Very light guided weapon

Discussion in 'Infantry' started by wessex_warrior, Apr 21, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I'd like to ask arrse's opinion on something....

    It seems to me that there is a gap in the Market for a long-range, man-portable, lightweight, antipersonnel missile. like a cheaper, antipersonnel Javelin.

    So tell me arrse, is there a role for this type of system? Who would carry it? Should it have night optics like javelin or would it be better if that were sacrificed for lighter weight?

    Would non-lethal but incapacitating effects be a useful tool to a commander in AFG?

    I'm thinking very much 'the war' here, and musing on whether we can neutralise insurgents better or more cheaply than we do now.
  2. that's the sort of thing I was thinking. But those systems rely too much on the accuracy of the firer, I was trying to go in more of a blue-sky direction, and warhead-wise even lasm is overkill against single human target, especially if you're trying to minimise collateral damage.
  3. Barratt .50 cal? why would you need anything else for just one man?

    Incapciating CS Gas round, fired to the left or right of the target? job jobbed.
  4. You cheap system is now starting to develop a serious R&D requirement. As the man said, 0.50 cal.
  5. I think the US SRAW/Predator is a mini Jav. Kind've like their version of the NLAW.
  6. Light weight, man portable anti-pers weapon you say?

    61mm mortar with HE or WP. Job jobbed.
  7. Is that similar to the 60mm mortar?
  8. Let's assume serious r&d is not a problem. And a 50 cal requires a high degree of user proficiency to use at 2-2.5 km ranges. Plus calculating for wind speed, coriolis effect, aim off for moving target etc adds significantly too the engagement time.
  9. And if you can reliably land a 51 bomb first time on a moving Taliban riding a scooter at 2km then you are the second coming of Christ and shouldn't really be trying to kill anyone in the first place!
  10. The devil is, unfortunately, in the detail:
    "It seems to me that there is a gap in the Market for:
    a long-range,
    How long range? range = weight, so how far do we want to go? Out range rifles? then 500-1000m. Better than machine guns, then we are in the 1000-2500m range
    man-portable, lightweight, Both together, so how man-portable? Do you want to carry more than 1, more than 2? Use once and discard or are you happy to carry a launch unit around?
    antipersonnel missile Targets in open ground, in buildings? One, or many? Collateral damage considerations?.
    like a cheaper, antipersonnel Javelin. Javelin with cost reductions? but how?

    The bulk of the cost of the missile is in the guidance and control. The warhead and motor are minor costs in comparison. So the easiest way to make it cheaper is to compromise the guidance. The simplest switch from Javelin is to switch from thermal imaging guidance to normal visible light imaging. This has problems though, as then it is a daylight-only system.

    Another option would be to go back to the SACLOS systems like Milan. With a lightweight, TI sight like VIPIR (which would limit your range, so the idea of a 500-1000m system would suit this best) it would be all weather and 24hr. You would have to stay in position to guide it on to target, but if you are outside the effective range of most MGs, rifles and RPGs, that shouldn't be a problem. If you go to radio or laser guided (which the current permissive ECM environment would allow, although laser beam riders would be favourite as this would limit the likelihood of friendly ECM spoofing the missiles) you avoid the cost of wires or fibre optics or potential problems with leaving wires all over the place. SACLOS has the advantage that all the expensive sensors are on the reusable launch unit rather than the missile. On the other hand, the accuracy of the missile is dependent on the ability of the operator to keep the sight on target

    The other area is control. Fine control means high cost, so low cost control will be less likely to hit the target. This can be addressed by using a bigger warhead, but that causes issue with collateral damage and also heavier warheads need heavier missiles to carry them the distance.
  11. Good points, but Milan was designed a couple of decades ago. Perhaps it might be possible by now to automate a SACLOS system using CCTV camera recognition technology. Allowing the operator to select a target, and the firing post does all the hard work of making sure target and missile become best friends.
  12. I`ve been out 20 years, but what happened to the LAW? Whats wrong with Javelin?
  13. £ or 60,000 of them :)

    I would have thought that by far the easiest solution would be a UAV with a laser designator and the capability for a bombload of 100-200lb's LGB's that can be operated from FOB's.

    Give it as small a logistical footprint as possible so it can operate as close to the front line as possible, you dont need 1000lb'ers to send Terry to his 42 virgins.

    Cheap and cheerful.
  14. 60,000? I was on the original & they were only 7,000. Rapier was 21,000. But all that is needed is a laser designator and call up a FST, they ouldn`t know what hit them! G...S anyone?
  15. There was a US designed missile that would fit this spec. it was in development a couple of years ago, Was linked on here on one thread or other. Very compact.