Javelin Live Fire - THIS ROCKS!

[Scifo]

Hey,

I do not post much, but this is something I had to share with you guys! This is just rocks! (http://www.zippyvideos.com/198125046446815.html)

Greetz,

Scifo (Dennis Schijff)

PS: Especially the last comment is SO funny!

[Trekker]

It's fake.

And i don't see any comments.

http://bestsmileys.com/hitting/24.gif

[RIPper]

from what i've read they stuffed the poor t-72 with plastic explosives. they were probably trying to simulate an ammunition explosion, but it seems they overdid it

[luit]

but anyways it is still a nice explosion... And too bad it is a fake.

[Wahrborg]

i've seen the same vid around the net a cupple of times named "USA tests swedish ATGM" :roll: lol

[Lone*star49]

...

Actually, it's a secret terrorist weapon, called a "cherry-blossom", first concieved by the Japanesse, towards the end of WWII, which has been modifed, and is a very fast, one way ride, for its' pilot.

Our intelligence dubed it "cherry-blossom", but the terrorist call it a, "magic-carpet-ride"


LS :lol:

j/k

[dejawolf]

well, here's the real deal.
javelin vs dragon.

http://dejawolf.com/steelbeasts/gallery/Javelin-Dragon.asf

oh, btw, if anyone wonders, the reason the javelin made such a nice fiery explosion, is because it missed.

[Bluewings]

lol !

Gimme a good ol' bazook ... 8)

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Wahrborg]

Hehe good movie deja..

btw.. if you just type in www.dejawolf.com and click the steelbeasts gallery, you can se some very nice vehicles... a hint of what to come maby? :roll: :lol:

[Lone*star49]

Hehe good movie deja..

btw.. if you just type in www.dejawolf.com and click the steelbeasts gallery, you can se some very nice vehicles... a hint of what to come maby? :roll: :lol:
...

Great find and post WB.. Dw's artwork and skill is first-class, all the way.. :thumbup:


LS :3starSK:

[TankHunter]

well, here's the real deal.
javelin vs dragon.

http://dejawolf.com/steelbeasts/gallery/Javelin-Dragon.asf

oh, btw, if anyone wonders, the reason the javelin made such a nice fiery explosion, is because it missed.

Nice site Deja

[PS-SCUD]

'nuff said


P.S. I'm sure Sherman will be tickled by the video.

[Trekker]

Deja you are my only 3d tank designer favorite.. Nice models..

[112TYR]

Has anyone got a link to a video showing a Javelin impact in a tank that ISN'T stuffed with explosives? Would be nice to have for comparison. The javelins in DWs video obviously decided to go ERYX on us...

[dejawolf]

hehe, thanks.
oh btw, the M113A1 and T-72M1 pictures are clickable.

[Trekker]

How long does it takes to make such model?

I'm impressed, and i finally know how the autoloader really works..
But how do you load the carousel?

[OddBall]

But how do you load the carousel?

You raise the cassettes one-by-one and put the round and the propellant in them. Then you press the approriate button on the memory unit on the turret floor and the cassette goes back into the carousel and new one raises up.

[Bluewings]

How long does it take to to do a full carousel load OddBall ?

Cheers . :3starSK:

[dejawolf]

Bw, don't expect an answer from Oddball.
for some reason, he's snatched a grudge on you.

as for the time it takes, to make such a model..
well it usually takes a week. if you don't count the search for reference.

[Trekker]

Only a week. Damn, thats fast, im getting more impressed, soon you'll be my god..http://bestsmileys.com/religous/1.gif

OB, do you load from the gunner or TC station?

[Bluewings]

Bw, don't expect an answer from Oddball.
for some reason, he's snatched a grudge on you.

Really ?... What have I done to the Special ?

Deja , how long it takes to replenish the T-72 's carousel from the ammo truck ?

Cheers . :3starSK:

[dejawolf]

well, seems like he thinks you're a bit self-centered.

as for the ammo carousel, after around 30 minutes of interrogation, i managed to
squeeze out of Oddball, if the ammo boxes and everything else is prepared ~15mins to reload the carousel.

[Elf`]

Are we EVER to have a real M1 A2 in SB Pro PE, or is this to be SB Leo Pro PE, w/ a National Gaurd(Read 15 yrs old barely runs) M1A1?

[ShermansWar]

As an Old Dragon Gunner( a crunchy), I myself think the game under models the effects and effectiveness of the Dragon.The missile was a whore to use, but if it hit you, you were NOT gonna drive away

.In the hands of a good gunner, it was bloody lethal,but you had to be willing to get a nice burn on your cheek from the nice "stockweld" or tube weld, as the case may be, resultant from a tight firing position. You had to get into the most unconfortable position to fire it, and an ineperienced gunner had little chance of hitting a target,his body unpracticed in the physical contortions necessary for a good firing position .Also, that 3 Lbs of Nitro used to propel it out of the tube detonationing 18 inches behind the base of your skull took bit of getting used to.(Not a weapon for the faint of heart).Howver,A veteran gunner would take you out lickity split.I myself was an excellent gunner, the best in my unit.If I could see you, you were dead.Not a user freindly weapon,but an effective one.( Moreso than the game models, IMHO).The game does seem a bit "Teutocentric" to me.

[dejawolf]

i would NOT call the M1A1(HA) for a national guard tank.
especially not with M829A3 ammuniton.

[ShermansWar]

The dragon can penetrate 720 MM rha, more than the Milan, yet the game seems to model the Milan as a better tank killer. According to the DOCs section on the SB CD, the only place any tank in the game can defend against a dragon is the turret front( it;s the only place armor values are higher than 720 RHA against HEAT).Yet, in game, it does not seem that effective.It is treated like a bazooka.

[ShermansWar]

Meanwhile, in the ammo section, it is listed as only able to penetrate 550 MM. so there is a discrepancy somewhere.(Teutocentrism rears it's ugly head?)

[TankHunter]

Sherm, the game is westerncentric <G> Europe isn’t going to see a major war, Asia will. That is why M60s, M48s, M47s, T54/55s, and a few others are needed to simulate a real modern war. You will never see M1s vs Leo1s or 2s. The same goes with T-80s, but T-80s or Al Zarrars vs T-54/55s or T-72s, that is something that one is likely to see.

I would add Africa, but then again, it isn’t sporting to massacre civilians.

[Ssnake]

If you can send me your sources, Sherman, I'll present them to our ammo consultants and see what they're saying. I suspect however that you're comparing manufacturer specifications (under controlled laboratory conditions) with the "discounts" that we applied on those figures to reflect realistic expectations of the battlefield performance. The guidance of a missile does have an effect on the actual performance because of the lateral and yaw thrust components at the moment of impact that reduce the warhead's full capacity.

All the HEAT warheads modelled in SB reflect this consideration and have been discounted. I don't say that there's no error in them, but they reflect our best effort to use estimations that are backed up by engineering papers and manufacturer specifications as well as other "credible sources". We're open to all suggestions that a certain figure may be off, but I can assure you that it is not a result from some sort of a nationalistic bias.

[Ludwigmeister]

The game does seem a bit "Teutocentric" to me.

Arguably like your signature, unless I misunderstand the meaning of "Teutocentric". :P

ITS EVERYWHERE MAN! 8) (Teutocentricism that is.)

Ludwig.

[Ludwigmeister]

Meanwhile, in the ammo section, it is listed as only able to penetrate 550 MM. so there is a discrepancy somewhere.....)

Ammo section? Hook a brother up!

Why what "can" it penetrate supposedly? EDIT... I saw the post, my bad. 720rha.

rha? C'est quoi?

Ludwig.

[112TYR]

My french isn't up to speed, but if you're asking what rha is, it stands for Rolled Homogenous Armour, and is commonly used to measure penetration rate.

[grumpyE-7]

It's funny to see people worshipping the M-47 Dragon Weapon System. I've spent a little time "draggin a Dragon through the woods, going boom at all the tanks I see" as my Platoon Sergeant would say. I was awarded the C2 designator (Dragon Gunner) in the late Eighties, qualified with it several times and saw at least 15 rounds go down range, or attempt to go down range. Two of the missiles barely made it the minimum arming distance, plowed into the ground and the one that had a live warhead exploded, the other was a training round with no warhead. Both of those missiles had the same problem, they went out the tube and either the wires broke or they weren't connected right.

Let me tell you what it is like to fire one. You have several thousand dollars and about 30 to 40 pounds on your shoulder and it's bipod, Your heart is racing, your mind is set on squirrel(everybody else is moving in slow motion). You look through the site at the target, right hand on the trigger, which is like the clacker on a claymore with a thumb safety. You depress the Safety with your thumb, squeeze the clacker. The thermal battery does its thing and the gyroscope in the round spins up. While the Gyro spins up in maybe 2 tenths of a second, it seems like an eternity. You start to think Oh No I have a misfire!, at that moment the missile leaves the tube in a cloud of dust and smoke. Almost all of the weight on your shoulder is gone, you can feel the heat from what just happened, but you can't see anything but smoke and dust through the sight. In about another half a second it clears and you hope your still pointed at the target. You have to stay focused on the target until the round impacts. If you don't, and you follow the round, it will not make any corrections and it will miss the target. You have 31 pairs of steering motors to make any corrections or just to keep it in the air, use all of them and it is eating dirt, not the target.

As far as the Dragon VS Javelin video goes, I saw the impact of the first Javelin and it appears that it impacted in the track area and probably would be a mobility kill, unable to move, but still able to fight from where it sat(the target looked suspiciously like an M60A1 or A3 to me). By my estimate the flight time on the dragon shots was somewhere around 5 to 6 seconds, probably 600 to 700 meters not the 1000 meter max. effective range. The Dragon steadily slows down as it goes down range. The other odd thing was that the cartwheeling Javelin looked very much like a Dragon before it was fired. If it was a Dragon fired at that high angle it would have malfunctioned, or so I remember from the training I had, 15 degrees was the magic number I think. I don't know whether that would cause it to do cartwheels though. The Dragon is "state of the art" for the 1970s and most of the rounds in storage are well past their shelf life, so it is due for replacement....

[Bluewings]

Thank you for your input grumpyE-7 , it does clear few things :thumbup:
Basically , the Dragon is a little piece of shit hard to put on target ...

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Ssnake]

Which wasn't the reason for the initial complaint - it was that the Dragon (IF it hit) was seemingly undervalued in its penetration power in comparison to the Milan missile.

[112TYR]

By the way, looking at the Javelin vs Dragon video....the Javelin is set to top attack mode, and is searching for a "signature", and then strikes down on the top of the target, right? In the video, the tank gun is pointed towards the gunner....any chance the missile read the gun itself as a "tank signature", and hit the dirt prematurely as a consequence?

[Ssnake]

That's a call to how effective the automatic image analysis and target tracking software in the missile guidance system works. I bet, details are very much classified.

[ShermansWar]

I fired 4 live rounds myself, and while a brutal weapon to use, I still beleive it was an effective one in the hands of a gunner who knew what he was doing with it.The field of view was 6 degrees, BTW, if you jerked it more than that, you'd lose the LOS to the missile and you'd get what you were decribing.I saw about 45 live rounds fired, and only 2 where the gunner totally lost the missile( which was kind of scary cause you never knew what it would do, it could come back on you, whatever. we always had a few wierd shots though.We use to give out " the round in the ground" award to the wildest shot. The best one i ever saw, the gunner fired the missile, it went straight up, then sideways, then the other way, then down, and, after a long series of convoluted turnings aand booster rocket firings, it finally struck the original target(dont ask me how, it had to be pure chance, because the gunner had clearly lost the visual link from the infrared flare on the missile to the tracker itself).Having come out of anti-tank assault school as the high shooter and Honor man, perhaps i'm biased( I got a meritorious promotion out of the deal), but i was always able to do well with it, and the guys who knew how to use it also did. As I said, it wasn't for the faint of heart.

Ssnake, i beleive the specs i got were from the docs section of SB, with the charts of the armor values and the penetrations of the various weapon systems, I'll look it up.

[ShermansWar]

In the docs section of the CD for SB, there are numerous refernce papers. One of them is titled "Vehicle database." in the date base, under the IFV section, it lists the dismount weapons for the various PCs. It lists Dragon II for the bradley, gives its range as 1000 meters, and lists it's RHS as 720MM.

Under another heading, titled"Squads" it lists the armor penetration value for ATGM for us dismounts. It does not stae the missile type( can only be dragon) But again lists the armor penetration value as 720 MM, but with a question mark next to it.When I Initially posted on this, I checked sources on the internet, and got RHA values for the dragon from 500 MM up to 720 MM.I assume the differnce is between the dragon 1 and dragon 2. The interesting thing is, the warhead weight on the dragon is heavier than on the Milan, and, whislt there may have been a technology difference in, say, how the wafer liner affected how the warhead operated on the original dragon, i doubt that that was the case with dragon II, which had a redesigned warhead, and id in fact the missile supposedly modeled in the game.

It is my beleif that it is specs for Dragon I, not Dragon II, that is modeled in SB, irregardless of the fact that it states that it is Dragon II we are using in game

.Either way, there is a discrepancy between your own database files on the CD( under Vehicle database, in the docs section) and the values actually used in game, because when you go to mission editor, and choose an infantry squad, and arm them with the dragon II, it lists it's RHA as 550 MM, not 720.

[ShermansWar]

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-77.html


Almost all ATGM and heat warheads burn at the same rate, so, the explosive itself has about the same capabilities.
The discrepancy cannot be accounted for by the dragon II not having a penetrator extension like the Milan, because it does. The dragon II was reworked, it is over 3 Lbs heavier than the original, and it's range is listed as between 1000 and 1500 meters( also not taken into account in the game)See pictures on link:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m47-dragon.htm

The Milan is listed as having a warhead weight of 2.7 kgs . See Link
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/milan.htm

the Dragon II has a warhead weight of 5.4 KGs, double that of the Milan II.I do not beleive that the Milan II can penetrate more armor than the ragon II.

compare the armor penetration value from the same site for the dragon:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/m47-dragon.htm

different sites figure armor penetration values differently, get different values depending on where I look, but although this site lists the dragon as having an armor penetration value of 400-500 MM( Whish is less than the 720MM i Posit for dragon II, and even less than the 550 MM the mission editor lists) It only lists the Milan at 325 MM.
we know these values are not measured the same way you guys measured them, but the comparison holds.720 VS 660, or 400-500 Vs 325.The point is the Dragon is a heavier missile.

I was a marine gunner and we used the dragon II, which was designed for the marines. The effectieness of the warhead was increased by 85% over dragon I. see Link :
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/marinefacts/bldragon.htm

In addition, the MilanII was fielded in 1984, the Dragon II in 1985, so I do not accept that the Milan warhead contains technological advances so far ahead of an american missile fielded a year later to account for the discrepancy between what the warhead weights are.Both have a penetrator extension. Both use the same explosoves< octal which burns at 27,000 FPS.

The Dragon II has 2.5 Kgs of explosive in the warhead, copmpared to 1.79 Kgs for the Milan II. The Dragon II was fieded a year laer. I do not accept the Milan can penetrate more armor.

Ssnake, you make the argument that possibly manufacturers numbers were used for the dragon, as opposed to the Milan, but, far as I can tell, this is speculation.You could say the same thing for the Milan, because i dont find any of these sources staing the milan II can penetrate 660 MM RHA.The comparison holds, IMO.

Is it not possible, sir, you used the RHA values for the Dragon I and not the Dragon II?

In conclusion, whether we accept the armor penetration values from global security.org, Or FAS, or the vehicle database from SB docs section on the CD, the dragon has a higher armor penetration value when compared to the milan from the same sources, which makes sense, it is a newer missile with a heavier warhead. [/i]

[foehammer]

I had the opportunity to observe a Dragon live fire twice in my short army career. Both times a disappointment. The first time, the missile failed to fire. We only had one so that was it. The second time the missile ran out of gas before it hit the target. Sort of confirms what Lakowski says in his narrative. The Dragon was such a pathetic missile that I felt sorry for the infantry that had to fire it. It would have taken nerves of steel to accurately fire that thing in real combat. :shock:

[ShermansWar]

As I said repeatedly, it was not a weapon for the faint of heart.If he "ran out of gas" it was because he had so many course corrections that he used al the booster rockets.either that or he tried to engage a target over 1000 meters away. either way, the gunners fault.

The missile itself had 2 manufacturers, Raytheon, and McDonnel Douglas. All the Missiles I fired were made by McDonnell Douglas, and it was a decent product, within the limitations of what the weapons system was.The Raytheon missile was a POS, and was disliked by those who had to use it.

It did take nerve to fire it, with 3 lbs of nitro going of right behind the base of your skull to blow it out of the tube( you always wondered if you were gonna blow up with it) then, the delay while the thermal batterry armed and the gyro spun up, then, holding your good firing position while you waited for the smoke to clear, then, not making any sudden jerking movements so you didnt move the thermal flare on the missile out of the 6 degree field of view of the tracker( not 15 degrees, but 6) then,all this while holding your face weld with the weapon, which gave you a nice burn on the cheek as the heat of the ignition launch conducted itself through the thin fibergalls tube and onto your face, then, overcoming the urge to steer into the missile, because it rode above your LOS to the target, and you always worried it was gonna miss. It never did, it went where you aimed it, it just never looked like it was going where you wanted it to, but it always impacted at the point of aim. Then of course was the fact it was a 10 second track at 1000 meters( talk about a gunner, keeping on target for 10 secs!!), so yeah, it took nerve and comcentration.

I still maintain if it hit you, you were toast. I qualified with 47 out of 50 hits on the range with the monitor, and also got 4 hits with the 4 live rounds I fired.I used it in action, worked fine.The first time, I fired at an old amtrac, about 750 yds out, and aimed for an opening I could see on the middle( obviously some armor plate had been removed, as you could see daylight through it). This was app. a 2'x2' opening. I aimed right for it. At the last second, I had to jerk the missile a hair, because it became apparent that the round was gonna fly right through this opening, and exit the target without making contact and detonating. I pulled the round a little, and it struck just right of the opening. I had no misfires, and didnt see any, so, by me, it was a good weapon, hopwever brutal it was to use.

[Bluewings]

Eryx :

" The Eryx system consists of the missile and launch tube and the firing unit. The system can be either shoulder-launched or from a prone position when mounted on the tripod.

The Eryx missile is wire-guided, optically tracked with semi-automatic command to line-of-sight (SACLOS) guidance. Fitted in the tail of the missile is an infrared beacon, which emits pulses detected by the sight unit. Course corrections are sent via the wire, which is unspooled as the missile is in flight. The missile is thrust vector controlled, which is efficient even at low speed and allows the launching to be achieved using a small propulsion unit. This allows "soft launch" in enclosed spaces. The rocket motor is manufactured by Roxel France (formerly Celerg), jointly owned by MBDA and SNPE and based at Le Plessis, France.

The missile is ready to fire in less than 5s. During flight (4.2s to 600m), the gunner only has to maintain the sight on the target. Missile speed is 18m/s at launch, accelerating to 245m/s at 600m. Up to five missiles can be fired in 2mins. The missile is armed with a 137mm tandem, shaped-charge high explosive (HE) warhead capable of penetrating up to 900mm of explosive reactive armour.

The Mirabel thermal imager has been developed for the Eryx missile system by Thales (formerly Thomson-CSF) Optronique of Guyancourt, France, and AlliedSignal Aerospace Canada Inc (now Thales Optronics Canada), of Montreal, Canada. Mirabel's modular design allows it to be clipped on to the system's existing direct view optic sight without any need for boresight alignment. The thermal imager has a field of view of 8 x 6° and it operates in the long-wave (8 - 12 microns) infrared spectral band. Weight is 3.5kg. "

Cheers . :3starSK:

[ShermansWar]

...

[Bluewings]

The Eryx has left Sherman voiceless ... :lol:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[112TYR]

The Eryx has left Sherman voiceless ... :lol:

Cheers . :3starSK:

It sure left me speechless the times I saw it in action on the firing range.... :roll:

[ShermansWar]

Start your own thread.

[Bluewings]

This is Scifo 's thread btw .... :roll:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Paul_L]

Did the Dragon missile increase its warhead diameter when they moved from Dragon I to Dragon-II, if so how much? They look the same missile but the old warhead had the narrower 105mm diameter warhead? The Dragon II looks like the warhead is equal to the diameter of the missile. So did the missile get narrower or the warhead enlarged?

Milan warhead moved from 105mm to 115mm and then 117mm diameter warhead. In addition the standoff of the warhead was improved. From what I understand within a contemporary generation warhead, these are the main factors that define penetration, standoff and diameter....not the warhead weight.

[ShermansWar]

Was never 105 mm, was always 140 mm, both versions.

[Paul_L]

Was never 105 mm, was always 140 mm, both versions.

Thats the out missile dimensions , the original version featured a narrower warhead front section clearly visible in any photo of the missile. This is listed as 105mm diameter, from what I recall.