TOW missile systems are impressive in the anti-tank role, but have little value against other threats. TOW missiles can be fired at regular ground targets, but at $18,000 per missile they are too valuable to waste on most infantry targets.  Firing TOW missiles during firefights with infantry is also dangerous since the gunner must remain stationary to guide the slow missile for up to 20 seconds after its large back-blast reveals his location. The TOW takes at least 65 meters to arm and a couple hundred meters for the gunner to reacquire control after initial firing, making it difficult to point and shoot at close-range targets.  Since soldiers will encounter infantry far more often than tanks, inexpensive 150mm rockets are the answer.

      Simple 150mm 50 lbs rockets would allow TOWs to be used in the same way the US Army once employed 106mm recoilless rifles mounted on jeeps. The TOW has excellent optical and forward-looking infra-red (FLIR) sights which enable it to accurately fire unguided munitions.  If enemy infantry is dug into concealed defensive positions, a battalion can send up its HMMWV-TOWs, or Bradley’s M901 ITVs or LAV-ATs and blast away with direct rocket fire.  During firefights, TOW gunners could shoot a rocket and immediately scoot into a protected position to avoid enemy counter-fire.  

     Since rockets will not be attached to the launcher with guidance wires, crews can rapidly reload rockets into TOW tubes. TOW rockets would carry blast/fragmentation HE warheads, which are more effective against infantry than shaped anti-armor missile warheads.  In addition, a rocket can carry a much larger warhead in place of the electronics and guidance components needed for TOW missiles.  Rockets also allow a variety of munitions, like canister "beehive" rockets.  In fact, a high-velocity 150mm anti-tank rocket may prove more effective at stopping tanks than the slow TOW.  The Vietnam era 130mm Zuni rocket reached speeds of 1.2 mach.  A 50lbs rocket at this speed would create enough kinetic energy to seriously damage a tank.

    Hughes/Raytheon Missile Systems, which currently manufactures the advanced TOW-2B missiles, should be able to produce "dumb" rockets for around $1000 each.  However, Hughes may not be interested in producing low-cost/low-profit munitions.  Fortunately, there are a dozen manufacturers in the USA which can manufacture 150mm rockets. Lockheed-Martin currently manufactures an assortment of 70mm "Hydra" rockets (right) for use by aircraft; producing 150mm rockets should easy. Competition to produce 150mm rockets would drive the price down even lower, especially with the potential for sales to foreign TOW customers.

                 Carlton Meyer  editor@G2mil.com

©2003 www.G2mil.com

Letters

While I see the value of a simplified rocket based system to augment/replace the TOW system, I do not feel it can be done with existing rockets made for aircraft.  The issues of how to deal with the backblast from the high impulse engines on existing rockets have several disadvantages:

1).  Large detectable signature.  To propel these projectiles to their target will create a large easily detectable signature that will attract a great deal of firepower onto the firing unit.  Further this backblast will interfere with the crew acquiring other targets which eliminates the advantage of being quickly reloaded.

2).  Excess heat and toxic smoke.  This challenge for the crew to simply survive the launch of the weapon is another challenge for the crew.  Most rocket propellants currently used would asphyxiate the crews at launch.

The good news is that both of these problems are easily solvable.  The inspiration comes from the Franco-German Armbrust and the venerable Soviet RPG series of weapons.  It would simply require the use of a ~150mm Scaled up RPG warhead of whatever type of downrange munition deemed necessary (for simplicities sake I recommend a HESH or HEP type warhead as these are the most general purpose) mated to a captive piston type cartridge to initially boost the warhead to sustainer ignite.  This not only solves the two initial objections but actually increases the usefulness of the weapon.

1).  Launch signature is not only reduced but at the launcher effectively eliminated.  This not enhances crew survivability but allows the TOW system to be emplaced into areas where it could not be expected as backblast area is dramatically reduced.  Thermal signature is non existent as hot propellant gases never leave the launcher.

2).  Toxic gases are never present in the fighting position as no gases escape the launcher.

3).  When the sustainer does ignite it does so away from the fighting position.  If the sustainer motor cannot be completely suppressed it's signature will be far enough away form the launcher to help conceal it's position.

4).  Off route munition.  Since none of the stress is placed on the launcher for the TOW, the round may be set up much like the M66 LAW in the use as an off route anti material weapon.  The benefit here is that the greater warhead volume will result in greater damage in the target area, with greater stand off making removal of these weapons orders of magnitude more
difficult.

This is what I see as the best possible solution for the overly expensive TOW system.

                                                                    Rich Gozynya

TOW-Hydra Rocket Launchers

      I did some quick calculations and an adapter can be made for the current breed of Tow launchers that would allow a triple pack of Hydra 70's to be carried.  A quick change to targeting software would allow firing the unguided rounds.  With the future implementation of laser guided hydra rockets, accurate fire is achieved.

      Better yet, have a replacement kit for Bradleys that changes out the double Tow launchers for a twin pack of 19-round Hydra packs.  Depending on the weight limit of the gimble, you might have to use a single 19, two 7 packs, or a single 19 and a single 7.  Since all operations vs. heavy tanks in Iraq is over, this is an ideal situation in an urban environment.  Another idea is to mount packs of Hydras on a remote turret on 113s and Hummers.

      Imagine a truck/trucks laden with explosives rounding a corner barreling toward a roadblock.  Does the crew have enough time to use a Tow?  Does the Tow have enough time to arm?  If there are multiple trucks, can the Bradley engage them both?  If the Bradley fires a volley of unguided Hydra HE rockets, this would vaporize the trucks.