![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
The TOW has always been assigned to the infantry. Whether it is ground mounted or vehicle mounted TOW units are most definitely, but not exclusively of course, used as an infantry weapon. Hence the 11H MOS designation.
I was a 106mm Recoilless rifle PSG as the TOW replaced it. In an infantry BN, the TOW platoon was part of a Combat Support Company. Later there were entire companies of TOWs that were part of those same Inf. BNs. I became 1SG of just such a company. My TOW crews were detached and assigned to rifle companies. There were many times when the TOW crews were required to dismount the TOWs and hump them right alongside the 11Bs. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
Thanks Dtop, that was some new info never heard before.
Jack, when I think bazooka I am referring to the original WWII weapon. We could go into a lot of semantics but in some histories I have read they refer to the WWII weapon as a bazooka and the subsequent Korean War weapon as an anti-tank rocket launcher. The recoiless rifle would not be a bazooka or rocket launcher or I think there wouldn't have been a new moniker donned for the hardware. The names usually reflect operation except in the case of the "bazooka" hehe. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
The RPG-7 has an 85mm HEAT warhead, I have seen an RPG-7 hit the left side of an M1A1 and it riochet off and hit the road. The M1 was made with armor that is anti-HEAT and anti-kenetic energy. No anti-tank shoulder fired rocket can defeat teM1, with the excepion of the Javlin and Wombat.
|
![]() |
|||
|
Quote:
This here is a copy of one of the troopers citations for his actions (name is removed for operational security. http://www.defence.gov.au/media/Depa...CurrentId=2761 It is taken from the Australian Department Of Defence Website. Quote:
|
![]() |
|
|
After the success of the Egyptians with their Soviet Sagger 'suitcase missiles' against the Israelis in '73, Chobham armour put a stop to man portable HEAT missiles, at least in a frontal attack, but the Swedes were quick to spot the archilles heel of Chobham tanks and came up with the first top attack missile, BILL.
Other countries have followed the top attack idea. Now with a myriad of top attack weapons, not many countries would design a shoulder fired missile without top attack. The Swedes have a very good set up with the 600 mt short range soft launch MTB LAW missile, it has a BILL 2 warhead and can be fired from an enclosed space, the BILL meadium range, and the 7 km. STRIX 120mm smart mortar, not sure if they have the top attack version of TOW, probably would have. Do you think the lone infantryman with top attack tamdem head HEAT missiles is getting back on top [excuse the pun] in tank killing? |
![]() |
||
|
Quote:
The BILL is more of an overflight type weapon instead of the true top attack. The true top attack dives on the target so the HEAT warhead is penetrating at a 0 degree angle straight in. The Bill over flys the tank by about a half meter and explodes its warhead at a 60 degee angle. Since mst tanks angled front hull and turret armor is at a 60 to 45 degree angle this cancels it out giving a 0 degree penetration path. I have some information given me by Bofors years ago and I will try and scan it and post it so members can see the unique way that Bofors was able to take the second generation SACLOS antitank missile and make it work with out having to do the complex R&D required of a 3rd generation like the Javelin. As to the statement about the TOW being an infantry weapon. It is more an infantry support weapon. In a fast advance or retreat it can not keep up with a fast moving infantry unit. Hence the reason the US Army also developed the DRAGON (ie a dog according to most I talked to). Jack E. Hammond |
![]() |