T-90... Vulnerable to Javelin... why?

[Apocal 10]

It doesn't - if you'd watched the videos you'd see it has a radar system on top which constantly scans for projectiles within a (relatively) short distance around the vehicle. Once a projectile enters that area it sends a signal to the other equipment which then chooses the appropriate defence and attempts to destroy the projectile.

Obviously all that has to happen in an extremely short space of time.

I know, I just wanted to see if the poster I was responding to knew what the fuck he was talking about. This of course is part of the reason for the top attack of Javelin and high-pass, top-attack of the late model TOW.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Apocal

[wld427 1705]

I was an 11H in the US army.

(Anti-Tank Infantry)

we were equipped with the TOW ITAS system.

We were always taught that the t-90 could detect our laser range finder and automatically swing the turret in our direction....

i wonder how much of this is true.

[Lhowon 10]

I know, I just wanted to see if the poster I was responding to knew what the fuck he was talking about. This of course is part of the reason for the top attack of Javelin and high-pass, top-attack of the late model TOW.

Oh ok. I'd be interested to know just how effective ARENA-E is against top-attack missiles. It's supposed to protect against them, but I struggle a little to imagine it completely stopping a Javelin given the sheer kinetic force it must have plunging down.

[max power 21]

Oh ok. I'd be interested to know just how effective ARENA-E is against top-attack missiles. It's supposed to protect against them, but I struggle a little to imagine it completely stopping a Javelin given the sheer kinetic force it must have plunging down.

These projectiles do not rely on kinetic energy to penetrate a tank. They rely on chemical energy and proximity. If their fuse is damaged by shrapnel or if they are detonated outside of a certain distance from their target, their shaped charge warhead will not be able to penetrate the tank. While I don't think that having a supersonic (or whatever) missile smash into the top of the tank would be fun for the crew or the maintenance personnel, there is a reason the missile has a shaped charge and not a boxing glove on the end.

[Baff1 0]

So how does it detect missile launch?

Radar and optical sensors.

---------- Post added at 02:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:04 PM ----------

I know, I just wanted to see if the poster I was responding to knew what the fuck he was talking about. This of course is part of the reason for the top attack of Javelin and high-pass, top-attack of the late model TOW.

The system is designed to counter top attack amongst other systems.

In those posted videos, helicopter launched attacks are mentioned as are mortars. You can clearly see a top attack missile launch at the testings. (Although not it's impact I note).

Top attack is designed to counter armour by striking at it's weakest point.

It is not designed to counter Arena.

It's an arms race.

Arena did not exist when Javelins were invented. Arena has been designed, in part, to counter Javelin; not the other way round.

(In addition to this the Russians have up armoured the tops of their tanks in response to top attack threats).

Perhaps Javelin will be upgraded to use higher velocity and radar stealthed projectiles in response to this system? The future is unwritten.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Baff1

[dayglow 2]

If ARENA is active then it can be jammed or itself targeted by it's emissions.

[Apocal 10]

Radar and optical sensors.

What optical sensors? Russians have never claimed optical sensors for ARENA and every other nation trying to use optical sensors for passive missile launch detection never got over problems with the constant false alarm rate.

Bear in mind "every other nation" developing such systems was doing so to detect hard-launch SAMs with a bloom measured in hundred foot radius, not two feet at the launch site like a soft launch ATGM.

So what's your source?

The system is designed to counter top attack amongst other systems.

In those posted videos, helicopter launched attacks are mentioned as are mortars. You can clearly see a top attack missile launch at the testings. (Although not it's impact I note).

Which is the question mark to me. I've seen a mockup of the hard-kill portion of the system and, assuming it's accurate, there really isn't a way for it to cover anything near diving; the projectiles are loaded at an angle and actually face downward.

Top attack is designed to counter armour by striking at it's weakest point. It is not designed to counter Arena. Arena did not exist when Javelins were invented.

My bad, was thinking of Drozd. Regardless, Javelin, or any other top-attack munition, spends the overwhelming majority of it's time outside of ARENA's sensor footprint. It remains to be seen whether TA-ATGMs enter it's engagement envelope even during the terminal phase of flight.

Top attack has many useful functions. The biggest is the weakest armor on the tank is the top, but that will probably change in the next decades as other nation's get better situational awareness systems in place and start building crew access through the rear. The next big one is that Javelin specifically has a mode called "dead reckoning" which allows it to attack tanks in full defilade. No line-of-sight required.

(In addition to this the Russians have up armoured the tops of their tanks in response to top attack threats).

Addition of the ERA bricks around turret. Notice some of the angles they've been placed; they'd be glancing, non-penetrating hits fired from a direct fire weapon. However there is a hard limit on just how thick the top armor can be and how much ERA can go there; various armor-penetrating (as in wires and tubes go from outside to inside the tank) subsystems are in place, as well as the crew's hatches.

Perhaps Javelin will be upgraded to use higher velocity and radar stealthed projectiles in response to this system?

Probably not in the near future. As a capability threat to Javelin, it's a question mark, as a percentage threat, it's not even close, there are something like twenty-five times as many Javelins in the world as there are ARENA-equipped tanks.

[max power 21]

My bad, was thinking of Drozd. Regardless, Javelin, or any other top-attack munition, spends the overwhelming majority of it's time outside of ARENA's sensor footprint. It remains to be seen whether TA-ATGMs enter it's engagement envelope even during the terminal phase of flight.

This is true of any missile launched at range. The sources I've read say that ARENA is omnidirectional. What is its actual envelope of radar coverage?

[Apocal 10]

This is true of any missile launched at range. The sources I've read say that ARENA is omnidirectional. What is its actual envelope of radar coverage?

Omnidirectional, in terms of bearing, not elevation. They claim the radar looks out to 50m, which I have no trouble believing.

[max power 21]

Omnidirectional, in terms of bearing, not elevation. They claim the radar looks out to 50m, which I have no trouble believing.

The word omnidirectional is so vague as to be almost meaningless. However, what information do you have on its ability to see upwards?

If it can see upwards at all, it can detect missiles at the same range as it detects all of the others. It seems that 50m would be a little short, though, seeing as it's supposed to blast a horn to warn nearby infantry. I don't think it takes long for most atgms to travel 50m.

[Gunnarmarine 10]

just to bring to light the only defense against missiles the t90 has is the IR emmiter it uses to jam thermal sights. the Tow2 and the Javelin both have a way to defeat this easily. easily as in it's like putting on a pair of shades when it gets bright out.

[Apocal 10]

The word omnidirectional is so vague as to be almost meaningless. However, what information do you have on its ability to see upwards?

Nothing that hasn't been written in Jane's or other open-sources, which only explicitly talk about detection of overflying ATGMs. Obviously just from the way the radar antenna is laid out it can't see straight up.

If it can see upwards at all, it can detect missiles at the same range as it detects all of the others. It seems that 50m would be a little short, though, seeing as it's supposed to blast a horn to warn nearby infantry. I don't think it takes long for most atgms to travel 50m.

Yeah, no idea idea what's going on there. Some of the newest ATGMs are actually supersonic.

[Baff1 0]

The Russians use ATGM's because they have a greater effective range than tank guns and superior destructive force.

If you think about an Apache launching from 8 miles away, or a Reflexs missile from 5km you can imagine there being some amount of time between detection and the countermeasures engaging the projectile. I think the Reflexs has an 8 second flight time?

I don't know what the range is of a TOW or Javelin but the pictures I've seen of them have all shown firing from a distance.

What optical sensors? Russians have never claimed optical sensors for ARENA and every other nation trying to use optical sensors for passive missile launch detection never got over problems with the constant false alarm rate.

Bear in mind "every other nation" developing such systems was doing so to detect hard-launch SAMs with a bloom measured in hundred foot radius, not two feet at the launch site like a soft launch ATGM.

So what's your source?

Which is the question mark to me. I've seen a mockup of the hard-kill portion of the system and, assuming it's accurate, there really isn't a way for it to cover anything near diving; the projectiles are loaded at an angle and actually face downward.

My bad, was thinking of Drozd. Regardless, Javelin, or any other top-attack munition, spends the overwhelming majority of it's time outside of ARENA's sensor footprint. It remains to be seen whether TA-ATGMs enter it's engagement envelope even during the terminal phase of flight.

Top attack has many useful functions. The biggest is the weakest armor on the tank is the top, but that will probably change in the next decades as other nation's get better situational awareness systems in place and start building crew access through the rear. The next big one is that Javelin specifically has a mode called "dead reckoning" which allows it to attack tanks in full defilade. No line-of-sight required.

Addition of the ERA bricks around turret. Notice some of the angles they've been placed; they'd be glancing, non-penetrating hits fired from a direct fire weapon. However there is a hard limit on just how thick the top armor can be and how much ERA can go there; various armor-penetrating (as in wires and tubes go from outside to inside the tank) subsystems are in place, as well as the crew's hatches.

Probably not in the near future. As a capability threat to Javelin, it's a question mark, as a percentage threat, it's not even close, there are something like twenty-five times as many Javelins in the world as there are ARENA-equipped tanks.

Sorry Mr, I don't have a source to hand. You can see the optical sensors in that first posted video.

The ones with the little glass windows.

I can't tell you precisely what they do, it could be as little as detect lasers shining on them. Certainly some of the sources I've read have discussed a combination of sensors sytems making up the tanks countermeasure suite. Weapons flare was mentioned.

I don't havean links offhand to share with you however.

I feel sure you will be able come up with something on Google under your own steam. (Had you approached me with a less confrontational attitude, I would probably have made the effort to surf some up for you, but there you go).

The projectiles are loaded at an angle facing downward but they are launched into the air before detonating. So they explode from a position above the tank.

In those videos you will see the little diagrams of the area of interception which starts above the tank in a hemispherical pattern.

It's just a simplified diagram.

I think it's probably wise for you not to read too much into this. The exact spots that have least coverage, blind spots, statistically less likely to intercept angles etc.

Broadly speaking it's a hemisphere starting above the tank.

I cannot imagine that a design brief that specifies intercepting missiles from above would fail simply because they forgot to angle the charges (or the radar) in the right direction.

I can't tell you how effective it is, but it's perfectly obvious that top attack missiles are within it's protective envelope.

If it helps you to visualise better, I don't think top attack missiles come in at 90 degrees to the perpendicular.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree completely with the whole radar aerial needs to point straight up thing.

There is no more a hard limit to how much armour can be placed on the top of a tank than there is any other part of it. If it needs more armour, when that need is identified, they will stick more on wherever they fell it needs it most.

Weld a birdcage, weld some more composite plates, add larger or multiple layered ERA charges etc.

On the subject of numerical superiority, an Arena system costs 2.5 times the price of a Javelin.

"25 Javelins" cost more than an entire T90 and the operators are highly prone to rifle fire, there are something like a million rifles for every Javelin if percentage marks are what you are looking for, a trillion bullets.

ARENA isn't any threat to Javelin, it's a countermeasure to it, if it defeats even one Javelin in every 25, it will have paid for itself ten times over.

---------- Post added at 02:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:46 AM ----------

If ARENA is active then it can be jammed or itself targeted by it's emissions.

Harpooned from the air!

---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:04 AM ----------

just to bring to light the only defense against missiles the t90 has is the IR emmiter it uses to jam thermal sights. the Tow2 and the Javelin both have a way to defeat this easily. easily as in it's like putting on a pair of shades when it gets bright out.

It has IR proof smoke screens as part of it's Shtora countermeasures.

Here is a little overview for you of how they work.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/shtora-1.htm

Edited October 23, 2009 by Baff1

[Apocal 10]

If you think about an Apache launching from 8 miles away, or a Reflexs missile from 5km you can imagine there being some amount of time between detection and the countermeasures engaging the projectile. I think the Reflexs has an 8 second flight time?

14.2 seconds out to 5km, it's maximum range.

Anyway, the Russians themselves only claim a fifty meter sensor footprint. Possibly they are lowballing and it has more, but certainly nowhere near the 2.5km range of a Javelin, or the 800-2000m range of the percentage threat ATGMs. The basic characteristics of the radar, carrier frequency and antenna size, argue very strongly against it.

Sorry Mr, I don't have a source to hand. You can see the optical sensors in that first posted video.

The ones with the little glass windows.

I only ask because the manufacturer of ARENA didn't mention anything but a MMW radar for threat detection. Jane's does not either.

I can however see that you may be confusing Shtora and ARENA. Of course that still leaves the mind-boggling question of how you came to think Shtora detects a passive sensor...

I can't tell you precisely what they do, it could be as little as detect lasers shining on them.

Then why are you claiming, with certainty, that they could detect the launch of a passive IR missile?

Certainly the sources I've read have discussed a combination of sensors sytems making up the tanks countermeasure suite. Weapons flare was mentioned.

Are you sure you are not confusing ARENA and Shtora in this?

I don't have links to any offhand to share with you however.

I feel sure you will be able come up with something on Google under your own steam. (Had you approached me with a less confrontational attitude, I would probably have made the effort to surf some up for you, but there you go).

I confronted your confusion and/or ignorance regarding the limitations regarding detection of a missile launch.

No need for links on my end. Reading through Jane's, Vasiliy Fofonav's Russian armor site, manufacturer's site, seeing a mockup, etc. all gave me a fairly reasonable idea of what the system is capable of. There is admittedly, some reading between the lines on my part, a lot of mentioning TOWs and Hellfires, a focus on helicopter-launched ATGMs in general by the company itself, along with the percentage threat of RPGs with late-model warheads, etc.

I cannot imagine that a design brief that specifies intercepting missiles from above would fail simply because they forgot to angle the charges (or the radar) in the right direction.

I can't tell you how effective it is, but it's perfectly obvious that top attack missiles are within it's protective envelope.

If it helps you to visualise better, I don't think top attack missiles come in at 90 degrees to the perpendicular.

Javelin comes down at high 70s to mid 80s in the terminal stage of a top attack profile, so it's functionally the same thing. The TOW-2B is the one you're thinking and KBP is speaking of; horizontal overflight with a downward firing EFP.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree completely with the whole radar aerial needs to point straight up thing.

Depends, there are some ways you can get around that, with phased arrays and such. But the company never claimed anything in that regard and no serious source has claimed they have full or even meaningful (with regards to Javelin) look-up capability.

There is no more a hard limit to how much armour can be placed on the top of a tank than there is any other part of it. If it needs more armour, when that need is identified, they will stick more on wherever they fell it needs it most.

Weld a birdcage, weld some more composite plates, add larger ERA charges etc.

This raises the interesting question of how you suppose crewmen are going to egress the vehicle...? Hypothetical future tanks aside, most have access to the turret through hatches, with ability of a man to lift and close being the limit. On top of this, the big 80s thing was to actually weaken this top armor with the addition of various improvements in fire control systems, most of which required perforation of the top armor.

On the question of numerical superiority an Arena system costs 2.5 times the price of a Javelin.

"25 Javelins" cost more than an entire T90 and the operators are highly prone to rifle fire, there are something like a million rifles for every Javelin if percentage marks are what you are looking for, a trillion bullets.

Javelin has an effective range over five times longer than a rifle and twice that of a tripod-mounted machine gun. Certainly the classic combined arms counter to ATGMs is still applicable, but I'm gonna bet you can't name what it is.

ARENA isn't any threat to Javelin, it's a countermeasure to it, if it defeats even one Javelin in every 25, it will have paid for itself ten times over.

:confused:

A curious world you must live in where a $100K (at bare minimum) system failing to protect a $2 million (at bare minimum) dollar tank over 95% of the time against a $75K missile is "paying for itself ten times over."

[GGTharos 10]

I can't tell you how effective it is, but it's perfectly obvious that top attack missiles are within it's protective envelope.

No, it isn't.

It used to be 'perfectly obvious' than an R-27ET would have to have a datalink and be cpaable of actual BVR engagements since the R-27ER had that, and all the did was switch the guidance section from radar to thermal ...

until a radar operator and certain mig manuals told us that the radar would not generate a datalink signal on an ET launch, and the sensor required a lock before launch anyway - you could not launch the missile and have a successful engagement if the missile's seeker was not locked on target while it was on the rail still.

So, with all due respect, you saying that 'it's perfectly obvious' it utterly and completely worthless, especially since there's no source backing you up on it. It might turn out you are correct some time in the future, but right now, you're just making an assumption that has no real merit.

[franze 196]

I see pages of technical discussion which is cool, but I think it's worth pointing out that these defensive systems are easily implemented with an eventhandler and some scripts. :)

[kolotei 10]

If you guys take a look on video it`s explaines a lot... I mean it`s gona detect missels within 50 miters, chouse type of shield calibre, then shoot a lot of small fragments in that direction, there is NO detection of missile lunche, no need one, all you need to know is missle is 50 meters away and what direction...

[343rdBadger 0]

If ya want the systems...download the Russian Armor Pack,it has rudimentry defense systems on all t-90's and t-80's.