However the mpatgms can penetrate 660mm rha +era & 710mm rha only
while akeron can penetrate 1540 to 1680mm rha
Has 150m min range and 5km max range.
Genrols put 800mm favouring phoren mall.
"...akeron can penetrate 1540...Genrols put 800mm favouring phoren mall"
You yourself claimed that competitors provide more than 1000mm of pen. When the market standard is slowly moving to 1000mm then 800mm is a reasonable ask.
Despite being so many cases of kick-backs, I don't think we should go with these emotions all the time.
A simple unguided RPG-29s from 90s have a pen of 700mm RHA.
And also I dont understand what advantage they will get by real time fibre optic data link.
While mpatgm has observe and update capability
Again, I didn't find any mention of fibre optics.
As for advantage, remember ATGMs travel at relatively slow speed due to reasons like avoiding sonic boom revealing position, extremely poor nose cone design and low thrust-to-weight; typically 150-250m/s. So even at fastest it would take 12 seconds to cover 3km. 12 sec is enough to change everything...a new, higher value target can pop up, something else can destroy the target.
Ig the warhead issue can be sorted out with new explosives developed by solar group's subsidiary economic explosives limited sebex 2 which is 2.01 time more effective than tnt. Work on sebex 3 & 4 going on.
So the requirement can be fulfilled with this new explosives.
In charges utilising Munroe effect (HEAT, EFP) the explosive power is never a significant factor.
Formula that's used:
Depth of penetration = Warhead diameter x Coefficient for jet length x Coefficient for target material x √(jet density/target density)
By substituting everything with typical values like copper and rolled homogeneous steel, you end up with a simple rule of thumb:
Depth of penetration = Warhead diameter x 5-8
That's why for a 120mm MPATGM the penetration is 120x6 = 720mm
And for an Akeron is becomes 140x6 = 840mm
This is also why insanely large warheads like Kornet perforated so much; 152x6 = 912mm
But there's a reason wire guidance is used for the observe and update part as its relatively easy to implement and lightweight, basically extra fibre inside the atgm tube.
Well, fibre optics is rarely used inside tube; most of the time you'll find it in the missile itself where it reels back from a "bobbin" as the missile flies. And they're heavy.
This is a secured wireless datalink from MBDA that's used on their AAMs. This thing weighs just 50 grams.
So in past couple of years the SWaP of electronic have drastically improved.
But then again, fibre optics offer two advantages at the cost of lower range.
> undetectable to enemy sensors
> virtually impossible to jam
You are basically complicating the system by adding comm system between fcu and missile and then comes other issues like image quality, latency etc in wireless mode compared to wired mode.
The image that's transmitted back from the seeker is of potato quality, even in the most expensive ATGMs. You don't need a 4K for a one way flight of just 15 seconds.
The kind of bitrates everything happens can be transmitted by even Arduino type LoRa modules.
Whatever I said can be totally made-up, so take it with a fist of salt