Read on Twitter
This is something I meant to comment on. People keep fixating on whether a modern ATGM can kill a tank (yes, and reliably so), but that's missing way more. We design and purchase ATGMs that are extremely expensive and not widely distributed. And if you fire a TOW or Javelin you https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1359229537486258180
need to be able to explain why using a $50-100k missile was necessary and other measures weren't. We used a Javelin to kill an IED emplacing team in Afghanistan at night. Gunfire would have alerted them and let them escape. Arty was a no go because of collateral concerns. But a
Javelin clean merc'd them. The gunner and his NCOs got questioned up and down by the BC for using such an expensive asset, but eventually it was clear they made the right call. How many civilians didn't die because they ran over a Taliban IED? How valuable were the legs of the
Marine who didn't suffer a double amputation after his MRAP ran over an IED? Because probably worth more than the missile.
Russia manufacturers a wide range of ATGMs from top of the line Kornet-M ($25-30k a pop) with a max range of 10km (though practically most shots likely far
Russia manufacturers a wide range of ATGMs from top of the line Kornet-M ($25-30k a pop) with a max range of 10km (though practically most shots likely far
closer) with top-attack & fire and forget type technology, to the extremely man-portable Metis-M with a much closer range and reduced effectiveness against armor, for $15k a pop. But ATGMs aren't just for tanks. They're for light armor (Bradley's/LAVs), artillery, rocket launcher
fuel and supply trucks, heavy equipment movers, *infantry* in cover, snipers, machine gun positions, *enemy* ATGMs, naval ships, or literally any target that a missile capable of punching a hole in a tank can hit. To this end, Russia straps ATGMs to tanks (or issues tube launched
ATGMs that fire out of the gun barrel), light armored, unarmored trucks, helicopters, and of course carried by troops or sitting in the back of their BTR for when they need it. ATGMs have long been useful for hitting far more than just tanks (but they're VERY good at hitting
tanks, too). Defense analysts consistently point out that Russia lags behind on PGM procurement/usage. But as @RALee85 rightly highlights, ATGMs offer Russia a cheap, effective, and mass production means to putting PGMs in the hands of the smallest unit, and giving crews/squads
the means to punch way above their weight. So you used a $25k missile to destroy an enemies HET. How much does the enemy need to spend to replace that? How dearly does he need that to move the tank you knocked the treads off of yesterday to a rear area for repairs? How many more
troops does he need to commit or how much more of his logistics get taxed because you shot a $25k missile from a few kilometers away then packed up and walked away before anyone figured out where it came from? Diversely spread loading ATGM launchers and their ammo gives you some
of the same capabilities as keeping an armed drone overhead. If you can see it in the launcher's sight, you can almost definitely kill it. And you can probably afford to hit it again if one shot doesn't kill it or another opportunity presents itself.
