Modelling armour in Ukraine crisis

eyes the RPG kit at work with fiery glee

Thanks @Stikpusher!

If you have not seen this one:
UDF Ambush Video

Only one launcher way close to road and maybe RPG? BMP riders un-ass the vehicle Olympic quick.
But
UDF troops start taking tank fire PDQ. And a few mines would hurt?
Says the armchair tactics expert why he sips a nice Chianti…
LOL

2 Likes

and you never rode inside if in danger. That’s a 55 year old train of thought. To be exact you never slept inside a vehicle cause you can’t get out when things go bad. Your better off getting a little wet and muddy than fry inside it.
gary

2 Likes

striped PJ’s (what we called them) were best in double and triple canopy. There were at least two colors and think I remember a third. The one serious advantage to them was they were quiet in the bush. Everything makes noise, but they made very little. Just like silk PJ’s didn’t. Noise is the big factor. You can hear the safety lever on an AK or BMP two hundred yards out. That’s why you always lock & load inside the wire.
The generic M16 had it’s own issues in the bush, and rarely spoken of. The fore stock was noisy if it rubbed against anything, and the M60 was like a rattle can (unless you fixed it). You can actually hear the water in a canteen two hundred feet away. Even the basic combat boots made noise. You learn to walk on the balls of your feet, and never the heel. Tie your pants leg down with shoe laces if you remember. Good men used charcoal instead of face paint cause they can smell it. The clacker on a Claymore make way too much noise, and some guys just used alligator clips and a 9 volt battery. All cat & mouse out there.

The driver is the guy who usually gets it when they hit a mine. Rest might get banged up a little bit unless the track is rolled. You ride on top to get off it in a hurry.

gary

3 Likes

by the rockets speed, it just about had to be an NLAW. Plus you can add the trajectory. Still an incomplete ambush; as they failed to set up in the field on the right. Had they done that, they’d have done three times the damage. Yet they are still in the learning curve, so give them time.
gary

1 Like

Ouch!!

Not a fan but unfortunately it is correct.

Sad but true.
Ken

1 Like

I was talking about the T-80U kit, now I might be able to make one that was captured…

However @Gary_Totty your comment has got me thinking… Once this is all done I’m sure lots of us will be making dioramas of these events. Does anybody make an NLAW in 1:35 scale? If not, perhaps I might have to start working on that… I’d be glad to send you a test print if that ever happens!

Regards,
Dennis

2 Likes

Sign me up for one as well dude! :rofl:

3 Likes

The googles didn’t show a 1/35 NLAW.

I would take one too.

Think one of the companies , will be stepping up, to do a new set of hand-held anti tank wpns.

1 Like

@DennisatAutoloader yep sign me up for some of those 3D printed NLAW’s

if you need someone to print them i know a man who can!

Klaus

@Gary_Totty

surely an ‘L’ shaped ambush would be better, as there is a risk of friendly fire coming onto the guy with the NLAW from tge potato field.

just my thoughts as an armchair commando.

The guy with the NLAW should get his a$$ out of the firing position pretty damn quickly,
Unfriendly fire could come pouring down in that area very soon

Since we’re talking about NLAWs, can somebody explain what the deal with the PLOS (Predicted Line Of Sight) actually does?

In basic terms, the firer will track the Tgt vehicle for a certain length of time. This is fed into the missile brain.

The internal tech wizardry in the NLAW will then predict the tgt movement on a set speed and direction and once launched the NLAW will make minor adjustments to hit anything on the predicted path where all the info takes it.

This only works if the Tgt vehicle maintains a constant speed and direction. If the Tgt veh speeds up/down or changes direction, it will in all probability miss.

1 Like

Interesting… So the NLAW targeting unit probably uses a laser rangefinder multiple times to create a 3-dimensional vector of the object by integrating the position. I suppose these aren’t usually being used at very long distances, so the tank won’t have time to stop after seeing a launch.

I imagine (if it works that way, that is) that the software could possibly be reworked to integrate for target acceleration too, but that’s probably just going overboard.

Edit: on second thought, perhaps the computer uses an onboard accelerometer to compute an angular difference of the NLAW itself, and extrapolates that for the missile? Physics has actually turned out to be useful…

1 Like

I dont think it has a laser, its just an internal guidance system which is used to work out the predicted path. That boils down to the tracking part which is done by the firer. I would presume there is a pre fire initiating button to start the tracking system for a moving target. Range isnt a factor, apart the firer making sure the tgt is within the range parameters. I dont know the full ins and out, as I haven’t fired this. But I will check the manual and see if it has any info that can be released here.

Edit. @DennisatAutoloader , Have just checked the manual, and as its a closed restricted source, there sadly isnt much I can go into here.

  1. There is no laser, the tracking is basically as I have said, which can also be found on Wiki as I just checked what info they have on the public domain.

One point is though, for the range it is used over, it is very very effective.

3 Likes

When tractors are already busy elsewhere, one can always use a wheel loader…

H.P.

12 Likes

Cue the theme tune to “Jaws”

5 Likes