TOW vs Nato tanks.

[si-h]

Just been reading ISIS/ Syrian theatre nutjobs, have nicked a smallish amount of TOW missiles.
How would various NATO tanks stand up against TOW, as these were the benchmark of 80's ATM's.
Or in other words; should any tank feel confident out there ?

[IroningMan]

I would expect the crew of a current M1, Leo2 or CR2 to survive a TOW hit on the frontal arc, but outside of that would not be good.

[TheRealFingers99]

I'd think it'll depend on the quality of the armour. UK and US tanks should be OK if frontline. Otherwise.............

There's a story -- possible true -- of a UK tank taking US anti tank friendly fire and just getting out and beating the crap out of the US tank crew during Desert Storm.

[V8 Fettler]

Why would ISIS_with_a_TOW be anywhere near to a NATO tank? I'm sure we can rely upon Messrs Drone, Warthog and Apache to ensure that this issue doesn't arise.

[TobyLaRohne]

TheRealFingers99 said:

There's a story -- possible true -- of a UK tank taking US anti tank friendly fire and just getting out and beating the crap out of the US tank crew during Desert Storm.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/26/iraq.rorymccarthy1

[badgers_back]

British tank was hit by a Milan missile after shedding a track and also hit by lots of RPGs.

Same generation ish as a TOW.

crew fine back in service 20 hours later.

So Isis TOW vs tank tank fine Isis V dead as one you piss one tank off all its friends come and join in.....

Realistically they will us up all the missiles before they see a tank on houses dam sight easire to hit and the distace you can hit them with is an advantage in the campiagns they are using.

[MKnight702]

From reading the above article it is apparent that despite growing up with guns the Americans are pretty crap with them.

It shouldn't come as a surprise seeing as there are a number of hunters killed each year after being "mistaken" for deer, after all deer are known for wearing fluorescent jackets. My theory is that a fluorescent jacket just makes you easier to spot!

[si-h]

Could a rocket attack take out a modern tank ?
There are reports of tank columns being taken out by multiple rocket attacks in Ukraine.
Is that because t55's and t72's are vulnerable, or would any tank be knocked out from above ?
Would a challenger survive this ?

[Godalmighty83]

Depends on the size of the rocket! C2's could withstand barrages of RPG's with little more damage then requiring a new paint job but there are some rockets out there which would take chunks out of the biggest armoured cruisers.

[anonymous-user]

I don't think Nato forces have much to worry about. It's not like we just going to send in a couple of tanks to get the job done. The first TOW launch is going to produce the mother of all IR signatures on probably 20 screens in numerous assets like Apache, predators, etc which means the guy with the TOW is going to be pretty busy right after pressing the trigger......

[Talksteer]

It depends on the model of TOW and the precise details of the tank armour.

The current Challenger II theatre entry standard has nose and side turret armour packages designed to stop the RPG-29 so it is likely to be well protected against the earlier single charge TOW, which I expect would be all ISIS would have. The later twin charge warheads will be able to penetrate the hull sides and turret sides at favourable angles.

The latest models mid 90's onwards have a top attack mode and stand a decent chance of seriously messing up even a challenger II if they hit from the right angle.

That said being on the receiving end of a missile containing several kg of explosive is no trivial manner and there are a number of weak spots that would allow the vehicle to be knocked out by even a basic TOW, and all models could cause a firepower or mobility kill.

[si-h]

Thanks for answering my other vague question about rockets !
I was thinking more of the big MLRS rockets used by Russia and Ukraine recently, but as you say a couple of pounds of HE in the right place will ruin a tank's day; never mind the big Russian Uragan jobs with 200lb warheads !

[V8 Fettler]

Sometimes, only naval gunfire will do. Although this does require a ship and a convenient bit of sea.

[b14]

Hopefully we won't have to deploy any ground forces to mean the question will be answered.

BTW I don't think MLRS is an anti-tank device? More anti-personnel / light vehicle. Pretty devastating though, not called the "Grid Square Removal System" for nothing...

[nellyleelephant]

[redacted]

[Talksteer]

[redacted]

[TheProfessor]

Not sure if my memory serves me right, but didn't the yanks loose an M1A2 from rear RPG fire in Iraq.

I remember the locals dancing round on it whilst being filmed by a local TV crew (Al Jazerra?) and thinking they had better run as the yanks would be back to incinerate the shell and render it useless, which I believe they did with a follow up A10 attack.........

[Lost soul]

TheProfessor said:

Not sure if my memory serves me right, but didn't the yanks loose an M1A2 from rear RPG fire in Iraq.

I remember the locals dancing round on it whilst being filmed by a local TV crew (Al Jazerra?) and thinking they had better run as the yanks would be back to incinerate the shell and render it useless, which I believe they did with a follow up A10 attack.........

I am also sure they did , hit from behind as I remember

[jesta1865]

apologies as i am far from being an expert on modern vehicles, but i seem to remember a programme that had a tank crew on from a challenger that had been blinded by a lucky shot and threw a track trying to get out of the area, it then took a pummelling from rpg's etc but come day break was towed out and back out in less than 48hrs? or has this been mentioned.

i also seem to remember a programme that said that when the challenger 2's and m1's came up against the Russian tanks the Iraqis had, they found to their delight that the intelligence on the Russian made tanks (was the same as had been poised at nato i think) were far inferior to their western counterparts to the point the allies had almost a kilometre extra effective range on them. i only mention this as there have been reports that ISIS have pinched tanks from the Iraqis.

[yellowjack]

Max_Torque said:

I don't think Nato forces have much to worry about. It's not like we just going to send in a couple of tanks to get the job done. The first TOW launch is going to produce the mother of all IR signatures on probably 20 screens in numerous assets like Apache, predators, etc which means the guy with the TOW is going to be pretty busy right after pressing the trigger......

The missile's launch platform crew also cannot 'bug out' until the missile hits (or misses) the target. TOW = Tube launched - Optically tracked - Wire guided. You watch through an optical tracking unit, as the missile pays out a spool of wire behind it, down which corrective inputs are sent by the crew to 'steer' the thing to it's target. By the time the missile gets to it's destination, the firing platform itself is likely to have been targeted in return, as opposing forces will be alerted by the cloud of smoke and dust from the launch unit.

There was a plan to use wireless data links in the late 80s, but it came to nothing, the US Army didn't take it up. There is a wire-free version, TOW-2B Aero RF, which uses a one way radio system, but it still requires 'eyes-on' guidance from the launch platform, and is therefore not 'fire-and-forget'.