FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1960
1960 - 0815.PDF
PLIGHT, 17 June 1960 Most anti-tank missiles have command guidance transmitted through trailing wires. In the Vigilant the controller's unit contains a monocular site and an articulated thumb-controller Missiles and Spaceflight . . . The largest and most potent anti-tank missile for which detailsare available is the Australian-designed Malkara. Each of its four wings is pivoted to the body—locally of square section—at about65 per cent chord, so that the four surfaces, acting in unison, can effect complete control in pitch, yaw and roll. Flight stability isensured by the cruciform of fixed tail fins. Seacat, and hence Tigercat, does not seem to have wire guidance.It follows, therefore, that some form of radio or radar command must be employed, and this at once renders the system liable to thepossibility of jamming or some other form of counter-measures. Crude as it may be, the missile which unravels a wire is immuneto countermeasures, unless enemy forward troops can become exceptionally handy with scissors. On the other hand, thenecessity of maintaining a tangible connection between the missile and the launcher inevitably tends to make the latter's positionhazardous. Enemy tank crews might well spot the firing of a missile, both from the flash and from the cloud of dust or debriswhich its boost charge would generate. It is therefore desirable to place the operator at a respectable distance from the launcher,while remaining coupled to the latter by a length of cable. In practice the length of this cable is determined by how much a mancan carry (except in the case of the larger types of missiles which are mounted on vehicles), and 50 to 100ft seems to be a fairmaximum at the present time.' Even this, however, is insufficient to afford an operator complete protection. There is another very important reason for the rejection of wire,and it stems from consideration of the fundamental flight profile. A tank's only obvious and effective means of defence against aguided weapon is to disappear, and in perhaps ten seconds an entire armoured formation can hide itself behind a smoke screenof its own making. It follows, therefore, that the flight time of a missile must be minimized, particularly if the first round misses.In turn, this implies a high flight speed—ideally, in excess of Ml. At present, however, around 50Oft/sec seems to be the upperlimit to the rate at which a wire-guided weapon can pay out its life-line, and this limitation is already being felt as a handicap. For adequate flight speed and accuracy at ranges of severalmiles a radio, radar or infra-red system must be employed, and it it naturally desirable if possible to make the missile home on to thetank. The latter may be achieved either by an active or semi- active radar system, or by any of a variety of thermal or opticalpassive systems which have the advantage of being difficult to nullify by counter-measures. Furthermore, an advanced missilesystem of this type may be controlled by an operator far removed from the launching point; in fact, certain missiles already in usemay be passed from one controller to another. There still remains one serious shortcoming to all such weapons,in that it takes several seconds to fire a missile, bring it down to earth and get it nicely lined-up on the target. During this timethe weapon flies an appreciable distance, and with existing missiles it is doubtful whether any target could be engaged at a range under200yd. What is obviously needed is a projectile which can be fired like a shell from a gun—on a sensibly flat trajectory—andwhich thereafter continues to fly as a guided weapon. Such a missile need not have wings, since at supersonic speed it can rideon body-generated lift and be steered either by varying the profile of the body or by jet deflection. TYPES IN USE The following notes give an outline of the principal types ofanti-tank missile developed in the Western world. Where applic- able, references to back numbers of this journal are includedadjacent to the name of the weapon. Australia. Malkara. This is the only guided weapon to havebeen designed and developed in the Commonwealth, and the Government Aircraft Factories appear to have done a remark-ably fine job. Several details remain classified, but a description and history were published in our issue last November 6. Trials of fully controlled rounds began in November 1955, and 823 exhaustive range trials have shown that the weapon is "almost100 per cent accurate." Its warhead is very large (about 601b) and Malkara would be extremely effective against bridges, bunkers,landing craft and most other types of battlefield target. Several rounds may be carried in a scout car or light tracked vehicle, andguidance is effected by means of electronic signals transmitted through wires from the missile control post. In August 1958 theBritish Minister of Supply announced that the United Kingdom had purchased 150 Malkaras for evaluation on the range inKirkcudbright, and it is understood that these trials have been most successful. An unofficial report suggested that the 150 rounds wereworth approximately £400,000. Last August it was announced that the Malkara has been adopted as a standard weapon by theBritish Army. France. S.S.10 (Flight, February 7, 1958). Notes on thisweapon were given at the beginning of this account. By January 1, 1959, Nord-Aviation had manufactured 23,000 guided missiles andexported these to eleven different countries; the vast majority of these were S.S.lOs. S.S.U (Flight, November 14, 1958). In this missile Nord havemarried the wire guidance of the S.S.10 with a jet-deflection system operating on the sustainer rocket motor. Compared withits predecessor the S.S.ll is appreciably heavier, being too much for an infantryman to handle. Nevertheless, these potent missileshave been fired from all kinds of vehicles, as well as from aircraft and helicopters. Although considerably more expensive than theS.S.10, the S.S.ll is being manufactured at a similar rate. Like its predecessor it has been delivered in quantity to the US7th Army in Germany; last month West Germany ordered 20,000 and, for evaluation purposes, some hundreds have been bought bythe British Ministry of Supply for launching from Twin Pioneers. S.S.12 (picture, Flight, August 14, 1959, p. 15). Until the ParisSalon last summer all details of this missile were classified. At the Salon a mock-up was displayed from which it could be deducedthat this new weapon is appreciably larger and heavier than its forbears. The figures given in the data table are estimates. Pointsof interest are the revised shape of the wings, the large bulge around the warhead, the retention of sustainer jet-deflection forflight control and the fact that the missile can also be employed in the air-to-surface role. Development rounds are said to have been"very successful" during trials by the French Army. ACAM. Still shrouded in secrecy, the ACAM is unofficiallysaid to be a light-weight replacement for the S.S.10. Nord should be as capable as anyone of evolving the minimum-weight weaponfor an infantryman, and their jealous guard over the details of this missile suggests that its performance may be exceptional. Germany. Bolkow 810. Originally known as Cobra, theBolkow missile was planned specifically to achieve the same kill ability as the S.S.10 in a much lighter and cheaper package.Studious attention to detail over a period of years has resulted in the evolution of an integrated weapon system (comprising merelythe missile and its command box), which is already in full pro- duction for the German government, and is being imported into theUSA by Daystrom, Inc, for Marine Corps evaluation and has been officially presented on behalf of the Federal Defence Ministryto France, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and Holland. Despite the fact that its hollow-charge warhead is 2.21b lighter than that ofthe French weapon, penetrative ability is stated to be the same. Moreover, Bolkow appear to have swung over to a velocity-typeof control system which should further rationalize the system. Great Britain. Pye (Flight, August 28, 1958). As a privateventure the Cambridgeshire company of Pye Ltd have produced an anti-tank system, the missile portion of which falls mid-waybetween the infantry and vehicle types of missile. With a firing weight of some 801b, it cannot be carried by a man any greatdistance, and the system also includes a ground control unit (measuring 15 X11 X 8in and weighing 201b), a launcher, a controljoystick, optical aids (ordinary binoculars can be employed) and a simulator. One advantage, which Pye have naturally exploited,is that the guidance signals are shaped in the ground control unit prior to injection into the wire. Tigercat. Tigercat has a cruciform of moving swept wings anda fixed cruciform of tail fins; propulsion is provided by a two-stage solid motor and radio command guidance—partly by Elliott Bros(London)—will apparently be utilized. The large warhead is contained within a bulged nose compartment, while the crosssection of the centre-body becomes approximately square in order to preserve the airflow over the roots of the wings over the extremerange of the latter's travel. Tigercat should be able to fulfil both the anti-tank and general bombardment roles, and four rounds canbe carried on a single light tracked chassis. Vigilant (Flight, May 22, 1959). Full details of this exceedinglysmall and attractive weapon were contained in the issue men- tioned. The Vigilant has been under development as a privateventure by Vickers-Armstrongs since July 1956, and is today fast approaching the stage at which it could be released for Army use. Sweden. Bantam. Following the classic pattern establishedby the S.S.10 and the Swiss and German missiles, the Bantam is .2,.:. v .-••••-
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
