AFVs spotting and evading ATGMs

[JustSomeGuy]

It's been pretty easy to spot incoming ATGMs ever since the first SB, at least using TIS: they're represented as HUGE white coronas in SB. However, I've been watching some real-life test-range footage of TOW-2 and Bill and they overflew the camera without any visual effects at all, being pretty much invisible, black dots until the last moment.

So, I've been wondering: how realistic is the representation of ATGMs in SB Pro? Can the gunner really see incoming missile's tracer when it's on the other end of the missile? What about fire-and forget like Javelin and Spike, which I presume don't have any tracers?

And are real-life TCs really able to spot the missiles flying towards "their" AFVs and pop smoke and order the driver to hide into turret-down position within some reasonable time?

Thanks for replies..

[Hedgehog]

It's been pretty easy to spot incoming ATGMs ever since the first SB, at least using TIS: they're represented as HUGE white coronas in SB. However, I've been watching some real-life test-range footage of TOW-2 and Bill and they overflew the camera without any visual effects at all, being pretty much invisible, black dots until the last moment.

So, I've been wondering: how realistic is the representation of ATGMs in SB Pro? Can the gunner really see incoming missile's tracer when it's on the other end of the missile? What about fire-and forget like Javelin and Spike, which I presume don't have any tracers?

And are real-life TCs really able to spot the missiles flying towards "their" AFVs and pop smoke and order the driver to hide into turret-down position within some reasonable time?

Thanks for replies..

The want of an actual missile model to replace the "Glowing Basket Ball of DEATH!" is known to eSim, whether they are doing anything about it, I don't know.

However, this requires a new missile model(s) to be implemented.

[Grenny]

To the questions in short: NO. The SB model is rather "abstract"....to say it politely ;-)

IRL much development time goes into "signature reduction" for the ATGM in order to make them nearly "unspottable". You'd only have a chance to see them from the side or the launch flash.

[Apocalypse 31]

Having fired over 70 TOW2B's in the past year, I will comment:

1 - They are very difficult to spot, especially at range. The vehicle doesn't produce very much smoke.

2 - I'm not debating whether the eSim data is correct, but in real life the missile seems to move a LOT faster.

Here's my unit firing:

zAg414r_ZHg

[Grenny]

2 - I'm not debating whether the eSim data is correct, but in real life the missile seems to move a LOT faster.

I stopped the time the TOW and the MILAN need to reach a tgt at 1500 and at max range(2000 and 3750 m) in steelbeasts.

It is very close to publicly available data on those systems.

[Kingtiger]

Yeah I just tested RBS56 that I am trained on and TOW and time to target are 100% correct atleast for the RBS56 and the TOW matches the public figures I could find out to 3.7km (23sec from trigger to detonation).

So it just feels slower in SB, can be something with graphics to do.

/KT

[JustSomeGuy]

So, if I understand this correctly, in real life, it would be nearly impossible for tank commanders to spot inbound ATGMs and attempt counter-measures like supressive fire or turret-down position?

[Gibsonm]

So, if I understand this correctly, in real life, it would be nearly impossible for tank commanders to spot inbound ATGMs and attempt counter-measures like supressive fire or turret-down position?

Sort of.

Its the launch signature you look for, not the missile in flight.

Things have changed a bit since AT-3s in 1973.

HE, coax on the launch site and regaining cover/concealment are your best defence against guided weapons.

Fire and forget ones have their own set of considerations (suppress suspected launch sites before they launch, etc.).

There's also the issue of your wingman maybe able to see the flight as he is on a flank, etc. and telling you.

There are a bunch of considerations from RL that may not be applicable in those "one tank vs the world" type SB scenario.

[Marko]

So, if I understand this correctly, in real life, it would be nearly impossible for tank commanders to spot inbound ATGMs and attempt counter-measures like supressive fire or turret-down position?

Some armies are developing active protection system like the Israeli trophy system.

Have no idea how effective they are but I would prefer to be in a AFV with such a system Then relying on the mark 1 eyeball.

[Brun]

The main problem with the TOW is it's speed, SLOW! Many a time I have fired a tow at Mongol units carrying AT missiles at a range of 3-4 K away. The enemy spots Me When My missile is half way to target. They fire their own missile , and it takes Me out. IRL tows had better be able to hide their signature, because the unit firing the tow has to be exposed for a Loooooong time.

[Grenny]

The main problem with the TOW is it's speed, SLOW! Many a time I have fired a tow at Mongol units carrying AT missiles at a range of 3-4 K away. The enemy spots Me When My missile is half way to target. They fire their own missile , and it takes Me out. IRL tows had better be able to hide their signature, because the unit firing the tow has to be exposed for a Loooooong time.

In Steelbeasts the problem is usually never the missle itself, but the deadly spotting capability of the always 100% vigilant AI. The will just spot your vehicle and engange.

Steelbeasts uses the public data on the TOW or "OPFOR" missles.(Numbers stated in Janes can be one source) So with the TOW at an average of ~300 m/s and for example the AT-11 with 800 m/s they have some speed advantage.