Thread:Defender7881/@comment-35115325-20190801022242/@comment-39901257-20190815064919

Defender7881 wrote: Zedkhan wrote: Defender7881 wrote:

Zedkhan wrote: Golurk 88 wrote:

Defender7881 wrote: Essentially, pretty much all tank designs have thin armor for the bottom and top.

If I'm correct, the Javelin missile system has the capabilities to penetrate and knock out a tank like the M1 Abrams. Yeah. I made a mistake with my previous post...MILAN is essentially an RPG which shoots an ATGM instead. You need a direct line of sight with the target and it won’t really change direction in mid flight.

The Spike is the Israeli version of the Javelin. It is ‘fire and forget’ and can execute top attacks, meaning flying over the tank then down onto the less well protected roof.

But the TOW isn’t quite as good because it requires manual steering, leaving the launch vehicle/site vulnerable and limiting its range. The TOW is more easily portable than the others though (it has been used on IFVs, wheeled reconnaissance vehicles and even helicopters) That’s what I pressumed javelin and other shoulder launched Anti Tank weapons to do — top attack.

I’m sure TOWs are more widely used because they can be deployed against a myriad of technicals like APCs, trucks, etc. Being clear, Javelin isn't exactly shoulder fired. It's portable but takes a team to operate.

TOW is more general use, as Golurk's short list of usage says.

@F0XTRAUT and Zedkhan, ICBM and MOAB are two completely different firing systems.

Intercontinental Ballistic Missile have multiple warheads and can deliver multiple payloads within 10 minutes or less.

Massive Ordance Air Blast (or Mother of All Bombs). Is the most powerful non-nuclear weapon in the US aresenal. I don't think it would be able to mount a nuclear tip warhead, as it is not intended to be a WMD.

Clarification for Zumwalt armament, it holds two Advanced Gun Systems (intended as naval artillery), which hold LRLAP ammunition as artillery support. Sorry, my post wasn’t clear—I didn’t mean MOAB be mounted with a nuke. I meant the ICBM could be; several, or, even one massive one If your talking about one big nuke, your probably looking at a ballistic missile, one that is launched from a submarine (single warhead). Otherwise, you can have an ICBM have all warheads target one location (Geez).

More portable methods would be artillery (USS Missouri does have 460mm nuclear tipped shells :o) and torpedoes. More ambush style would be through landmines and naval mines. An atomic mortar has even existed, although was abandoned at some point.

Well, dookey, if you’re going to be that expansive and precise... I’ll wait until this “Nuclear Engine” cough cough, scientists dead in N. Russia, cough cough, becomes viable, and then have attached cruise missile deliver several nuclear warheads intermittently over several months....