Iron Curtain APS : amazing video of Americas new RPG proof armor - no armor needed!!

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Did you even watch the video?

Yes

1) It may stop the first rocket, but it's not going to stop the next dozen rockets, or multiple rockets at once from all directions.

The video shows it stopping multiple rockets from all directions. And how many situations occur where more than a couple rockets are fired before the people shooting them are mowed down?

Well, I've never been in such combat before. Not by choice either.

However, if I was going to take out an enemy vehicle, and this deployed on my first rocket, I would logically hit it again. I don't think I would be shot after my first rocket attack because I would not be stupid enough to attack a convoy by myself, nor without planned ambush tactics.

2) It's not going to end up well for buddies outside of the vehicle, which is why I am skeptical about placing this on a hummer like in the video.

The video addresses this, too, saying nearby items were not harmed.

We're talking about a active protection system that automatically shoots off a projectile to intercept an incoming projectile. Anybody standing anywhere close to the interception point isn't going to be standing after deployment of the APS.

www.army-guide.com...

"A projectile is launched at the direction of the incoming threat, to intercept and destroy it at a distance of 30 meters from the protected vehicle."

And again, this is addressed in the video with the rocket destroyed after first travelling through a vehicle driving past the target. You would think the 2nd vehicle would have interfered with the defensive system, but it did not.

Why would another vehicle interfere with the APS? What does the second vehicle have to do with anything about the effectiveness of the APS?

No, I would think that if this APS was deployed in a real combat situation against a capable enemy (such as Russia, who has developed APS for decades and knows how to beat them through tactics, weapons and jammers), then the vehicle might survive for slightly longer than without it when facing perhaps a squad armed with RPGs (typical of Russian infantry and guerellas alike).

However, this APS wouldn't be as effective against incoming modern anti-tank missiles, especially if they are deployed with APS-defeating measures (even newer RPG-models are designed with this in mind). What if an RPO round is intercepted? I doubt the APS is going to stop the vehicle from getting hit by flammable material, which would really mess with the thermal optics designed to automatically track an enemy launch.

APS can do nothing against rifled rounds, like a 125mm HEAT.

ateuprto-
Hate to tell you, this type of detonation sure as hell beats an uncontrolled detonation of an RPG, in or outside the vehicle.

The most logical and practical use of this technology would be on patrols, but the dwindling insurgency prefers remotely detonated IEDs these days as compared to the full-on ambush.

First off, a hard-kill APS is designed to intercept the trajectory of the incoming projectile; not to destroy it (though it will probably disable the weapon if hit anyways). This is specifically to deny kinetic penetration, which is important since there's a lot of anti-armor missiles/rockets out there these days. This is also another reason why I don't see why this would be deployed on anything other than heavy armoured units.

Secondly, yes, this is obviously designed with insurgency in mind. Most insurgents aren't armed with sophisticated anti-tank weapons, so an APS system would be beneficial.

However, in a scenerio where two conventional forces engage each other, APS would prove to be too costly to deploy in a war of numbers vs numbers. APS systems are more practical for elite armored units, who can efficiently field such technology without being destroyed as easily as your regular front-line units.

Don't get me wrong, I think APS are great. However, they aren't very practical in anything other than specialized warfare (like fighting insurgents or special forces). APS doesn't stop advanced anti-tank guided missiles, especially since they tend to be much faster, larger (more mass to defeat), sophisticated (maneuverability), and supported ("counter-countermeasures", integrated combat). If it can stop a Hellfire or Khrizantema or Vihkr, then I will be impressed.

Watched the video a few times, here's what I thought...

Pros- Inexpensive(maybe), simple to fit (vs Arena), and it solves the massive collateral damage problem of Arena/Drozd/Trophy APS by shooting downwards.

Cons- Sure it can destroy a puny RPG-7, what about an ATGM, like Kornet, Svir, Refleks, or BGM 71? Tandem warheads will still be 100% effective against a system like this.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


Dimitri, you are right about the RPG-30 being able to defeat western APS, due to the tandem warhead. The first warhead acts as a decoy tripping the APS and the actual warhead is free to defeat the hull armor. Vladimir Korenkov, director of Basalt stated this.

reply to post by ZIVONIC


I just want to clarify what I meant by my RPG-30 example. It fires two seperate projectiles specifically to beat the APS. A tandem warhead itself is a warhead with two parts (usually the first is to blow away ERA, or just armor in general, and the second is the primary warhead), and is one projectile over all.

You probably already know what I mean, I'm just making it clear since "tandem warhead" might be misinterpreted

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


You are right, I was just using Basalts terminology. It is regarded as tandem, but not tandem like the PG-29V... the RPG-29s HEAT round. Probably the most familiar tandem warhead there is.

I have always wondered why Arena never went into production, it only costs 300K per unit. Do they have something better in the works, or are Kontact-5 and Relikt more effective than anticipated

(1) Great potential for defeat against direct fire. Possibly less success against indirect fire.

(2) I have low confidence that it would be effective against larger payloads.

(3) I only see a 2m strike zone in the video. Would be interested to see this work for larger targets.

(4) Dismounted personnel are often targeted by RPGs. This defeat mechanism may not be healthy for persons in or around the targeted vehicle/structure when it initiates, but could help minimize fragmenting of the projectile.

(5) The fuel source for the defeat mechanism could present a new logistics hurdle for deployed forces.

I noticed something I missed in the first few playbacks

If you look at the first slow motion capture at 20 sec, you can clearly see the entire projectile is not destroyed and the propellant continues to move the rear portion of the grenade after the warhead is destroyed, thus proving my initial observation that warheads like the PG-29V can defeat this system. Also look at 1:35, this is very clear.

Any large ATGM will have no problem defeating this.

Around 30 seconds you can see what appears to be the damaged warhead bouncing off the armor and detonating next to the target a few seconds later.

Personally, I would not be confident enough to ride in that Humvee during the test.

As for real life combat scenarios:
“On the 1st of March 2011, a Merkava MK IV stationed near the Gaza border, equipped with the trophy system foiled a missile attack aimed toward it, and became the first operational success of the trophy armor defense system.[11] On 20 March 2011, a missile was fired toward a Merkava MK IV tank equipped with trophy system inside the Israeli area along the perimeter fence of the Gaza Strip, the system identified the shooting, but calculated that it did not endanger the tank, and no intercept occurred. The system passed information about the shooting and the tank crew returned fire toward the source of fire”.

en.wikipedia.org...(countermeasure)#Combat_history

I take it you all here realise that the PG-29V and other similar tandem warheads are not physically seperate? They are on the same rocket or body so to speak and the first warhead is only timed to go off fractions of a second before the main. Thus, a system like this is still likely to be "disrupted" i.e. the rocket brocket effectively, and neither charge coming close to the standoff required to form an effective EFP. Anyway, who says the "distrupter" or "intercepter" is not a slug of water like the PigStick or Bootbanger bomb disposal weapons... Just something to think about, dont assume for a minute that defence contractors are showing and telling you everything about their product.

reply to post by Solarity


Obviously, the PG-29V is one projectile. Watch the parts of the video I pointed out, there is clear evidence that this system failed to destroy the complete projectile. This is intentional, to avoid collateral damage, something Arena and Trophy don't do. Iron Curtain takes a minimalist approach to the problem, by making the warhead "inert", not destroying it and letting it bounce of the armor. However, because of this, large tandem projectiles can and will pass through. Here's some stuff to look at the better understand the system.

www.defensereview.com...

www.artisllc.com...

Regarding the PG-29V, compare the projectile to an RPG-7. The distance between the the 29Vs primary and secondary warheads would put the secondary warhead just out of the APS's reach, it would have a high probability of passing through, and anyone in that Humvee would be toast. Keep in mind, the secondary warhead is built to withstand the concussive force of ERA, and the detonation of the primary. The manufacturer even says it cannot defeat RPG-29s and 32s without "enhancement". Which probably include, buying two systems and doubling up.

I would feel much safer behind a system like Arena or Trophy, hell even the 30 year old Drozd. There is a video floating around of Ukraine's zaslon APS defeating a 125mm APFSDS.

Originally posted by Solarity
I take it you all here realise that the PG-29V and other similar tandem warheads are not physically seperate?

I meant the RPG-30, which most certainly fires two separate rockets. RPG-29 and RPG-32 don't seem to feature double-projectiles though.