Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Well I suppose it the warhead is exploding downwards it has a very high chance of detonating the ammunition in almost any Russian Tank due to how their auto loaders as arranged. Cannot be instilling mush confidence in Russian Tank crews either.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Timmymagic »

The LWCLU also enables Javelin to reach out to 4,000m rather than 2,500m with the original CLU. Hopefully we'll retain the older CLU in formations as well as its still an additional CLU and can be used as a surveillance tool.



From Wiki...

"The new CLU is 70 percent smaller, 40 percent lighter, and has a 50 percent battery life increase. Features of the lightweight CLU are: a long-wave infrared (IR) thermographic camera; a high-definition display with improved resolution; integrated handgrips; a five megapixel color camera; a laser point that can be seen visibly or through IR; a far target locator using GPS, a laser rangefinder, a heading sensor, and modernized electronics. The LWCLU has also demonstrated the ability to fire a FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft missile, using its superior optics to identify and destroy small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)."

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Timmymagic »


Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Timmymagic »


Djpowell1984
Junior Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 01:28
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Djpowell1984 »

I know it is might off the topic.

I think British should look replacement this ATGM with MMP (Akaron - Wrong spelling?*) Or Spike Family

Due NLOS technology; which usefully datalink or Laser designator via UAV or other side force (hill) to suspire strike to tank or other target etc.

Also can use helicopter and boat, vehicle, man portable, even small enough to fit on UAV.

I not sure if Javelin have NLOS ability; suspect not have NLOS that reason; French switch javelin to Akaron. Possible due not have NLOS on javelin.

Therefore my question Is javelin does has NLOS; (I think not have) as I'm Only aware that Javelins does have fire and forget. So can upgrade NLOS on javelin?
Deaf Man among huge Military Technology & Aviation Hobbies.

Pardon regard my poor written skills as due to my language-specific - BSL and it is the second language English after BSL as it is different Grammar Rules applied. (Use Grammarly APP)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

I agree with the previous post. Rather then buying more Javelins to replace thise sent to Ukraine, I would place orders for the Spike-LR2, from the Europeans production line and join Germany and Poland as a user. It is applicable to vehicle mounting, where any platform that could mount say a Milan can mount a Spik-LR2 single launchers, though many companies are offering under armour launchers armed with usually two missiles. Give Ukraine more Javelins but retain a number in UK service until replaced by Spike-LR2 and then send the remainder to Ukraine. Work on the next generation Spike-LR is ongoing and this will have full network capabiloity so a missiola could be handed off to a third party during an engagement
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
Djpowell1984

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by SW1 »

Lord Jim wrote: 08 Feb 2023, 22:12 I agree with the previous post. Rather then buying more Javelins to replace thise sent to Ukraine, I would place orders for the Spike-LR2, from the Europeans production line and join Germany and Poland as a user. It is applicable to vehicle mounting, where any platform that could mount say a Milan can mount a Spik-LR2 single launchers, though many companies are offering under armour launchers armed with usually two missiles. Give Ukraine more Javelins but retain a number in UK service until replaced by Spike-LR2 and then send the remainder to Ukraine. Work on the next generation Spike-LR is ongoing and this will have full network capabiloity so a missiola could be handed off to a third party during an engagement
There is a lot of institutional knowledge on javelin as it is in service and a lot of kongsberg remote weapons stations arriving which can mount javelin it may seem an odd move to switch horses now when so many other things need attention. Gd to see you back posting LJ.

Djpowell1984
Junior Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 01:28
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Djpowell1984 »

Lord Jim wrote: 08 Feb 2023, 22:12 I agree with the previous post. Rather then buying more Javelins to replace thise sent to Ukraine, I would place orders for the Spike-LR2, from the Europeans production line and join Germany and Poland as a user. It is applicable to vehicle mounting, where any platform that could mount say a Milan can mount a Spik-LR2 single launchers, though many companies are offering under armour launchers armed with usually two missiles. Give Ukraine more Javelins but retain a number in UK service until replaced by Spike-LR2 and then send the remainder to Ukraine. Work on the next generation Spike-LR is ongoing and this will have full network capabiloity so a missiola could be handed off to a third party during an engagement
Good idea, Slow replacement Javelin with Spike LR2 / Akeron MP either as both seem like similar range and ability.

I doesn’t reliese that British were looking at Spike MR vs Javelin prior 2001; they pick up Javelin in the end.

Lots of other countries (Slovakia and other) move to Spike LR2 and pick this over Javelin, which much more advanced weapon that British use, can use on platform.

NLAW upgrade program + Spike LR2 / NG LR will make British stay ahead of future conflict.
Deaf Man among huge Military Technology & Aviation Hobbies.

Pardon regard my poor written skills as due to my language-specific - BSL and it is the second language English after BSL as it is different Grammar Rules applied. (Use Grammarly APP)

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

For the next step up from Javelin is Hero 120 or Brimstone as said on other threads moving javelin on to the RWS's around the Battalion would free up what is now the AT Platoon to become a Overwatch Platoon with Hero 120 or Brimstone

with this a Mechanised Battalion could have in depth fire power like so

100 to 2000 meters = 12.7 HMG , LW 30mm , 40mm GMG , NLAW , Javelin , 120mm mortar
2000 to 10,000 meters = Javelin , 120mm mortar Hero 120 or Brimstone
10 km to 40 km = Hero 120 or Brimstone

this Battalion could rock up with

200 NLAW , 60+ ready fire Javelin plus 3 reloads , 128 ready fire Brimstone plus 3 reloads
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
Djpowell1984

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Tempest414 wrote: 09 Feb 2023, 12:27 For the next step up from Javelin is Hero 120 or Brimstone as said on other threads moving javelin on to the RWS's around the Battalion would free up what is now the AT Platoon to become a Overwatch Platoon with Hero 120 or Brimstone

with this a Mechanised Battalion could have in depth fire power like so

100 to 2000 meters = 12.7 HMG , LW 30mm , 40mm GMG , NLAW , Javelin , 120mm mortar
2000 to 10,000 meters = Javelin , 120mm mortar Hero 120 or Brimstone
10 km to 40 km = Hero 120 or Brimstone

this Battalion could rock up with

200 NLAW , 60+ ready fire Javelin plus 3 reloads , 128 ready fire Brimstone plus 3 reloads
100% agree.

Djpowell1984
Junior Member
Posts: 9
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 01:28
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Djpowell1984 »

Tempest414 wrote: 09 Feb 2023, 12:27 For the next step up from Javelin is Hero 120 or Brimstone as said on other threads moving javelin on to the RWS's around the Battalion would free up what is now the AT Platoon to become a Overwatch Platoon with Hero 120 or Brimstone

with this a Mechanised Battalion could have in depth fire power like so

100 to 2000 meters = 12.7 HMG , LW 30mm , 40mm GMG , NLAW , Javelin , 120mm mortar
2000 to 10,000 meters = Javelin , 120mm mortar Hero 120 or Brimstone
10 km to 40 km = Hero 120 or Brimstone

this Battalion could rock up with

200 NLAW , 60+ ready fire Javelin plus 3 reloads , 128 ready fire Brimstone plus 3 reloads
Very good suggestion

I check hero 120 vs switchblade 600 in turn hero 120 better range and loiter time.

I would like see

Anti tank platoon ;
NLAW - urban / CQB
spike LR2 / NG LR (replacement javelin) - Open field / stations remote
Hero 120 - loitering weapon
Brimstone (tri-service) and MBDA Precision land Missile (army and navy) - NLOS rapid reaction support / strike anti-tank or other, structures

.338 MG / 40mm cannon (HE / AP / frag fuse anti UAV ‘ helicopter ‘ missile) / 40mm GL /(60mm or 81mm) mortar / 120mm mortar remote turret

With aerial UAV the stalker for laser targeting also reconnaissance for every platoon with Indago 3 or i forget name of helicopter minture drone

Mallory T-650 supplied reload / wound airlifts / brimstone armed / fury light bomb / torpedo
Deaf Man among huge Military Technology & Aviation Hobbies.

Pardon regard my poor written skills as due to my language-specific - BSL and it is the second language English after BSL as it is different Grammar Rules applied. (Use Grammarly APP)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by dmereifield »

And in future would we need Gernman authorisation to donate or sell our Spike to a 3rd country being invaded by a hostile aggressor?
These users liked the author dmereifield for the post:
Djpowell1984

sunstersun
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by sunstersun »

dmereifield wrote: 09 Feb 2023, 17:34 And in future would we need Gernman authorisation to donate or sell our Spike to a 3rd country being invaded by a hostile aggressor?
You'd need the Israeli's who have done a total weapons embargo.
These users liked the author sunstersun for the post:
Djpowell1984

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by dmereifield »

sunstersun wrote: 09 Feb 2023, 18:49
dmereifield wrote: 09 Feb 2023, 17:34 And in future would we need Gernman authorisation to donate or sell our Spike to a 3rd country being invaded by a hostile aggressor?
You'd need the Israeli's who have done a total weapons embargo.
Let's give it a miss then. Surprised Uncle Sam hasn't pressured Isreal to do the right thing yet
These users liked the author dmereifield for the post:
Djpowell1984

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

Whether we can or can not sell or pass on a system should not be the main driver in procurement of a system

However if there is not a lot in it between systems the one that gives the best flexibility should win out

As far as the UK is concerned for me we know Javelin it fits on our RWS's we should stick with it as said up thread and look to push the Overwatch Platoon with better range. This could allow us to free up RA Regiments on the 105mm light gun to become HIMARS regts now for me this could be game changing
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
Djpowell1984

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Timmymagic »

This could mean that Javelin might not be as effective into the future....

I've always said I'd prefer MMP to Javelin, for a lot of reasons, but I think this swings it...the Man in the Loop could end up being crucial if the thermals can't hold the target...


User avatar
Ian Hall
Member
Posts: 490
Joined: 18 Jun 2023, 14:55
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by Ian Hall »

I don't quite understand your point. I believe that both MMP and Javelin have IR seekers. I think you're perhaps saying that man in the loop is less likely to be deceived than an auto track/ auto lock (?). This may or may not be true but is there any evidence to prove it? Or have a missed your point entirely?

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by jimthelad »

Man in the loop only works if you have stable firing platform and reliable comm link. Current seeks have home on jam which renders some of the IR jammers irrelevant. On a modern battlefield, the luxury of firing and then performing in flight correction is a luxury only if you have a standoff range of >3km, if you have Armour or stage 3 cover, and if your round has Mach 2 + speed. IF x 3 in any sentence does not work if someone is shooting at you (I have some experience in this). On paper MMP looks better, but is derived from the seeker technology of TRIGAT MR, a complete clusterfuck.

Infantry need reliable shoot n scoot with fire and forget. That is why if the engagement range is <500m NLAW is the weapon of choice.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

jimthelad wrote: 06 Jul 2023, 20:52 Man in the loop only works if you have stable firing platform and reliable comm link. Current seeks have home on jam which renders some of the IR jammers irrelevant. On a modern battlefield, the luxury of firing and then performing in flight correction is a luxury only if you have a standoff range of >3km, if you have Armour or stage 3 cover, and if your round has Mach 2 + speed. IF x 3 in any sentence does not work if someone is shooting at you (I have some experience in this). On paper MMP looks better, but is derived from the seeker technology of TRIGAT MR, a complete clusterfuck.
Man in the loop on a missile like Akeron (new name for MMP) isn't a Command to Line Of Sight like Swingfire or Milan, it means that the missile transmits the seeker image back to the launch post and the operator can alter the aim point as the missile flies. The operator can lock on, fire the missile, seek cover and then course correct the missile. On some missiles with this feature the operator can fire the missile from complete defilade, guiding the seeker to lock on after launch.

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by jimthelad »

Having fired Milan, I am familiar with SACLOS. My point is, any mid course corrections are difficult in a firefight, artillery barrage, or shoot and relocate evolutions. Fine under armour or if on Helo's but not for infantry. Fire and forget is the only way to avoid being slotted on a contested area of ops. In counter insurgency or in urban environments where cover is available then fine, not in mobile operations.
These users liked the author jimthelad for the post:
new guy

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

jimthelad wrote: 06 Jul 2023, 22:10 Having fired Milan, I am familiar with SACLOS. My point is, any mid course corrections are difficult in a firefight, artillery barrage, or shoot and relocate evolutions.
My point was that it isn't SACLOS. Or MCLOS or any other flavour of CLOS.
If you are in an area of operations with no cover then infantry will probably be dead before they get to use an ATGW. If there is cover they can duck into it and course correct. Or they can fire from cover and course correct onto a target they can't even see from their firing position.
Comme ca:


I don't know if the nearby laptop is a training aid only, but if they can control from there then they can be remote from the firing point to start with.

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by jimthelad »

mr.fred wrote: 06 Jul 2023, 22:32
jimthelad wrote: 06 Jul 2023, 22:10 Having fired Milan, I am familiar with SACLOS. My point is, any mid course corrections are difficult in a firefight, artillery barrage, or shoot and relocate evolutions.
My point was that it isn't SACLOS. Or MCLOS or any other flavour of CLOS.
If you are in an area of operations with no cover then infantry will probably be dead before they get to use an ATGW. If there is cover they can duck into it and course correct. Or they can fire from cover and course correct onto a target they can't even see from their firing position.
Comme ca:


I don't know if the nearby laptop is a training aid only, but if they can control from there then they can be remote from the firing point to start with.
Ukraine's experience would beg to differ. Integrated ATGM fire teams stopped at least 2 corps level units with artillery support. They we fire and forget with integrated fire and manouver.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

jimthelad wrote: 07 Jul 2023, 22:36 Ukraine's experience would beg to differ. Integrated ATGM fire teams stopped at least 2 corps level units with artillery support. They we fire and forget with integrated fire and manouver.
Beg to differ with what? That the Akeron can use it's mid-course guidance to engage targets that cannot be seen from the launch position?
Ukraine operate an mixture of ATGW, including both fire and forget and CLOS systems, both of which have proven effective.
Ukraine, while relatively flat and open compared to some place, still has lots of cover.
jimthelad wrote: 06 Jul 2023, 22:10 In counter insurgency or in urban environments where cover is available then fine, not in mobile operations.
What are you suggesting that Ukraine is an example of? It's not COIN and most of it isn't Urban either.

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by jimthelad »

My point is that in a contested environment, fire direction is linear in order to limit counter fire. It is nice to switch fire to an emerging target, but in reality, after shooting, most AT teams are relocating for the next shot or scarpering to avoid counter fires.

The hidden target, in Armour terms is likely not a threat due to poor accuracy of most MBT in indirect fire. If you want to flash the cash, spend it on better optics, faster projectiles, or multistage warheads.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Javelin Anti-Tank Missile (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

jimthelad wrote: 08 Jul 2023, 22:04 My point is that in a contested environment, fire direction is linear in order to limit counter fire.
Historically, fire direction is linear because of the limitations of the guidance.
Fire and forget was developed as technology improved as it permits your firing team to displace and for the missile to follow a non-linear trajectory, such as top attack.
Man-in-the-loop has been developed as technology develops further as it permits your firing team to shoot at targets that are not visible.

jimthelad wrote: 08 Jul 2023, 22:04 The hidden target, in Armour terms is likely not a threat due to poor accuracy of most MBT in indirect fire.
Isn't that the exact point? Shoot the enemy when he can't shoot you?
I'd take the ability to engage and destroy targets from complete defilade over better optics, faster missiles or fancier warheads.
An infantryman in a field twenty kilometers away isn't a threat to you personally, in the near future, but you'd still engage him with artillery. The artillery will be engaging indirectly and from far away because it stops them being immediately located and destroyed by counterfire.
jimthelad wrote: 08 Jul 2023, 22:04 It is nice to switch fire to an emerging target, but in reality, after shooting, most AT teams are relocating for the next shot or scarpering to avoid counter fires.
The reason they are relocating or scarpering is because they are in line of sight at launch and they are likely to be seen. If the opposition can't see your launch point do you need to move?

Post Reply