Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 141 to 145 of 145

Thread: Bunker and tank busters at section/squad and platoon level

  1. #141
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B.Smitty View Post
    I recall reading somewhere about a Dynamit Nobel program to build a guided version of the Pzf 3. Anyone know if there has been any progress on this?

    It seems like they could have the makings of a pretty flexible weapon system if they could use the same base fire control unit with guided/unguided Pzf 3 and Bunkerfaust rounds, and maybe expand it to fire the RGW 90mm and 60mm rounds. A 1200m range, guided 60/90mm round could be very handy in Afghanistan.

    Also, does anyone know how their new Wirkmittel 90 hopes to achieve any kind of reasonable hit rate at 1000m with an unguided round?
    A computerised sight offer 600m (official) effective range for Pzf3, that should suffice for most purposes.
    I didn't hear about a guided version yet. A guided version would need a new sight and as every munition of the Pzf3/Bunkerfaust system has its own barrel, it would also need that one. In the end, a guided weapon would necessarily have nothing or almost nothing in common with a Pzf3.

  2. #142
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Maybe it died on the vine.

    In 1993 it was learned that an extended-range guided round was being developed for the Panzerfaust 3. Developed in conjunction with the Israeli Rafael organization, the new round integrates an ogive having a laser seeker with the standard projectile. A “bang bang” actuator and two canard control surfaces are fitted, along with the electronics module. Four wings are at the rear of the ogive; they mount the laser radiation detectors at their tips. The ogive is designed so as not to disturb the formation of the shaped-charge jet. A laser illuminator is mounted on the launcher. Once the projectile is launched, the guidance component senses its deviations from the projected laser beam and issues course correction commands to the aerodynamic control surfaces. This new projectile has not yet been offered on the market.
    http://www.dfeeler.com/forecastinc/s...nzerfaust3.doc
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 05-05-2010 at 08:17 PM. Reason: Add quote marks

  3. #143
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    33

    Default

    The problem with a computerized sight on an unguided weapon is that, while your claimed effective range is 600m, the hit percentage drops significantly the further out you go. Hitting moving targets is an exercise in (now computerized) educated guesswork.

    OTOH, guided weapons have less of a hit chance drop off as range increases.

    Just seems like if you could build a CLU that was lighter than Javelin and use a large range of existing unguided and guided munitions (60mm, 90mm, 110mm, maybe 124mm with HEAT, bunker buster, HESH, timed-airburst), you could more effectively tailor munition to METT-TC.

    One would also hope it'd be a lot less expensive than the Javelin CLU/missile combo.

  4. #144
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    99

    Default

    And for the readers who don't understand military acronyms METT-TC means?

  5. #145
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GI Zhou View Post
    And for the readers who don't understand military acronyms METT-TC means?
    Mission, Enemy, Terrain and weather, Troops and support available, Time available, Civil considerations.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...5.htm#par2-1-1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •