How Russia’s Kornet Missile Launcher Works

Video Sponsored by Ridge Wallet:
www.ridge.com/...
Use Code “TASK” for 10% off your order
Russia claims their most advanced anti tank missile system, the 9M133 Kornet is capable of taking out any main battle tank with a single shot. It’s a man portable Anti Tank Guided Missile which was designed specifically to take out NATO’s Main Battle Tanks and for a period of time it made Russia the most technologically advanced anti tank forces in the world. In the 2014 invasion of Crimea the Kornets destroyed hundreds of Ukrainian tanks in its first wide spread use so you can understand why Russia thought they were headed in the right direction with this weapon. But we’ll see things change quickly on the battlefield. On paper the Kornets looks like the weapon you would want to take into combat but as we’ll see those numbers don’t always match up with the practical realities of using it in the heat of combat.
Recently the Kornet has seen extensive use by Russian forces in the Ukraine Invasion where they say it out matches both the US Javelin and the British NLAW missile. In this video we’re going to examine whether or not that’s true. Can you blame me for being just a little bit skeptical here? Some sources refer to it as a 2nd generation while others will say it's the third generation. I feel like its more accurate to call it generation 2.5 honestly. I think the reason for this discrepancy is it’s kind of half way between the two since it's not wire guided, it has a newer laser guided ability but it still lacks an automatic lock on homing feature.
The Kornet is also known as the AT-14 Springgar according to its NATO designation. Springgar is of course as we all know a reference to a legendary creature from Cornish Fairy lore. I assume the NATO officer who came up with that name wanted to show off their obscure pretentious European fairy knowledge. Someone promote that guy.
Follow Chris Cappy: / cappyarmy
email for inquiries: [e-mail]

[@Taskandpurpose]

Correction javelin velocity is 583 m/s Sponsor Ridge Wallet: www.ridge.com/TASKANDPURPOSE Use Code “TASK” for 10% off your order. It's worth investing in a wallet that will last you a lifetime guys!

[@janvesely6353]

I've seen the higher number several times, I suspect it's coming from confusion with British Javelin SAM.

[@xxxlonewolf49]

So the REAL reason US TOWS went to laser guidance...the factory that MADE the wire went out of business. We only bought so many missiles & weren't shooting them so didn't need more. And newer TOWS are tandem warheads so only need one missiles to kill.

[@KillersFromTheWest]

Russia lying? Psssssh, I think you mean telling the absolute truth as always. /s

[@charleslanier1992]

Potato patato. Pretty much.

[@ETmyAz]

A wallet that's going to last a lifetime? Imagine the stench!

[@gj1234567899999]

This system really isn’t the same type as the javelin. The javelin system’ weighs 24 kg (54lb) while the koronet system weighs 63kg. (138lb). A single person can barely carry a javelin all day, but nobody is going to be running around with a koronet missile. They aren’t analogous systems. It would be like comparing a saw machine gun to a browning 50 cal.

[@modenasolone]

we gotta make a video about something....

[@ultimathule1473]

RPG-28,

[@ninjavlad9721]

Kornets are carried by teams it's like comparing a M249 to a m240

[@adambussert3383]

More comparable to a tow missile system

[@treebeardtheent2200]

@@ninjavlad9721 With Ammo and spare barrels. Might not be THAT heavy, but it is when everything else is added. Also, it's reasonable to figure that an invading army has to pack heavier than those defending their own land, or you get things like cold hungry attackers, something that seriously degrades numerical advantages and such.

[@thebarbershop6693]

I feel like comparing the Kornet to a Javelin system is like comparing a heavy machine gun system to an LMG. Javelins and NLAWs are easily transported and quickly ready to be used, while the Kornet is more of an emplacement weapon.

[@hermelnderhans]

Yeah Most True but don’t forget it’s also very fast to Built up But the weight and Portability is a huge different

[@petrsafranek5725]

@@hermelnderhans well, 29 kg vs Javelins 12 kg..., more like 63 kg with launching system. Its more like comparing F-16 with B-52, totally different class

[@hermelnderhans]

@@petrsafranek5725 as is meant the Huge different is weight and mobility but Not Building up and Fire. And no you are Comparing Strategic bombers with Fighters 😂 thats far away from Each other

[@romanberkutov2592]

Джавелин стоит в 10 мать его раз дороже

[@STDRACO777]

Something I'm wondering about is how on earth the FOF on the javelin (friend or foe) system is working in Ukraine with them and the Russians using so many similar weapons or if its just disabled?

[@philipdavis7521]

From what I've read, they were pretty successful in Syria - I believe they took out quite a few Turkish Leopard II tanks. I think the type of warfare and topography has to be ideal for nearly any type of small to medium anti-tank missile.

[@nobodynoname6062]

The Turks were also terrible in their tactical employment of their Leopards.

[@talkbigdosmall3192]

@@nobodynoname6062 yeah dude, everything russia made is terrible, if that weapon successful that mean tank driver terrible employment. but everything US made is god mode, it doesn't matter tank driver is pro, really pro and expert in tank weapon still successful. same with this video, everything russia made is copy from US.😂.. but this not propaganda video, because only Russia know about propaganda other country especially US never use propaganda video 🤣

[@nobodynoname6062]

@@talkbigdosmall3192 Man, learn to make yourself understood in English. Russia is a fucking developing country. Them idiots have ten times the fucking casualties in Ukraine that the US had in Iraq. So think again, if you're capable of it.

[@michaelkoerner4578]

Turkey also doesn't have any 2a6 or 2a7 variants with up armored turrets

[@AbuBakr-gm6bf]

@@talkbigdosmall3192 lol the entire us space programm is an copy of soviet one even the engine

[@AnthonyEvelyn]

Kornet more or less like a TOW more than the Javelin. The Kornet was effectively deployed against the IDF by the Hizbollah in southern Lebanon where the Israelis lost some Merkavas and other armoured vehicles. The Kornet ATGM should not be underestimated.

[@theprogressivecynic2407]

Only against Merkeva IIIs. They didn't actually manage to destroy any Merkeva IVs, which have Trophy that can knock out incoming missiles. US Abrams, UK Challengers, and German Leopards all are in the process of being updated with Trophy.

[@reufuraque8771]

They are made by the badguys therefore they are inferior. Citizen please report to your local homeland security advisor for further clarification of facts.

[@theprogressivecynic2407]

@@reufuraque8771 No, they aren't inferior and will still kill virtually any tank that doesn't have an APS specifically designed to counter that type of threat. Unfortunately for Russia, most of Israel's enemies get weapons from them, and so Israel was motivated to develop a countermeasure that could kill their best offense, and then this countermeasure was propagated to a couple of Israel's allies, who happen to be the main adversaries of Russia.

[@Seth9809]

@@theprogressivecynic2407 We've only seen it kill tanks that have half the armor of a modern day Abrams. The ones we sell to Iraq are deliberately shit on purpose.

[@reufuraque8771]

@@theprogressivecynic2407 Dude I thought my sarcasm was evident. Yeah my country still fields rpg-2,4,7s we would never underestimate something like the kornet.

[@charlesmartin1121]

This missile is more in the class of the TOW missile in size, range and effectiveness.

[@76456]

Russia has made in limit a top attack weapon more comparable to javelin than kornet to it. That top attack weapon is more like a trap. It works at very limited range.

[@kubagra456]

@@76456 What you're talking about is probably ptkm-1 anti-tank/vehicle mine. It has range of max 100m making it one of best mines... but its nowhere close to range of Javelin, NLAW or Kornet that are all missile launchers

[@76456]

@@kubagra456 yes. Thx

[@aitorbleda8267]

i would say it is a much better tow. still, no jav.

[@emortalelitegaming2667]

What about top attack tows

[@ahafeel]

The Kornet E was used by the Hezbollah in the 2006 war with Israel. Around 52 merkava tanks were reportedly knocked out by these systems. These were used in conjunction with guerrilla tactics, so that may account for the high kill rate.

[@AHalz]

Hezbullah only had a few hundred Kornet missiles, at most. They used Konkur missiles and RPG-29s as well. So far, there isn't any publicly released data on how many Merkava tanks were knocked out with what type of rocket/missile either

[@ahafeel]

@@AHalz there was data when the conflict happened. I have read it

[@AHalz]

@@ahafeel can you please post that? I'm quite curious

[@edubogota1]

Not true at all, very few merkava tanks have been knocked out and it is mostly done by land mine.

[@thatdude-cc6ui]

52 tank were hit. Only five were destroyed. A few were knocked out and has returned to service after the war.

[@250Skyer250]

The Kornet spins for a different much more mondane reason. Its not Laser Designated but Laser Beam riding. Meaning the missile just flyes around the laser trying to keep the laser behind it as best as possible, thus spinning around the laser. The Russians are using this system a lot.

[@seekrengr751]

True that, regarding laser beam-riding. Almost everyone confuses a Semi-Active Laser (SAL) designated system with a passive laser beam-riding system, such as the UK Starstreak. Videos of the Starstreak show the same pattern of flyout, a telltale for a beam-rider. The projected laser patterns for such beam-riders do a pretty good job of missile guidance, and the orbital patterns are intentional. Advantages of the completely passive system are that laser warning sensors are not triggered, which means that only passive warning sensors will be capable of triggering obscurant CM. Chris did mention that the rocket motor is unusually bright, so this would be possible, but it's never as good a trigger as a designator laser. I worked on one of these beam-riders back in the 1980s called ADATS, designed as a dual anti-armor and air-defense system. Due to high cost and poor development of mission profiles, it was only sold to two nations (Canada and Thailand) which retired them within a decade or so because maintenance costs were too high with a tiny installed base (50 systems). It was produced by Oerlikon-Buehrle (now Rheinmetall) but designed at Lockheed Martin Missile Systems. With better system design it might have been lower cost and successfully sold to the US military, with a Mach 3 missile (much more effective than a slow missile like Kornet, as Starstreak shows) and 900mm RHA penetration, but the HEAT/frag warhead had very poor frag performance and the vehicle was also very unreliable. Hard to do two such different missions well.

[@johnnybravo5406]

I gotta look into the m this I'm not going to lie

[@rinaldoman3331]

@@seekrengr751 wow you are so cool man. Wonder what situation about ADATS right now.

[@barbosaguzman6101]

Whats the advantages and disadvantages between the two?

[@250Skyer250]

​@@barbosaguzman6101 Laser Beam Riders have the advantage of being simpler and cheaper overall, they can function with a comparatively weak laser so it has a higher chance of a laser warning receiver not triggering, It is not affected by smoke, so the gunner can try his best of guiding it towards the target even if smoke is deployed. Their disadvantage is somewhat reduced accuracy, It can only fly a direct flight path towards the target (Top attack being either more difficult to achieve or not possible. A Semi Active Laser guidance has the Advantages of: Doesn't have to fly directly towards the target, it can loft, fly up and come from above which increases range and potentially hits the top armour of the target, you can also program them what flight path the should use fairly easily, They have the potential of being more precise. Disadvatages are: More costly production, they require a much more powerful laser as the missile needs to see the reflection of the laser and not just the laser itself, smoke will 99% of the time make the missile go dumb because it can't see any laser anymore.

[@jsb2277b]

Would have liked to see a comparison between this and the Stugna-P

[@oveidasinclair982]

I think they're about the same, the Ukrainians have used the Stugna-P with great effect, but they're set up in ambush defensive positions and the operator isn't sitting at the tripod (source of fire position) guiding the missile in. The Ukrainian system is safer for the operators, but like the Kornet not as man portable as the Javelin, or NLAW

[@Freeukraine45]

Stugna-p strikes have reached out to 4.3km i think, also the operator of stugna doesn't have to be next to the system so thats good

[@meisterproper8304]

@@Freeukraine45 such a good system for propaganda purposes. Similar stuff should soon pop up all over the middle east

[@UzumakiNaruto_]

@@Freeukraine45 I'd rather have the Stugna than the Kornet. Not having to be near the launcher and also being able to aim with a display is so much better.

[@davidty2006]

@@meisterproper8304 Hmmm Stugna P is sure showing it's worth theres plenty of footage of people just recording whats on the control screen.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

The Abram's turret face is probably the only place you could consider armor. The Kornet can without problem penetrate the upper front plate, lower front plate, and through the turret ring.

[@CrazyGamer-ip2wd]

Yeah only in war thunder, the Abrams tank would eat it for breakfast, we have tried destroying a Abrams with a Abrams before and we couldn't pen the armor with the gun we have which fires shells with much better pen rates than the kornet missle

[@definitelyfrank9341]

@@CrazyGamer-ip2wdI can't wait until we see your claim get completely debunked. Allegedly, the Abrams has appeared in Avdiivdka, so it won't be long until we see one get floored.

[@alestbest]

Smile, 2024 is greeting

[@definitelyfrank9341]

@@CrazyGamer-ip2wd Well would you look at that? An Abrams got pegged by a Kornet.

[@CrazyGamer-ip2wd]

@@definitelyfrank9341 congrats you got me.. oh wait that was a export model of the Abrams meaning it didn't have the DU armor plates or the multitude of armor packages the American Abrams have

[@fortweek_7389]

Canadian volunteer sniper Wally in his interview sad that he had to become a Javelin operator because the nature of combat in the eastern front had changed. His complaint was that he never had a chance to shoot his javelin because tanks were constantly out of range.

[@sigbauer9782]

@Obama yup.

[@williamgray9692]

@Obama russian tanks don’t have thermal imaging. only the best of the best. to expensive, they are too broke.

[@karl5056]

@Obama Wali was a spoiled Canadian living off his laurels cut in Afghanistan against a insurgency wearing man jammies and sandals. He left Ukraine mugged back into reality that the Russian Federation doesnt play war, they win them.

[@nicholasconder4703]

@@sigbauer9782 If he was fighting in Donbass, I wouldn't blame him. I think they are all getting close to the ends of their ropes there. They really need to be rotated out of combat as soon as possible.

[@alexseguin5245]

@@nicholasconder4703 He was originally deployed on the Kyiv front. After they won there, he was redeployed in the Donbas. He almost died after a tank shot spread shrapnel around his group. Two of his Ukrainians buddies got mangled by the shrapnel and died on the scene. I think most people would just want to go back home after that.

[@Kebria]

The upgraded version of Kornet-M is equipped with an automatic target tracker with operational range of 8-10 kms.

[@AHalz]

Other Kornets also have top attack ability as well

[@rafomic4210]

​@@lime4rvthats kalibr hahhaa

[@rafomic4210]

IT Tracks a moving target ?

[@AHalz]

@@rafomic4210 yes, automatic target tracking will track a moving target

[@brookwhiteman9810]

Stugna doesn't have that ragne but has a top attack mode and the launcher can be placed 50 ft from the launch modem meaning it can be placed high up and operator would be safe. It also has 2 ka-52 helicopter kills with footage. It's my fav reloadable atgm. I'd pick it over the kornet any day

[@LunarJim69]

Kornet missile has just taken out the second Challenger II tank.

[@scottadkins9902]

Mostly the "export" model, just like Saudi Abrams. They're not utilizing the same armor as the country of origin.

[@voidtempering8700]

​@@scottadkins9902 Proof that Britain changed the armor array.

[@kylep007]

I want Task & Purpose to do a video on Taiwan’s military. I’m curious on his thoughts on the PRC’s odds of successfully invading and if Russia’s struggles in Ukraine have discouraged Beijing.

[@jeremyholland4527]

I would love to see Chris tackle that too.

[@u2beuser714]

One thing for sure, the west cant sanction china the same way they did sanction russia, since many are still pretty much dependent on chinese manufactured goods and stuff

[@_Itchy_Bones_]

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he's already working on one

[@Ba11leFieldAce]

Binkov has a few good videos on the subject.

[@Sophistry0001]

@@u2beuser714 Everyone thought Russia was going to tank from the sanctions too, but they somehow seem like they've managed to pivot and bounce back and the ruble is doing just fine, jumping 40% against he US dollar since January. So it may be we can pivot in a quick way if necessary away from buying Chinese goods. Especially if there is an air of patriotism attached to it where people start to police/shame each other.

[@gavinrothery8825]

You mention at the start that Russia destroyed hundreds of Ukrainian tanks when they took Crimea in 2014. Wasn't that invasion done without much of a real fight? I remember the Russians appearing with no markings on their uniforms surrounding Ukrainian bases and them backing out and leaving Crimea to Russia without a real fight. The Crimean invasion resulted in only five or six deaths, it wasn't a huge battle and hundreds of tanks weren't destroyed there?

[@williamlloyd3769]

Agree from accounts I’ve read. Maybe there was a tank graveyard in Crimea in 2014?

[@andreaskul1]

Tanks in storage

[@LoisoPondohva]

That whole sentence in the video was a mess. First, he meant Donbas, nobody shot any Kornets in Crimea. Second, there weren't hundreds of tanks, just dozens over the course of many years. Third, the Kornets in the photos were 2 unexploded ones from around Kramatorsk and Luhansk around 2014-2017.

[@Anubis2828]

Russia already had military in Svestapol because they rented the port from Ukraine. There was not a war, just a referendum.

[@meisterproper8304]

@@Anubis2828 more like a quick occupation followed by a referendum

[@jigzonyt517]

Im no military expert but comparing this and a jav or nlaw is like comparing a pistol and a turret mounted gun One is easily portable and the other looks not so easy to carry. One is good for popping out of a dug out and firing on site ans the other needs transporting and sitting out on display. It certainly looks mote capable but its all about application and differing circumstances

[@name-yn6vu]

Yeah, but part of it is a difference in doctorine. Russians use RGPs in infantry teams I believe, as they are meant to close the gap quickly in accordance with soviet tactics, so range in infantry AT equipment is not really important

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

What would be a closer comparison. im sure something exsits thats more close

[@name-yn6vu]

@@pleasedontwatchthese9593 rpg vs javelin or kornet vs tow

[@alexmitchell9336]

Doesn't matter what comparison is made, the same conclusion is reached - russian technology sucks ass

[@creesmith2794]

@@name-yn6vu The rpg is too old to compare to a javelin. Its like comparing the t70 to a modern m1-abrams. Yes one is clearly better, but they're from completely different eras.

[@m.abusada]

for correction; The latest versions of it, which are installed on the Tiger car, have the indirect attack feature, as well as the fire and forget system

[@michaelccozens]

Um, the Kornet-EM is noted as having an autotracker, but where are you getting the idea that a beam-rider has a top-attack mode? How would that work?

[@sheeplord4976]

@@michaelccozensProbably the same way the TOW-2B does it

[@jamesmandahl444]

The secret to the penetrating power of kornet is a couple things. The shape of the lens and diameter as well as the means of detonation. The biggest though is the composition of the lens. It is a copper and powdered depleted uranium alloy matrix. This alone allows even small diameter RPGs to have very impressive penetration performance.

[@jake4194]

Powerful AT misslile but I dont think it even classifies as a manpad, too big and heavy.

[@LordMarchewka]

It'd be difficult to classify any AT missile as a MANPADS.

[@psychomantis9442]

@@LordMarchewka here to say the same, lol

[@BulletSponge178]

Menpad?

[@Chopstorm.]

Manpat, not manpad. Manpad is man portable air defense.

[@andreaskul1]

@@LordMarchewkaSeen some Stugna-Ps shoot down helicopters though

[@deusvult7721]

Just to make things clear, our average infantryman confused Crimea with Donbas.

[@jsb2277b]

Yeah I must have missed the massive armor battles of Crimea

[@snowsnow4231]

this is all you need to know about western experts 3 months past, still unable to tell a difference between a coal mining province and a peninsula with resorts and naval bases shows complete lack of willingness to actually learn anything or dive deeper into any details Ukraine is good and innocent, Putin is evil, Russia is bad, Bucha atrocities, Russians eating babies - congratulations, you are now an expert on Ukraine, according to the western media

[@Ass_of_Amalek]

oooooh yeah that was rather confusing. I was pretty sure that there was essentially no combat in crimea, certainly no organized ukrainian resistance.

[@oknevals]

He is likeable guy but, sometimes he seems either clueless, misinformed or most likely just given bad script by his "sponsors".

[@unclewerner]

How dare you! Donbas is not meant to be mentioned, especially not in this critical time of another rescue operation.

[@analytics805]

The weapon seems a superior product that cost only $26K, flies 10K and defeats Abrams tanks costing $8 million. It seems Russia has done it again. AK47, Sputnik, now this .

[@coolkid5972]

Thanks for the consistent uploads Chris!

[@Taskandpurpose]

I do my best! new episode coming out on Saturday also

[@Blinkin97]

Uhh, I am sure it was an oversight, but I highly doubt the Javelin travels at 2000 m/s, that’s Mach 5.8, that would make it a Hypersonic Missile. For comparison, the AIM-120C AMRAAM Air-Air missile reaches a top speed of around Mach 4, and only at high altitude where atmospheric resistance is much less of a problem.

[@grammoore]

I was looking for this comment, lol. 2000 m/s is faster than 90 percent of APFSDS from tanks.

[@paulhickie6974]

I looked it up 150m/s.

[@spoodermens]

To successfully throw off a laser guided ATGM you have to either: 1. Have IR dazzler systems on your vehicle capable of detecting said lasers. 2. If no dazzlers, you have to have visual confirmation of an atgm backblast signature. When dealing with this low profile tripod mounted soviet atgm's their backblaster signature is very hard to spot. With all of these launchers being fairly man portable and compact, Russian infantrymen could utilize mass surprise fires from multiple different angles, and potentially using adjacent armored or mechanized units to draw the eyes of the intended armor away from flanking atgm's.

[@dj_unicorn5608]

Love seeing you post

[@Taskandpurpose]

thanks for watching , I really appreciate everyone's time

[@marcusdean3557]

The Stugna-P has been shown to be very effective against tanks.

[@murphy7801]

The old Milan missle is plenty deadly

[@death_parade]

@@murphy7801 Milan 2T......yeah. But its still being phased out in favour of newer ATGM in Indian Army. Even though the other side (Pakistan) has meh Armour and no IFVs. Its days are over, I think.

[@pisko1969]

Stugna really looks nice. On paper, everything is perfect. Available videos, of course, support this narrative. As idea, for sure is almost perfect for such type of weapon. But, one thing raises concern... Ukrainian government asks for other weapons, not for support of own Stugna production. Something is not perfect in reality even if idea is without obvious flaws. If money was the problem before war, now it's not I assume. Maybe, for such type of pretty static weapons, it is problematic when enemy fire back? You can't run with Stugna same as with Kornet, or something else. Looks like it needs some further upgrade.

[@Tonyx.yt.]

because they only show successful attacks, that's called propaganda my friend

[@slartybarfastb3648]

@@Tonyx.yt. There's a whole bunch of successful attacks. I mean many, many, many successful attacks. Why sit through video of the misses? No amount of propaganda takes away from the abundance of success.

[@dariozanze4929]

Small correction. Javelin max range is 2000m in top attack mode. In direct mode it is about 5000m

[@76456]

It has 1300mm RHA max penetration. But it isnt top attack sow, it has its own caracteristics. It will perform well in open field. Depends on doctrine

[@warbrain1053]

Another thing. APS becomes more and more standart on newer MBTs. Why wait until the rocket hits when you can jist not be hit/locked?

[@76456]

@@warbrain1053 ik, that would be solved whit rocket spam

[@warbrain1053]

@@76456 the problem is APS is far from one use. You shoot once. Tank detects direction. Aims at you. Eradicated. Tank is unharmed Tanks are still far from obsolete. A gun round is far faster than a missile

[@ultimathule1473]

@@warbrain1053 RPG28 can penetrate 1300mm after ERA and has been used brutaly by the Russians in the Ukraine war, it is just an RPG whith brutal penetration

[@warbrain1053]

@@ultimathule1473 i am not talking about ERA. never had. I was talking about APS, a system that shoots down danger before it touches the tank

[@cubeflinger]

Much love for this channel. I really enjoy the tactical analysis. Peace out from the UK

[@john.rc.3274]

Not only is war horrific. It is also VERY complicated. Thanks for showing both realities in a way that is somewhat comprehensible (although still complicated) for some of us civilians.

[@Max_Da_G]

Javelin, while Fire-and-forget, has a different set of disadvantages, which is normal for any weapon system. Ones in Ukraine, are basically almost past their use-by date. Secondly, to launch a Javelin, one must perform a 30-second lock-on during which the seeker is cooled from a coolant bottle. Now if target disappears, the procedure has to stop, and operator has one more attempt at it before the bottle is empty and whole thing becomes dead weight. Or at least the pre-launch unit. Kornet can re-lock the target as many times as one wants. Top-attack mode can only be done from a certain range of over several hundred meters (can't remember exact number), and while that missile is fast, it's also unimpressive in terms of penetration: around 650mm RHA. Which tells us that if fired in direct mode (faster), it wouldn't penetrate most tanks today if it hits an ERA-covered spot on a T-72B3 for instance. Kornet would penetrate pretty much any tank in service today. Another thing is that Javelin is a MUCH more expensive weapon. After all that IR seeker isn't cheap by any measure. We can have 2 Kornet launchers as opposed to 1 Javelin. with all the associated increase in defensive capability. Another thing about Javelin is its limited use against non-IR contrasting target. You can use Kornet against enemy pillbox or fortification. Can Javelin target that?

[@michaelccozens]

Why would you think you need IR targeting for a LOS attack on a static target?

[@MrDmitriRavenoff]

If it can hit a moving target, what makes you think it can't hit a building?

[@Max_Da_G]

@@MrDmitriRavenoff If Javelin can detect the IR signature, then for sure. But again: it needs to detect the building itself in IR. But then damn that's one expensive-ass use of a self-guided missile: against a building.

[@juavi6987]

It was used against fortifications in Afghanistan. It is possible, because it has an IMAGING infrared, that actually gives a picture rather then tracking just the hottest spot in sight

[@ВосславьСолнце-е5х]

У вас устаревшие данные, корнет пробивает 1400 мм гомогенной брони без динамической защиты, за динамической защитой 1100-1200 мм.

[@nicholasconder4703]

I think the Javelin's biggest asset is the "fire and forget" ability. With a Javelin you can fire the missile and then shift position to a potentially safer location (like a trench or bunker), while with a Kornet you are stuck in your firing location until after you hit the target. Those 2-5 seconds of time you lose could mean the difference between life or death.

[@death_parade]

Depends on tactics. In modernized Indian Infantry battalions, for example, there are two types of ATGM available:- 1.) 3rd Gen ATGM with 2.5 km range (Javelin-type, either Israeli Spike or Indian MPATGM) 2.) 2nd Gen ATGM with 5 km range (Russian Kornet or Indian CLGM/SAMHO) . So depending on how far away the target is, the ATGM DET deploys either a fire and forget type or a beam riding type.

[@dickmelsonlupot7697]

it depends on how it is used though. In an offensive battle, the Javelin would win hands down due to how portable it is and with the F & F ability. But in terms of defense like say defending a building or even a city, this is where the Kornet shines mostly because of it's longer range than the Javey since in a defensive war, you try your damned hardest to make the distance between you and the enemy as far as possible and with the Kornet's long range, you can keep them as far away as possible without worrying about return fire. The Javey's F & F ability isn't really that realistically useful in a defensive battle since your avenues for "escape" and hiding are small plus with the shorter range of the Javey, the enemy would already be near enough from you to start yeeting rounds onto you. The escaping ability is also a bit moot since in a defensive fight, the enemy already knows about your general location so hiding really isn't going to help you since they already know the direction where to throw rounds at you.

[@milanstankovic4149]

But this video is FULL of false information!!! That "fire and forget" can be also a biggest flaw on Javelin.One problem is battery that power supply Javelin before firing...Can be low after couple minutes.We can see that now in Ukraina. Second thing is price of missile for Javelin.It is VERY expensive.Why? Because is "fire and forget"! Every "fire and forget" atgm have a expensive missile.Every missile is computer.And because is SMART but also expensive!!! Launcher is just pipe and small electro unit on.Looke just in size:launcher is just a empty pipe,and looke a size of missile and thickness.Everything important is there. On another side,Kornet have a cheap missile because guiding comp is on luancher.

[@VladimirTironi]

@@milanstankovic4149 it's so cheap that Russian army couldn't afford to equip all the units.

[@VladimirTironi]

And yes.... Expensive? Compared to what? How much are T72/ T/80 T/90 tanks? What about crew life?

[@SalveMonesvol]

10:46 That's impossibly fast for the Javelin. It must be 2000 KM/h. That's supersonic, about mach 1.6 to 1.7. 2km/s would be hypersonic and the missile would likely not be able to take the heat from the compressed air on the nose.

[@JekaZMD]

I was also like what the, that's way too fast.

[@Danji_Coppersmoke]

Probably he mistaken with the info for Javelin surface-to-air (not ATGM) . That S2A goes about Mach 1.7. The ATGM Javelin is

[@Wick9876]

That might be the old British mach 1.7 Javelin AA missile. The FGM-148 under discussion is 140 m/s.

[@exo068]

Modern APS can stop the javelin also. The US tested the StrikeShield against projectiles going 1700m/s+ so it can just stop it.

[@thisguyyyyyyy2723]

Yeah I saw that and just thought “hold the fuck up, what?” Pretty sure he’s also gone into detail about the Javelin’s flight time and range in other videos, so I don’t know how he thought 2000 m/s sounded right

[@erikmitchell6458]

It’s an improvement on the TOW missle. I think vehicle mounts are most useful. Static defense is just ok

[@MrLathor]

Little surprised nobody caught the fact that he said a Javalin could go nearly Mach 6. Glad they corrected it.

[@dankaloww1067]

Lol, I was like 2,000 m/s. That's literally high speed anti air missile territory. The real speeds are between 300-400m/s Which is the same as the Kornet.

[@unbannablebob395]

Little surprised nobody caught the fact that he claims there was some massive invasion of Crimea in 2014. The people who took over already lived there.

[@superstar8162]

2,000 m/s or Mach 6 is hypersonic speed. Need a scram jet engine. Wrong information.

[@williamblaker2628]

Javelin travels at Mach 1.7, or 583 m/s

[@djl5634]

@@superstar8162 not really. Thaad missile defense has a missile that goes mach 8 hypersonic. And it isn't scram jet. Most hypersonic missiles aren't scram jet.

[@ВикторФирсов-е9ф]

10:45 C'mon, javelin doesn't fly at 2000 m/s. That would be insane. It flies 15 seconds to 2km, so it is like at least 10 times slower than you said.

[@ВикторФирсов-е9ф]

Meaning it is slower than the kornet.

[@Sophistry0001]

lol that's over mach 6, turns out we had hypersonic missiles all along, and they're shoulder fired to-boot! Good catch, I didn't catch that while watching.

[@Ukraineaissance2014]

@@ВикторФирсов-е9ф kornet is around 250 m per second, javelin 300 m per second.

[@thephoenix756]

@@Ukraineaissance2014 No, the Javelin travels at 140 m/s

[@Ukraineaissance2014]

@@thephoenix756 nope, top speed 300 m per second. Dont bother me with your quick googling nonsense.

[@burnttoast111]

Kornets seemed to do pretty well in Syria, when used by the YPG. Also, I think some Houthis took out a Saudi M1 Abrams with a side turret hit. Seems like a capable missile. The Stugna-P is much better in that you can operate it from a remote location, rather than being stuck under the launcher.

[@jabb161]

True they were also used in south lebanon and took out lots of Merkava tanks. This report is biasd to say the least

[@burnttoast111]

@@jabb161 Yeah, there is a tendency by a lot of people in the west to think Russian equipment is trash. Generally, I think much of the Russian equipment is good *IF* it is maintained and used properly, and while it may not be the best in all areas, it generally is cost-effective and reliable. The Russian military has proven to be poor, although they do have some good units. Although the command structure is a major problem for all of it, along with some major cultural problems.

[@kenken8857]

With a side turret hit an old RPG would do it - tanks have their impressive armor only on the front side for weight reasons. In fact you could shoot up all modern MBTs with an 8.8 from the side or back.

[@mhh7544]

I was in anti tanks, at the time there were recoiless platoon and ATGM platoon in a company . ATGM used Russian M 82 wire guided missile, US TOWs started to replace them , but our company still used Russian one . I was in recoiless platoon but what I understood TOW was superior, but this was long ago.

[@superm.3199]

In which country did you serve?

[@mhh7544]

@@superm.3199 Finland.

[@superm.3199]

@@mhh7544 OK. That explains the fact you firstly had soviet weapons and then American

[@mhh7544]

@@superm.3199 I had pretty good walk through of soviet tanks, we had T 72s, Russian APCs and IFVs. We were stressed to aim always between the hull and the turret, we were told about the dangers of that ammo carousel. Finland is very bad tank country, eastern border at its whole lenght is nothing but dense forest, only few roads cut it.

[@m1812Z]

The Fagot (M82) is incomparable to the Kornet. The Kornet isn't wire guided and is superior in performance compared to the TOW and can also do top-attack.

[@AlanTheBeast100]

The explanation of why the Russian AT's follow the squirely path was very interesting. See a lot of other Ukrainian vids where Stugna-P missiles also have a similar flight path.

[@ivanmonahhov2314]

the real reson is that uses not fins for steering but a small pulse rocket engine on the side , it rotataes so it can steer using only one engine.

[@vladimir0rus]

they need to circle around of laser beam to not lose it

[@lukewhitehouse4103]

Exactly the same with KA-52/Mi-28 Vikhrs missiles

[@TheDanteVergil]

Good Video. U should have mentioned tho that tge javelin system costs almost 10 times as much as the kornet. With one missile costing 200'000 dollars

[@hutzpa3619]

You should review Stugna-P, it has unique design and had A LOT of kills and footage

[@RTXpl]

because it's so simple to record video from Stugna-P screen but impossible to put cell phone camera inside Javellin vision system.

[@nikitatarsov5172]

But maybe this would colide with the prominent US opinion (and media statements) that nearly all tank destructions are results from glorious Javelins. Sounds like a lot of explanation-work to me that this isen't the case.

[@nikitatarsov5172]

@@mikes989 Yes i know the statistics. As i didn't want to get into detail, i just critisised the medial imbalancement and the warped perspective of interest groups.

[@maximus7809]

same shit made on Konkurs basis (as Kornet) but has a remote control and a screen, so the crew can stay in dugout. There's the same version for Kornet, but not in mass production

[@maximus7809]

@@nikitatarsov5172 80-90% of losses (human and equipment) is a result of an artillery work. All say it from both sides (Ukr and Ru)

[@archibaldthesimple]

"Maybe, just maybe the Russians are lying to us" made me lol

[@jamilabdallah4086]

Isn't the cornet used to destroy Merkava tanks?

[@myotheraccountissuspended921]

It is now!

[@PitFriend1]

There’s another problem with an actively guided slow moving missile system like this, especially one that rides a laser beam. Modern tanks usually have a laser detection system so the crew will know if they’re getting lased either for ranging or for an ATGM. If the missile is being launched from 200 meters or so the tank could fire on the launch site with either the main gun or their machineguns. The gun rounds will reach the launcher before the missile reaches the target. Since the missile has no self guidance if the operator is killed or even flinches the missile will miss. The massive advantage of fire and forget missiles like the Javelin or NLAW is that once the missile is in the air shooting back at the launcher crew does nothing.

[@jumpingoutofairplanesmentality]

Sure javelins are great, unless you have automated vibranium fly swatters on your tank 🤷‍♂️ 🤜🚀

[@Seth9809]

Most serious users or operators, have been just aiming above the tank. Do not watch the videos?

[@run2u520]

I think generally, the crew would pop smoke in whatever direction they were being lased from. This is because you never really know what is currently lasing you, it could either be a slow flying kornet missile or a tank about to put a sabot round through you. So I speculate that crews will usually pop smoke and reverse away rather than trying to hunt for whatever it was that was lasing them.

[@Benson_aka_devils_advocate_88]

Thermobaric doesn't vacuum up the air or suck it out of your lungs. It uses the free oxygen in the atmosphere to detonate a fuel charge. This in turn displaces said oxygen with CO2 effectively smothering you, if the pressure wave doesn't kill you.

[@kingfish2703]

Kornet has a top attack capability and newer ones are also capable of tracking their target autonomous.

[@sevse23]

it's an effective missile, I've seen it perform. remember you don't need to penetrate a tank to stop it, which can lead to it be out of the fight and become a sitting target. under stress not everyone remembers to use soft or hard kill countermeasures.

[@TheWorldEnd2]

When the operator lines their laser on the tank, the laser warning receiver mounted on most mbt's fielded by the west would go off. This informs the crew to deploy smoke countermeasures, or if set to AUTO, will deploy the smoke by itself. In most modern weapon systems, the gunner can also swing their turret to the source of the laser and send one away, taking out the kornet operator. Not so effective now...

[@rayzerot]

@@TheWorldEnd2 I'm glad you shared that. That's neat!

[@kubagra456]

Hard kill countermeasures for what i know ALWAYS work without need to be operated by vehicle's crew whatsoever (maybe exept for turning on/off systems such as Trophy)

[@goodlife6277]

​@@TheWorldEnd2 Bot😂😂😂😂😂

[@jkl9984]

@@TheWorldEnd2 Which is why no well trained ATGM crew will ever point directly at the tank but a few meters above to not trip off LWR until it's too late to react.

[@AHalz]

Kornet missiles made their debut not in 2014, but much earlier in 2006 in Lebanon. Just a note that's all Second, the Israelis stated that an IDF bulldozer was hit by a Hezbullah Kornet at nearly 4 km (or 2.4 miles) away. Which is at the near max effective range of the missile The rumor about the Kornets being used in Iraq in 2003 has actually been just that...a rumor. Unless somebody can post sources, I poured over a plethora of sources online and couldn't find a single picture of a Kornet in Iraq, and there was no proof that a third party country ever transferred it to Iraq. The two knocked out Abrams and Bradley's were at first contributed to Kornets, but later reports I saw stated it was just RPG's that hit the more vulnerable areas of these vehicles. The only recorded instance of an ATGM actually being used in 2003 was a Milan missile fired at a British Challenger, but it didn't suffer much damage. Again, open to hear differently, but that's what I've read.

[@Ukraineaissance2014]

From what I recall it was supposedly 2 Kornets used at once by republican guards against marines outside some city

[@AHalz]

@@Ukraineaissance2014 Yes, I read that report. I read a follow on report which stated 'sources' that claimed Iraq bought thousands of Kornets from Ukraine prior to the 2003 invasion. Obviously, that was false. There was no deal of that sort between Iraq and Ukraine, and on top of that, the Kornet didn't come into service until the 90s anyways, so Ukraine wouldn't have it. Besides that report, I didn't come across anything that hinted at Saddam's forces having Kornets.

[@grandayatollah5655]

@@Ukraineaissance2014 Iraq never had Kornets, so it's fake. There's no recorded instances of ATGMs being used against US tanks in the invasion

[@jeansansterre6908]

There is a Video of Abrahams being destroyed by kornet in Irak by ISS and One Leclerc in yemen

[@AHalz]

@@jeansansterre6908 yes, but the Kornets in those case came from the inventory of the former Syrian army which had thousands of them. Didn’t come from Saddam’s Arsenal

[@analytics805]

Any missile that can fly 10 K is a major achievement.

[@prfwrx2497]

10:40 I think you meant 2000 feet per second. Fwiw, 120 and 125mm APFSDS has a muzzle velocity of 1700 m/s. 660 m/s is Hella fast for an AT missile. It's almost mach 2. It's about as fast as a rifle bullet on target.

[@ВикторФирсов-е9ф]

Sidewinder missiles fly at 1100 m/s, and they are for sure waaay faster than the Javelin

[@ВикторФирсов-е9ф]

Even 2000 ft/s seems optimistic, I think he just put an extra zero on accident

[@Blarg54321]

Yep. 2000 m/sec would be mach 5.8 at sea level -- hypersonic.

[@Pasaken]

Yes I was really baffled at first, then I thought "why would you bother carrying a HEAT warhead when your missile can go at 2km/s", I did some research and then I got the suspicion that he may not have gotten it quite correct in the video. Thank you for helping me confirm my thoughts.

[@atomicspartan131]

@@ВикторФирсов-е9ф that’s not an AT missile though. That’s an air-to-air missile

[@thrash208]

Apples and oranges. Javelin and NLAW is a mobile shoulder mounted anti tank weapon this is a fixed anti tank weapon... very different things

[@reginaldlagrone5082]

The Kornet is the best ATGM in the world, it stops everything it engages.

[@ArchOfficial]

Should probably be comparing the 9M133 Kornet to the BGM-71E TOW-2A, seeing as they're more similar. Or maybe to the TOW-2B Aero if you care about the production date matching closer. Truth be told I'm not sure exactly what launcher and missile the US is realistically using right now, but surely some kind of TOW-2.

[@MLN-yz4ph]

I agree that the wire guided had major issues vs laser guided. Still I have seen Dragon gunners that could "Nose down" the missile just above a target for a top attack and even guide around obstacles to get to a hidden target. This was not the rule I know still at some point I really hope we can get some of the same type of "Trim" control with laser.

[@adilachahbar3154]

He forgot that tanks now have a detector if they are targeted with a laser Sometimes wire-based anti-armor missiles are better than lasers

[@cadennorris960]

The TOW (replacement for the dragon I believe) has a laser guided variant.

[@mullwurm1904]

Let's go on comparing 90's technology with recent shit. Makes you feel adequate.

[@theewatchfuleyeseesyou]

I don't really think that it makes much sense to compare the Javelin to the Kornet. They seem more of a heavy machine gun vs. light machine gun kind of situation, with the Kornet having to be set on a tripod and the Javelin being shoulder-mounted. It would make more sense to be compared to something like the Stugna or the Milan since you wouldn't be able to use the Kornet the same way you do with a Javelin. Also, no way they'd lie to us, they'd never.

[@blackwhite5078]

The Javelin lost its advantages when the Russians put a steel cage on top of the tank 😂😂😂

[@goldman_ya]

In the conflict the kornet performed very well, it doesn't need top attack, cause the only place where it can't pen a tank is it's cheeks, and top attack capabilities are expensive and malfunction frequently, also there were no issues with with targeting moving targets

[@mr.normalguy69]

Kornet is cool, but I personally like Stugna-P more since it can be remotely operated from a safer location or a hiding spot, where kornet needs to be operated by hand, exposing the operators to enemy fire. But where Stugna-P is much cheaper and gives a degree of safety to the operators. Kornet can compensate that with its insane 10km range.

[@sodinc]

Didn't he say that remotely controlled Kornet are being produced now?

[@tedarcher9120]

@@sodinc from 2011

[@tedarcher9120]

Also Kornet missile is about 50% faster than Stugna

[@John-hu9qg]

The Kornets hit a lot harder than Stugna, Stugna probably wouldn't destroy a 70 ton western tank like the Kornet. And newer variants have the remote operating station also.

[@tedarcher9120]

@@John-hu9qg newer stugnas are also 152 mm like Kornet

[@scpgaming-452]

very badass this atgm destroy challenger-2

[@unclezlatin1495]

90% of comments be like "compareing this to a jav or an nlaw is like compareing a ......... to a .........."

[@Raul_Menendez]

Spoilers: It isn't better, its the same as all ATGM. ATGMs poses a threat more to tanks than tank vs tank.

[@minhtran7431]

could be better, soldiers fighting have complained about the lack of range of nlaw and javelin. Sometimes the tank are too far away

[@Raul_Menendez]

@@minhtran7431 Well thats the risk of it. And also the risk of a tank not having infantry support. Like how the current Russo-Ukraine conflict or US in Iraq. Sending tanks without proper infantry support spells disaster

[@moshedimawalaadormeo]

Is it true that the Kornet was also used in several of the Israeli conflicts damaging or destroying their Merkavas?

[@76456]

Yes

[@ferdonandebull]

I think they would be pretty good in the desert and you could get a lot of range out of them..

[@goodlife6277]

Very True

[@briant5685]

not only markavas but also abrams

[@moshedimawalaadormeo]

@@briant5685 Which Israeli conflict was the Kornet used against Abrams

[@korencek]

Russia now has tv guided atgms.

[@Vixctor13]

Since Ukraine was invaded I've seen footage of the AT missile Stugna-P. Would be cool to hear your research on it.

[@Eddy1938-b]

@@dylanwalker7624 so it’s their version of the Kornet?

[@derekbilston]

The Kornet that the Russians are using at the moment appears to be an upgrade. 2 Challenger tanks destroyed already.

[@jafarhon]

Saw bunch of videos with this Nasty Kornet being used in Ukraine, im impressed, hitting moving targets well over 2 miles, and when it hits you bet that target will not survive, very big bang.

[@jacknelson5987]

Not a good argument, the jav still outclasses this on the fact of fire and forget… this is way more similar to tow missiles…

[@lihisluikku]

The Ukrainian Stugna-P missile system is like the practical and modern version of the Kornet. It's equally portable (hard to carry around, but doable). However it's remote controlled and has a decent thermal sight. So finding your target is easier as the sight is more modern, aiming is easier, and it's safer to use. Also it's more comfortable, you don't have to kneel behind the sight all day. You can comfortably sit or even lie around in cover, while watching the target area with the remote sights. And when guiding the missile, the Ukrainian missile lets you do it from total cover. The Kornet requires you to physically stay at the tripod. The javelin and NLAW are entirely different beasts though. They are actually portable. You can actually use both systems for offensive operations. Russia just completely lacks an offensive shoulder fired missile that defeats MBT armor from any angle of approach.

[@Saiga-saiga]

For the Kornet there are also complexes for remote use, but then the users increase to two people. They are avoided by the Russian Ministry of Defense as superfluous, more expensive and inconvenient. And yes, and the Stugna is by no means a modern Kornet the Stugna is a deeply modernized missile for the T-62 and T-55 tanks, and the Kornet system has its own unique design. For offensive operations, the Russians have plenty of tanks, artillery, and monsters like the RPG-28. They have a different doctrine and they do not need an emphasis on infantry, as in NATO.

[@danielmackormack8524]

Thank you for the video , always a pleasure to see your work Chris !! 💯👍

[@pinyaposka9671]

It would be interesting to see how the US Abrams M1A2 and the British Challenger tanks would perform against thousands of Kornet ATGMs they way Russia's T-72s,T80s and T-90s tanks have had to contend with thousands of Javelins and NLAW ATGMs

[@Pupil0fGod]

a little better if similar tactics are used. WAY BETTER if using proper combined arms tactics.

[@patriotenfield3276]

good question and here's the answer. Ukrainians are using them like Saudis with Abrams, without air support and artillery cover, and so far lost 70+ Bradleys , about 20-30 Leopards taken out of service and one Challenger 2 Ammo racked.

[@vinceraeff3124]

Soon you will see

[@bykvuk]

It is not "laser-guided" as the US laser-guided. It is "Laser beam riding" so it is much more capable against the smoke countermeasure. You can use it as A2G that's why range and with better optics and locking. Rotation on some Russian missiles is because it is used only 2 axes of control so you save on mass complexity and price (do not know if cornet use only 2 axes. Also because it is a BEAM RIDING laser receiver is on the back so the exhaust for the rocket engine has to be on the side, Also to pack fins they are curved so they used all that as one more perk in design. All that is why it is rotating, going in a spiral way to the target.

[@luciankristov6436]

Dont forget its also dual tandem charged to deal with ERA .its killed 9 Abrams and 7 leopards in the middle east.

[@BrickByBrickVets]

2:49 “springar as we all know….” Dude what are you talking about? 😂 never heard of that shit ever! Hahaha

[@joeblack5393]

My god dude. You have an enemy position. It doesnt even have to be armored target. Your combat troops make contact with said position and they *KNOW* that this position is there. This position consists of trenches and reinforced bunker like structures with heavy machine gun placements. They tell you about it. You are a kornet operator. You show up there. You pick a position which is way beyond the enemy's ability to spot you. Say 6 km with a direct line of sight. You fire a missile. -1 enemy reinforced firing position. This happens in Ukraine literally EVERY day. So yes, there are absolutely targets (static ones) that you can fire your missile at those 5km+ ranges.

[@kubagra456]

Do you have any media examples of such things taking place? Where in Ukraine can you find places where you have unobstructed +5km line of sight (no trees and all) and to make it better, place where you can take your time to set up such thing and use it? (ignoring fact that in such situations you'd probably want to have mortar or artillery piece, which both provite more firepower without need to expose yourself and shoot ~100k USD worth missile aganist max ~10k USD worth machinegun)

[@pedrocosta6440]

@@kubagra456 Have you ever been to Ukrainia? It’s the flattest land you can imagine, it’s like the desert with grass….

[@theimmortal4718]

@@kubagra456 You mean like every road and farmers field? It's an ATGM gunners dream

[@alania8737]

I don't believe the speed of javelin is correct. 2000 meters/sec is like mach 6, which is even faster than APFSDS.

[@Taskandpurpose]

Javelin is Mach 1.6 my bad !

[@JR-mh8vn]

Pin this comment

[@bidzinatsereteli987]

But is not Kornet using the Laser Command Line of Sight (AKA Laser Beam Riding) guidance principle? Which is not the same as being laser-guided. Laser-guided missiles are equipped with electro-optical sensors in the nose, the job of which is to identify the reflection of the laser on the target. In the case of laser-guided missiles the laser designator illuminates the target using a specific pulse repetition frequency code, the missile identifies the pulse repetition frequency code of the particular laser designator and flies towards that illuminated target. Well, if you look at the 9M133 missile, it does not have an electro-optical sensor in the nose, but rather - in the rear end of the missile body and that sensor is looking back towards the launcher, but not looking towards the direction of the flight. That's because it is using the Laser Command Line of Sight guidance principle instead.

[@dj1NM3]

That "dual firing, to exploit the damage from the first missile" system seems to be overlooking the fact that the reported "within 5m" accuracy means that the missiles could impact (at the most) 10m (30-ish feet) apart from each other, so one could hit and the other fly past or over the targetted tank, missing its mark.

[@Chilionloppu]

The accuracy was 5 feet, not 5 meters. If it was 5 meters the designer would have ended up in a gulag

[@dj1NM3]

@@Chilionloppu Maybe it was in arshins, instead? Even at 5' (1.5m) accuracy, that could still separate the missile impacts by about 3m (10') at maximum (each missile at maximum impact distance from aim-point) which could easily send one "centre mass" on the side of a T-80 (2.2m high) and the other flying clean over the top. The odds of them both hitting the exact same ERA panel also seems so vanishingly small that "double fire" seems more like a "one might miss, but maybe two won't" spamming attack

[@dj1NM3]

@@mikes989 That certainly makes far more sense, because two at the one target seemed a bit wasteful.

[@Necromancer_88]

Dual firing is used for avoid active defence systems The ADS will calculate 2 close missiles as 1 only 1st missile will be destroyed 2d destroy thé target

[@hiddenninja7792]

Javelin is still the best ATGM out there since it can attack vertically.

[@SPEARHEADGLOBAL]

There are few more missiles which can do that spike,SANT,raybolt,HJ12 to mention some. And purely technologically indias SANT missile seems to be the best along with MMP missile of France. These missiles are 5th gen. With active radar homing and course correction and ability to relocate its lock during fire. Well both of em aren’t proved in combat yet. But still there’s that

[@grandayatollah5655]

Spike is better

[@alighamlouche6238]

The system first saw auction in the 2006 invasion of Lebanon

[@hairharbor5080]

No mention of how defective the Javelins we've sent over have been? Some Ukrainians report hitting a Russian tank with several Javelins to no effect. Apparently a lot of them have bad batteries.

[@almac9203]

Why you support Putler? You gay?

[@BGTom]

The answer to the question posed at the beginning is yes, it is superior to the Javelin with a long list of destroyed Abrams Tanks going all the way back to the 2003 Iraq Invasion. It has a longer range, can engage low flying helicopters, and has a far greater penetration measured in RHA75 standard. Javelin has pretty much been a bust this entire war, the bulk were shipped with expired batteries, the ones that fired were defeated by Russian ERA blocks and UkA soldiers basically ditch them and use their far superior Soviet based ATGMs which can defeat Russian ERA as they use proper RHA75 standard while NATO uses an inferior RHA50 standard. NLAW at least fires, but Russian BMPs and other vehicles outrange it so long as they get a spot on them, in which case they whack the teams outside of their range.

[@StromBugSlayer]

I have to say, that with all the video that comes out of Ukraine, I have yet to see a definite successful Javelin engagement. Awfully suspicious considering such video would have propaganda value.

[@BGTom]

@@StromBugSlayer Because they are worthless outside of fighting 3rd World Militias. 95% of Russian AFV losses are from 152mm Krasnopol laser guided rounds which is a Soviet Era round all former Soviet States possess.

[@Tonyx.yt.]

@@StromBugSlayer yep, i have yet to see a really successful javelin use, even considerign ukranian propaganda really commited about show this. i saw only one, a javelin shot a tank in a open field while appearing from a small hill, well the tank didnt esplode or anything, just a little bit of smoke at impact and (of course) the video ended. the propaganda title was something like "javelin destroy russian tank" that's bullshit

[@eichler721]

60 M1 Abrams where shipped back after the invasion for damage and less then a dozens destroyed. So stop lying the US didn't lose the long list you claim. However Russia lost more Tanks during the Ukraine invasion then the US did during Gulf War, Afghanistan war, and Operation Iraqi Freedom combined. Guess facts are hard for a Russian Simp to swallow.

[@Семействотоживотаинещоповече]

The most important thing that people nowadays must understand is following: How much costs one peace of "these" or "that"!!! It DOESN'T MATTER that Kornett or AK are not "100%" supreme! They work actually pretty good - and they are already all around the world! Today is not The Wild West - very rarely is coming up to "stand off" moments - its a complex battlefield! That's why - when you compare Javelin vs. Kornett - it's Kornett the winner! Battle characteristics are almost the same - actually Kornett can be used usually up to 8 km!..even 10!.. twice more than Javelin. Its dependable sometimes from the weather - but it doesn't matter!! Javelin - 140 - 175 thousand $ /for the army around 85 000$/ Kornett - 10 000 $ ...for the army maybe 8000. This was always a battle of Economy, and the Russia is 4-5 times the US - that's all you need to know! By the way - in one battalion there are 3 vehicles with 16 Kornett rocket each!! You have almost 50 rockets . Even if you have a 7-8 the newest M1A2SEPv4 Abrams - at least 4 will be "gone" in a imaginable attack against "Kornett" Battalion... and you have also T90, 152mm Hotwizer..and so long. ..and by the way - all of that is pretty clear to the US Command. That's why they don't want to get "personally involved" in any battle with Russia.. and are using a proxy war variants - Ukraine

[@cx3268]

Problem with a lot of the fancy high tech weapons being sent to Ukraine. How many there have the training to use them properly. Silly assumption is Russian soldiers have training to use Russian weapons.

[@singular9]

The other assumption is how much of the aid being sent to Ukraine is being sold and money laundered to find zelenskys villas in the states. I say this as a Ukrainian.

[@Paberu85]

stugna-p is considerably better then kornet...

[@grandayatollah5655]

Lol no

[@Tonyx.yt.]

according to what? ukranian propaganda?

[@Paberu85]

@@Tonyx.yt. Ukraine don't resort to bullshit methods as propaganda, little russian bot.

[@KrustyKrabBasementProductions]

now that we got your javelin missiles, I don't think its gonna take long until we have the exact same thing being deployed by our forces LMAOOO

[@mhobson2009]

Javelin is far superior to any SACLOS (Semi-Automatic Command Line-Of-Sight system because it is Fire and Forget and because of the Top Attack mode. Javelin users can get under cover immediately after firing, thus evading possible return fire from the target or other units before the missile hits. SACLOS systems may be defeated by fire directed at the launch site before the missile hits, since killing the operator or forcing them to abandon their position causes the missile to lose guidance commands from the operator.

[@IsaacKuo]

The Ukrainian Stugna-P has an interesting solution to this problem - the operator fires and guides the missile remotely using a laptop-like interface. This lets them be safely behind cover and they can ignore enemy machinegun fire toward the launcher (obviously if a lucky bullet hits the guidance unit the tank will survive, but so does the operator). Nevertheless, the tank will probably survive if they use smoke launchers, which are useless against Javelin, and Stugna-P could be more effective if it had a top attack mode.

[@slartybarfastb3648]

@@IsaacKuo I'm yet to see a Russian tank deploy IR smoke canisters in defense. Pre-war they touted the 'world class' protection systems. Active defense, passive defense, ERA armor, missile launch detection and automatic countermeasures deployment, etc. All I've seen is Russian armor getting shredded with no effective countermeasures at all.

[@Kwisss]

@@slartybarfastb3648 Because both Russian and Ukrainian anti-tank crews were taught to not lase until the last second to not set off LWS (which is present in the T-90s outside of the more modern Russian tanks). Besides most of the kills on both sides come from lack of infantry support or placing tanks were they shouldn't be aka an open field or within tall buildings in a city.

[@IsaacKuo]

@@slartybarfastb3648 I've been seeing the same thing you have, in the videos, but we have to keep in mind the selection effect. We mostly see videos where the attack was successful. Or at least appeared to be successful. Considering smoke launchers are on basically every AFV since WWII surely someone has some good idea of how often they are actually used - and how often they're used successfully. I have absolutely no freaking clue.

[@wallingnaga6563]

He’s comparing the wrong platforms too !! Javelin should be compare to Israeli SPIKE or Chinese HJ12 . for direct comparison TOW-2 and Kornet is similar platforms !

[@snipe1973xxl]

Nice video, but I don't think that the Javelin is THAT fast. Depending on the source, its speed is ca. 300 to 580 m/sec.

[@yujinhikita5611]

yeah he mistakes kph and mps, 580m/sec is 2000kph.

[@RTXpl]

@@yujinhikita5611 still quick as fuck boi!

[@yujinhikita5611]

@@RTXpl actually it's come to my attention that another missile also called javalin, which is instead a surface to air missile. That goes mach 1.7 which is 580m/sec, I am sorry to disappoint you the fgm 148 javalin which is the atgm that was talked about in the video, goes around 300 to 140 m/sec. Closer to 140 really. That's just how much the sources vary.

[@joshicune]

Automatic loader is not feature of missile but vehicle. Javelin speed is lot smaller than presented. Javelin is different category of weapon, more for guerilla war. That worked well until Russians discovered that rules of engagement for tanks have to be followed. When you showed Kornet on Toyota, you should also show Kornet on Mi-28. Imagine Javelin on heli? Just to understand difference in categories.

[@tekannon7803]

You do a great job and explain things clearly. You have spots on your face and neck that can be safely removed at a dermatologists. It's worth doing because two spots that I decided to have removed turned out to be cancerous, if a girlfriend hadn't complained, I might have had some problems later. Don't forget: spots only get bigger and then they are harder to remove.

[@karmpuscookie]

Sanctimonious.

[@SonOfSal94]

Thanks mom

[@john.rc.3274]

Might be worth looking into.

[@johnanthony5393]

They just took out a Challenger II with one 😛👌

[@finnm.2582]

The best thing you can do in a tank is still not to get hit by anything. Getting hit by an APDSFDS Shell is horrific, getting hit by a shaped charge warhead or an explosive formed penetrator is also horrific. The Kornet also has a variant that fires a Fuel-Air-Explosive Warhead, which is utterly destructive against fortified positions and bunkers. But yeah, technically it’s still a SACLOS guided missile like the TOW, with the difference that pretty much all modern Russian ATGMs are Beam-Riders and not wire guided.

[@RomanianReaver]

You made quite a few mistakes: 1) NLAW/Javelin are more modern but in Ukraine it's been the Stugna system (which is very similar to the Kornet) that's been more deadly by a lot. 2) The Abrams cheeks can resist a Kornet. Nothing else, the front hull plate and the chin would be woefully inadequate and the gun breach would be, at least, wrecked. 3) Where'd you get the 2000 m/s number for the Javelin? Because at those sorts of speeds you're dealing with something going around Mach 5. That's a radically different beast in terms of design needs and any Jarhead can tell you that missile ain't mach capable on the shape alone (look at Zircon for a general idea of how you'd need to design a missile to not fly apart at high Mach speeds). 4) Top attack is mostly a gimmick. It's not liable to hit anything vital unless it's a high yield weapon system (so a top attacking Kornet would by monstrous, a Javelin not so much, much lower yield by nearly 1/3). 5) Didn't the US deplete, severely, its Javelin stockpile with 10-20k sent over to Ukraine? And it'll take Raytheon a few years to replenish the stocks.

[@RomanianReaver]

@DefinitelyNotBrandon 4) you're shooting a jet of molten shot into a tank from the top where most tanks have a massive crossection but everything in the tank tends to have a much lower crossection due to orientation. Unless it's lacking a spall liner (1950s - 1960s unmodernized) it won't do dick usually. 5) It isn't but thank you for telling us you're to be ignored off brand Brandon.

[@J_X999]

I've been reading some interesting stuff about china's artificial intelligence ambitions. We've seen Chinese AI drones on their aircraft carriers and a new drone mothership thingy. Could Chinese AI start a new front in the US China competition? China seems to think so, just look at everything they are doing with it

[@J_X999]

@@OksmanTV I'm gonna pretend you don't actually believe that and are just like the other people who say things like that to make themselves feel better, without actually knowing what they are on about lol

[@afrasiyabkhan3259]

@@J_X999 what did he say

[@BulletSponge178]

And that's about when we start fielding EMP munitions and countermeasures.

[@tonysu8860]

Don't believe it. The AI described in reports is supposed to make faster and better calculations on a missile that is approaching its target making adjustments to the end at hypersonic speed? Additionally, just to even have a ghost of a chance at guessing trajectory would require knowledge of the real target or at least the most likely target. If there are numerous possible targets in the general vicinity, the calculations become vastly more speculative and inaccurate. Bottom line, all that AI stuff is worthless unless someone can suggest some theory I haven't thought of... and IMO the most likely weapon with greatest chance of success will be CIWS, eliminating all the hijinks the trajectory might have taken and knowing at the last second exactly what the target is because especially at hypersonic speeds there is no more time and distance to change course. If you want to use AI for the last few seconds before impact to better aim your weapon, OK. But not before.

[@Tom_Cruise_Missile]

Chinese AI drones? Wtf? Any source besides the Chinese government?

[@BibEvgen]

There were no damaged tanks in Crimea, there was no war, 2 people died there.

[@charlesmartin1121]

Man-portable? Yeah I suppose, if you a talking about moving it 20 meters from your Tigr. Otherwise not so much.

[@divinelyblessed3056]

Well, a year later with Leopard 2, and Challenger 2 easily taken out by Kornet, Merkava 4 taken out by less sophisticated missile fired by "primitive Hezbollah, and even Hamas", meanwhile Abrams was barred from the Front to avoid the same fate and embarrassment, WHO IS LYING?

[@MrPymbaa]

The cost of the Kornet rocket is $26,000, but the cost of the Javelin rocket is $177,600. This is an important parameter.

[@Erusean_pilot]

Why is russia charging hundreds if thousands for the kornet then?

[@MrPymbaa]

@@Erusean_pilot The Cornet is a great weapon. Even Russian drones are incredibly deadly. "Abrams" are already burning in the fields of Ukraine.

[@Masterafro999]

​@@Erusean_pilotExport or domestic?

[@Erusean_pilot]

@@Masterafro999 export

[@spinmaster4348]

@@MrPymbaaEven Russian t-72s are extremely deadly…to its own crews

[@kevintaylor791]

All the most modern russian tech, suffers the same problem, they cannot make enough of them. Even if this missile was better than a Jav or NLAW it does not matter, they can't get the chips to build enough to make a difference. Even if The SU-57 could make an F-22 look like a punk, it does not matter because they only have like a dozen of them and have no capacity to build more.

[@milosmilictrob2046]

There are about 50-60 thousand Kornet missiles in service, in 2009 there were 30 thousand missile build, 10-15 thousand were exporte, by contrast, there are around 42 thousand Javelins.

[@doublehelix7880]

Says who? According the MSM and the "expert community", the Russians were supposed to be out of missiles 90 days ago, out of food 60 days ago, out of tanks 60 days ago, out of troops 30 days ago... Would you please remind me what of these actually happened?

[@thebob5240]

@@milosmilictrob2046 That's assuming all of them have been well maintained and stored well and none of the possibly 11 year old electronics have gone bad in anyway shape or form, which is highly doubtful since Russia can barely keep it's 'fleet' of tanks maintained, its troops well trained at all times, keep it's nuclear arsenal well maintained and at readiness at all times, and it's thousands of aircraft maintained as well. To add credence to my thoughts here the ENTIRE Russian military budget is around 65 billion US the US spends 60 billion on it's nukes alone for maintenance and readiness and a host of other expenses that go along with it.

[@grandayatollah5655]

Lol what, tens of thousands of Kornets have been made

[@thebob5240]

@@grandayatollah5655 They have been made yes but how many of those thousands of missiles actually work Javelin missiles have been known to go bad nad the system is of a similar age and had a large stock pile built up over a long period of time not as large as Russia for sure as i said Russia can barely maintain it's current military forces on top of other things that are important like it's nuclear weapons i bet you most of those are sitting around in poorly maintained bunkers doing the same thing that the Javelin missiles are doing while being properly stored only worse.

[@simeon6120]

There wasn't any large-scale fighting in the invasion of Crimea though, you must be talking about the Donbas 2014 invasion

[@piotrd.4850]

Few people understand how and WHY country that build by far most tanks in the world and insane number of aircraft, also invested absurd amounts into plethora of anti-armour and air-defence systems. USSR fielded more types, families (not to mention - pieces) of ATGM than rest of the world put together. They hit the wall with one thing: IIR ccd. PS: usually combat debut of system is either total disaster or spectacular success - only later it settles to some plateu.