Excellent as usual. Facts and historical context presented at just the right pace. Not sure why but that little copper wire spiderweb analogy stuck with me after watching this.
We were always told that the 4km range was important because most villages on the north german plain are less than 4km apart and so when necessary you could fire on armour leaving one village from the cover of the next one.
As a TOW-H and laser designator engineer back in the day, the limitation I saw was the large and expensive optics (8x-13x) needed to see and track a target at max range. The newer systems primarily use passive IR which apparently works out to 4500 m.
He's got a very stern presentation but without it being unlikable. It's impossible to replace David Fletcher, but Chris Copson has really stepped up and filled his shoes very well. And that was no easy task.
Chris is just a phenomenal presenter. It's like being back in the day, listening to an officer giving an Intel report. I'm sure I unconciously brace to attention when Chris begins his videos 😂
Yes he is, I have not seen him before that I can remember is he a new addition? Suddenly you learn about weapon system you never heard of. hahahaahah wonderful.
@@GerardMenvussa Well now, in my day the internet was in black and white and I remember my dad telling us we could use it just once a week on a Sunday evening, and only if we had enough spare coal to power the computer. During the winter of '47 that meant we had no internet at all for months and we only avoided starvation by eating Mrs Harris at number 35 along with her prize-winning poodle Bertie - we had him for Christmas dinner and do you know what, in all my years since then I don't think I've ever tasted a better roast...
My wife was part of the guidance software development team working for Ferranti at the time. When, back in the early '70s, I was a REME Vehicle Mechanic, I showed her the inside of a 438, she couldn't believe how all the control equipment had been massively reduced in size from the big boxes she'd been used to seeing during the R&D phase!
I'm also glad this channel had decided to not have annoying and distracting generic background music. Too many youtube channels (even educational ones with lots of talking) have unnecessary (and usually too loud) background music when I just want to hear the person talk and get information.
So was the red highlights on the FV438 hatch handles. I wasn't expecting it. Actually the whole FV438 section was shot and edited beautifully. Someone was really trying to flex their skills in that sequence
The combination of many quality props and exhibits, copious pertinent historical footage, and a good script well delivered really makes for great content.
yeah i can just imagine a soviet tank commander seeing one of these from the side thinking "Ha, they don't see us" only to watch a missile do a 90* turn right at them. lol
@@xXBisquitsXx I mean if he's able to see one of these from the side, then his first reaction would be put a round through its side, considering that his SABOT round would reach the missile carrier quicker than the missile reaches him.
@@infamousfalcon588 oh yeah i'm not saying that it would be effective in such a situation. more so that its not something you'd expect. If i didn't know about its capabilities then i'd thought it was an "easy kill" and took my time to line up the shot. Only to see it shoot back, might make you rush the shot and you'd better hope the first round hits. Though it's clearly designed to be used from behind cover like a house, wall, hedge or hill.
Well that was a blast from the past. I ran the Swingfire repair section at 35 Base Workshops REME (Old Dalby) during the late 80s. By that time FV438 was going out of service and the thermal imaging combined sight was being fitted to Striker. My hardest job was arranging sufficient serviceable parts to keep up with the production target. The FV438 was provided with a portable thermal imaging sight, but it was impractical in use, due to it's weight. I believe this is why FV438 was discontinued. The vehicle mounted Hensoldt Sight was never replaced with a thermal imaging sight. FV102 Striker fitted with Swingfire saw action in Gulf War 1 and the feedback was that it worked well. One operator was reputed to have made 5 kills out of 5. I can't confirm that. I left before the ground control and launch equipment was updated to further automate the control of the missile in flight. It would be interesting to see the system again after all these years. Incidentally, the simulator display tube is missing from the bottom of your Hensoldt sight. Thanks for sharing this great video.
The ability to remote the sighting unit gave a great advantage in concealment, the missile could literally pop up from dead ground or from behind a small building. As to it being wire guided, it was unlikely to be jammed by electronic counter measures.
In Sir John Hackett's "World War III" he described a battlefield covered in a spider's web of copper wires from wire-guided ATMs as NATO met the massed Soviet armoured attack across the Fulda Gap. Those were the days.
I'm always really impressed by Chris' delivery. His pacing is just right for me to absorb the information without getting bored, his accent is easy to understand even out here on the Canadian Prairie, and his ability to seamlessly continue dialog through multiple setups is just amazing!
As a Retired US Army Infantry NCO who started his career as an 11H - Heavy Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman - I’ve spent a lot of time adding more skill sets to my duty and foreign AT systems have always interested me. I never had a lot of data about UK systems so this is a great discussion! Our TOW system has numerous generations and subsequently, more options due to various missiles in our remaining inventory. And although I can’t speak for the method of penetration for their warhead, the TOW uses a HEAT type main charge with a copper cone. This copper cone will invert and form the molten penetrator that goes through insanely thick armor that most won’t believe if I mention it here so I won’t. The UK system is similarly controlled like the Soviet system where the gunner “flies” the missile to the target while keeping track of the missile via a bright burning flare at the rear of the missile but I doubt that’s the primary method of control. The TOW uses both IR and thermal beacons that the day sight is constantly scanning and tracking the IR beacon while the thermal night sight (AN/TAS-4B) is tracking the thermal beacon and relaying the location to the Missile Guidance Set (MGS) so if the primary IR beacon is lost as a result of either failure or enemy counter actions, the thermal beacon is switched as the primary beacon within a split second and continues the missile to target. I’d have to agree with the missile wires spread all over the battlefield as a result of use. The TOW wire can cut through human skin if you try to recover the wire and hit a snag so you must be careful to not use hands to do the task, we’d often use a piece of wood to roll it up. The TOW will fly its full 4,000 meter flight in 14 seconds so it’s a fast missile. And with the newer upgrades, it has the ability for a top attack option which allows us to punch through the thinner armor plating on tanks with two tandem shape charges.
Only the initial production of Swingfire were MCLOS (i.e controlled by joystick), they switched very quickly to SACLOS (i.e. the same as TOW or MILAN, with the operator keeping the sight on target and the guidance system sending the control signals to the missile to adjust). Worth noting that Swingfire and Vigilant's gyroscope's meant that unlike all other early missiles, the early MCLOS variants flew very stable, the operator wasn't having to make constant adjustments just to keep the missile flying straight. The Gyro's also meant that unlike most wire guided missiles there wasn't the initial spinning around its axis that other missiles suffered from whilst the control system struggled to get positive control over the missile. But it did make it more expensive than most...
@@dogsnads5634 thank you for the update, well appreciated. The TOW used two motors, the ABOL then the mid mounted flight motor that had two ejection nozzles at a 45 degree angle. This was to keep the CG of the missile within a minimal range as the solid fuel motor burned during flight, if it was at the rear, the balance change would be immense and the flight controls would be overwhelmed. I’m curious how the Swingfire dealt with their flight motor and if it was rear mounted? If so then we’re the mid mounted vanes/wings designed to deal with the balance shift as the motor consumed/exhausted its fuel? I’m guessing the Swingfire used an ABOL motor or maybe it was just a single or two stage flight motor? For flight controls, the missile had two small nitrogen bottles in the aft section where solenoids used the nitrogen to actuate the aft fins. I apologize in advance for the questions, I’ve never spoken with any counterpart Tank Destroyers from NATO countries.
@@echohunter4199 Similar story with Swingfire. Mid body engine, but the exhaust was at the rear. Steering was by vectored thrust (the nozzle was moved by servos, called a Jetavator). The exhaust ran from the mid body rocket motor to the rear of the missile where the vectored thrust nozzle was. The rocket motor was 2 stage, first stage was boost and acceleration, second was a sustainer. The fins were spring loaded so opened on exit from the canister, but were otherwise totally fixed, all steering via the rocket thrust vectoring. When the rocket stopped firing you'd lose steering, but that wasn't an issue as it was good for longer than the wire spool would go (just over 4,000 metres). There was a kill in Iraq that was just over max range, the missile essentially completed its run unguided as it had gone past the maximum guidance wire length and cut it, but because the missile was so stable due to the gyros it carried on in a straight line and hit, I believe a T-55. One other difference was that the spool was nylon coated copper, so there were never the issues with going over bodies of water that early TOW had.
That 90° turn is wild. Edit: The closing question about whether Swingfire would have worked if used can probably be answered by the fact I can absolutely imagine Toyota and Mitsubishi trucks with bed mounted launchers in Ukraine right now. The ability to hide the vehicle in a ditch or behind a building and have the operator hidden 100 meters away is invaluable.
Ukraine has a somewhat similar ant-tank missile the Stuhna-P. And it has been working very well for them. They used it recently against Russian armor making an attack in January. And they were able to ambush the Russian tanks and successfully engaged them.
Not quite sure the point of the 90 degree turn in practice. The footage indicated that there was no reason for the launch vehicle to be at a right angle to the target.
@@herbertkeithmiller Yes and no... Stuhna P exposes the enormous launcher and allows the crew to stay in cover, but its a huge unit as ATGM's go, with a big launch signature. Yes it seperates the crew and firing unit....but does it in precisely the wrong way...
I remeber trying out to be an operator when Swingfire was introduced to my regiments Recce troop to be mounted on 432's. At the time I'd never come across thumb control for anything, let alone a missile, and can truthfully say I was hopeless, despite being the 2nd best gunner in the regiment. Of the three test firings(using some type of simulator) I used up the full 32, I'm sure it was 32, seconds of flight time and got nowhere near the target. Truth to tell half the time I couldn't see the target! Needless to say I never got a transfer to Recce troop 🙂
I am reminded of a line from a Martin Caidin novel: "All the shrimp in the ocean can't block wire transmission." Wire guidance isn't perfect but jamming it is basically impossible.
There was a defense publication in the late '80s that talked about how the wire-guided missile was un-interdictable. They also included a cartoon of an infantryman, armed with scissors, cutting the wire as it streamed over him. I still laugh thinking about it.......
Automatic gather , direct approach, back off and terminal guidance , 40 years and its still stuck in my head , even though I can't remember where I left my glasses 5 minutes ago 😂😂
As a former Bundeswehr TOW & MILAN Gunner it makes me wonder why we never got the Swingfire instead. The possibility to launch from behind cover around corners would have made so much more sense for the Airborne Brigades and their Kraka / Wiesel launchers (which was my job).
So I was part of the quality assurance of the MOD that use to test Swingfire missiles. I remember in the 80’s driving to BAE Stevenage and walking round the factory seeing the missives in various stages of assembly and the wire spool test area. The electronics didn’t last long which never gave you much time to carryout all your tests but was probably understandable given the missile either hit or missed !
I had great fun in a Cold War miniatures game once long ago with Swingfire. I used the over the hill firing ability to take on Soviet tanks on the attack. The player running them did not sight the missile inbound so the first thing he knew was four of his tanks blew up. I think I took out twelve before he finally spotted a missile inbound. The launch vehicles were behind the hill while the controllers were below the military crest on the forward slope.
That's likely how they would have been used. Swingfire was quite possibly the first NLOS missile if one considers the stereoscopic sight as NLOS. I would think a modern Swinfire with the IMU from NLAW and a bigger tandem and top attack warhead would be very effective and far more useful than TOW 2 which still requires the operator to be stationed along side the launcher.
Another greatly entertaining anti-tank chat. I think the camerawork, editing and composition is also commendable. Thank you for taking the time to make this educational program.
Fantastic video. I was in the Canadian Army during the latter part of the cold war; the Blowpipe missile (air defense) had a similar 'auto-gathering' feature and was joystick guided to the target.
i Imagine trying to manually guide a missile to a moving aircraft would be incredibly hard to do with a joystick. No wonder they suck so bad in the game: Wargame, lol.
A thumb joystick - the most imprecise device to control anything yet alone to guide a missile over the distance of several kilometres. Or is it just my thumbs? Excellent programme from Chris as always.
Its a matter of setup and practice. By setup a mean length and spring resistance of the joystick and also its sensitivity to inputs and response curve With practice you can also perform much more precise and subtle inputs. What I would be more worried about here is eye to hand tracking at that range. The ability to estimate how much and when to turn at that distance (even with stereo optics), would lower drastically imo.
Just shows the weather patterns of the British isles “rain, fog, and even bright sunlight” as if the occurrence of sunlight is so very rare. Keep up the amazing work, I need to get more models soon!
Mr.Copson is another great host the Museum has provided us enthusiasts, and he was the perfect choice to succeed Mr.Fletcher. These videos have always felt like they are talking to the viewer as an equal; and not down at us like young school children on a field trip.
Great video and a nice trip down memory lane. As an armoured recce troop leader in the late eighties and early nineties I spent some time as “the electric darts team captain” in my squadron. An impressive missile to fire on ranges, but some of the practise stock tended to be a bit old and if the gyros got stuck on launch you had quite a hairy few minutes when the missile went askew. All in all though, a tremendous weapon for it’s day and I would not want to have been on the business end of that warhead. Never fired one in anger but on exercise, the things we hated when siting the Strikers were electric pylons. They would have really spoilt your day and would have been the first thing to have been blown down for real. Happy days and thanks for the reminder. JD
I forgot. I actually appear in the Tank Chat on CVR(T), loading my Striker onto flatbeds at Ludgershall rail sidings in the video. All painted sand as it was just before Gulf War 1 😅.
I think it was and is still a heck of a lot harder to jam wire guided than radio guided self seeking. That only matters if the other side has the jamming equipment needed to get the job done.
It has always surprised me that no other ATGM has ever really incorporated Swingfire's off-axis launch capability that I can discern. It seems like an extremely useful design, that offers tremendous protection to the launcher, vehicle, and crew. I really wonder if there is a reason that capability isn't considered worthwhile in keeping? It doesn't seem to impact the minimum range of the missile, nor the maximum range.
The application of modern electronics and IMU (inertial measurement unit for the velocity control autopilot) such as that from say NLAW would greatly simply the Swingfire. Make it cheaper. I would think a modern version would be built into a sealed tube. -There are NLOS Non Line of Sight missiles such as Akeron MMP now that have a camer in the nose.
Best yet Chris. Not one um. When I started out in community radio the "um" where everywhere. They soon disappeared as I gained confidence and experience. Thanks for your great videos. Makes me want to get back to the UK and revisit the museum agian, and I'm in Australia.
Absolutely brilliant briefing by Chris. It makes a huge difference hearing from an actual 'Cold' Warrior about the lit that was used in the late 20th C.
I was a controller in the Striker version of the swingfire from 1977 to 1981in the Belgian army. I fired 15 missiles and never missed. If I remember correctly we had a higher rate of succes than the British controllers because our simulators were more sensitive adjusted. Firing the swingfire was a blast. Inside you did hear the gyroscope engaging just before the roaring of the rocket motor. I think the max range was 4100m. We went shooting in England somewhere. Can't remember where exactly but it was somewhere near Salisbury?
Hi I was with D Bty 3RHA in Bergan Hohne Germany. I was in was in G Troop , we had the Stricker I think I fired it 4 or 5 times. You say that the floatation kit was never used, it was I was a crontroler when we crossed the river Wasser using it on crausdaer 80. There was a Sgt from 9/12 or 14/20 who broke his leg when an object pierced the floatatin kit on his vehicle and injured him. That was the one and only time we used it, after that it was removed.
Chris Copson is bang on as David Fletchers successor. He brings authority and excellent clarity to the subject. All he needs to do now is grow the moustache ;)
The Ferret Swingfire vehicle is particularly devious and sneaky when attacking from behind a berm. Makes me wonder why the platform was not named Ninja
Javelin has a physical range of 2.5km. If you want more there is Spike and Akeron MMP with 4km. Akeron MMP is NLOS "Non Line Of Sight" with a stablised TV camera in the nose transmitting via a fiber optic link. You can be behind a mountain. Several other ATGM of around 5.4km range are around as well.
Not sure about the dates transferred to RAC, as I was in a aGuided Missile Troop with Mk5 Ferret in 15/19 Kings Royal Hussars in Tidworth in 1976. Had great fun firing Swingfire. You could actually fly them over fences and trees on the way to target if you knew what you were up to. Also great fun firing them with the separated sight, especially when you were forward of the Ferret, as the missile was programmed to fly directly over the remote sight before it came into your line of sight. Very unnerving first time you did it !!!
That's amazing - must have been so much fun. how difficult was it to fly? It always seemed like having to control a missile remotely with a joystick while watching it fly off into the distance must be incredibly difficult, not least because it doesn't look obvious how far away it is or where it it in relation to the terrain.
Wow. I was a vehicle commander on a 438 in an Armoured Rgt in the mid '70's before they went to the RA,who really didnt know what to do with them ,and then came back to the experts. What a brilliant briefing. I remember we were always regarded with slight suspicion in the Rgt as it was thought to be a bit of a Black Art and we were frequently locked in the trainer. In Armour Vol 1 The Armoured Rgt under siting the launcher there was a lovely little sentence warning that the line of site must not be crossed by live cables. I always wondered a) Would we actually see a cable at 3000+ m and b} How would we know if was live or not.? More like this please.
You might not see a cable, but if you recce then you should be able to plot any power line poles in the area and connect the dots. As for, "Is it live," the traditional practical way to find out was to throw a length of grounded copper or aluminum wire over the power line, and if it shorts and melts through in a fraction of a second, then the power line is live.
Pros and cons of wire-guidance. When talking about guidance, then one one side, using radio does away with the wire getting tangled (and needed in the first place), however using wire guidance makes the guidance system immune to radio jamming (unless said jamming is the EMP from a nuke, but in that case it doesn't matter anyway.....) Even the Germans in WW2 had this dilemma. Their Firtz-X guided bomb used radio control, but soon the allies found out which frequency was used and could effectively jam the control signals causing bombs to go 'dumb' and miss.
My dad trained on swing fire. I have some Polaroids of some missile variants and the console used for training. Sadly he is suffering from vascular dementia now.
In some ways it's more advanced than Javelin and in other ways the archaic-ness of the design would also be an advantage. You've mentioned longer range, but a Javelin can't do those 90* turns, and neither can the firer/targetter locate themselves separately from the launcher or vehicle, leaving them much more exposed, especially on a battlefield where tanks can now fire out to 2-2.5km fairly accurately. I've also been told that the wire-guided nature of these missiles actually makes them harder to jam or dazzle with countermeasures than a modern fire-and-forget system like Javelin.
It was although for newcomers who aren't already familiar with how HEAT works, it would have been better if the term 'explosive' was used instead of words such as 'detonator' and 'charge'. The use of the word 'kinetic' could also lead to some confusion, as HEAT is actually a chemical energy warhead.
@@FlyboyHelosim The penetrating rod formed is purely kinetic though, even if the extreme velocity makes the penetration process more akin highpressure water into mud.
@@johanmetreus1268 It's not a penetrating rod, that term is reserved exclusively for Sabot rounds. Furthermore, that's simply not how ammunition is classified. Sabot is purely kinetic, whereas HEAT is kinetic only as the result of explosives (i.e. chemicals) detonating. Think about it, if they were all legitimately classed as kinetic energy there'd be no need for the chemical energy distinction.
@@FlyboyHelosim Are we talking about actual physics or garbled mil-lingo? There is a HUGE difference. Classification (KE, Chem) simply tells in which form the energy is stored during the transfer between the firing unit and the target, and says absolutely nothing about what actually goes on once the target is reached. Bit closer thought, the only reason a KE round has any energy is the controlled explosion in the barrel, but that's getting too far into the rabbit hole lol Anyway, when detonated, 20-40% (depending on shape and material) of the HEAT liner forms the penetrator (let's call it "needle" to get away from the whole rod discussion) that typically travels at 6-10 km/s (again depending on shape and materials). The reason it exceeds the detonation velocity of the explosive used by a fair margin is the change of geometry, forcing it to travel a longer distance is the same time... about the same principle that says the outside of a spinning disc will travel faster than the disc does near the centre in spite of having the same rpm. To achieve this, a ductile material that can be violently reshaped is needed, which is why most liners are copper based and not for instance steel based. Meanwhile the reminder forms the "HEAT-carrot" which trails behind at, in this context, insignificant speed. At this stage, neither needle nor carrot exceed temperatures above 600-700 °C according to the extensive trails done at Fösvarets Forskningsanstalt. (Fun detail, the highspeed X-ray cameras used was originally developed for the Swedish atomic bomb project). This extreme velocity (far exceeding a long rod penetrator even at point blank) turns the collision between the needle and the amour into a fully pseudo-plastic deformation, but that entire field isn't a rabbit hole... it's a bloody colony! Best analogue I found is if you imagine a vertical wall of dirt or mud you (for some reason) want to make a hole in with your garden-hose, as that can be used to explain various types of armour as well. Basic principle is pretty straight forward: the longer you keep the water jet in the same spot, the deep the hole will become. The length of the needle (determined mostly by the shell diameter, with shape and material factoring in) is essentially how long you can keep going before someone turns the tap off.
@@johanmetreus1268 OK I understand all that and it didn't really add anything to the discussion. The way I described it is how these types of ammo are actually differentiated. I don't make up the terminology. Sabot is kinetic, HEAT is chemical. That's it.
The exposure to enemy recon units must have made using the maximum range (at the risk of misidentification) a top priority. Whereas modern Javelin teams can volley fire their missiles, and start relocating before the first ATGMs have impacted their targets
I'm glad it's not just me that wondered what would happen with all the wires. Swingfire! Anti-Tank missile system, with in-built tripwire layer to slow advancing enemy troops! Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice firing a bunch of these things. I'm also assuming when it was new, how that bit worked would have been classified, which meant some poor soldier had to police up all 20km of cable, assuming the vehicle had fired all 5 missiles. Right lads, I need 5 volunteers for a 4km run!
How was the wire dispensed? I imagine the wire spool remained with the launcher and the rocket pulled the wire out. It amazes me that these systems worked so well. I would think getting wire to dispense without breaking would be a huge challenge. Thanks for the interesting video.
Not sure about Swingfire, but the TOW wires are contained in two spools at the back of the missile. The winding technique must be amazing since touching a used missile spool will cause the wire to spring out sharply! The TOW wires are copper coated steel and (just noticed) the tech was licensed from Bofors in the 1960s!!
@@jasondalley4607 That agrees with what @Mick Freeley shared. I had thought the spool would remain with the launch vehicle to save weight within the missile. I'd really like to see how the spools worked. It sure seems like one of those things which seems impossible but which smart engineers managed to make work. Thanks for setting me straight about where the spool was located.
I've done a bit more research and I've determined there's no possible way to dispense wire fast enough to both not break and not to interfere with the missile's flight. After careful consideration, I've determine witchcraft is involved. Mystery solved. Since this is the internet, I apparently should add that I'm joking. I've seen a few patents on how the wire is dispensed but I'm still amazed these things work as well as they do. Again, thanks for the replies helping to be a bit less confused about the topic.
Imagine him lecturing you on something mundane like cheese after you ask him a simple question. You literally walk out of your house and he just stands in the front door, still talking like nothing happened.
Wasn't Swingfire (fired from a Striker) used in Iraq, 2003, I think? I feel sure I recall a video of a Striker launching a Swingfire at an Iraqi tank in the desert. The tank was hit and destroyed. P.S. In retrospect, the video I recall could have been from the Gulf War in circa 1991.
Hi guys just thought I would put my spin on things. I joined C bty 3 RHA in Germany in about 1980. C Bty were equipped with Swingfire with both AFV438's and Strikers. During my time with the regiment I performed all three roles. I started as a loader, then did a driving test and became a driver, and after being promoted became a launcher commander. And here is the first mistake in the video. Chris mentioned driver commander and controller. That incorrect the crew was in fact driver, commander and loader. The commander was expected to perform the firing of the missiles although the loader and driver could be qualified missile operators. The loaders job was to as implied load the missiles and the most important role, make the tea. I would argue the point about the genetic weapon. When I did my basic missile course in Lark hill and later my advanced missile course in Germany we were taught by the experts that the inverted coper cone was forced by the explosion into a long thin molten stream of coper that burned through the armour. I can't remember the speed of the missile it always looked painfully slow when it fired and if you were the controller the wait for the missile to hit at maximum range seemed a lifetime. To clear up another inaccuracy most of the controllers shown must have been early models. When I was involved with swing fire we had the semi automatic to line of sight system. All that meant was that if the controller was pointing the weapon at a target that was not directly ahead the missile would leave the bin and fly towards the direction the sight was pointing so the controller could then see the missile in the sight. Once the missile could be seen there was a small button just under the joystick which was pressed to take control of the missile manually and then the controller would steer the missile on target by eye. There was no infer red lasers I don't know where that came from. This was achieved by sensors in the vehicle that sensed which way the sight was pointing. With the separated sight the loader would manually input the distance bearing and difference in hieght of the position of the separated sight from the vehicle into an onboard computer. The computer would then sense the direction of the separated sights line of sight and add that to its relative position so the missile would still steer into the controllers line of sight while looking at the target. That bought back a lot of happy memories I had a lot of fun serving with the guys in C bty in the 80s and I hope that I have helped some people understand what the weapon system was about.
Hi Tank Nuts! What do you think of Chris' latest video?
I thought it was gonna be about the Goliath since it's a Wire-Guided Tank Killer.
He's an excellent presenter. Good cadence, tone and information
A brilliant presenter. He’s helped maintain the extremely high quality of TTM’s educational work. Long May he continue.
Chris is an excellent presenter. Also, a big thank you to the team behind the recording, editing and research. Fantastic job all around!
Excellent as usual. Facts and historical context presented at just the right pace. Not sure why but that little copper wire spiderweb analogy stuck with me after watching this.
We were always told that the 4km range was important because most villages on the north german plain are less than 4km apart and so when necessary you could fire on armour leaving one village from the cover of the next one.
As a TOW-H and laser designator engineer back in the day, the limitation I saw was the large and expensive optics (8x-13x) needed to see and track a target at max range. The newer systems primarily use passive IR which apparently works out to 4500 m.
@@mickfreeley6054 ما اسم هذا الصاروخ الذي في الفيديو وما هي مواصفاته الفنيه
I don't know about north germany, but in south germany villages are literally 5 minutes apart or less by car.
Heat is like magic.its very powerful
@@koalabrownie4km takes 5 minutes by car if going 48 kmh. So that checks out well
This guy is ace. Explains topics extremely clearly. 👌
Because he is an ex British Army officer with years of experience 👍
Yes I agree, a really excellent presenter with an obvious deep subject knowledge
He's got a very stern presentation but without it being unlikable. It's impossible to replace David Fletcher, but Chris Copson has really stepped up and filled his shoes very well. And that was no easy task.
Effective and/or well trained communicator.
Qué
Chris is just a phenomenal presenter. It's like being back in the day, listening to an officer giving an Intel report. I'm sure I unconciously brace to attention when Chris begins his videos 😂
he looks like an ex-Rupert, so probably was an officer of some sort.
Yes he is, I have not seen him before that I can remember is he a new addition? Suddenly you learn about weapon system you never heard of. hahahaahah wonderful.
My only issue is he tends to insert a lot of uhhhs and ummmms in his speaking which bugs me a bit. Otherwise top notch.
@@GerardMenvussa Well now, in my day the internet was in black and white and I remember my dad telling us we could use it just once a week on a Sunday evening, and only if we had enough spare coal to power the computer. During the winter of '47 that meant we had no internet at all for months and we only avoided starvation by eating Mrs Harris at number 35 along with her prize-winning poodle Bertie - we had him for Christmas dinner and do you know what, in all my years since then I don't think I've ever tasted a better roast...
@@MasterN64 those are just a part of proper speech that give rhythm and intelligibility to it.
My wife was part of the guidance software development team working for Ferranti at the time. When, back in the early '70s, I was a REME Vehicle Mechanic, I showed her the inside of a 438, she couldn't believe how all the control equipment had been massively reduced in size from the big boxes she'd been used to seeing during the R&D phase!
You mean she was physically part of it 😮
@@chpet1655 🤣
A lot of brave men and women lived in those little boxes for freedom during the Cold War. 🤖7
@@thorodinson3597 I spent most of the first half of the '70s in a 434 in W Germany.
As others have said, the presenter is incredible, couldn't believe 20 minutes had passed.
I'm also glad this channel had decided to not have annoying and distracting generic background music. Too many youtube channels (even educational ones with lots of talking) have unnecessary (and usually too loud) background music when I just want to hear the person talk and get information.
The transition to the inside of the FV438 was smooth
Smooth as butter
So was the red highlights on the FV438 hatch handles. I wasn't expecting it. Actually the whole FV438 section was shot and edited beautifully. Someone was really trying to flex their skills in that sequence
The combination of many quality props and exhibits, copious pertinent historical footage, and a good script well delivered really makes for great content.
That missile taking a right hander just after launching was pretty terrifying.
yeah i can just imagine a soviet tank commander seeing one of these from the side thinking "Ha, they don't see us" only to watch a missile do a 90* turn right at them. lol
@@xXBisquitsXx If and when the system worked !!!!! ........
@@xXBisquitsXx I mean if he's able to see one of these from the side, then his first reaction would be put a round through its side, considering that his SABOT round would reach the missile carrier quicker than the missile reaches him.
@@infamousfalcon588 oh yeah i'm not saying that it would be effective in such a situation. more so that its not something you'd expect. If i didn't know about its capabilities then i'd thought it was an "easy kill" and took my time to line up the shot. Only to see it shoot back, might make you rush the shot and you'd better hope the first round hits.
Though it's clearly designed to be used from behind cover like a house, wall, hedge or hill.
Well that was a blast from the past. I ran the Swingfire repair section at 35 Base Workshops REME (Old Dalby) during the late 80s. By that time FV438 was going out of service and the thermal imaging combined sight was being fitted to Striker. My hardest job was arranging sufficient serviceable parts to keep up with the production target. The FV438 was provided with a portable thermal imaging sight, but it was impractical in use, due to it's weight. I believe this is why FV438 was discontinued. The vehicle mounted Hensoldt Sight was never replaced with a thermal imaging sight. FV102 Striker fitted with Swingfire saw action in Gulf War 1 and the feedback was that it worked well. One operator was reputed to have made 5 kills out of 5. I can't confirm that. I left before the ground control and launch equipment was updated to further automate the control of the missile in flight. It would be interesting to see the system again after all these years. Incidentally, the simulator display tube is missing from the bottom of your Hensoldt sight. Thanks for sharing this great video.
they eventually coated the wire in wax so the missile could go over water and still operate!
Brilliantly presented.
The ability to remote the sighting unit gave a great advantage in concealment, the missile could literally pop up from dead ground or from behind a small building. As to it being wire guided, it was unlikely to be jammed by electronic counter measures.
In Sir John Hackett's "World War III" he described a battlefield covered in a spider's web of copper wires from wire-guided ATMs as NATO met the massed Soviet armoured attack across the Fulda Gap. Those were the days.
I'm always really impressed by Chris' delivery. His pacing is just right for me to absorb the information without getting bored, his accent is easy to understand even out here on the Canadian Prairie, and his ability to seamlessly continue dialog through multiple setups is just amazing!
As a Retired US Army Infantry NCO who started his career as an 11H - Heavy Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman - I’ve spent a lot of time adding more skill sets to my duty and foreign AT systems have always interested me. I never had a lot of data about UK systems so this is a great discussion! Our TOW system has numerous generations and subsequently, more options due to various missiles in our remaining inventory. And although I can’t speak for the method of penetration for their warhead, the TOW uses a HEAT type main charge with a copper cone. This copper cone will invert and form the molten penetrator that goes through insanely thick armor that most won’t believe if I mention it here so I won’t.
The UK system is similarly controlled like the Soviet system where the gunner “flies” the missile to the target while keeping track of the missile via a bright burning flare at the rear of the missile but I doubt that’s the primary method of control. The TOW uses both IR and thermal beacons that the day sight is constantly scanning and tracking the IR beacon while the thermal night sight (AN/TAS-4B) is tracking the thermal beacon and relaying the location to the Missile Guidance Set (MGS) so if the primary IR beacon is lost as a result of either failure or enemy counter actions, the thermal beacon is switched as the primary beacon within a split second and continues the missile to target.
I’d have to agree with the missile wires spread all over the battlefield as a result of use. The TOW wire can cut through human skin if you try to recover the wire and hit a snag so you must be careful to not use hands to do the task, we’d often use a piece of wood to roll it up. The TOW will fly its full 4,000 meter flight in 14 seconds so it’s a fast missile. And with the newer upgrades, it has the ability for a top attack option which allows us to punch through the thinner armor plating on tanks with two tandem shape charges.
Only the initial production of Swingfire were MCLOS (i.e controlled by joystick), they switched very quickly to SACLOS (i.e. the same as TOW or MILAN, with the operator keeping the sight on target and the guidance system sending the control signals to the missile to adjust). Worth noting that Swingfire and Vigilant's gyroscope's meant that unlike all other early missiles, the early MCLOS variants flew very stable, the operator wasn't having to make constant adjustments just to keep the missile flying straight. The Gyro's also meant that unlike most wire guided missiles there wasn't the initial spinning around its axis that other missiles suffered from whilst the control system struggled to get positive control over the missile. But it did make it more expensive than most...
@@dogsnads5634 thank you for the update, well appreciated. The TOW used two motors, the ABOL then the mid mounted flight motor that had two ejection nozzles at a 45 degree angle. This was to keep the CG of the missile within a minimal range as the solid fuel motor burned during flight, if it was at the rear, the balance change would be immense and the flight controls would be overwhelmed. I’m curious how the Swingfire dealt with their flight motor and if it was rear mounted? If so then we’re the mid mounted vanes/wings designed to deal with the balance shift as the motor consumed/exhausted its fuel? I’m guessing the Swingfire used an ABOL motor or maybe it was just a single or two stage flight motor? For flight controls, the missile had two small nitrogen bottles in the aft section where solenoids used the nitrogen to actuate the aft fins. I apologize in advance for the questions, I’ve never spoken with any counterpart Tank Destroyers from NATO countries.
@@echohunter4199 Similar story with Swingfire. Mid body engine, but the exhaust was at the rear. Steering was by vectored thrust (the nozzle was moved by servos, called a Jetavator). The exhaust ran from the mid body rocket motor to the rear of the missile where the vectored thrust nozzle was. The rocket motor was 2 stage, first stage was boost and acceleration, second was a sustainer. The fins were spring loaded so opened on exit from the canister, but were otherwise totally fixed, all steering via the rocket thrust vectoring.
When the rocket stopped firing you'd lose steering, but that wasn't an issue as it was good for longer than the wire spool would go (just over 4,000 metres).
There was a kill in Iraq that was just over max range, the missile essentially completed its run unguided as it had gone past the maximum guidance wire length and cut it, but because the missile was so stable due to the gyros it carried on in a straight line and hit, I believe a T-55.
One other difference was that the spool was nylon coated copper, so there were never the issues with going over bodies of water that early TOW had.
You had 4000 meters of wire wrapped around a piece of wood in the ground?...you had a lot of free time.
That 90° turn is wild.
Edit: The closing question about whether Swingfire would have worked if used can probably be answered by the fact I can absolutely imagine Toyota and Mitsubishi trucks with bed mounted launchers in Ukraine right now. The ability to hide the vehicle in a ditch or behind a building and have the operator hidden 100 meters away is invaluable.
Ukraine has a somewhat similar ant-tank missile the Stuhna-P.
And it has been working very well for them.
They used it recently against Russian armor making an attack in January. And they were able to ambush the Russian tanks and successfully engaged them.
Not quite sure the point of the 90 degree turn in practice. The footage indicated that there was no reason for the launch vehicle to be at a right angle to the target.
@@FlyboyHelosim Ah, but think if its firing from cover. That cover may not always allow the vehicle to be pointed directly at the target.
@@JohnyG29 The whole vehicle wouldn't need to be pointed at the target if the launchers were mounted on a turret.
@@herbertkeithmiller Yes and no...
Stuhna P exposes the enormous launcher and allows the crew to stay in cover, but its a huge unit as ATGM's go, with a big launch signature. Yes it seperates the crew and firing unit....but does it in precisely the wrong way...
I remeber trying out to be an operator when Swingfire was introduced to my regiments Recce troop to be mounted on 432's. At the time I'd never come across thumb control for anything, let alone a missile, and can truthfully say I was hopeless, despite being the 2nd best gunner in the regiment. Of the three test firings(using some type of simulator) I used up the full 32, I'm sure it was 32, seconds of flight time and got nowhere near the target. Truth to tell half the time I couldn't see the target! Needless to say I never got a transfer to Recce troop 🙂
I am reminded of a line from a Martin Caidin novel: "All the shrimp in the ocean can't block wire transmission." Wire guidance isn't perfect but jamming it is basically impossible.
There was a defense publication in the late '80s that talked about how the wire-guided missile was un-interdictable. They also included a cartoon of an infantryman, armed with scissors, cutting the wire as it streamed over him.
I still laugh thinking about it.......
It's been done by accident. SF Platoon firing one way. AT Platoon fire across their arc. Missile wanders off out of the valley.
Fire hose.
Swingfire was the "Christine" of missiles, Deffo had a mind of its own😂😂😂😂😂
Automatic gather , direct approach, back off and terminal guidance , 40 years and its still stuck in my head , even though I can't remember where I left my glasses 5 minutes ago 😂😂
Chris really presents well and I enjoy all the videos he is apart of. Thank you.
One whitespace character can change therapist.
As a former Bundeswehr TOW & MILAN Gunner it makes me wonder why we never got the Swingfire instead. The possibility to launch from behind cover around corners would have made so much more sense for the Airborne Brigades and their Kraka / Wiesel launchers (which was my job).
I was just thinking the same thing about T.O.W.!
So I was part of the quality assurance of the MOD that use to test Swingfire missiles. I remember in the 80’s driving to BAE Stevenage and walking round the factory seeing the missives in various stages of assembly and the wire spool test area.
The electronics didn’t last long which never gave you much time to carryout all your tests but was probably understandable given the missile either hit or missed !
I had great fun in a Cold War miniatures game once long ago with Swingfire. I used the over the hill firing ability to take on Soviet tanks on the attack. The player running them did not sight the missile inbound so the first thing he knew was four of his tanks blew up. I think I took out twelve before he finally spotted a missile inbound. The launch vehicles were behind the hill while the controllers were below the military crest on the forward slope.
That's likely how they would have been used. Swingfire was quite possibly the first NLOS missile if one considers the stereoscopic sight as NLOS. I would think a modern Swinfire with the IMU from NLAW and a bigger tandem and top attack warhead would be very effective and far more useful than TOW 2 which still requires the operator to be stationed along side the launcher.
I really appreciate the use of the red color coding of what is being described. No other channel does that. Good on you Mate.
Another greatly entertaining anti-tank chat. I think the camerawork, editing and composition is also commendable. Thank you for taking the time to make this educational program.
Good video, great explanation. 👍🏻 I always remember my Dinky 'STRIKER' Swingfire-firing realistic 1970's die-cast toy! 😃
Converted mine to firing matchstick ends when I lost my Swingfire missiles.. Still as deadly in my mind😂
@@burville100 In the end, I did THE VERY SAME THING! 🤣
Had one. Not much smaller than my Dinky Chieftain strangely 😕
Had some great battles between those two and my Dinky Spectrum SPV.
Had one too, and also lost the missiles. Great fun for a small boy
Chris actually taught me in first school for a while, was sad when he left to go back to the Dorchester museum’s. Really top bloke! Love his videos!
Not only are you all preserving some amazing world history, the content you create is incredible!
Chris is just the right person for this. Thank you Tank Museum! A great presentation.
Wow. Such professional quality : presentator, editing, explanation of scientific concepts, historical facts. Just wow. Keep up the excellent work.
Again,thank you for a very good documentary.
Really apreciate the balance of details with ways I can actually understand it.
Fantastic video. I was in the Canadian Army during the latter part of the cold war; the Blowpipe missile (air defense) had a similar 'auto-gathering' feature and was joystick guided to the target.
i Imagine trying to manually guide a missile to a moving aircraft would be incredibly hard to do with a joystick. No wonder they suck so bad in the game: Wargame, lol.
@@xXBisquitsXx Fired the Blowpipe on the simulator...couldnt hit a thing, despite multiple attempts
A thumb joystick - the most imprecise device to control anything yet alone to guide a missile over the distance of several kilometres. Or is it just my thumbs?
Excellent programme from Chris as always.
Its a matter of setup and practice.
By setup a mean length and spring resistance of the joystick and also its sensitivity to inputs and response curve
With practice you can also perform much more precise and subtle inputs.
What I would be more worried about here is eye to hand tracking at that range. The ability to estimate how much and when to turn at that distance (even with stereo optics), would lower drastically imo.
I love this series. Thank you so much for putting it together!
Just shows the weather patterns of the British isles “rain, fog, and even bright sunlight” as if the occurrence of sunlight is so very rare. Keep up the amazing work, I need to get more models soon!
Mr.Copson is another great host the Museum has provided us enthusiasts, and he was the perfect choice to succeed Mr.Fletcher. These videos have always felt like they are talking to the viewer as an equal; and not down at us like young school children on a field trip.
Good video, which left me with a better impression of Swingfire. Best feature? That automatic gathering to the LOS.
Great video and a nice trip down memory lane. As an armoured recce troop leader in the late eighties and early nineties I spent some time as “the electric darts team captain” in my squadron. An impressive missile to fire on ranges, but some of the practise stock tended to be a bit old and if the gyros got stuck on launch you had quite a hairy few minutes when the missile went askew. All in all though, a tremendous weapon for it’s day and I would not want to have been on the business end of that warhead.
Never fired one in anger but on exercise, the things we hated when siting the Strikers were electric pylons. They would have really spoilt your day and would have been the first thing to have been blown down for real.
Happy days and thanks for the reminder.
JD
I forgot. I actually appear in the Tank Chat on CVR(T), loading my Striker onto flatbeds at Ludgershall rail sidings in the video. All painted sand as it was just before Gulf War 1 😅.
Delighted to see this from Chris, an excellent presenter and an wholly credible speaker on these subjects.
I think it was and is still a heck of a lot harder to jam wire guided than radio guided self seeking. That only matters if the other side has the jamming equipment needed to get the job done.
There is a video of an Iraqi tank getting hit by swingfire. The turret went ballistic
Fired from a Striker FV102 CVR(T) it was. Maybe this one which skims the deck before hitting an Iraqi T55 th-cam.com/video/8ZqRPBwLafc/w-d-xo.html
It has always surprised me that no other ATGM has ever really incorporated Swingfire's off-axis launch capability that I can discern. It seems like an extremely useful design, that offers tremendous protection to the launcher, vehicle, and crew.
I really wonder if there is a reason that capability isn't considered worthwhile in keeping? It doesn't seem to impact the minimum range of the missile, nor the maximum range.
Simplicity vs complicated mechanics. Most ATGM`s have an unvectored rocket motor and operate the steering by means of fin AOA.
The application of modern electronics and IMU (inertial measurement unit for the velocity control autopilot) such as that from say NLAW would greatly simply the Swingfire. Make it cheaper. I would think a modern version would be built into a sealed tube.
-There are NLOS Non Line of Sight missiles such as Akeron MMP now that have a camer in the nose.
Makes it educational not just entertainment. Rare on the internet!
Best yet Chris. Not one um. When I started out in community radio the "um" where everywhere. They soon disappeared as I gained confidence and experience. Thanks for your great videos. Makes me want to get back to the UK and revisit the museum agian, and I'm in Australia.
Maybe this one was more scripted and not told from memory, it'd certainly explain it.
@@FlyboyHelosim They are all scripted.
@@JohnyG29 In which case there's a lot of 'ums and ars' normally.
1:00 he says um about 3 seconds after this timestamp
Those are a healthy part of normal speech. Not every presenter needs to be a robot.
Absolutely brilliant briefing by Chris. It makes a huge difference hearing from an actual 'Cold' Warrior about the lit that was used in the late 20th C.
I was a controller in the Striker version of the swingfire from 1977 to 1981in the Belgian army. I fired 15 missiles and never missed. If I remember correctly we had a higher rate of succes than the British controllers because our simulators were more sensitive adjusted. Firing the swingfire was a blast. Inside you did hear the gyroscope engaging just before the roaring of the rocket motor. I think the max range was 4100m. We went shooting in England somewhere. Can't remember where exactly but it was somewhere near Salisbury?
Hi I was with D Bty 3RHA in Bergan Hohne Germany. I was in was in G Troop , we had the Stricker I think I fired it 4 or 5 times. You say that the floatation kit was never used, it was I was a crontroler when we crossed the river Wasser using it on crausdaer 80. There was a Sgt from 9/12 or 14/20 who broke his leg when an object pierced the floatatin kit on his vehicle and injured him. That was the one and only time we used it, after that it was removed.
brilliantly done. this easily reads as something the BBC might have produced
Chris Copson is bang on as David Fletchers successor. He brings authority and excellent clarity to the subject. All he needs to do now is grow the moustache ;)
The Ferret Swingfire vehicle is particularly devious and sneaky when attacking from behind a berm. Makes me wonder why the platform was not named Ninja
Ferrets are sneaky. Well mine are.
@@handlesarefeckinstupid Also, you can't fit a couple of ninjas down your trousers. Believe me, I've tried.
Dubious little creature getting up to mischief
Great video as always. Thanks for all your hard work.
Great video, thanks Chris and team.
Great video, and I'm happy to see an FC101 on this channel :) 09:40
Small correction. More recent Javelin iterations with upgraded CLU do match the 4km range of Swingfire
Javelin has a physical range of 2.5km. If you want more there is Spike and Akeron MMP with 4km. Akeron MMP is NLOS "Non Line Of Sight" with a stablised TV camera in the nose transmitting via a fiber optic link. You can be behind a mountain. Several other ATGM of around 5.4km range are around as well.
@@williamzk9083 Javelin with upgraded CLU has demonstrated an effective range of 4km. This is straight from the ASC website.
Not sure about the dates transferred to RAC, as I was in a aGuided Missile Troop with Mk5 Ferret in 15/19 Kings Royal Hussars in Tidworth in 1976. Had great fun firing Swingfire. You could actually fly them over fences and trees on the way to target if you knew what you were up to. Also great fun firing them with the separated sight, especially when you were forward of the Ferret, as the missile was programmed to fly directly over the remote sight before it came into your line of sight. Very unnerving first time you did it !!!
That's amazing - must have been so much fun. how difficult was it to fly? It always seemed like having to control a missile remotely with a joystick while watching it fly off into the distance must be incredibly difficult, not least because it doesn't look obvious how far away it is or where it it in relation to the terrain.
@@trolleriffic😊
I spent the majority or my time as an Anti tanker in the Royal Marines so this video was very interesting to see some of the earlier missle tech
Great video! nice Swingfire! greetings from Buenos Aires, Argentina!
Ola 👍
Nicely explained and a top notch presentation Chris!
Thanks, that was a great presentation!
Enjoyable educational experience so thanks to the best museum in the world which no one can do better!
Really great video 👍🏻. Thank’s for making. 🇬🇧
I didnt actually know how NBC protection worked before this thanks.
Wow. I was a vehicle commander on a 438 in an Armoured Rgt in the mid '70's before they went to the RA,who really didnt know what to do with them ,and then came back to the experts. What a brilliant briefing. I remember we were always regarded with slight suspicion in the Rgt as it was thought to be a bit of a Black Art and we were frequently locked in the trainer. In Armour Vol 1 The Armoured Rgt under siting the launcher there was a lovely little sentence warning that the line of site must not be crossed by live cables. I always wondered a) Would we actually see a cable at 3000+ m and b} How would we know if was live or not.? More like this please.
You might not see a cable, but if you recce then you should be able to plot any power line poles in the area and connect the dots.
As for, "Is it live," the traditional practical way to find out was to throw a length of grounded copper or aluminum wire over the power line, and if it shorts and melts through in a fraction of a second, then the power line is live.
I recall a time when a company (J Bull Electrical!) back in the day (1990s?) listed spools of the command wire for sale...
I love the idea of the swing fire system, and the striker is one of my favourite vehicles in war thunder
Fantastic presentation. Keep up the good work.
Pros and cons of wire-guidance.
When talking about guidance, then one one side, using radio does away with the wire getting tangled (and needed in the first place), however using wire guidance makes the guidance system immune to radio jamming (unless said jamming is the EMP from a nuke, but in that case it doesn't matter anyway.....)
Even the Germans in WW2 had this dilemma.
Their Firtz-X guided bomb used radio control, but soon the allies found out which frequency was used and could effectively jam the control signals causing bombs to go 'dumb' and miss.
My dad trained on swing fire. I have some Polaroids of some missile variants and the console used for training. Sadly he is suffering from vascular dementia now.
That's such a shame about your dad, I'm so sorry. Watching a loved one succumb to dementia is truly horrible.
Facinating presentation. Packed so much in to such a short time.
Fascinating and so well presented and explained
In some ways it's more advanced than Javelin and in other ways the archaic-ness of the design would also be an advantage. You've mentioned longer range, but a Javelin can't do those 90* turns, and neither can the firer/targetter locate themselves separately from the launcher or vehicle, leaving them much more exposed, especially on a battlefield where tanks can now fire out to 2-2.5km fairly accurately. I've also been told that the wire-guided nature of these missiles actually makes them harder to jam or dazzle with countermeasures than a modern fire-and-forget system like Javelin.
Excellent explanation of how HEAT works
It was although for newcomers who aren't already familiar with how HEAT works, it would have been better if the term 'explosive' was used instead of words such as 'detonator' and 'charge'. The use of the word 'kinetic' could also lead to some confusion, as HEAT is actually a chemical energy warhead.
@@FlyboyHelosim The penetrating rod formed is purely kinetic though, even if the extreme velocity makes the penetration process more akin highpressure water into mud.
@@johanmetreus1268 It's not a penetrating rod, that term is reserved exclusively for Sabot rounds. Furthermore, that's simply not how ammunition is classified. Sabot is purely kinetic, whereas HEAT is kinetic only as the result of explosives (i.e. chemicals) detonating. Think about it, if they were all legitimately classed as kinetic energy there'd be no need for the chemical energy distinction.
@@FlyboyHelosim Are we talking about actual physics or garbled mil-lingo?
There is a HUGE difference.
Classification (KE, Chem) simply tells in which form the energy is stored during the transfer between the firing unit and the target, and says absolutely nothing about what actually goes on once the target is reached.
Bit closer thought, the only reason a KE round has any energy is the controlled explosion in the barrel, but that's getting too far into the rabbit hole lol
Anyway, when detonated, 20-40% (depending on shape and material) of the HEAT liner forms the penetrator (let's call it "needle" to get away from the whole rod discussion) that typically travels at 6-10 km/s (again depending on shape and materials). The reason it exceeds the detonation velocity of the explosive used by a fair margin is the change of geometry, forcing it to travel a longer distance is the same time... about the same principle that says the outside of a spinning disc will travel faster than the disc does near the
centre in spite of having the same rpm.
To achieve this, a ductile material that can be violently reshaped is needed, which is why most liners are copper based and not for instance steel based.
Meanwhile the reminder forms the "HEAT-carrot" which trails behind at, in this context, insignificant speed.
At this stage, neither needle nor carrot exceed temperatures above 600-700 °C according to the extensive trails done at Fösvarets Forskningsanstalt. (Fun detail, the highspeed X-ray cameras used was originally developed for the Swedish atomic bomb project).
This extreme velocity (far exceeding a long rod penetrator even at point blank) turns the collision between the needle and the amour into a fully pseudo-plastic deformation, but that entire field isn't a rabbit hole... it's a bloody colony!
Best analogue I found is if you imagine a vertical wall of dirt or mud you (for some reason) want to make a hole in with your garden-hose, as that can be used to explain various types of armour as well.
Basic principle is pretty straight forward: the longer you keep the water jet in the same spot, the deep the hole will become.
The length of the needle (determined mostly by the shell diameter, with shape and material factoring in) is essentially how long you can keep going before someone turns the tap off.
@@johanmetreus1268 OK I understand all that and it didn't really add anything to the discussion. The way I described it is how these types of ammo are actually differentiated. I don't make up the terminology. Sabot is kinetic, HEAT is chemical. That's it.
Excellent narrator he needs a raise
Brilliant presentation
The exposure to enemy recon units must have made using the maximum range (at the risk of misidentification) a top priority. Whereas modern Javelin teams can volley fire their missiles, and start relocating before the first ATGMs have impacted their targets
I'm glad it's not just me that wondered what would happen with all the wires. Swingfire! Anti-Tank missile system, with in-built tripwire layer to slow advancing enemy troops! Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice firing a bunch of these things. I'm also assuming when it was new, how that bit worked would have been classified, which meant some poor soldier had to police up all 20km of cable, assuming the vehicle had fired all 5 missiles. Right lads, I need 5 volunteers for a 4km run!
Sudenly realise most of the photos of this system implied to me to be misfires were actually... swingfires.
was 411 with a Canadian TOW missile crew. best scope I ever looked through. fires 4km.
Hoot to watch fired.
Excellent video. Thank you.
Excellent presentation, very interesting. Thanks a lot.
Ok i see these were slapped on anything that moved, very impressive!
Excellent presentation.
Chris is a sensation
Sir, you're doing a great job.
One thing not mentioned is that the stryker and probably the other vehicles had their own onboard training simulator.
11/10, excellent. Thank you very much, really appreciated.
Absolutely love your videos mate
Outstanding, thank you!
The best video about guided missile...ever...
How was the wire dispensed? I imagine the wire spool remained with the launcher and the rocket pulled the wire out. It amazes me that these systems worked so well. I would think getting wire to dispense without breaking would be a huge challenge.
Thanks for the interesting video.
Not sure about Swingfire, but the TOW wires are contained in two spools at the back of the missile. The winding technique must be amazing since touching a used missile spool will cause the wire to spring out sharply! The TOW wires are copper coated steel and (just noticed) the tech was licensed from Bofors in the 1960s!!
@@mickfreeley6054 Wow! Thanks for all the great information.
Other way round. The spool was situated around the outside of the actuator nozzle at the back of the motor.
@@jasondalley4607 That agrees with what @Mick Freeley shared.
I had thought the spool would remain with the launch vehicle to save weight within the missile. I'd really like to see how the spools worked. It sure seems like one of those things which seems impossible but which smart engineers managed to make work.
Thanks for setting me straight about where the spool was located.
I've done a bit more research and I've determined there's no possible way to dispense wire fast enough to both not break and not to interfere with the missile's flight. After careful consideration, I've determine witchcraft is involved. Mystery solved.
Since this is the internet, I apparently should add that I'm joking.
I've seen a few patents on how the wire is dispensed but I'm still amazed these things work as well as they do.
Again, thanks for the replies helping to be a bit less confused about the topic.
Superb presentation!
Nice to see the 16th/5th cap badge, Britain's premier cavalry regt
Fantastic presentation.. keeps me really interested..
What a presantation. David Athenbourough of tanks.
Tank you for making this video 😛
Is it weird I want this guy in my house so I can get these talks whenever
Imagine him lecturing you on something mundane like cheese after you ask him a simple question. You literally walk out of your house and he just stands in the front door, still talking like nothing happened.
We've got youtube at home
Splendid video thank you.
British innovation 💡 is limitless. Always awestruck.
Wasn't Swingfire (fired from a Striker) used in Iraq, 2003, I think? I feel sure I recall a video of a Striker launching a Swingfire at an Iraqi tank in the desert. The tank was hit and destroyed.
P.S. In retrospect, the video I recall could have been from the Gulf War in circa 1991.
Hi guys just thought I would put my spin on things. I joined C bty 3 RHA in Germany in about 1980. C Bty were equipped with Swingfire with both AFV438's and Strikers. During my time with the regiment I performed all three roles. I started as a loader, then did a driving test and became a driver, and after being promoted became a launcher commander. And here is the first mistake in the video. Chris mentioned driver commander and controller. That incorrect the crew was in fact driver, commander and loader. The commander was expected to perform the firing of the missiles although the loader and driver could be qualified missile operators. The loaders job was to as implied load the missiles and the most important role, make the tea. I would argue the point about the genetic weapon. When I did my basic missile course in Lark hill and later my advanced missile course in Germany we were taught by the experts that the inverted coper cone was forced by the explosion into a long thin molten stream of coper that burned through the armour. I can't remember the speed of the missile it always looked painfully slow when it fired and if you were the controller the wait for the missile to hit at maximum range seemed a lifetime. To clear up another inaccuracy most of the controllers shown must have been early models. When I was involved with swing fire we had the semi automatic to line of sight system. All that meant was that if the controller was pointing the weapon at a target that was not directly ahead the missile would leave the bin and fly towards the direction the sight was pointing so the controller could then see the missile in the sight. Once the missile could be seen there was a small button just under the joystick which was pressed to take control of the missile manually and then the controller would steer the missile on target by eye. There was no infer red lasers I don't know where that came from. This was achieved by sensors in the vehicle that sensed which way the sight was pointing. With the separated sight the loader would manually input the distance bearing and difference in hieght of the position of the separated sight from the vehicle into an onboard computer. The computer would then sense the direction of the separated sights line of sight and add that to its relative position so the missile would still steer into the controllers line of sight while looking at the target.
That bought back a lot of happy memories I had a lot of fun serving with the guys in C bty in the 80s and I hope that I have helped some people understand what the weapon system was about.