More accurately a random quote from a M3 Bradley commander at a Taiwanese military expo said “it’ll uhh pen something like 10 centimeters of armor” was taken as word of god.
While technically accurate, the number provided is a very low estimate. Minimum penetration should be 125mm, possibly up to 200 or 270mm with dual layer shaped charge designs.
We’ve got sources proving EFPs with dual layer shaped charges and copper liners are capable of penetrating 218% their radius. Tantalum (the material used for the TOW-2B liner) should be capable of the same things. Only thing missing is a source showing TOW-2B is using dual layer designs. Or a source outright stating penetration as proven by tests/manufacturer. Neither of which will be declassified for decades to come.
We might get lucky and some footage / post impact images of a TOW-2B dealing with ERA from Ukraine in the future, since we know that some have been provided.
GJ uses nerfing weapons as a form of balance. Even if you proved this issue, GJ would ignore it as it is what it is for balance. They kept the Bradley where it was but nerfed the missile. Before this I used the Bradley at top tier and it was useful. Same for the ADATS, no weapons lock on ground vehicles as a form of nerfing it. Still pay a lot of SL for repair of a tank destroyer but without ground lock, it’s just a SPAA? USA vehicles tend to get smacked pretty hard with the nerf stick.
Yeah good luck with that. The usual suspects will appear like moths to a flame when you present any photo of a Russian tank that has been blasted to kingdom come by insert weapon here. In fact I’ll be willing to bet internet cookies that you’ll get a response along the following lines.
'You can’t prove it penetrated! (leaving aside the bloody big hole in said vehicle with the turret blown 100ft away)
‘It was an export model so it doesn’t count.’
‘It was photoshopped. Fake news.’
'Yeah but whatabout insert random Kremlin talking point here on some radical tangent.
‘Western tanks can get destroyed too! Desperately posts up the one googled image of a knocked out CR2 or Leo2’.(Leaving aside the fact they don’t usually blast themselves into orbit along with the poor sods inside more often than not).
‘That one doesn’t count because the photo doesn’t have a signed signature from the AT operator who blew up the tank, signed statements from the crew of said vehicle and a statement from Russia Today that the tank was knocked out by X weapon on X day.’
The TOW-2 series was designed with plinking Soviet AFVs in mind (oddly enough they were once considered the most likely opponent for NATO forces in the 1980s). I suppose the designers couldn’t possibly know what we know now…
The 2B was expressly designed to take advantage of inherent weaknesses in a tank’s design and so was almost tailor-made to knock them out. Guess what! Anti-Tank missiles are rather good at destroying Tanks! Apart from in War Thunder - where they might whack an optic, or the AA MG, or some other random bit of furniture.
I can’t wait until we get Javelin and the mental gymnastics Gaijin deploy to make sure it DOESN’T work as intended.
I have a proper explanation of how The -2B works ( w/ video) linked below.
The only thing I can think of that might carry the FMG-148 is the AN/TWQ-1 (M1097), which has numerous mission pods designed and tested for it, I think there is also a related modular CROWS based launcher variant (CROWS-J) as well, wich could probably be fiited in place of other CROWS modules for relevant designs.
I haven’t used that missile, but knowing that it uses HEAT, which is by far the most nerfed ammunition that exists and doing the most ridiculous damage in the game, I imagined that that missile must not work very well, even though in reality it is a tank killer.
I was thrilled when it came out. It worked. The vehicle was a giant pinata with a pack of Inland Taipans for missiles.
If it got into position it was insanely powerful but if it didn’t, it was insanely dead. Even a heavy machine gun will knock it out.
Now it’s just an insanely costly RP sponge to grind through on the way to a slightly less useless scout. The HSTV should have IR tracking and air burst munitions options as it was designed for. Then at least would be on par with that under tiered Russian premium that calls itself a scout.
The TOW 2B is very effective. Fire to the left of the cannon breech and it will kill the crew member there. The right side has optics modeled and Gaijin is too stupid to model destroyed optics as destroyed, causing repeated hits on them to be absorbed.
It’s only “HEAT” because gaijin is too lazy to model EFPs as KE penetrators (which they are closer to rather than superplastic metal jets). TOW-2B should have at minimum enough penetration to reliably go through every single T series tank roof on a center mass hit.
It’s still so bad, that it does not kill frontally T-55, T-62, T-64, because it detonates over gun barrel or in best case scenario it kills commander or loader only.
Wiesel 1A2 with 8 ATGMs is really a disappointment to play with such unreliable missiles.
Ok I found a declassified tow field manual which states precisely how TOW-2B warhead is built, with this it is time to create a bug report:
This section shows the missile priority against different types of targets with Tow 2B being the first choice against tanks:
Also this - in WT we have to track ahead of the moving target, but according to manual a gunner should always point the crosshair on the centre of mass of the target:
Its very good on maps with lots of sniping posistions and long sightlines where you will have a whole host of people showing their pintel mounts or top of their turrets.
