Îò SB
Ê All
Äàòà 16.02.2000 01:35:00
Ðóáðèêè Ïðî÷åå;

Jane's î ðîññèéñêèõ ÏÒÓÐ â 1994 ãîäó

Ïðîøó ïðàùåíèÿ çà áîëüøîå êîëè÷åñòâî ëèøíåãî â òåêñòå - íåò âðåìåíè óáðàòü
Âîò ÷òî ïèñàëè ïî òåìå
hjJANE'S INTELLIGENCE REVIEW - 19940200
1994 006/002 54 B :Russian Anti-Tank Guided Missiles - Part 1: Heavy Systems >B B Steven Zaloga B
B

Introduction B
B
CRussia has the world's largest output of anti-tank guided missiles GB
E(ATGM) both in terms of variety and numbers. In the 1960s and 1970s, IB
Cannual production averaged 25000 missiles per year. The US Defense GB
?Intelligence Agency estimated that production climbed to 70000 CB
Eannually by 1983 due to the addition of a broad range of new systems IB
Edescribed in this article. It is likely that recent budget cuts have IB
@substantially slashed these production levels. However, even if DB

Eproduction has been reduced to 20 per cent of the levels achieved in IB

Russian anti-tank guided missiles can be categorised into two BB
Cbasic groups. Man-portable ATGMs, as their name implies, are light GB
Eenough to be carried by two or three-man teams. These are gen-erally IB
?employed in motor rifle battalions for the defence of infantry CB
Epositions. Heavy ATGMs are larger system inten-ded to provide longer IB
Drange and greater armour penetration. These are mounted on armoured HB
Avehicles such as the BMP infantry combat vehicle, on wheeled and EB
?tracked tank destroyers, and on anti-tank helicopters. A third CB
-Acategory of anti-tank missiles, those fired from tank guns, bear EB
-Clittle technical similarity to these two first categories and have GB
Fbeen already been described in a previous article (see JIR, Vol 5, No JB
! 7, pp 301-304). B
" B
#Development of the first Soviet ATGM started in the mid-1950s BB
)=through the Special Mortar Design Bureau (SKB Gladkostvolnoi AB
*Eartillerii) in Kolomna, headed by B Shavyrin. The programme was part IB
+Eof Khrushchev's new defence initiative stressing the desirability of IB
,Anew missile technology over conventional weaponry, in this case, EB
-4ATGMs over towed and self-propelled anti-tank guns. 8B
. B
/:The first system was designated 2K15, and the missile was >B
0@designated 3M6 Shmel (Bumblebee). The Shmel was patterned after DB
1Asimilar French missiles of the period, notably the Nord Aviation EB
2=SS.10, although it was significantly larger. Guidance was by AB
3Amanual-command-to-line-of-sight (MCLOS) with the command signals EB
4Cpassed from the operator to the missile over a thin trailing wire. GB
5FFlight control was unconventional, using a set of vibrating spoilers. JB
6BThe missile was too large to be man-portable, so was mounted on a FB
7Avehicle. There were two standard launcher configurations for the EB
8FShmel, namely the 2P26 mounting four missiles on the rear of a GAZ-69 JB
9?truck, and the 2P27 mounting three missile launchers in a rear CB
:*compartment on a BRDM-1 armoured vehicle. .B
; B
FArmy in the 1967 war. Few were used in combat, and there was only one JB
?Ddefinitive tank kill attributed to the system. During the fighting, HB
@Fthe hit probability was under 25 per cent because of the difficulties JB
AEinherent in any MCLOS guidance device. The acknowledged shortcomings IB
BEof this system led to the deployment of a second generation of ATGMs IB
C@in the early 1960s. The Shmel system is no longer commonly seen DB
D except in war reserve. B
E B
F AT-2 `Swatter' B
G B
HBThe 3K11 Falanga radio-command guided weapon was developed by the FB
IENudelman OKB-16, a design bureau previously associated with aircraft IB
JDcannon development. It was developed as a heavy ATGM to replace the HB
K;Shmel and was intended for both ground-based launchers and ?B
LEhelicopters. The missile system was shown to Khrushchev in September IB
M31964, and accepted for service shortly afterwards. 7B
N B
OBThe original 3M11 Fleyta (Flute) missile (AT-2a) employed a MCLOS FB
PEsystem with a radio-command link. The 3M11 Fleyta was judged to have IB
QEinadequate range and an improved missile, the 9M17 Skorpion (AT-2b), IB
RDwas developed as a successor. It used the same MCLOS radio-guidance HB
SB
jJmedium-range ATGMs such as the 9M14 Malyutka and the later Fagot/Konkurs. NB
k B
lAThe Falanga system was the first Soviet ATGM to be deployed from EB
mChelicopters. It was fitted in small numbers to an armed version of GB
nDthe Mil helicopter, the Mi-4AV. The helicopter-based version of the HB
oEFalanga system required two new systems, the light weight 2P32M/K-4V IB
pElauncher system, and the Raduga-F guidance antenna package. The most IB
qFwidely used version of the helicopter-based Falanga system was on the JB
rFMi-24 `Hind' helicopter. It was used as the standard anti-tank system JB
s@on the initial Mi-24 `Hind A' and on the more common Mi-24D and DB
t-export Mi-25 `Hind D' series. "B
u B
v?The missile is aimed from the weapons officer's station in the CB
wDnose of the Mi-24D, using a telescopic sight (x3.3 and x10) mounted HB
xCon the right side of the cockpit. Guidance signals are transmitted GB
yEvia the Raduga-F antenna, located under the left side of the forward IB
z9nose section. The missile tracker is integrated into the =B
{Delectro-optical sighting system mounted under the right side of the HB
|Anose. These helicopters were initially fitted with the Falanga-M EB
}DMCLOS system but this was replaced by the Falanga-P using the 9M17P HB
~DSkorpion-P missile, and the later Falanga-MP system with the 9M17MP HB
Emissile. The system is still in widespread use around the world with IB
€@Mi-24 `Hind' operators, and has been extensively used in combat DB
Aincluding the Lebanon War (1982), the Iran-Iraq War, Angola, and EB
‚
Afghanistan. B
ƒ B
„BThe assault version of the `Hip' transport helicopter, the Mi-8TB FB
…E`Hip E', required some modification to the system in order for it to IB
†Ebe integrated into the helicopter since it lacks the electro-optical IB
‡Fweapons aiming system fitted to the Mi-24. This led to the Falanga-DB JB
ˆ@system which uses the 9M17DB Skorpion-DB missile and a separate DB
‰Dgyro-stabilized missile tracker assembly and guidance antenna. This HB
Š-version was used mainly by the Soviet Union. 1B
‹ B
ΠAT-5 `Spandrel' B
 B
ŽADevelopment of a new generation of ATGMs started in 1962 through EB
Cthe Tula Machinery Design Bureau (Tula KBP), headed by A Shipunov. GB
BTwo different missiles were planned, the light man-portable 9K111 FB
‘Asystem and a heavier, longer ranged 9K113 system for arming tank EB
’Cdestroyers and other armoured vehicles. The SACLOS guidance system GB
“Dwas developed by K Zvyagin and V Kurnosov of the Central Scientific HB
”?Research Institute for Precision Machinery (TsNII Tochmash) in CB
•9Klimovsk. This programme was a direct counterpart to the =B
–DFranco-German ATGM effort that eventually resulted in the Milan and HB
—EHOT missiles. The heavier, longer range 9K113 Konkurs (Contest, AT-5 IB
˜=`Spandrel') was a direct counterpart to the Euromissile HOT. AB
™ B
š=The 9M113 missile is delivered in a glass-reinforced plastic AB
›9launch tube/container. At the rear of the container is a =B
œ>gas-generator to eject the missile. Once clear of the tube, a BB
Fsustainer engine ignites, venting its exhaust from two ventral ports. JB
žAThe larger container forward of the gas-generator and behind the EB
Ÿ?engine is a spool of trailing wire for the command link and an CB
Finfra-red lamp for missile tracking. Missile stability is provided by JB
¡Efour gas-inflated thin metal fins which curl around the missile body IB
¢Dwhile in the launch canister. The basic 9M113 Konkurs uses a 2.7 kg HB
£B9N131 shaped-charge warhead with a penetration of about 600 mm of FB
¤Darmour. The improved 9M113M Konkurs-M uses a tandem warhead with an HB
¥Fextensible stand-off probe for dealing with explosive reactive armour JB
¦;and has an advertised penetration of 750-800 mm of armour. ?B
§ B
¨CThe 9K113 Konkurs missile was intended to be used as the secondary GB
©Darmament on armoured infantry vehicles such as the BMP-2 and BMD-2. HB
ªEThese use a fixed 9S428 guidance controller and launch system on the IB
«Dvehicle roof with a 9Sh119M1 optical fire control system integrated HB
Binto the gunner's BPK-1-42 fire control system. Four missiles are FB
­>carried internally and are reloaded via the gunner's hatch by BB
®Dtraversing the launcher and folding it vertically to accept another HB
¯Fmissile tube. The launch system can also fire the smaller 9M111 Fagot JB
° missile.
B
± B
²BThe other major role for the 9K113 Konkurs is to arm wheeled tank FB
³Ddestroyers based on the BRDM-3 (GAZ-41-08) chassis with a five-rail HB
´Dlauncher on the roof. The vehicle has a crew of two, the driver and HB
µ=gunner/commander. The five missiles can be reloaded using an AB
Cautomated system which takes 25 seconds. There are two versions of GB
·Athis tank destroyer. The initial 9P137 was designed to carry and EB
¸Elaunch the 9M113 Konkurs exclusively; it carries a total of 14 9M113 IB
¹@missiles internally. The 9P148 tank destroyer can fire both the DB
º@smaller 9M111-2 Fagot missile, and the 9M113 Konkurs. The usual DB
»Fmixture is 10 of each type of missile, giving a total of 20 missiles. JB
¼DBoth these vehicles have an electro-optical tracker assembly on the HB
½Eright side of the superstructure. Although the basic guidance method IB
¾Dis SACLOS, there is a warning system incorporated in the tracker to HB
¿Dalert the gunner when optical jamming is taking place, and there is HB
À;an elementary manual system override for this eventuality. ?B
Á B
Â@The main production centres in Russia for the 9M113 Konkurs are DB
ÃDthe Degtaryev Machinery Plant in Kovrov, the Shchit Machinery Plant HB
ÄFin Izhevsk, and the Tulsky Armaments Plant in Tula. Export prices for JB
ÅFthese systems, as of 1992, were $13 000 for the 9M113 Konkurs missile JB
ÆDand $135000 for the improved 9P135M firing post. License production HB
ÇFof the 9M113 Konkurs is currently being undertaken in Bulgaria by the JB
ÈFVazov Engineering Plant in Sopot, in India by Bharat Dynamics, and in JB
ÉFGermany on the basis of an existing East German govern-ment agreement JB
Ê with the former USSR. B
Ë B
ÌAT-6 `Spiral' B
Í B
ÎAThe 9K114 Shturm (Storm) missile system has no immediate Western EB
ÏDcounterpart, though it is somewhat similar to the US Army's AGM-114 HB
ÐAHellfire in role. It was developed by the Kolomna Machine Design EB
ÑDBureau under S P Nepobidimy, the reorganized bureau formerly headed HB
ÒCby the same B Shavyrin who developed the Shmel (AT-1) and Malyutka GB
Ó (AT-3). B
Ô B
Õ?It was primarily intended as a helicopter-launched anti-armour CB
ÖEmissile, and was originally called the AS-8 under the US designation IB
×Asystem, later being reclassified as the AT-6 `Spiral'. The 9K114 EB
Øhelicopter version and Shturm-S (sukhoputny or ground) in the BB
ÚFground-launched version. It was first deployed on the Mi-24V `Hind E' JB
Û in 1978.
B
Ü B
Ý?Like most Soviet helicopter-fired ATGMs, it uses radio-command CB
ÞBguidance, rather than the wire guidance or laser guidance used on FB
ß?most Western ATGMs. As with many contemporary Russian tactical CB
à>missiles, the 9M114 Kokon (Cocoon) missile is transported and BB
áDlaunched from a glass-reinforced plastic storage/launcher tube. The HB
âDmissile uses a Soyuz NPO solid-rocket with a small booster stage at HB
ãCthe tail of the missile to propel it out of its launcher tube. The GB
äFmissile guidance system on the Mi-24V `Hind E' is configured much the JB
åFsame as the Falanga system on the Mi-24D, with a new podded Raduga-Sh JB
æEantenna replacing the Raduga-F under the left nose of the helicopter IB
çBand a new x8 telescopic sight for the weapons operator integrated FB
èFinto the new electro-optical system/tracker. The radio-command system JB
éDoperates on five fixed frequencies in the millimetre wave band with HB
ê?two coding systems to minimize the risk of electronic jamming. CB
ë B
ìBThe Shturm was first employed in Afghanistan. There were guidance FB
íDproblems using the missile against mojahedin defensive positions in HB
î>caves and rocky areas according to some Russian accounts. The BB
ïDshaped-charge warhead had a disappointing perfor-mance against such HB
ð@targets, leading to the development of a special enhanced blast DB
ñ warhead as mentioned below. B
ò B
óAThere are at least four versions of the 9M114 missile. The basic EB
ô?9M114 employs a conventional shaped-charge anti-armour warhead CB
õEcapable of penetrating up to 600 mm of armour. This missile was used IB
öFin Afghanistan, but the warhead was only marginally effective against JB
÷Fdug-in guerrilla forces or against reinforced buildings and caves. As JB
øBa result, a special bunker-buster warhead was dev-eloped using an FB
ùFenhanced blast warhead similar to the fuel-air explosive warhead used JB
úDwith the RPO. This warhead uses a dispersed metallic powder for the HB
ûFblast and not a liquid. In recent years, two additional variants have JB
ü=been fielded with an enhanced anti-armour warhead capable of AB
ý?penetrating tanks protected with reactive armour, presumably a CB
þFtandem-shaped charge type. The variants differ in the length of their JB
ÿDrocket engines, one with a range of 6 km and the other with a range H‚
Dof 7 km. These are referred to here as the 9M114M1 and 9M114M2 (see I‚
Atable) but these designations are not confirmed. The 9M114 Kokon F‚
Cmissile is manufactured by the Shchit Mechanical Plant in Izhevsk. H‚
"Its 1992 export price was $50000. '‚
‚
BIn 1990, the 9K114 was adapted for the ground role, being mounted G‚
Don an automated launcher on the MT-LB light armoured vehicle as the I‚
@9P149 tank des-troyer. This vehicle was developed by the design E‚
Dbureau at the Saratov Machinery Plant headed by V Petrov; the MT-LB I‚
Ditself was developed and manufactured at the Kharkov Tractor Plant. I‚

FThe 9P149 tank destroyer is currently being mar-keted for export, but K‚

Eit is unclear if it has been adopted by the Russian Army. The export J‚
Cprice for the 9P149 vehicle was stated to be $1.0 million in 1992, H‚

Cnot an inconsiderable price in view of the $1.6 million price of a H‚
Bfully equipped T-72S tank. The launcher assembly is being offered G‚
Dboth in the 9P149 form, and as a modular unit that can be used as a I‚
=static pillbox, or mounted on various armoured vehicle hulls B‚
Eincluding surplus T-55/T-62 medium tanks or light armoured vehicles. J‚
>The system is entirely automa-ted, with the launcher assembly C‚
Dprotected under armour until used. The autoloader assembly holds 12 I‚
:missiles and the rate of fire is 3-4 missiles per minute. ?‚
‚
?In recent years, the Shturm-V system has been mounted on other D‚
=attack helicopters including the Kamov Ka-29 `Hormone' naval B‚
Ahelicopter. Besides its use as an anti-armour system, it is also F‚
Demployed in a secondary role as an air-to-air missile against enemy I‚
Fhelicopters and slow-flying aircraft. In the late 1980s, the upgraded K‚
Bversions of the 9M114M Kokon missile were incorporated into a new G‚
Csystem called Ataka-V (AT-9) for the Mi-28 helicopter. The Ataka-V H‚
Esystem employs a new fire control system, mounted in the nose of the J‚
- DMi-28. As in previous Soviet attack helicopter designs, the missile I‚
- Cis aimed through a monocular telescopic sight, mounted slightly to H‚
@the right of the electro-optical display in the forward weapons E‚
! Cofficer's cockpit. The Ataka-V system on the Mi-28 `Havoc' carries H‚
" range of 5 km, a speed of 170 m/s, and its 150 mm warhead can C‚
7 Dpenetrate up to 800 mm of armour. Other details on the missiles are I‚
8 lacking. ‚
9 ‚
: BSteven Zaloga is author of several books and numerous articles on G‚
; CSoviet/Russian missiles. The diagram below includes missiles which H‚
B
A`Swatter') was from helicopter launchers like this 2P32M/KV on a EB
Mi-24 `Hind A' helicopter. -B
B
=5. A close-up view of the 3M11 Fleyta missile on a 9P32 tank AB
Cdestroyer. This radio-command guided missile was supplanted by the GB
evolutionary 9M17 Skorpion. B
B
carry a mixture of both 9M113 and 9M111 Fagot (AT-4 `Spigot') BB

missiles. B
B
?Bottom: The improved 9M113M Konkurs-M missile uses an improved CB
Cwarhead for better performance against tanks protected by reactive GB
-armour. (Photograph: C F Foss) #B

B

Photograph: B
Top: The weapon system associated with the 9M114 Kokon on the BB
@Mi-24V `Hind E' and Mi-24P `Hind F' helicopters is the Shturm-V DB
Fsystem, with the associated Raduga-Sh radio-command antenna seen here JB
Eunder the nose of the helicopter aside the shuttered electro-optical IB
'sighting unit. (Photograph: M Jerchel) +B
- B
->Middle: The latest heavy ATGM for helicopter use is the 9M120 BB
FVikhr missile, used on the new Kamov Ka-29 Oboroten attack helicopter JB
!>as well as some fixed-wing strike aircraft such as the Su-25T BB
"`Frogfoot'. B
# B
$ABottom: The 9M114 Kokon missile can be used from tank destroyers EB
%@like this 9P149 on the MT-LB chassis, using the Shturm-S weapon DB
&Bsystem. The radio-command guidance system is mounted in the right FB
',forward station of the hull superstructure. 0B
( B
)Table:
B
*$Russian Anti-Tank Missile Launchers (B
+ B
,?Designation Missile Missile Launcher CB
- B
.>Russian US/NATO Russian Chassis BB
/ B
0=2P26 AT-1 `Snapper' 3M6 Shmel GAZ-69 AB
1 B
2=2P27 AT-1 `Snapper' 3M6 Shmel BRDM-1 AB
3 B
4=2P32 AT-2 `Swatter' 3M11 Fleyta BRDM-1 AB
5 B
6=9P110 AT-3 `Sagger' 9M14 Malyutka BRDM-1 AB
7 B
8B9P111 AT-3 `Sagger' 9M14M Malyutka firing post FB
9 B
:=9P122 AT-3 `Sagger' 9M14M Malyutka BRDM-2 AB
; B
=9P133 AT-3c `Sagger' 9M14P Malyutka BRDM-2 AB
? B
@B9P135 AT-4/AT-5 9M111/9M113 firing post FB
A B
B=9P137 AT-5 `Spandrel' 9M113 Konkurs BRDM-3 AB
C B
D=9P148 AT-5/AT-4 9M111-2 /9M113 BRDM-3 AB
E B
FThe 9K11 Malyutka system was also widely deployed on armoured BB
+Cvehicles, both as secondary armament on armoured infantry vehicles GB
,Dand as primary armament on tank destroyers. It was an integral part HB
-?of the armament of the BMP-1 infantry combat vehicle and BMD-1 CB
.Dairborne fighting vehicle (see article pp 109-113). These vehicles, HB
/Awhich share nearly identical armament systems and turrets, carry EB
0Athree missiles internally and can carry a fourth on the external EB
1Elaunch rail. The guidance optics for the missile are built in to the IB
2Bgunner's 1PN22 sight, and the joystick controller is folded under FB
3Bthe gunner's seat in the turret when not in use. The Malyutka was FB
4Cused as secondary armament on many other armoured vehicles outside GB
5Dthe USSR including the Yugoslav BVP M80, Romanian TAB-77 and Polish HB
6 SKOT-2A.
B
7 B
8DThe 9K11 Malyutka has also been fitted to helicopters including the HB
9CMi-8TVK 'Hip F' and some export Mi-25 'Hinds'. However, the longer GB
:Cranged Falanga (AT-2) system was a far more common helicopter ATGM GB
;?system in Soviet service. Other countries fitted the system to CB
B
?EThe 9M14 served as the basis for the most common BRDM tank destroyer IB
@@versions. The first of these was the 9P110, based on the BRDM-1 DB
AAwhich carried six missiles on launcher rails and a further eight EB
B=reloads. This type was shortlived owing to the advent of the AB
C=improved BRDM-2 armoured vehicle. The initial version of the AB
DEMalyutka system on the BRDM-2 (GAZ-41-06) was the 9P122; it was also IB
EEfitted with six launch rails and carried eight reload missiles. This IB
FCversion was equipped to fire the 9M14M Malyutka-M (AT-3b) missile. GB
GEThe later 9P133 version has been modified to fire the improved 9M14P IB
H@and 9M14P1 Malyutka-P (AT-3c) missiles which use semi-automatic DB
I=command-to-line-of-sight (SACLOS) guidance. The 9P133 has an AB
JBenlarged optical sight system and can carry 16 missiles of either FB
KEthe 9M14M or 9M14P types - six on launch rails and 10 reloads. These IB
L:BRDM tank destroyers serve in the anti-tank battalions of >B
MASoviet/Russian motor rifle divisions; each battalion has an ATGM EB
N%battery with nine of these vehicles. )B
O B
P?The effectiveness of the Malyutka anti-tank missile, like many CB
QEfirst-generation MCLOS missiles, is the subject of some controversy. IB
RDUS Army assessments estimated that these missiles had a probability HB
SCof a hit (Ph) of 67 to 90 per cent at ranges over 2000 m, and a 65 GB
TBper cent probability of kill (Pk) if the tank was hit. These were FB
UAidealised estimates which assumed a highly trained crew, lack of EB
V=enemy countermeasures and other factors which were extremely AB
W=unlikely in the real world. To become proficient, a Malyutka AB
XAoperator had to fire at least 2300 simulated rounds on a missile EB
YCtrainer, and had to fire regularly 50-60 simulated rounds per week GB
ZEon a trainer. Beyond these technical skills, an operator had to have IB
[?a particularly stout heart when actually using such weapons in CB
\Ecombat, as they took about 30 sec from launch to target impact, with IB
]=the operator vulnerable to suppressive fire during the whole AB
^engagement. B
_ B
`>The manportable Malyutka was used by North Vietnamese forces, BB
aDbeginning in 1972, with some success against ARVN armour units. The HB
bDuse of both manportable and vehicle launched Malyutka's in the 1973 HB
cCArab-Israeli War came as a shock to many observers, the first time GB
d=that ATGMs were used on a large scale. The press interpreted AB
eEEgyptian successes with the Malyutka against Israeli tank formations IB
f@in the opening days of the war as a signal of the demise of the DB
gEtank, akin to the demise of the armoured knight following the advent IB
hDof the longbow at Crecy. More sober observers felt that the initial HB
iCIsraeli tank losses were due as much to Israeli overconfidence and GB
jEpoor tank-infantry co-operation. During the later phases of the war, IB
kCthe successes of the Malyutka teams disappeared as Israeli tankers GB
lCcame to understand their vulnerability to counteraction during the GB
mEengagement. What the 1973 war demonstrated was that the actual Ph of IB
n@one of these missiles was dramatically lower than the idealised DB
o>figures of 65-90 per cent suggested by the US Army, generally BB
pCaveraging 25 per cent or less, and often as low as 2 per cent. The GB
qEEgyptian Army used Malyutka missiles in massive numbers. On average, IB
r@each launcher expended two units of fire (20 missiles) or about DB
sA2000 missile per division during the war. One division fired 460 EB
t missiles on one day alone. -B
u B
vCThe Soviet Army was already aware of the shortcomings of the MCLOS GB
wEguidance system, deploying a SACLOS system for the Malyutka in 1969. IB
x9It was called the 9M14P Malyutka-P (poluavtomaticheskiy, =B
yEsemi-automatic) or AT-3c 'Sagger C' under the NATO reporting system. IB
z:This version introduced an improved warhead which boosted >B
{Dpenetration from 400 mm to 460 mm. A slightly improved version, the HB
|A9M14P1, was fielded in the early 1970s shortly before production EB
}7began to shift to future systems like the 9M111 Fagot. ;B
~ B
EIn recent years, there have been at least two upgrade programmes for IB
€>the Malyutka warhead. The improved 9M14MP1 warhead used a new BB
Dstand-off probe on the nose, increasing armour penetration from 460 HB
‚Amm to 520 mm. This was followed in 1992 by the 9M14-2 Malyutka-2 EB
ƒ?which has an enhanced warhead and also a new solid-fuel rocket CB
„@propellant. This gives it higher average flight speed - 130 m/s DB
…Cversus 115 m/s. The Malyutka-2 warhead is 3.5 kg compared with 2.5 GB
†?kg on earlier types and, together with a new generation shaped CB
‡5charge, increases penetration from 460 mm to 800 mm. 9B
ˆ B
‰CThe 9M14 Malyutka is probably the most widely produced ATGM of all GB
ŠDtimes with Soviet production in the 1960s and early 1970s averaging HB
‹D25000 missiles annually. The unit cost was extremely low, about 500 HB
ŒAroubles (roughly US$500) per missile. Besides manufacture in the EB
AUSSR, the 9M14M was built under licence by the Vazov Engineering EB
Ž;Plant in Bulgaria, in Romania and by Krusik in Yugoslavia. ?B
EUnlicensed copies of the 9M14M are still being manufactured by China IB
:(Red Arrow 73), Iran, North Korea and Taiwan (Kuen Wu 1). >B
‘ B
’ AT-4 'Spigot' B
“ B
”CDevelopment of a new generation of ATGMs began in 1962 by the Tula GB
•EMachinery Design Bureau (Tula KBP), headed by A Shipunov. The aim of IB
–@this programme was to develop a new generation of SACLOS guided DB
—EATGMs suitable both for the manportable role (AT-4 'Spigot') and the IB
˜Dheavier vehicle-mounted tank destroyer role (AT-5 'Spandrel'). Both HB
™>missiles share similar technology, differing only in size and BB
šCcapability. The lighter of the pair, the 9K111 Fagot (Basoon, AT-4 GB
›@'Spigot') was a direct counterpart of the Milan. The associated DB
œA9P135 firing post is very similar to the firing post used by the EB
CMilan which has led to some suspicion that espionage played a role GB
ž@in the programme. However, there are several distinct technical DB
ŸCdifferences between the Fagot/Konkurs and the Milan/HOT. All these GB
@missiles employ a gas-generator to boost the missile out of the DB
¡Blaunch tube. However, the Milan/HOT system expels the launch tube FB
¢Cbackwards as a counterweight to reduce the recoil on launch, while GB
£=the Russian approach expels the gas-generator backwards as a AB
¤Bcounterweight. The 9K111 Fagot system was first deployed in 1973, FB
¥+the larger 9K113 Konkurs followed in 1974. /B
¦ B
§EThe basic 9M111 Fagot uses a 1.8 kg 9N122 shaped-charge warhead with IB
¨Cpenetration of 400 mm of RHA (rolled homogenous armour). The 9K111 GB
©CFagot has gone through two evolutionary steps. The 9M111-2 (AT-4b) GB
ªEhas greater effective range through the use of an improved sustainer IB
«Cmotor and longer guidance wire. It is fitted with a better warhead GB
>with penetration raised to 460 mm. The most recent model, the BB
­?9K111M, has been renamed Faktoriya (Trading Post, AT-4c). This CB
®Bvariant uses a tandem warhead for better penetration of explosive FB
¯ reactive armour. B
° B
±EThe 9P135 firing post is mounted on a simple tripod, with the gunner IB
²Claying prone for firing. A 9S451 guidance controller box is fitted GB
³>to the tripod, with an attachment for the missile launch tube BB
´Dimmediately above. The 9Sh119 optical sight is attached to the left HB
µCside of the launcher. The launcher system weighs 22.5 kg and has a GB
Erate of fire of three rounds per minute. The 9P135 is limited to the IB
·D9M111 missile; 9P135M series can fire either the 9M111 Fagot or the HB
¸>heavier 9M113 Konkurs/Faktoriya. There have been at least two BB
¹Eupgrades to the system, the 9P135M1 and 9P135M2. An improved 9P135M3 IB
ºEnight-capable firing post was introduced in the early 1990s. This M3 IB
»Eupgrade adds a TPVP thermal imaging night sight weighing 13 kg; this IB
¼Eclips on above the 9Sh119 sight. Using the sight, the 9P135M3 firing IB
½Cpost has an effective range of 2.5 km at night. TsNII Tochmach has GB
¾Ealso been developing an upgrade for the 9S451M1 guidance control box IB
¿@which would harden the missiles against electro-optical dazzler DB
À@countermeasures like the US Army VLQ-6 and VLQ-8 or the Russian DB
ÁCShtora system (see JIR, Vol 5, No 6, pp 254-257). The new guidance GB
ÂCtracker increases the weight of the complete firing post from 22.5 GB
à kg to 23.5 kg. B
Ä B
ÅCThe 9K111 is a battalion-level weapon with the anti-tank companies GB
ÆDof Russian motor rifle units. It replaces the earlier 9K11 Malyutka HB
ÇCsystem. The anti-tank company deploys two or three 9K111 sections, GB
È@each with two 9P135 launchers, for a total of four to six 9P135 DB
É=launchers. Each ATGM team consists of a gunner, carrying the AB
ÊElauncher and tripod in a backpack, and two assistants, each carrying IB
Ë@two 9M111 missiles. Unlike the 9K11 Malyutka, the team does not DB
ÌDcarry an RPG-16 since the 9K111 has a very small dead-zone in front HB
ÍDof the launcher. The standard firing unit for a team is eight 9M111 HB
ÎEmissiles, the additional missiles being carried on the section's BTR IB
Ï?transporter. The 9P135 launcher can also fire the larger 9M113 CB
Ð?Konkurs missiles but, generally, they employ the lighter 9M111 CB
ÑFagot.
B
Ò B
ÓEThe 9K111 missile was used to upgrade older BMP-1 and BMD-1 armoured IB
Ô>infantry transporters by replacing the obsolete 9K11 Malyutka BB
ÕEmissile. The modified versions of the vehicles are designated BMP-1P IB
ÖCand BMD-1P. The conversion involved the removal of the launch rail GB
×Dand guidance system for the 9K11. A small attachment post is welded HB
ØCto the turret roof for mounting the 9P135 firing post. To fire the GB
Ù?missile, the upper portion of the 9P135 firing post, minus the CB
ÚBtripod base, is removed from the troop compartment and mounted on FB
ÛEthe roof along with a missile. The gunner is exposed when firing the IB
Ü=missile since he is obliged to use the guidance system in an AB
Ý2identical fashion to the normal infantry version. 6B
Þ B
ßBThe main production centres for the 9M111 Fagot in Russia are the FB
àCDegtaryev Machinery Plant in Kovrov, the Shchit Machinery Plant in GB
áCIzhevsk and the Tulskiy Armaments Plant in Tula. Export prices for GB
âEthese systems as of 1992 were $10000 for the 9M111M Fagot-M missile, IB
ãB$85000 for the basic 9P135 firing post, and $115000 for the 9P135 FB
äAfiring post. Licensed production of the 9M111 Fagot is currently EB
å?being undertaken in Bulgaria by the Vazov Engineering Plant in CB
æ>Sopot, and in Germany on the basis of an existing East German BB
ç$government agreement with the USSR. (B
è B
é AT-7 'Saxhorn' B
ê B
ëEThe 9K115 Metis (Mongrel, AT-7) is a light-weight infantry anti-tank IB
ì9missile somewhat similar to the US Army MGM-52 Dragon or =B
íAAerospatiale Eryx. It was developed by the Tula KBP, headed by A EB
î@Shipunov, and introduced in 1979 to supplement the larger 9K111 DB
ïEFagot at company level. The lighter weight of the system is due to a IB
ð@less sophisticated firing post and a lighter missile. The 9P151 DB
ñCMetis tripod firing post is only 10.2 kg, compared to the 23 kg of GB
òto the smaller amount of rocket propellant in the 9M115 Metis BB
ö@missile. This is most evident in the range difference, with the DB
÷DMetis being credited with a maximum range of 1000 m while the Fagot HB
ø has a range of 2500 m. B
ù B
úCThe Metis has a variety of intriguing features. The 9S816 guidance GB
ûDsystem is powered by a thermal battery attached to the front of the HB
üDlaunch tube prior to launch. The missile contains no battery; power HB
ýBis provided via the guidance wire at relatively high voltage. The FB
þEsystem can be fired from the shoulder as well as from the tripod but IB
ÿAthis requires a great deal more skill. Like the French Eryx, the E‚
EMetis can be fired from within an enclosed space such as a building, J‚
=though it requires at least 6 m of clear space behind and an B‚
Einternal volume of 100 m3. The missile is launched from the canister J‚
;by a booster stage, not a gas generator as is found in the @‚
?Fagot/Konkurs missiles which are also designed by the Tula KBP D‚
bureau.
‚
‚
DThe significant size and weight difference between the two missiles I‚
Bis due to their different roles. The AT-4 'Spigot' is deployed in G‚
:Soviet BTR-equipped motor rifle battalions in a dedicated ?‚

Danti-armour platoon. (BMP battalions have organic anti-tank defence I‚

=on their vehicles.) The AT-7 'Saxhorn' has been added to the B‚
Einventory to deepen Soviet anti-tank defensive capabilities; it does J‚

Dnot replace an existing weapon but adds new capability. It is being I‚
Adeployed at a lower level ie motor rifle companies than the AT-4 F‚
C'Spigot', with three launchers per company (for a total of nine in H‚
Bthe battalion). The AT-7 'Saxhorn' is operated by a two-man team. G‚
DThe gunner carries the 9P151 firing post and one 9M115 missile, and I‚
NATO Codename 'Sagger' 'Sagger' 'Spigot' C‚
5 :IOC 1963 1990 1975 ?‚
6 ‚
9 9Missile span (mm) 393 393 369 >‚
: :Missile weight (kg) 10.9 12.5 12.5 ?‚
; 9Warhead weight (kg) 2.6 3.5 2.5 >‚
‚
= 9Average speed (m/s) 115 130 186 >‚
> 8Minimum range (m) 500 500 70 =‚
? :Maximum range (m) 3000 3000 2000 ?‚
@ ;Firing post 9P111 9P111 9P135 @‚
A :Firing post weight (kg) 8.1 8.1 22.5 ?‚
B 9Canister length (m) n/a n/a 1.1 >‚
C :Canister weight (kg) n/a n/a 13.0 ?‚
D ‚
E =Russian System 9K111M 9K115 9K115-2 B‚
F ;Russian Missile 9M111M 9M115 9M131 @‚
G =Russian Name Faktoriya Metis Metis-2 B‚
H ;US Designator AT-4b AT-7a AT-7b @‚
I ?NATO Codename 'Spigot' 'Saxhorn' 'Saxhorn' D‚
J :IOC 1991 1979 1990 ?‚
K ‚
M 9Missile diameter (mm) 120 94 130 >‚
N 9Missile span (mm) 369 300 400 >‚
O :Missile weight (kg) 12.9 5.5 13.0 ?‚
P 9Warhead weight (kg) 2.5 2.5 4.6 >‚
Q 9Armour penetration (mm RHA) 460 460 900 >‚
R 9Average speed (m/s) 180 223 200 >‚
S 8Minimum range (m) 75 40 80 =‚
T :Maximum range (m) 2500 1000 1500 ?‚
U ;Firing post 9P135 9P151 9P151 @‚
V :Firing post weight (kg) 22.5 10.0 10.0 ?‚
W :Canister length (m) 1.1 0.78 0.98 ?‚
X :Canister weight (kg) 13.4 6.3 13.8 ?‚
Y {ct}
‚
Z ‚
[ Note.
‚
\ 91. Length shown is with gas generator; missile is 875 mm >‚
] without gas generator. ‚
^
B
Photograph: B
Bottom: The 9P151 firing post can fire either the 9M115 Metis BB
,Emissile, as seen here, or the larger diameter 9M131 Metis-2 missile. IB
-AThe silver finish of the tube and the stencilled marking 'MAKET' EB
.:indicate that this is a training dummy, not a live round. >B
/ (Photograph: H Dodds) B
0 B
1CTop: This is the 9P151M improved firing post with the larger 9M131 GB
2 Metis-2 missile fitted. B
3 B
4@Bottom: This detail view of the 9M131 Metis-2 missile shows the DB
5Dmid-body exhaust port for its rocket engine. (Photograph: C F Foss)

Ñ óâàæåíèåì
SB