Military Weapon question

Please keep this on the technical side of things- not feelings over battle X or Y...

So watching videos from the current battle in Iraq- you see some smaller vehicles being used as suicide weapons.

Of course, the desire of such attack would be to destroy them as far away as possible.

I know we have shoulder fired guided weapons for tanks, which seem to be a big overkill for a smaller one.

Is there a smaller (also less expensive, easy to carry) guided weapon that would work for these smaller and quicker targets?

I know the infantry had LAW's but as far as I know they were not guided. So there is some skill involved in hitting a moving target. The AT4 is just a larger version built by the swedes but still effective.

EDIT: I'm sure the M203 would likely be effective at disabling a vehicle if you scored a hit in a vital area.

Anything guided is going to be more expensive. Strangely enough, I was Googling this the other day and Bobzilla is right on it. The smaller stuff is also shorter range.

The LAW and AT4 are our versions of the omnipresent RPG the bad guys use.

In reply to spitfirebill:

I think the current version of hte LAW is like 200m

In reply to Bobzilla:

Crap. Don't think I'd want to hold that mutha. The first ones were 66mm.

The current correct answer is overwhelming fire, think they have anything mobile that can hold mounted m61's?

My choice would be the MK 19. 40mm automatic grenade launcher. But like the others have said, anything guided is going to cost.

Hitting a small fast moving truck with a grenade launcher might be difficult, but but enough out there, I am sure something will explode!.

I am not sure the Army and Marines carry around the LAW much anymore. I have not seen any pics of recent US military carrying them. Not an easy shot on a fast moving truck anyway. I think the primary anti-vehicle weapon is the Javelin, but that's serious overkill (and expensive) for a truck.

I think the primary defense, as noted, is lots of bullets. If you have access to some big bullet pushers, you can do some serious damage very quickly to an low armored vehicle:

In reply to aircooled:

6500rounds per minute of 20mm sounds even better....

While not an infantry weapon, I would think that the M42 duster would be very effective. Twin 40mm Bofors would stop most vehicles.

Enough large bullets is a good answer

In reply to aircooled:

From Wiki: "he Mk 19 is a belt-fed, blowback-operated, air-cooled, crew-served, fully automatic weapon that is designed not to cook off. It fires 40 mm grenades at a cyclic rate of 325 to 375 rounds per minute"

Not quite as fast as a M2 but a much bigger bang. One of the few regrets I have from my military career is not being able to shoot a Mk 19.

What you need is a 4 bore rifle aimed at a engine block. That will stop just about anything and is cheap and cheerful at least for the military.

But with tech, and base safety, being what it is you would see them approach from far enough away that you could riddle them with 50 cal before they even got in range to do any damage.

TOW missile (see my post in the "hilux for Isis" thread).

Mk 19 is a party stopper and fun to shoot.

Ma Deus has been rocking out for nearly a century now and putting a slug the size of your pinky finger into most anything tends to cause significant damage.

TOWs cost $60,000 each. There are "reports" the CIA has provided some to vetted opposition fighters.

$60,000 each is cheap by military/government contractor standards. A Tomahawk was a million bucks 20 years ago. It'd be interesting to see a "per shot" breakdown of all the military armaments. Anyone have a chart handy they can post?

http://www.defensereview.com/spike-shoulder-launched-fire-and-forget-guided-missile-kills-fast-moving-threats/

SPIKE costs 10 grand per shot.

One of these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm4nva8v_FY

Yes, I know its a stupid movie...but I like it.

KyAllroad wrote: http://www.defensereview.com/spike-shoulder-launched-fire-and-forget-guided-missile-kills-fast-moving-threats/ SPIKE costs 10 grand per shot.

THAT is what I was wondering about. Nice find

If you get a chance, check the some of the videos coming out of Mousul- the trucks are small and moving fast. And given what is inside, the farther away you hit them, the better.

The other concept is an updated Panzerfaust- which was a much better weapon the Germans had than we had- easier to carry, easier to shoot, and more powerful. Put some guidance on it, and you have a simple and effective weapon vs. smaller vehicles.

Bear in mind- we are talking about where we are supporting other countries in a fight- not us, where you know there will be a lot of air-ground support involved- both for fixed wing and not.

M 67 fiberglass bazooka. Not guided, but if you plan ahead .....

I wondered why there was not a land based version of the Phalanx CIWS, but according to the linked wikipedia page, there is a land-based version used for missile defense called C-RAM and the Italian army has their own version that they call DRACO and can be used against ground targets.

20mm projectiles fired at 75 rounds per second will stop a truck in no time. I'm sure the cost is way more than just using some 50 cals.

In reply to T.J.:

Even something like the phalanx targeting (or paint the target with a laser) system guiding a .50 cal or two would be the E36 M3.

Something that could be mounted to a humvee or similar purpose wheeled vehicle. I'm sure something could be bodged together for defending against such "Hail Mary" tactics.

In reply to Wall-e:

The a-10's & AC130's pretty much put an end to their parades....

I would think a well-located trench would also be useful if you're trying to fortify a fixed location against this kind of attack.

Keith Tanner wrote: I would think a well-located trench would also be useful if you're trying to fortify a fixed location against this kind of attack.

Good for defense, bad for offense- since you can't move the trench.