEM), care dispunea de o racheta ceva mai mica, cu o lungime de 1.52m si o masa de 43.5 kg, totul asezonat cu o raza superioara cuprinsa intre 5 si 8km.

Revenind la KEM, aceasta rachete lansabila de pe un vehciul 4×4 obisnuit dezvolta o viteza apropiata de un proiectil APFSDS tras de un tanc – 1,5km/s, dar are ca principal neajuns masa foarte mare de 80kg si este de fapt un proiectil sub-calibru cu sabot, dar fara… sabot, “sageata” fiind propulsata de un motor racheta fabricat de ATK (Alliant Techsystems) Tactical Systems Company, dispunand pentru stabilizare de patru apripioare in zona posterioara.

Racheta  poate primi corectii de traiectorie in timpul zborului de la sistemul automat de achizitie a tintei, desi la viteza de 1500m/s, corectile au foarte putin timp la dispozitie sa-si faca simtita prezenta in cazul unei lansari nu tocmai fericite.

Un vehciul are in dotare patru rachete gata de lupta, sistemul putand fi programat sa angajeze doua tinte aproape simultan. Odata ce operatorul a fixat prima tinta poate sa o achizitioneza si pe urmatoare, iar la comanda foc, fiecare racheta sa indreapta catre tinta desemnata, existand astfel potentialul ca un singur Humvee sa distruga un intreg pluton de tancuri in doar cateva secunde.

O arma cu adevarat cutremuratoare, o arma mica cat un 4×4 obisnuit dar cu o putere de foc egala cu a unui Abrams M1, dar mult mai greu de detectat decat un tanc greu si infinit mai ieftina.

 

GeorgeGMT

31 de comentarii:

  1. Arma o fi mai ieftina decat un tanc, dar munitia folosita cu siguranta este mult mai scumpa ceea ce iti da batai de cap ca pregatire a echipajelor pe termen lung

    • @Raptor Pai tu compari pregatirea unei echipaj de tanc cu a unui echipaj pentru LOSAT?! Tancul este muuuult mai scump de intretinut si de pregatit.
      Orice racheta AT este cu mult mai scumpa decat un proiectil de tanc. Un proiectil max 10 mii $ o racheta +100 mii$, asa ca …care ar fi de fapt problema?!
      Si nu ai nici o bataie de cap, pt ca oricum ai unitati de vanatori de tancuri. Acum daca sunt echipati cu Javelin sau LOSAT tot un drac.

    • Este munitia inteligenta mai scumpa insa echipajul doar tinteste si lanseaza racheta.Atat.Plus vorba lui GeorgeGMT mentenanta la un vehicul 4X4 este mult mai ieftina si usoara decat la un tanc.Inclusiv costul unui autovehicul 4X4 este mult mai mic fata de un tanc de ultima generatie.
      Cum am mai spus si altadata, in repetate randuri, liderii armatei americane, indiferent de arma din care fac parte, isi cunosc cel putin foarte bine meseria.

  2. Un articol interesant. Cautand sa aflu mai multe am aflat ca LOSAT-KEM-CKEM a fost … anulat.

    • Mai este o racheta (Starstreak) care foloseste trei sageti din tungsten pentru penetrarea blindajelor usoare. Poate distruge un APC, dar nu are destula forta sa strapunga blindajul unui tanc.

  3. Salut!
    APFSDS nu e chair de neoprit – poate d-aia a si fost anulat programul…
    de pe WIKI

    Relikt defends against tandem warheads and reduces penetration of APFSDS rounds by over 50 percent.
    The M829E4 is intended to defeat the newest Russian Relikt explosive reactive armor (ERA), which detonates on radar command just before a KE penetrator hits it.
    The M829E4 is a fifth-generation APFSDS-T cartridge consisting of a depleted-uranium, multi-segmented, long rod penetrator with a three-petal composite sabot. The penetrator includes a low-drag fin with a tracer, and a windshield and tip assembly. Its propellant maintains consistent muzzle velocities across operational temperatures from −25 to 145 °F (−32 to 63 °C). The new Advanced Combustible Cartridge Case is similar to previous models but has a relocated skive joint placement for better crew-member safety during handling. The round is to be fielded operationally in 2016.The initial order for 2,501 M829E4 rounds in 2014 will have a unit cost of $10,100 each

    Daca LOSAT nu reuseste macar scoaterea din lupta a unui tanc inamic din prima lovitura, pe a doua nu o mai trage… Un alt tanc ar mai avea o sansa…

    • Eterna lupta intre defensiva si ofensiva. Doar ca LOSAT poate trage simultan doua lovituri asupra aceluiasi tanc si deocamdata conceptul pare foarte atragator. In alta ordine de idei situatia este ca in cazul oricarei arme AT – prima lovitura trebuie sa fie nimicitoare altfel ti-o iei.

    • Parca SUA s-a inteles cu sauditii in privinta continuarii scaderii, deci mai e loc de o mica scadere.

      • Cine are bani, acum sa parieze cresterea petrolului pe Forex si in vreo 3 ani il scoate la 120-130$/baril, aprox dublu fata de cat e acum. Daca bagi banii in banca dobanda e sub 2%/an la valuta din ce stiam.

  4. Bica si Crinuta au prejudiciat statul cu 2 miliarde euro iar Dusa nu e in stare sa asigure nici macar o minima finantare normala pt o tara de dimensiunea si pozitia Romaniei.

    • @Rosu
      cu banii aia aveai cel putin 500 de taburi saur 2 si parcul de camioane reinoit pentru armata
      ce dracu daca suntem asa de prosti si nevertebrati

  5. Am gasit pe forumul Strategy Page comentariul de mai jos. Foarte interesant.
    „Here’s a discussion regarding MBT’s and the new Line Of Sight AntiTank guided missile weapon. What’s new about the LOSAT is that it is a high Mach number kintetic kill – not shaped charge – AT weapon. Furthermore, the LOSAT has a short time of flight and multiple simultaneous engagement capability. http://www.jerrypournelle.com/alt.mail/military.html#losat5 Jerry, A number folks up-thread doubt the qualitative difference between LOSAT and existing AT-Missiles. I’ll try and clear it up. The differences between LOSAT and, say, a top attack version of the TOW missile is several fold. The first one is obvious. LOSAT is faster. It moves as fast as APFSDS shells out to extended battle ranges (2.5km-4.5km). This limits the time for maneuver, electronic or tactical countermeasures, and active defenses have to react. It also allows the use of tank-like „keyhole” positions that launchers slower missiles like TOW, HOT or Sagger can’t take advantage of. Second is its lethality. No amount of passive protection can stop LOSAT. A clean hit is a kill, period. And probably a catastrophic kill at that. Third is the rate of engagement. An Abrams tank with a well-trained crew can fire eight rounds a minute at up to eight targets. TOW class missile will fire 1-2 two rounds a minute. Realistically, in a defensive engagement scenario, this means that the Abrams will conduct a 15-20 second engagement; destroying 2-3 enemy tanks, and relocate to a new position. A TOW missile launcher will fire one missile and relocate; getting a killing hit half the time. The LOSAT launcher third generation thermal sight can track several targets simultaneously and time-share its laser guidance beam among several missiles in flight, each attacking a different target. This means it can empty all four missiles on the launcher at four different targets in less than an a 15-20 seconds. This is a better than MBT rate of engagement, at greater than MBT ranges, with greater lethality. A platoon of LOSAT launchers can kill an MBT company in a single volley at ranges that the MBT cannot reply. There is a shock effect here that cannot be underestimated. The only real drawback to the LOSAT is that it leaves a long „please shoot me” smoke trail when it is fired. So whether it fires a single missile or four, it will have to relocate >FAST<. This is also the primary reason that I rate the Hummer-LOSAT as having a much lower exchange ratio than a LAV-LOSAT. It is too vulnerable too area effect high explosive fragmentation such a smoke trail will attract. … Merry Christmas to all, LTC Tom Kratman … Jerry, A little history is in order. The original LOSAT launch platform was a stretched (seven vice six road wheels) Bradley fighting vehicle that carried four LOSAT ready to fire and 16 more missiles in an automatically reloaded magazine. Average reload time for four missiles was 15-20 seconds. The Bradley-LOSAT was to be part of a mech-infantry battalion's "Echo" or anti-tank Company with the extended range (10-15 km), top attack, FOG-M. There were to be 12-16 launchers proportioned 2/3 LOSAT and 1/3 FOG-M. When the Cold War ended. Bradley production was cancelled and the LOSAT was moved to the XM8 Buford light tank chassis. The Buford-LOSAT carried eight ready to fire missiles in two pods of four missiles. It had no reload magazine. Then Buford was cancelled to pay for Bosnia, at which point LOSAT nearly died. The LOSAT program was re-scoped yet again and placed in a Hummer, which carried four ready to fire missiles and had four more in a trailer for reloads. It was intended to provide the 82nd Airborne Div. with a heavy punch anti-tank company of 12 launchers and 144 missiles (IOC 2003). I've run into this "Hummers die from artillery, so LOSAT is no threat," argument before. The Hummer is after all a soft target. Against a M1A2 class tank opponent with full combined arms support, the exchange ratio of a Hummer-LOSAT to MBT will probably be 2-to-1 in the MBT's favor. WHAT MAKES LOSAT CRITICS THINK IT WILL BE LIMITED TO HUMMERS? Shinseki's Medium brigades won't be armed with a Hummer-LOSAT. They will have something like a USMC LAV. Proponents of the LOSAT have stated in old MARINE CORPS GAZETTE articles that an LAV could carry four LOSAT ready to fire and another four in an auto-loaded magazine. The exchange ratio between such vehicles and Abrams class tanks will be better than four-to-one in the LAV-LOSAT's favor. That is all she wrote, when it comes to heavy armor, because all our likely enemies that require us to ship large numbers of Abrams will be able to afford a battalion or two of the missiles. Hells bells, Sweden is working on a LOSAT equivalent missile. It is dead certain China and Russia are working on missile in that class and will sell them everywhere it is hurtful of US interests within 10 years. Our current fast sealift can deliver a brigade of US Army heavy armor anywhere .."

    • Da, foarte interesante comentarii.
      Intr-adevar, LOSAT este o arma extrem de puternica si aproape imposibil de parat! tocmai asta mi-a atras si mie atentia cand am vazut datele prima oara!

Lasă un răspuns

Adresa ta de email nu va fi publicată. Câmpurile obligatorii sunt marcate cu *