TOW 2 vs T-72?

[JJ_BPK]

Just spotted on FB.
Good clean shot lands right in the turret of a T-72(?)
Maybe a export version of a TWO 2??,,

and someone climbs out of the turret??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOJSz1WOEg

As far as tanks go,, is there a significant difference between the TWO 2 rounds??

1) TOW-2A (BGM-71E);
2) TOW-2B (BGM-71F);
3) TOW-2B Aero (BGM-71F6);
4) TOW-BB (Bunker Buster) (BGM-71H)

I was expecting 100% fatalities..

[miclo18d]

With the advent of reactive armor, the TOW was improved with a probe to set off the reactive armor before the shaped charge fired, the TOW2.

A shaped charge that doesn't penetrate the main cabin and ignite the ammunition will not necessarily catch the cabin on fire (though possible). It appeared to hit high on the turret and scare the living Shi'ite out of the guy inside. The tank could have later caught on fire.

My dad was a project manager for AT weapons at the Pentagon during the late 80s (If you like the Javelin, you can thank him. He was told to scrap the Javelin because it cost too much. He waited for the next guy to come in and resubmit it as a project.) One of the things he told me was, at the time, there was nothing that the TOW couldn't defeat.

[Old Dog New Trick]

I was a TOW gunner back in the mid 80s (just before TOW II) it's not a Sabot that sucks everything out a much smaller hole on the exit. It causes spalling and secondary fires. Best case it hits the ammo bunker, fuel tank or engine.

This is probably just a lucky sum bitch that he didn't get hit by shrapnel from his own tank steel.

[JJ_BPK]

I was attached to a 1/9 Cav platoon in Nam as the INF co-support(?) platoon,, for a week.. We were doing interdiction along the Cam boarder.

I told our Bn Co that the APC were useless death traps, noisy, cumbersome, slow, gas hogs. We were hit every night and during the day.

They were withdrawn shortly after to a flat open area, where their tactical strength(S) was usable.

Any-who,, Granted the ACP is not a tank, but I saw what the RPG could do to them daily.. The liquid aluminum SPLAT was all over the place. Not pretty..

I would have thought that 40yrs later the TOW would at least keep up with an RPG?? Given they were shooting at a 40 yr old tank..

PS: If I give the impression, I am not fond of armor,, I'm not...

[ElevenBravo87]

I was a TOW gunner in the late 80s during the TOW2 changeover. We were trained that the tandem warhead would defeat all armored threats, even straight shots at the forward turret armor. We were trained to take shots at the turret rings in most cases, but to attempt to ensure a flat strike, or one that was as close to perpendicular to the armor face as possible. This was to allow the warhead to do the work and create the shaped plasma jet to defeat the armor and create the secondary explosions - fuel, ammo, etc.

Looking at the footage, the shot appears to come from low and to the right. Looking at the position of the tank, I think the vehicle was actually hull down to the sight picture from where the weapon was fired, thus there was likely only turret armor to select. Additionally, there appears to be possible cover from the block walls to the right of the target. This may be why the round stuck so high on the turret, it may have been all they could see from their angle of fire. When you are looking through the sight, the round spirals around quite a bit from the cross-hair (which you are supposed to ignore), and maybe they even moved the aim point up further to keep from clipping the cover. The round looked like it flew true and did not wander as they sometimes did back in my day.

Generally the round strikes very close the cross-hair on a stationary target like that. The tank never moved, so the Optically Guided part should not have had to update and steer the round due to target movement.

Reading some other articles, it looks like it was a T 90, and that turret top is very sloped, and all reactive plates. The impact point is very high on that plate, maybe even up to the sight housing there on the upper right. Possibly high enough for the jet to have not hit anything critical. Certainly there are no good secondary explosion targets up that high the turret.

So either it was a good aim point on what little area was available, or a piss poor aim point on a massive tank at relatively short range for a TOW shot.

The tandem warhead configuration (71E) rams a HEAT charge right after an HE charge to defeat reactive armor. The top down warhead is after my time, but I do not think that runs as hard hitting combination as the tandem, as its designed to defeat the far thinner top armor from an off angle.

In any case, that is one lucky guy. Tankers stay in their vehicles unless the crew cabin is on fire. That means the turret armor had to be defeated in some manner to make it crappy enough in there to want to get out. Maybe it hit so high, it just set wiring and spare light ammo on fire. In any case the plasma jet penetrated the tank in some way, and the guy who appears to be sitting within 2 feet of the impact survived to get out I would absolutely expect 100% fatalities as well on any clear turret penetration.

Shows why the Javelin is so awesome. Fire and forget with top down profiling is far superior. Would have loved to fire one of those things.