Search results

  1. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    inducting a brand new weapons system like nag on 30 year old carrier like bmp 2 is stupid India needs a light fast stealthy at platform like Singapore axe or go the chrizantema path with big indoor ammo supply (bmp 3 chassis) but for that you need a better missile lighter with more range to...
  2. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    bmp 2 is a death trap my father personally destroyed 2 on the Golan heights in 1973 with a bloody heavy machine gun
  3. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    there is a whole multitude of problems because your missile is sow heavy you need a big carrier which means that not only is your tank destroyer a big slow target . it can also be easily destroyed by the same tanks it hunts because off similar range (tank gun = nag) you cant shoot and scoot .
  4. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/6/1026.pdf here is proof ye of Little faith
  5. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    well namica is a modified bmp 2 (first inducted in 1972) as for range our dedicated anti tank carrier uses spike NLOS has a range of 25 km wail being twice as light as the nag ( only 70 kg) i don't think nag range is better then spike er (8 km)
  6. P

    Nag anti-tank Missile

    can someone explain the military logic of nag as far as i can tell : it's too big and heavy to be hand held. it's range is very limited for a dedicated tank destroyer missile it has yet to be inducted and it's platform is already 40 years old can someone please clarify why bother with such a...
Top