They've got one.
Posted on 09/05/2006 6:53:40 PM PDT by ruptured duck
WASHINGTON - Rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs, are a favorite weapon of insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are cheap, easy to use and deadly.
RPGs have killed nearly 40 Americans in Afghanistan and more than 130 in Iraq, including 21-year-old Pvt. Dennis Miller.
“They were in Ramadi, and his tank was hit with a rocket-propelled grenade,” says Miller’s mother, Kathy. “Little Denny never knew what hit him.”
Sixteen months ago, commanders in Iraq began asking the Pentagon for a new system to counter RPGs and other anti-tank weapons.
Last year, a special Pentagon unit thought it found a solution in Israel — a high-tech system that shoots RPGs out of the sky. But in a five-month exclusive investigation, NBC News has learned from Pentagon sources that that help for U.S. troops is now in serious jeopardy.
The system is called “Trophy,” and it is designed to fit on top of tanks and other armored vehicles like the Stryker now in use in Iraq.
Trophy works by scanning all directions and automatically detecting when an RPG is launched. The system then fires an interceptor — traveling hundreds of miles a minute — that destroys the RPG safely away from the vehicle.
The Israeli military, which recently lost a number of tanks and troops to RPGs, is rushing to deploy the system.
Trophy is the brainchild of Rafael, Israel’s Armament Development Authority, which has conducted more than 400 tests and found that the system has “well above [a] 90 percent” probability of killing RPGs and even more sophisticated anti-tank weapons, according to reserve Col. Didi Ben Yoash, who helped develop the system.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
If we only put cars on the road that insured 98% suvivability in high speed crashes, then we would never have had private cars. IAC my son's commander found a good offense to be a good defence. He had them take the doors off of humvees. What ended his anxiety over the lack of armor was when he saw a roadside bomb blow off the turret of an M1A1. As a graduate of armor school, he knew the strengths of that vehicle. Thereafter he never regreted his choice to stick to scout vehicles. ahtough he often wished that he was elsewheere than driving down Iraqi streets and highways.
You have managed to insult everybody within a five block radius, and you ask me to calm down. You sound very excitable for a man of your years and experience.
That depends on how tight the focus and how many false firings you have. The system can be 100% in destroying RPGs and still have no military utility, if it does not fit into our battle plan.
Back during WWII, the soldiers found an answer to the Panzerfaust/Panzershrek ambush problem.
Infantry, mounted on the Shermans, would shoot at the likely hiding places, and when they got close enough, would throw grenades into the hidy holes. (The BAR was a favorite for the fire suppression job.) The sound of the explosion was absorbed by the German soldier's body, giving it a liquidy "schrumpf" sort of sound.
That requirement, to direct fire at suspected enemy locations, to get the first shots out before the enemy, was the first step away from Known Distance marksmanship to assault rifles for the US.
And a sham and a mockery.
It's a traveshamockery.
You're obviously familiar with the issues here, but for others who aren't, it's not as simple as bolting a Trophy projectile container to the side of the turret. Radar sensors, at least 4 for 360 degree coverage, also need integration, in addition to any required electronics - amplifiers, control units, etc.
Per system or per shot? There's a big difference. Phoenix missiles were $1 Million per shot. Of course, they did tend to take out multimillion dollar aircraft if fired at their intended targets.
One SGLI payment is $400K. That's before the monthly VA survivors stipend.
I wasn't going there, but just trying to identify how difficult it will be to get funding.
I don't know its effectiveness but yes I have heard of this system before.
I could be wrong but it sounds like you don't want to be anywhere near the area when this thing intercepts.
Which leaves the gunners open to Sniper fire...
Its a sad fact of war.... Young men will die... and nothing anyone ever does will prevent it.
I don't know what the exact objections the ARMY has to this system... but given they are at war, and basically can get the money if they want it for them, there has to be a legitimate reason the system is not yet going into combat.
I suspect there are some issues that this reporter doesn't know about, or didn't care to report.
Hey now, don't talk about war in the classical and proven sense...everyone knows war nowadays is not about being so wretchedly aweful that it ends as quickly as possible... but about doing so as agonizingly slow and humane as possible so as to give our enemies pleaty of time to harm us as we can.
Uh, if this system is so great, why isn't Israel using it? Preponderance of IDF deaths in Lebanon were due to anti-tank missiles.
They've got one.
On the "FutureWeapons" show on The Discovery Channel, there was a short
bit on the defensive capabilities of the NLOS cannon platform.
IIRC, it was for identifying and neutralizing things like infantry threats,
including missle/RPG.
Sorry I can't give more definitive description, but it was a blip after
talking about all the other admirable features of the system:
http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=7214
Particularly not if the tanks are using the XM1028 120mm canister rounds. Big damn shotgun.
There may be legitimate reasons why the Army does not want to spend the money or there may be something wrong with the system, but gunners will still have to accept a certain level of risk.
Well put.
Provided it does not do negative things to the vehicle's CG, transportability, etc., the bolt-on equipment on the outside of the vehicle is relatively easy to accomodate. It is all the equipment that must be mounted on the inside of the vehicle that may be the sticking point. Here there is a fixed volume and competing demands for that volume. If you end up with significant impacts in the areas of power supply, increasing weight, and volume that you mention, it may be impossible to accomodate Trophy and do anything like the original mission of the vehicle.
If that is the case, why leave the compound? Staying home certainly does not get the mission done, but it is a heck of a lot cheaper! Sometimes CAIV has too much independence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.