First operation success to Trophy/Windbreaker APS

[500]

-Drozd 2, M and Arenal have all 360 area protection.

Never deployed.

-And the diference is? none from technical point of view.

Difference is that if u trust a system u would use it on first line tanks not on some useless junk.

Arena was on T-80, BTW.

Never deployed.

-Drozd was old, Arena has the same reduced collateral damage as Throphy. Not a unique feature.

Drozd was deployed in 1983. Arena uses fragments fired from above. Huge collateral damage.

-If operational in the sense of term means fully developed and available for service, then it's not the only one by 2 decades. The fact that Drozd is no longer in production and Arena is little deployed does not mean they are not operational, nor are Drozd-2 and others made for export.

Operational means it is used by army units.

Tandem in all this context meant 2 projectiles from 1 launcher, and the term was applied to RPG-29/30 as we all knew (and probably you too) If you really missunderstood then we have nothing to argue here. Arena could also destroy many targets simoultainously, but destruction of 2 projectiles wich follow the same trajectory and at almost the same time is not possible, as my post explained.

OK lets use ur definition. Trophy can take 99.99999% of tandem RPGs and 100% of tandem ATGMs of the world. In fact RPG-30 is not operatonal anywhere. And Trophy can take multiple missiles in same time so it can take RPG-30 as well.

Drozd-M and others the same, but the diference is that they are fully operational.

No. U dont understand meaning of operational.

Apart from RPG-29, wich was 3/5. BTW, all the rest hardly could penetrate even the stripped target, and that test was 10 year old, the test was made to improve protection. Tandem warhs have special characteristics, traditional ATGMs could not penetrate. The point is aceptable damage, not invincibility. What destroyed Merkava's in that war were really wire and laser guided ATGMs as Kornet-E, throught Syria and Iran, rpg-29, very few of them.

Kornet is actually more powerful than RPG-29. And your test show that even front is vulnerable to tandem warheads.

Not really, just a new turret, gun and other details. It was exhibited some time ago. The pic was just a T-90 with Relikt.

When it will be deployed then u can talk. So far its just a concept and no one knows how it will be finalized.

 

[nightcrawler]

So far its just a concept and no one knows how it will be finalized.

I really don't know what you are implying by saying concept to an item that is out there for export purposes !!

 

[500]

I really don't know what you are implying by saying concept to an item that is out there for export purposes !!

T-90M is not for export.

 

[mnd]

Never deployed

I told you, and you did not get my point.

Difference is that if u trust a system u would use it on first line tanks not on some useless junk.

T-55 were frontline the same as the others, and it was made to operate en masse, and it's APS accordingly. Not like the Throphy in Merkava, against limited insurgency.

Never deployed.

Still did not get my point.

Drozd was deployed in 1983. Arena uses fragments fired from above. Huge collateral damage.

Developed and produced is not the same. Arena uses accurate and small blasts, secure according to the manufacturer, doesn't matter anyway.

Operational means it is used by army units.

I explained my point. If a system is not bought/deployed, it does not imply the system is not ready and operational in that sense. Is the Throphy more mature than Drozd-2? No, the only difference is that Throphy was deployed in more units. Nothing special here.

OK lets use ur definition. Trophy can take 99.99999% of tandem RPGs and 100% of tandem ATGMs of the world. In fact RPG-30 is not operatonal anywhere. And Trophy can take multiple missiles in same time so it can take RPG-30 as well.

No, because all this time you did not exactly knew what I was referring with "tandem warheads/launchers" the fact is that tandem warheads (in this definition" are 2 projectiles wich follow the same trajectory at almost the same time one behind the other. Throphy and Arena can take many projectiles at the same time since they come all from different directions. But they cannot deal with what I explained because of the design and response time.

Tandem rpg-29 is mass produced and it's the main manual anti-tank weapon of the russian army. As of the rpg-30, Jordan bought a licence to produce it's rpg-32 variant on their soil a few months ago. Not talking about another export contracts with Syria or Iran.

Kornet is actually more powerful than RPG-29. And your test show that even front is vulnerable to tandem warheads.

Kornet is more powerfull, but rpg-29 was more effective because it's first decoy warhead took out ERA, and the second impacted on the stripped part of the tank. A Kornet against a Merkava will theorically cause more damage, but the Rpg-29 will always hit against an APS.

When it will be deployed then u can talk. So far its just a concept and no one knows how it will be finalized.

Does not matter, the important thing is that it's developement and production is funded by the current arms program. My original point was that a new ERA is being deployed in current T-90 as the pic showed.

 

[nightcrawler]

I explained my point. If a system is not bought/deployed, it does not imply the system is not ready and operational in that sense. Is the Throphy more mature than Drozd-2? No, the only difference is that Throphy was deployed in more units. Nothing special here.

End it now. This statement above is decisive one

 

[500]

I told you, and you did not get my point.

I dont care about your assumptions, I care about facts: it was never deployed.

T-55 were frontline the same as the others, and it was made to operate en masse, and it's APS accordingly. Not like the Throphy in Merkava, against limited insurgency.

USSR had several types of tanks: T-80 and T-64 were considered first class tanks for breaching hardest defences. T-72 was second class mobilization tank. T-62 third class tank for support. T-55 was total junk in 80-es. It had not any chance against NATO tanks. So why they put on Drozd on that junk? On the other hand Israel puts Trophy on its first line tanks - Merkava Mk4.

Still did not get my point.

That you dont have any sources to support ur claims.

Developed and produced is not the same. Arena uses accurate and small blasts, secure according to the manufacturer, doesn't matter anyway.

No, Arena uses jumping round full of fragments spreading them at 30 m range.

I explained my point. If a system is not bought/deployed, it does not imply the system is not ready and operational in that sense. Is the Throphy more mature than Drozd-2? No, the only difference is that Throphy was deployed in more units. Nothing special here.

Trophy is deployed,. Drozd-2 was never deployed. Thats fact. You claim that Drozd-2 is ready to be deployed. I dont know. Do u have proofs for this claim?

No, because all this time you did not exactly knew what I was referring with "tandem warheads/launchers" the fact is that tandem warheads (in this definition" are 2 projectiles wich follow the same trajectory at almost the same time one behind the other. Throphy and Arena can take many projectiles at the same time since they come all from different directions.

Because u dont know what u are talking about. All operational tandem missiles and RPGs today have two warheads in 1 round.

But they cannot deal with what I explained because of the design and response time.

Any proof for ur claim?

Tandem rpg-29 is mass produced and it's the main manual anti-tank weapon of the russian army.

Trophy can deal with RPG-29.

As of the rpg-30, Jordan bought a licence to produce it's rpg-32 variant on their soil a few months ago. Not talking about another export contracts with Syria or Iran.

You again dont know what u are talking about. RPG-32 is not variant of RPG-30. Trophy can take RPG-32.

Kornet is more powerfull, but rpg-29 was more effective because it's first decoy warhead took out ERA, and the second impacted on the stripped part of the tank. A Kornet against a Merkava will theorically cause more damage, but the Rpg-29 will always hit against an APS.

And again you dont know what u talk. RPG-29 does not have any decoy warhead. Its regular tandem just like Kornet

Does not matter, the important thing is that it's developement and production is funded by the current arms program. My original point was that a new ERA is being deployed in current T-90 as the pic showed.

I am not interested in ur hallucinations. So far not a single T-90M is operational. That means all Russian tanks are vulnerable to RPG-29 even front front.

 

[500]

End it now. This statement above is decisive one

Its wrong statement however.

 

[mnd]

I dont care about your assumptions, I care about facts: it was never deployed

.
I tried to explain you, how military industry works, how are systems developed, what requirements they have to meet, what is developement according to a specific doctrine and situation and what is arms export market and on what it is based on. And very basic knowledge about how tanks operate. You do not know/understand all this, but you keep ignoring people who explain you, and keep up with your pride and ignorance.

USSR had several types of tanks: T-80 and T-64 were considered first class tanks for breaching hardest defences. T-72 was second class mobilization tank. T-62 third class tank for support. T-55 was total junk in 80-es. It had not any chance against NATO tanks. So why they put on Drozd on that junk? On the other hand Israel puts Trophy on its first line tanks - Merkava Mk4.

Now you gonna tell me about what was soviet doctrine? You are telling this to the wrong person. T-55 was the main tank to fight NATO, was available in very large quantity and around all socialist bloc. The doctrine was to operate in big numbers in mass wars, and T-55 was simple, reliable and a good tank in general for it's role. APS systems are made only to fight against limited insurgncy, for big wars and tank battles it is not rentable, that's why Drozd was deployed in some T-55, wich was the only tank wich operated in Afghanistan. Arena was tested and deployed after Chechnia, and Throphy against insurgents in Merkava. It's different doctrine and enviornment

No, Arena uses jumping round full of fragments spreading them at 30 m range.

Argue this with it's manufacturer. You don't know that much, sincerely.

Trophy is deployed,. Drozd-2 was never deployed. Thats fact. You claim that Drozd-2 is ready to be deployed. I dont know. Do u have proofs for this claim?

See my response above, when you'll know how industry works, then you would understand. And it's not just my assumption, is the manufacturer's export advertisement.

Because u dont know what u are talking about. All operational tandem missiles and RPGs today have two warheads in 1 round.

No they are not, Rpg-30 passed acceptance tests for russian army years ago and it,s rpg-32 variant produced in Jordan and other countries. All use 2 projectiles. Just google a rpg-30/2 video or in Youtube to see how they work.

Any proof for ur claim?

-

Trophy can deal with RPG-29.

Sorry, confused with terminology, referred to rpg-30.

You again dont know what u are talking about. RPG-32 is not variant of RPG-30. Trophy can take RPG-32.

Said above, Throphy cannot take 2 projectile design rpg-30/2

And again you dont know what u talk. RPG-29 does not have any decoy warhead. Its regular tandem just like Kornet

Got confused (happens to the best of us). What happened with the rpg-29 is that it had a different warhead placement design wich was more effective against ERA than the Kornet's design was, but later Kornet versions are said to overcome this.

I am not interested in ur hallucinations. So far not a single T-90M is operational. That means all Russian tanks are vulnerable to RPG-29 even front front.

I said i am not interested in the T-90M and to argue about it. I said a new ERA was produced and showed a T-90 pic with it, not relationed to T-90M, wich I'm not disscussing. A tank needs decent protection, learn what concept a tank is. The T-90 has very good protection against all kind of munitions. Your concept about an "invincible" israely tank, or any other, is funny. There's no war without looses, and systems are developed accordingly.

 

[500]

I tried to explain you, how military industry works, how are systems developed, what requirements they have to meet, what is developement according to a specific doctrine and situation and what is arms export market and on what it is based on. And very basic knowledge about how tanks operate. You do not know/understand all this, but you keep ignoring people who explain you, and keep up with your pride and ignorance.

So far you are the only one who confused, showed ignorance and made claims without any proofs.

For instance you claimed that Drozd-2 was deployed in small number of units. Can u provide any proof for that claim? I'll wait.

And it's not just my assumption, is the manufacturer's export advertisement.

As I said, systems are often marketed before being finished, marketing proves nothing. Do u have proof that they passed government acceptance tests?

 

[mnd]

So far you are the only one who confused, showed ignorance and made claims without any proofs.

No, it's just that you did not understand my points and explications, and have no clue about how the arms industry works, nor about the system you are talking about.

For instance you claimed that Drozd-2 was deployed in small number of units. Can u provide any proof for that claim? I'll wait.

ÊÀÇ “ÄÐÎÇĔ

Developed in the 80s for T-62 and later passed tests, but it was chosen to not produce it. Later was deployed and tested in T-80U.

As I said, systems are often marketed before being finished, marketing proves nothing. Do u have proof that they passed government acceptance tests?

In arms industry, in order to a system being offered for export, it has to meet a series of requirements, it is regulated by a goverment controlled agency or institution, (Rosoboronexport in Russia). A company cannot offer undeveloped or non functional systems, unless joint developement is part of the deal, but that's another type of business. Systems sold have to be fully operational.

And yes, Drozd-2 did pass goverment tests. From the same link:
"In 1989 APS T2A2 (Drozd-2) succesfully passed tests, but no funding for their production (mass deployment) was given"

 

[500]

ÊÀÇ “ÄÐÎÇÄ”

Developed in the 80s for T-62 and later passed tests, but it was chosen to not produce it. Later was deployed and tested in T-80U.


In arms industry, in order to a system being offered for export, it has to meet a series of requirements, it is regulated by a goverment controlled agency or institution, (Rosoboronexport in Russia). A company cannot offer undeveloped or non functional systems, unless joint developement is part of the deal, but that's another type of business. Systems sold have to be fully operational.

And yes, Drozd-2 did pass goverment tests. From the same link:
"In 1989 APS T2A2 (Drozd-2) succesfully passed tests, but no funding for their production (mass deployment) was given"

В 1989 году КАЗ "Т2А2” успешно прошел предварительные испытания, после чего из-за отсутствия финансирования работа прекращена.

In 1989, KAZ "T2A2" successfully passed the preliminary tests, then due to lack of financial close.

So it only passed the preliminary tests but then closed, ie it was never finished. Surelly not deployed.

 

[mnd]

В 1989 году КАЗ "Т2А2” успешно прошел предварительные испытания, после чего из-за отсутствия финансирования работа прекращена.

In 1989, KAZ "T2A2" successfully passed the preliminary tests, then due to lack of financial close.

So it only passed the preliminary tests but then closed, ie it was never finished. Surelly not deployed.

If you want to remark something, at least read until the end:
"Apart from developement of APS for prospective vehicles, the company dedicated to the modernization of existing vehicles. In 1998, Drozd APS was deployed on T-80, in 1993, a variant was developed for light vehicles"

That's the enhanced one, and here's a note to you: completion of preliminary tests indicates that the system has reached full maturity. Final tests are evaluation of the system by the army, it is related to how they operate with it, not to the system itself, wich is finished.

 

[Archdemon]

Just in fresh news, another successful interception of Trophy

Gaza: Windbreaker shield thwarts missile fired at IDF tank - Israel News, Ynetnews

 

[Archdemon]

Gaza: IDF tank-shield intercepts missile - Israel News, Ynetnews

 

[500]

If you want to remark something, at least read until the end:
"Apart from developement of APS for prospective vehicles, the company dedicated to the modernization of existing vehicles. In 1998, Drozd APS was deployed on T-80, in 1993, a variant was developed for light vehicles"

No, it does not say deployed. It says that Drozd was fitted on ONE T-80 tank.

That's the enhanced one, and here's a note to you: completion of preliminary tests indicates that the system has reached full maturity.

No.