so the ukraine war confirmed that the javelin is the best man-portable ATGM in the world, right?

so the ukraine war confirmed that the javelin is the best man-portable ATGM in the world, right?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, it kinda wins that by default just for actually being portable (unless you count NLAW as guided, but I'd more put it as the superior AT4, they serve different roles). The top attack is just icing on the cake, the part that really matters is that you don't have to frick around with tripods and control consoles.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, I can't really think of another Fire and Forget shoulder-fired ATGM right now (other than the Chink Jav clone).
      Definitely not one that has actual real time guidance (i.e. not PLOS which just sets a course for the missile without being able to react to the target changing speed or heading).

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ignore that, I was moronic, the Spike is right there in the thread.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Shouldn't Javel be a bit cheaper? 300k per piece seems a bit too much when you can have AI integrated rocket that determines its target speed snd how much it needs to correct itself based on visual data. It should cost 50k at most

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Costs are probably prorated with the additional production facilities/capacity being made plus some R&D for incremental improvements to the system and software

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        the max 10$ missile's cost is entirely a function of availability of competition, greed of the seller, availability of money of buyer (which in case of the government is infinite) and the memorized historic pricing record. The last point is the only reason they aren't sold for 300 quadrillion $ per piece or more considering the 2nd last point.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >The last point is the only reason they aren't sold for 300 quadrillion $ per piece or more considering the 2nd last point.
          Nah, while they hold a lot of political power arms manufactures aren't deluded about who holds power in a nation. If they asked for 300 quadrillion $ per piece they would be nationalized instantly, they need to walk the line between robbing the taxpayer blind and not posing a threat to the security of the nation with their greed.

          The missile is guided, it steers to a predicted impact point while compensating for terrain/elevation and wind. GMLRS is guided in the same way. Lack of an active/passive seeker doesn't mean it's not guided.

          >while compensating for terrain/elevation
          Source? Does it have a forward facing radar / lidar?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Source? Does it have a forward facing radar / lidar?

            Why would it need either? It has a gyro based INS and a downward facing sensor that can distinguish between terrain and vehicles. It deliberately flies at a meter above line of sight and the warhead and compensate for the sideways momentum and angles up to 45'

            >https://www.saab.com/products/nlaw

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Why would it need either?
              To compensate for the terrain, if it can't see the terrain it can't avoid it. Unless you mean it just maintains the launch elevation / depression in flight.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You don't need a forward facing sensor to do either of those things. It just needs the magnetic and optical sensors looking down to know when it's over a target and not terrain.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That isn't compensating for terrain at all, it's a magnetic influence sensor picking up a big chunk of steel and detonating.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Ignoring things you're not meant to below up is compensating for terrain. Clearly not a "dumb projectile" like you said.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That wasn't my post, I just disagree that anything can be considered "guided" when there is no feed of position information into a guidance loop.
                In short the missile does not know where it is.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It has an INS, that's how it gets back on course after launch and how to completes it's slow turn at the correct rate. That's how it knows it's flying a meter above the line of sight to target.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Everything the military buys should be cheaper but contractors found one wierd trick the pentagon hates.
      They are only allowed to charge 10% markup on the manufacture cost but if DeathCorp just so happens to own BobsBolts and BobsBolts charges $50 for a 1/4" bolt it's not DeathCorps fault they are allowed to charge $55 per bolt.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Then how are you going to bribe the politicians to push for a war in Europe where they can send an endless amount of weapons?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Everything the military buys should be cheaper but contractors found one wierd trick the pentagon hates.
      They are only allowed to charge 10% markup on the manufacture cost but if DeathCorp just so happens to own BobsBolts and BobsBolts charges $50 for a 1/4" bolt it's not DeathCorps fault they are allowed to charge $55 per bolt.

      Cost plus contracts lol

      Space industry has moved on from that. good luck with incumbent military procurement.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >you can have AI integrated rocket that determines its target speed snd how much it needs to correct itself based on visual data.

      Anon, that is exactly what the Javelin is. With ludicrous range. And it also gives nightvision to the grunt. Kinda.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >you can have AI integrated rocket that determines its target speed snd how much it needs to correct itself based on visual data.

      Anon, that is exactly what the Javelin is. With ludicrous range. And it also gives nightvision to the grunt. Kinda.

      Fricking KYS AI Black folk javelin has a contrast seeker that uses IMU + angle tracking to measure range, it has been done since the '80s atleast. The electronics excluding the seeker cost frickall

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      military costs are never the unit price, it includes RD costs, and full lifetime maintenance costs paid up front

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >javelin is the best man-portable ATGM in the world
    it's the same as NLAW but costs 10x

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You're right, they are exactly the same. Not a single difference in spec.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No, no it's really fricking not. NLAW is a smart AT4, well-suited to close-in fighting like urban areas such as Mariupol where it garnered so much fame. Javelin is a long-range weapon, Stugna without the drawbacks. Yes, using a Javelin like an NLAW is a waste, but that's not what you're supposed to be using it for.

        they are not different enough to warrant 10x price difference

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >one can hit a manuvering target at ~5km
          >the other can hit a target moving at constant speed at ~600m
          >one can hit choppers and jets
          >the other can't

          While I'm

          Everything the military buys should be cheaper but contractors found one wierd trick the pentagon hates.
          They are only allowed to charge 10% markup on the manufacture cost but if DeathCorp just so happens to own BobsBolts and BobsBolts charges $50 for a 1/4" bolt it's not DeathCorps fault they are allowed to charge $55 per bolt.

          and hate the racket the MIC has become I would certainly be willing to pay 10 times as much for an extra 4km range and anti-air.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            But, do you want a
            >23kg dedicated AT system that's best used as a two-man team and limits your operation into an AT role due to the system's size and weight
            or
            >12.5kg disposable tube that you can lug around on your back, that lets you fulfill other roles, and destroy an enemy MBT if you need to
            ?

            They're not the same kind of system.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              That they are not, I'm also

              Best long range carriable ATGM that has seen combat for sure but I wouldn't want to use it at close range.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              One outranged its prey- the tank, the other is easier to use and everyone can have one, even poorgay army units. NLAW is like a gucci RPG without the modularity.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I wanna say the NLAW is a whole new thing. Used to be the average grunts had just disposable dumb tubes, but with modern tech we can just give them a sort of "miniature" ATGM.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >CG

                We want to PREVENT injuries with our jarheads, not cause them with our own weaponry.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm sure the eggheads will come out with a protective helmet or something to stop the traumatic brain injury at some point.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              It's 22.3kg and the LWCLU upgrade reduces weight by about 3-4lbs and the CLU size physically is reduced by about 30% as well which allows the CLU to be carried much easier in a backpack or similar.

              It's still a heavy b***h with the missile tube, but at least the CLU isn't such a clunky piece of shit anymore.

              Also the new LWCLU extends the effective range from ~1.5 miles to ~2.5 miles.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It is what it is, but I sure as heck wouldn't want to be doing anything else than Javelining had I to carry this stuff on my back.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >carry big tube all deployment
                >see enemy tank
                >bigger grunt pushes you into the dirt, takes your tube, pops the tank, throws tube back in your lap as your ass sits there in the cold mud
                >"Keep up the good work, soldier."

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                but if your platoon weapons team has an NLAW then it can't do much of anything other than anti-tank work, the Javelin team can be posted and both perform battlefield surveillance and do anti-structure work at long range.

                The NLAW is a bit too heavy to carry around all the time as a member of the fireteam, but not quite effective enough to actually fill the role of the Javelin in Weapons Teams.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Your platoon-level AT really should be dedicated to AT work, instead of being thrown around for multipurpose roles. It might work in unconventional warfare, but in peer warfare against an enemy with armored capabilities, your AT really needs to focus on being AT, and nothing more. If those capabilities against fortifications are needed somewhere, then they can be brought down from the company's weapons platoon.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >5km
            Anon no. That entirely depends on the missile variant

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      No, no it's really fricking not. NLAW is a smart AT4, well-suited to close-in fighting like urban areas such as Mariupol where it garnered so much fame. Javelin is a long-range weapon, Stugna without the drawbacks. Yes, using a Javelin like an NLAW is a waste, but that's not what you're supposed to be using it for.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The NLAW is still of a higher level than the disposable squad level tubes like AT4, M72 and RPG. It pretty much sits in a niche of its own (with Spike-SR) as a close-range (platoon level) AT defense system, and shouldn't really be compared to the Javelin like that.
        The Javelin is more in competition with stuff like Spike MR/LR, systems more capable of and designed for anti-tank "hunting," rather than just defense.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      NLAW is only superior at close range due to direct-fire mode
      its a dumb projectile, it only calculates lead based on angular momentum of the tube
      and it can set off prematurely by a tall truck or other metal object in the way due to being a fly-over warhead

      javelin is actually guided and has its own thermal camera for detection
      this means vastly superior acquisition and tracking
      true top-attack means very little can stop it once its fired other than driving into a tunnel

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >one can hit a manuvering target at ~5km
        >the other can hit a target moving at constant speed at ~600m
        >one can hit choppers and jets
        >the other can't

        While I'm [...] and hate the racket the MIC has become I would certainly be willing to pay 10 times as much for an extra 4km range and anti-air.

        doesn't warrant 10x price tag
        also videos show russian tanks don't move, probably because of their meme reverse speed

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >doesn't warrant 10x price tag
          It does. NLAW has been completely useless outside of cities while Javelin has been raking up kills all this time.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >its a dumb projectile,

        Dumb projectiles don't have overflight top attack

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          He's saying it's not guided and he's right, it has automatic lead calculation but no target tracking.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            The missile is guided, it steers to a predicted impact point while compensating for terrain/elevation and wind. GMLRS is guided in the same way. Lack of an active/passive seeker doesn't mean it's not guided.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >t. moron

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Best long range carriable ATGM that has seen combat for sure but I wouldn't want to use it at close range.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >ukraine war confirmed
    Kinda hard to do that, what with there being a sample size of 1. Javelin is the only active-seeker missile used there. The rest are either PLOS or beam-riding. You don't have Spikes, you don't have Akerons, you don't even have that Turkish one.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Or any of the Asian ones, Raybolt (RoK), LMAT (Japan) or HJ-12 (PRC). I guess you could stretch the definition a little and include Brimstone, which isn't really man portable but does have an onboard sensor.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    hi, I'm a tourist but eager to learn more. I understand the javelin is getting a lot of press lately, but I also hear a lot about the AR-15. is one clearly better than the other?

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I'm not sure about that, the Russians say that there has not been a single successful use of javelin yet, and this is just a money laundering tool for military corporations;
    they also call it "rzhavelin" (rzhavyi/pжaвый - rusty)

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I've payed taxes for things you people would not believe.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Literally chump change for the US. I am glad that my taxes are contributing to the extermination of vatBlack folk rather than some psyops about giving money to single mom shaniquas in some section 13

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Don't really care it just makes my portfolio go brrrrrrt.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Paid $500 in taxes my last paycheck. My determination is slowly eroding

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What percentage has your income tax increased since the start of the war?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        100%
        but only because I got a job that pays twice as much as before (NTA)

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >has your income tax increased
        The USA is having a standoff over the debt limit because Joe and the D's are unwilling to make spending compromises and we are having TWO new banks on the verge of collapse today alone

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Debt limit bs happens every two years, and bank failures happened because they finally turned off the endless money spigot that's been printing money for the last decade.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Debt limit bs happens every two years
            Because the government spends 5 trillion dollars despite getting 2 trillion in revenue
            House Republicans already agreed to increase the debt limit, but Schumer won't agree since they have a compromise about cutting back on some spending
            >because they finally turned off the endless money spigot that's been printing money for the last decade.
            Yeah stuff like raising the interest rate from effectively negative to 5.25%, the most aggressive and fastest interest rate hike in history, has absolutely nothing to do with this

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >House Republicans already agreed to increase the debt limit
              They also want to neuter the IRS, which helps create revenue for the country.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Have we forgotten that inflation was already sky high before the war? Inflation was 7% in December '21.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah it's government creating problems and creating more problems to 'fix' it.
                Inflation is stuck at 6% now and I'd argue it is going to be stuck there for a while just due to Millennials hitting their peak consumption phase and re-shoring industry. That's assuming nothing else in the world goes terribly wrong or the government does something stupid

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >it's the government's fault that oil prices are determined by speculators
                >It's the governments fault that oil companies are recording record profits when everything costs more due to higher shipping prices

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                what are you fricking talking about
                go do your false flag strawman on reddit

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >it's the government's fault that oil prices are determined by speculators
                >It's the governments fault that oil companies are recording record profits when everything costs more due to higher shipping prices
                NTA but yes, when you have the power to regulate the economy and markets is any way you wish those markets being broken in your responsibility.
                This is why all the economic propaganda sucks off the "free market" constanly, so people like you forget command economies exist and every market is a mixed market with some areas open to free trade and others tightly controlled by government regulation.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-oil-isnt-as-rich-as-everybody-thinks-202513503.html

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >the most aggressive and fastest interest rate hike in history, has absolutely nothing to do with this
              Of course it does, but it doesn't excuse banks being poorly ran. If you found $1000 on the ground you wouldn't change your entire life budget to revolve around finding $1000 on the ground every month. That's basically what these banks did.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Regional banks go under because they were ran like idiots and went too heavy into bonds
          >Debt limit shenanigans happen every other year
          This is nothing new.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >LM
    >Raytheon
    >7bn
    So that's like, what, 5 missiles?

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Noooooo they could have spent that money on more tax breaks for my boss

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What kind of a sad gaslighting attempt is this thread? This war confirmed that Javelin is an evolutionary dead end and utterly worthless as an anti-tank weapon, completely mogged by Stugna and NLAW. The ukies have pretty much repurposed their Javelins into ghetto anti-fortification weapons.

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    In the Javelin's history we've spent ~$5.47B on procurement for 33,234 missiles (technically $3.9B on the missiles and ~$1.5B on government management of the project)

    So a $7B+ contract has to be for like 20 years of procurement, or they're paying for some massive amount of R&D for upgrades or something.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >So a $7B+ contract has to be for like 20 years of procurement, or they're paying for some massive amount of R&D for upgrades or something.
      There was that project for integrating the launcher into C3 networks so it could transmit target data and coordinates to other units. Maybe they're finally looking to realize that?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Honestly i'll need to wait to see the contract and procurement justification before I make heads or tails of it.

        Knowing the media it could be a contract with a maximum value of $7.2B but the government has only authorized like $500M or something right now, but since the contract is live for 5-10 years, they can add more orders later until they hit the $7.2B cap on the contract. (or never order enough to hit the $7.2B cap at all).

        OR they could be funding some crazy R&D intended to field significant upgrades to the current Javelin.

        No idea.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Not sure but it's certainly one of the best for generating seeth from the melanin-enriched posters here.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >best
    It works but it is expensive.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      its almost always worth it to destroy an enemy target regardless of price, because an enemy threat that fires can potentially cause more damage than the price of any projectile

      longer engagement range of the javelin gives it a much better chance to destroy an enemy target before it can fire

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        When Russia is rolling out T54s you don't need """"cutting edge""" javelins that cost 100-300k per missile

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          the greater the overmatch between you and your enemy, the fewer the casualties you take

          while you could tackle a T-55 with a carl gustaf, that still opens you up to the possibility of getting machine gunned after firing
          there is no reason not to bring a javelin unless the enemy is brought down to using T-26s and BT-7s

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >between you
            but this isn't "us", this is a country that isn't in NATO
            Furthermore, that money would be better spent on artillery, something Ukrainians are whining about being out of

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >but this isn't "us", this is a country that isn't in NATO
              you = person using weapon
              this doesnt literally mean the other person

              >Furthermore, that money would be better spent on artillery, something Ukrainians are whining about being out of
              artillery is being sent
              weapons of all types are being sent, to fill all tactical gaps against the enemy
              the javelin gives infantry a chance against a heavily armored force with greater standoff than unguided weapons
              that alone is a good reason to send them

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Despite how morons like to report on it we aren't making anything to be sent to Ukriane, we are giving them shit that has been in stockpiles for decades and would be blown up in the desert if they weren't used in the next decade or two.
              Also all "costs" of weapons supplied are based on the new manufacture cost meaning if I gave them the 15yo car I paid $5k for it would be counted as $50k because that was the new price adjusted for inflation.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >we aren't making anything to be sent to Ukriane, we are giving them shit that has been in stockpiles for decades and would be blown up in the desert if they weren't used in the next decade or two.
                True for the most part, but stuff like the Abrams are being made new and it has used up a large part of Javelin/etc. stockpiles
                If I were in charge of the US military, I'd be putting more money into naval and less into "anti-Russian" materiel considering how they've basically used up all of their soviet inheritance already

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >the Abrams are being made new
                I thought they scrapped that idea and sent M1A1s instead?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                huh you're right, they changed that ~2 months ago. I didn't notice it, it must have been buried under all the 'le Bahkmut meatgrinder of doom!' news

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                huh you're right, they changed that ~2 months ago. I didn't notice it, it must have been buried under all the 'le Bahkmut meatgrinder of doom!' news

                Its both, m1a1s are being sent ASAP but the production batch will be sent when ready.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                the M1A1s are going to be refurbished and brought up to modern standards
                so if they arent just actually going to be M1A2s, they will at least be M1A1 HCs which have commonality with the M1A2

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                they have to make a completely new tank. one with everything removed, all the optics all the electronic, all the armor and replace it with simple sheet metal. the guns and machine guns are replaced with old equivalents possibly soviet. it's a completely different tank that they want to give to ukraine one that is 100% safe to give to your enemy so yes it must be built new from scratch.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If I was running the show I would be planning the defence of a post-Putin Russia from a Chinese invasion.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but stuff like the Abrams are being made new
                this is only true for the Abrams iirc

                >it has used up a large part of Javelin/etc. stockpiles
                This vis only true for Javs, Stingers, and that read-headed stepchild RPG-knockoff that never gets any media attention iirc. Maaaybe a significant dent was put into large bore shell stockpiles but US isn't letting that one dip.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          But the ridiculous impact on morale will be worth it.
          >enemy has Javelins more than capable of eradicating even the propaganda tanks your side has
          >you are riding into battle in a 70-year-old MBT

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          this actually. I mean sure, lets help the ukrainians, but when we're looking at T-55s or T-62s we can probably scrounge up some LAWs or dragons first.

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No, but the Israelis shot themselves in the foot by not allowing Spyke to be sent to Ukraine.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Anything you give infantry is likely going to be captured sooner or latter, I get why they don't want to hand them out.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Isreal is one of the biggest friends of russia. They should have no problem with giving their weapons to their friend and sharing tech. Most israelis are russian.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I'd rather see my tax dollars blowing up ruskie tanks than serving food stamps to basketball americans

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Mexican
    >Haven't had to pay a single Peso in tax to the US or a NATO country contributing to Ukraine.
    >Still get to see Russians being blown up and the balkanization of Russia in Live 4K HD.
    GO WAGIE, GO

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Don't you think being a Mexican balances it out?

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I am Johnny Hamburger from Metropolis oblast and I agree
    Every day I work hard lynching Black folks to buy interracial pornography for my wife and mixed race children, but the hard earned wage is now stealed by government to fund NATO genocidal war of aggression against Russia

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    > The indefinite-delivery and indefinite-quantity contract is for fiscal years 2023 through 2026, with a base period executed for $1.02bn and a ceiling of $7.2bn.

    Oh, poor Russia.

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No, Nagro war confirmed Spike LR is. Javelins still good but not as good.
    >Spike LR
    >NLAW
    >CG
    >M72
    Above is the premium AT for a military.

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    You don't need a war to prove that America's military tech is the best in the world, but that fills the pockets of the war profiteering zionist elite.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Sell weapons
      >Get paid
      >Donate to Israel
      I fail to see the problem.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >You don't need a war to prove that America's military tech is the best in the world

      As a matter of fact, you do, newfriend.
      You weren't here in 2013 when slavaboos were crowing over how the US hegemony was ogre because Armata and Su-57 would BTFO anything the US could field, and how the mighty Russian manly army would annihilate the gay and soft western militaries.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *