Originally posted by jec10:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
The US hasn't had an ATGM with a range of under 2500m since the Dragon. 2500m is the assumed effective range of a well trained crew in a T80. The Tow II was and still is a ground launched ATGM. You can launch from a tripod, a specialized vehicle, a HMMWV, a Bradley, or an attack helicopter. On the Helicopter mount it carries 3750m or wire, all of the ground mounts carry 3000m of wire. Javelin range is 2500m. Hellfire is 6000m. Those are the US Army's current inventory of ATGM. (Mavericks belong to the Airforce, though I have seen a picture of a pair mounted on an Apache.)
Which is (nearly) all entirely superfluous to the original post which referred to infantry ATGMs. We are talking about man-portable ATGMs here (to go with your thesis), not various vehicle mounted or portable systems. The Javelin is the only relevant system you mention, and it requires a two-man team, and is generally considered overweight by users (especially when you consider the weight of the batteries which it chews through), and only has a 2.5 click range. An autocannon-armed IFV can outrange that today, provided it has decent optics.
Try designing an ATGM light enough for one man to carry unemcumbered using Striker. It is not much fun if you want decent range and penetration.
That said, if you are consistently using battledress for your gunners then under Striker you can carry up to 100kg unemcumbered. This gives greater scope for a long-range, good penetration, missile. Still doesn't get around the point-defence systems most vehicles from TL9 will be sporting though. </font>[/QUOTE]First the TOW is and always has been an Infantry ATGM. The vehicle mounts came later. The Hellfire and Copperhead systems may not be man portable, but the Infantry can and does aim it.
Second, If Point defense is so effective then why do Tac Missiles stay in the Tech Level charts? For that matter why have grav vehicles?
The answer is obvious, they improve with advancing technology alongside point defense and armor. Just a couple of ideas ideas on how the Tac Missile can still score kills.
1. Stealth. Point defense can't hit what it can't see.
2. Standoff attack. Perhaps the missile attacks from outside the effective range of the Point Defense. (Bomb Pumped Laser on a smaller level, with or without the nuke.) Or the TAC Missile is just a bus and delivers 12-24 hypervelocity stealth KE penetrators and 6-12 barrage jammers and other ECM systems in the salvo.
Starship missiles get through batteries of Point Defense Lasers, without intervening terrain, and at generally over 15,000km of tracking distance. What makes you think that battlefield missiles wouldn't also be difficult to shoot down?
You are generally dealing with less than 6km to track the weapon, intervening terrain, lower quality sensors, smaller and less powerful weapons.
By the way, when dealing with infantry, as opposed to vehicles, normal engagement ranges is still under 300 meters. (As Infantry are difficult to see in normal terrain at longer ranges than that.) BTW that is specifically infantry actually expecting contact, as opposed to a bunch of guys standing in the chow line.
IT can tell the difference not only between the suits you listed, but give you a full readout of when and where they were built as well as any other factory coded data the manufacturer cares to include.
