Jump to content


Photo

How Can Infantry Potentially Combat Aps Equipped Vehicles?


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,008 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 1552 PM

Until recently, the infantry vs armour equation equation seemed to be going ever more in favour of infantry with better and better ATGMs and unguided launchers. By and large any advance in armour could be countered by a better warhead or attack profile. APS changes all that. How will infantry weapons and tactics evolve to counter APS equipped vehicles?


  • 0

#2 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 1606 PM

One option is to just use more missiles (and then by necessity smaller missiles, and then necessarily with some top attack capability in order to be lethal), and simply saturate the defenses, perhaps with some sort of salvo fire (eg. a single launcher launching 2 or more missiles at once). This is sort of a return to the early 1970's, where you would expect to have to expend quite a few rounds to achieve a hit.

The strategic level response here is the development of the suitable missile(s), their production at low cost, and their proliferation. Possibly every squad could get something like this. Of course it looks better for motorised and mechanised units, which have vehicles to lug reloads.


  • 0

#3 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 1854 PM

Or what amount to the same concept - launching a swarm of very small (and hence man portable) suicide drones.


  • 0

#4 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,617 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 1937 PM

The simplest solution aside from simply shooting more missiles at the target may be to simply add a 4" section of missile for a dispenser filled with chaff optimized for MMW / APS engagement radar wavelengths and poff it just outside of the APS engagement envelope during the terminal dive.


  • 0

#5 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 2012 PM

The simplest solution aside from simply shooting more missiles at the target may be to simply add a 4" section of missile for a dispenser filled with chaff optimized for MMW / APS engagement radar wavelengths and poff it just outside of the APS engagement envelope during the terminal dive.

This can however be countered by tracking the munition on approach and estimating the flight path of the incoming munition, and firing at the predicted location.


  • 0

#6 Special-K

Special-K

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 770 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 2152 PM

The simplest solution aside from simply shooting more missiles at the target may be to simply add a 4" section of missile for a dispenser filled with chaff optimized for MMW / APS engagement radar wavelengths and poff it just outside of the APS engagement envelope during the terminal dive.



I suppose I was going to bring up something similar. Is it possible to somehow 'Jam' (raspberry or otherwise) the sensors on the APS?

Also, wasn't there an RPG of some sort that was designed to counter an APS by firing two separate projectiles on the same trajectory, intending that the first one would be intercepted but the APS wouldn't be 'nimble' enough to stop the second one?



-K
  • 0

#7 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 2335 PM

 

The simplest solution aside from simply shooting more missiles at the target may be to simply add a 4" section of missile for a dispenser filled with chaff optimized for MMW / APS engagement radar wavelengths and poff it just outside of the APS engagement envelope during the terminal dive.



I suppose I was going to bring up something similar. Is it possible to somehow 'Jam' (raspberry or otherwise) the sensors on the APS?

Also, wasn't there an RPG of some sort that was designed to counter an APS by firing two separate projectiles on the same trajectory, intending that the first one would be intercepted but the APS wouldn't be 'nimble' enough to stop the second one?



-K

 


RPG-30

%D0%A0%D0%9F%D0%93-30-%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8E


  • 0

#8 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,323 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0008 AM

https://www.youtube....h?v=YRCTPq2QEGc


  • 0

#9 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,511 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0047 AM

This can however be countered by tracking the munition on approach and estimating the flight path of the incoming munition, and firing at the predicted location.

 

Maneuvering missiles then, à la AShMs, which are facing the same point defense problems? Though I guess that adds yet more mass, and there are limits to portable systems. Which gets us back to drones - develop essentially self-propelled ATGM launchers on tracks or legs as an extension of the packbot/mechanical mule idea?


  • 0

#10 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0137 AM

 

This can however be countered by tracking the munition on approach and estimating the flight path of the incoming munition, and firing at the predicted location.

 

Maneuvering missiles then, à la AShMs, which are facing the same point defense problems? Though I guess that adds yet more mass, and there are limits to portable systems. Which gets us back to drones - develop essentially self-propelled ATGM launchers on tracks or legs as an extension of the packbot/mechanical mule idea?

 

The intercept happens too late and with too much margin for error for this to be feasible.

 


  • 0

#11 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,511 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0206 AM

Okay, I guess it's back to swarm attacks by lots of missiles/decoys then. Carried by robots.


  • 0

#12 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0314 AM

Okay, I guess it's back to swarm attacks by lots of missiles/decoys then. Carried by robots.

Guided artillery of various forms removes the need for grunts to lug any munitions.


Edited by KV7, 16 October 2019 - 0314 AM.

  • 0

#13 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,265 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 0323 AM

Simultaneously fired volleys of M72s?


  • 0

#14 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,606 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 1242 PM

Its a good question and something I was considering asking myself some time back.  Maybe we'll see an increasing use of things like anti-material rifles (.50 Cal and above), even the WW2-era PTRS and PTRD were put to good use in the Ukraine.  Weapons that use 14.5mm KPV rounds may not be capable against your top of the line IFV but what about the APS elements?  Are they armoured enough to protect them from AMR rounds?

 

I'm not sure that saturating a single target with a bunch of single-shot weapons such as the M72 LAW would be a good idea.  Especially for a smaller unit, only a limited number of weapons would surely be available...?


  • 0

#15 TTK Ciar

TTK Ciar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,034 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 1259 PM

Is any APS currently fielded able to intercept a thrown molotov cocktail? Or a grenade or satchel charge tossed to bounce off the commander's chest into the open hatch?

Is any APS able to counter an RPG launched from a basement window into a tank's underbelly, as seen in Chechnya?

There are admittedly non-APS defenses against all of these threats, but they require disciplined use of screening infantry, or an alert human loader manning a machine gun and watching the rear and flanks. These things don't always happen.
  • 0

#16 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 16 October 2019 - 1300 PM

https://defense-and-...iral-grows.html

 

https://defense-and-...defence-ii.html


Edited by lastdingo, 16 October 2019 - 1301 PM.

  • 0

#17 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,055 posts

Posted 17 October 2019 - 0211 AM

Carl Gustav with the airburst round (or similar) can probably mess up the sensors and launchers.


  • 0

#18 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,008 posts

Posted 17 October 2019 - 1513 PM

I was thinking an AHEAD type 120mm round that would release its cargo well short of the enemy tank, blind it and smash up any APS launchers covering that arc. In the long run, it's got to be swarming drones with AI, but there would be nothing stopping the tank releasing or being accompanied by a defensive drone swarm.


  • 0

#19 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,617 posts

Posted 17 October 2019 - 1549 PM

Are the individual subprojectiles on Starstreak guided?


  • 0

#20 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,518 posts

Posted 17 October 2019 - 1707 PM

The best defense against infantry-fired AT missiles is friendly infantry and combined arms.  An unsupported tank is like heavy knights of old; the only question is how many enemies they take with them.


  • 0