What makes a weapon anti-air or anti-tank? Would anti-air be effective against tanks? Could we create one weapon that covers both, or even all possible targets?
In: 864
As others have said, tanks and aircraft present different challenges.
Aircraft are fragile, fast, manoeuvrable and usually high up in the air, while tanks are heavily armoured, robust and almost always on the ground.
There are some exceptions to the rule, mostly guns that are high velocity. This makes it easier to shoot shells high up in the air and to hit things that are fast or agile, and it also makes them good for punching through armour.
So a number of anti-aircraft guns were put into service as anti-tank weapons in WW2 (albeit with different ammunition, as /u/toffeemanstan notes). The most famous is the German flak-88, but the Russians and Americans did the same. As planes have flown higher and faster, this kind of AA gun has become obsolete.
There’s also at least one missile system, ADATS, that was designed as a dual-purpose weapon but I’m not sure it was ever adopted. The extra cost or limitations outweighed the advantages.
One other thing to note is that when we say “aircraft” we don’t just mean planes. Helicopters are a little bit of a special case, since they fly more slowly and often lower. So they can still be vulnerable to high velocity guns. In theory both the autocannons on infantry fighting and scout vehicles and the cannons on main battle tanks can be used against helicopters, though I don’t know if this has been done much in practice. Some anti-tank guided missiles can also be used against helicopters (many can be used against anything you can keep the crosshairs on), and I think there are some examples from Ukraine of this actually being done.
As others have said, tanks and aircraft present different challenges.
Aircraft are fragile, fast, manoeuvrable and usually high up in the air, while tanks are heavily armoured, robust and almost always on the ground.
There are some exceptions to the rule, mostly guns that are high velocity. This makes it easier to shoot shells high up in the air and to hit things that are fast or agile, and it also makes them good for punching through armour.
So a number of anti-aircraft guns were put into service as anti-tank weapons in WW2 (albeit with different ammunition, as /u/toffeemanstan notes). The most famous is the German flak-88, but the Russians and Americans did the same. As planes have flown higher and faster, this kind of AA gun has become obsolete.
There’s also at least one missile system, ADATS, that was designed as a dual-purpose weapon but I’m not sure it was ever adopted. The extra cost or limitations outweighed the advantages.
One other thing to note is that when we say “aircraft” we don’t just mean planes. Helicopters are a little bit of a special case, since they fly more slowly and often lower. So they can still be vulnerable to high velocity guns. In theory both the autocannons on infantry fighting and scout vehicles and the cannons on main battle tanks can be used against helicopters, though I don’t know if this has been done much in practice. Some anti-tank guided missiles can also be used against helicopters (many can be used against anything you can keep the crosshairs on), and I think there are some examples from Ukraine of this actually being done.
Anti-air needs to be hella fast to reach planes. Anti-tank needs to punch through very thick tank armor. A weapon that you describe already exists: the [Swiss Air Defense Anti-tank System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Anti-Tank_System)
Anti-air needs to be hella fast to reach planes. Anti-tank needs to punch through very thick tank armor. A weapon that you describe already exists: the [Swiss Air Defense Anti-tank System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Anti-Tank_System)
Anti-air needs to be hella fast to reach planes. Anti-tank needs to punch through very thick tank armor. A weapon that you describe already exists: the [Swiss Air Defense Anti-tank System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Anti-Tank_System)
People missing keypoint – mass.
Air targets are fast but way more vulnerable if hit. Thus we need rocket which can be faster and can change dirrection fast too. This cannot be achived if payload is heavy. Majority of AA rocket mass going to fuel.
Ground targets like tanks are slow but durable, thus a lot of explosive payload is required. Majority of rocket mass is contributed to payload.
Another important thing – targeting system. AA targeting issuper easy comparing to ground targeting, that make proceccing unit lighter too
People missing keypoint – mass.
Air targets are fast but way more vulnerable if hit. Thus we need rocket which can be faster and can change dirrection fast too. This cannot be achived if payload is heavy. Majority of AA rocket mass going to fuel.
Ground targets like tanks are slow but durable, thus a lot of explosive payload is required. Majority of rocket mass is contributed to payload.
Another important thing – targeting system. AA targeting issuper easy comparing to ground targeting, that make proceccing unit lighter too
People missing keypoint – mass.
Air targets are fast but way more vulnerable if hit. Thus we need rocket which can be faster and can change dirrection fast too. This cannot be achived if payload is heavy. Majority of AA rocket mass going to fuel.
Ground targets like tanks are slow but durable, thus a lot of explosive payload is required. Majority of rocket mass is contributed to payload.
Another important thing – targeting system. AA targeting issuper easy comparing to ground targeting, that make proceccing unit lighter too
we do. the american ADATS stands for Air Defense Anti Tank System. it’s basically an anti tank missile with proxy fuze. the russian is also the same with the vikhr missile. though iirc, on the vikhr missile, you need to select what mode do you want to use prior to launching. so if it’s in aa mode, it wont work well for at role and vice versa
going back a bit, we had dual puprose guns. like the one on many warships. they are designed to be used against aircraft and surface targets
the also, everyone converted aa guns into anti tank role in ww2. german 88, soviet 85, american 90, etc
mostly, anti tank or anti air are defined by the ammunition that it fires. if it fires armor piercing, then it’s anti tank, if it fires air burst, with time fuze, it’s usually anti air.
making a missile that can do both is certainly doable. but it’s really complicated. because to kill aircraft, you want something fast and turns well. and to kill tank, you want to pack as much explosive as you can. these points contradicts each other. so we have separate missile for aa and at
we do. the american ADATS stands for Air Defense Anti Tank System. it’s basically an anti tank missile with proxy fuze. the russian is also the same with the vikhr missile. though iirc, on the vikhr missile, you need to select what mode do you want to use prior to launching. so if it’s in aa mode, it wont work well for at role and vice versa
going back a bit, we had dual puprose guns. like the one on many warships. they are designed to be used against aircraft and surface targets
the also, everyone converted aa guns into anti tank role in ww2. german 88, soviet 85, american 90, etc
mostly, anti tank or anti air are defined by the ammunition that it fires. if it fires armor piercing, then it’s anti tank, if it fires air burst, with time fuze, it’s usually anti air.
making a missile that can do both is certainly doable. but it’s really complicated. because to kill aircraft, you want something fast and turns well. and to kill tank, you want to pack as much explosive as you can. these points contradicts each other. so we have separate missile for aa and at
Latest Answers