Of course, the Trophy wasn't the first APS to be fielded in active units, and not even the first to be combat-tested, as that title definitely goes to the Soviet Drozd, fitted to T-55 and T-62 (named T-55D and T-62D respectively) in the early 80's.
The Drozd was rather primitive. It only covered a limited arc of 60°, couldn't track fast objects beyond 700m/s (although believed to be able to track faster objects than stated by manufacturer), and proved to be too dangerous for surrounding infantry, thus it was abandoned and never entered mass-service, and the outfitted tanks were sent to permanent storage.
 |
| Drozd APS utilized 4 tubes per side, covering a total of 60° in its earliest variant |
Since the 80's, APS have come a very long way. From covering only 60° on the horizontal plain, no vertical protection, and primarily subsonic munition defeat, to cover a full sphere around the vehicle and intercept even hypersonic munitions.
The Threat
Now, of course, the Merkava 4M and Namer are not the only ones to tout an APS as a key asset in their protection suite. The US is now advancing quickly in its MAPS and interim APS solution programs by testing Trophy HV on the Abrams, and Iron Fist-LC on the Bradley, with the Stryker likely going with Artis' Iron Curtain.
 |
| The Abrams, for some reason, was rendered without its armor. We can see Trophy HV on Abrams and Iron Fist LC on Bradley |
In December 2016 the Netherlands have also announced plans to acquire Iron Fist APS for their fleet of CV9035NL vehicles.
And perhaps the most central piece to my article today is Russia's push towards APS, and it's a serious push.
Unveiled to the public in May 2015, several new vehicles families appeared and signaled a major shift in Russian standards for land gear procurement. Russia abandoned, for the most part, most vehicle projects that commenced during the days of the Soviet Union and moved forward with a new philosophy.
Now, the Armata family which includes the T-14, T-15, and T-16, the Kurganets family with the Kurganets-25 IFV and APC variants, Boomerang family with K-16 APC and K-17 IFV, are all going to be fitted with the Afghanit APS. Only a few years after mass-production for all these vehicles commenced, Russia will be able to take pride in a huge fleet of ground vehicles protected with an APS, a technology that is only beginning to revolutionize ground warfare.
 |
| 5 Afghanit tubes embedded onto the turret of the T-14 tank |
The Solution
So how can this suddenly appearing threat be properly met? The first country to admit taking this matter very seriously, is Norway.
Norway is now looking to replace its relatively new and modern Javelin anti-tank missile systems with a new weapon capable of penetrating APS defenses. They're looking for at least 100 systems with a total program cost of 200-350 million NOK (23-40 million dollars).
This comes almost immediately before Rafael, developer of the world renowned Spike missile, has announced the existence of the Spike LR II missile, which brings the Spike from 3rd and 4th generation into the 5th generation realm, which has so far only been inhabited by the MBDA MMP missile.
Interestingly, the Spike LR II has already secured a first order, which together with Norway's announcement of its future acquisition program may hint that Norway is the first customer. Time will tell.
I will not go into detail about the Spike LR II, other than just mentioning that it is 10% lighter, penetrates 30% more, and flies 38% farther.
More can be found here (link).
The one feature that really deserves mentioning is the Spike LR II's ability to dive at a very steep angle of 70°.
Norway is now looking to replace its relatively new and modern Javelin anti-tank missile systems with a new weapon capable of penetrating APS defenses. They're looking for at least 100 systems with a total program cost of 200-350 million NOK (23-40 million dollars).
This comes almost immediately before Rafael, developer of the world renowned Spike missile, has announced the existence of the Spike LR II missile, which brings the Spike from 3rd and 4th generation into the 5th generation realm, which has so far only been inhabited by the MBDA MMP missile.
 |
| Spike LR II will enter production in 2018 and is a 5th Generation missile |
Interestingly, the Spike LR II has already secured a first order, which together with Norway's announcement of its future acquisition program may hint that Norway is the first customer. Time will tell.
I will not go into detail about the Spike LR II, other than just mentioning that it is 10% lighter, penetrates 30% more, and flies 38% farther.
More can be found here (link).
The one feature that really deserves mentioning is the Spike LR II's ability to dive at a very steep angle of 70°.
This does not really bother systems like the Trophy HV, Iron Fist, or Iron Curtain that the US, Netherlands, Israel, and Australia are fielding or plan on fielding. (ADS is also being considered in Australia's case), as these are all providing hemispheric protection that will have no trouble defeating such ATGM. However, Russia's Afghanit APS does not provide hemispheric protection, nor full rounded protection, and only protects on the horizontal plain, therefore it is vulnerable to such an ATGM.
The Afghanit borrows its concept from the Drozd system which I shortly described earlier.
Drozd was capable of hitting with its tube-launched grenades, targets that were ~30° elevated or depressed relative to the tank's center-line, therefore we can assume the Afghanit can do the same.
With enhanced fragmentation and proper programming, it could probably be increased to 40°. Considering that, Spike missiles could evade the Afghanit with a Fire & Steer mode of operation, but that would require both a higher level of skill in operating the missile, and to constantly man the missile launch unit until the missile hits the target.
What the Spike LR II allows is to guarantee a hit on the top of the tank, where it is completely uncovered, without anyone manning the missile in a complete Fire & Forget mode.
Just Temporary
As I have mentioned above, only the Afghanit seems to be vulnerable to this system, as the Spike LR II uses a high angle of attack to exploit the Afghanit's large dead zone.
Russia has taken delivery of RPG-30 rockets, with the unique feature of a dummy warhead located in a separate small tube, which is fired before the real rocket is fired as a type of precursor. The precursor dummy round is supposed to activate the APS, leaving it unprepared to deal with the real rocket coming in right behind it. However, due to its concept of operation, and according to Rafael press releases, the RPG-30 remains largely ineffective against the Trophy, and was said to actually be developed to counter the Drozd and Arena systems, which may imply that the Afghanit is also vulnerable to decoys.
In order to defeat decoys, all that is needed is a 3D radar that will determine the shape and size of the projectile and classify it as either potentially dangerous or not, so the RPG-30 is ultimately a nice but failed concept.
Other APS systems that are currently fielded or will be fielded in western armies, are immune to top attack munitions, even those going down completely vertically on target, and it seems that for now, the theoretical solution to APS will be merely fire saturation.
Russia has taken delivery of RPG-30 rockets, with the unique feature of a dummy warhead located in a separate small tube, which is fired before the real rocket is fired as a type of precursor. The precursor dummy round is supposed to activate the APS, leaving it unprepared to deal with the real rocket coming in right behind it. However, due to its concept of operation, and according to Rafael press releases, the RPG-30 remains largely ineffective against the Trophy, and was said to actually be developed to counter the Drozd and Arena systems, which may imply that the Afghanit is also vulnerable to decoys.
 |
| Precursor can be seen on the right tube |
In order to defeat decoys, all that is needed is a 3D radar that will determine the shape and size of the projectile and classify it as either potentially dangerous or not, so the RPG-30 is ultimately a nice but failed concept.
Other APS systems that are currently fielded or will be fielded in western armies, are immune to top attack munitions, even those going down completely vertically on target, and it seems that for now, the theoretical solution to APS will be merely fire saturation.
End Result
It seems that despite the Spike LR II merely taking advantage of a dead zone of the Afghanit APS, NATO will have a strong counter to Russia's brand new fleet of armored vehicles for a long while, as replacing the Afghanit at this stage would be far too difficult, and would put Russia's land vehicle programs at an unbearable delay, even further than the delay they're suffering at the moment.
The Road Ahead
The future lies in saturation capabilities. Today, the best example of combat between APS-protected vehicles is naval combat. Every ship is protected with vast arrays of air defense systems that can intercept missiles at different stages of their flight and different ranges, all the way from hundreds of kilometers to just tens of meters away from the ship.
Protective qualities of ships are usually measured in their ability to sustain a certain saturation fire, and ASM capabilities are usually measured in their ability to apply pressure on the defensive array and force at least a single missile through for a given salvo.
The winner is usually the one who manages to either deplete his opponent's defensive weapons and still retain ASMs, or apply a saturated enough salvo that the opponent will not be able to handle in a single time.
Same will go for ATGMs. How do you do that? You work mainly on the price. Simplify the seeker, warhead, battery, engine, everything you can do to drive the cost down, you do. That, I believe, will soon become the new hot trend in missile-building technology, together with a light weight. Both will allow higher salvos per tank, ensuring quick depletion of the APS's munitions.
Regarding tanks, who will naturally also take a major part in anti-tank operations, will have to rely on faster rates of fire to deplete the enemy's APS quickly. The Abrams, for example, MAY have an autoloader planned at the moment for existing M1A2 tanks, as described in an old article of mine.
Sources
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/05/20/time-arm-us-tanks-israeli-anti-missile-tech.html
http://armor-il.blogspot.co.il/2016/12/netherlands-first-aps-user-in-nato.html
https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/f134b420fc8f4d4889aaa06b2400c08e/2017-04-07-u-faf-2017-2025-english---final.pdf
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/rafael-to-debut-spike-lr-ii-missile-in-paris-437979/
http://defense-update.com/20170529_spike_lr_2.html
http://armor-il.blogspot.co.il/2016/12/abrams-to-get-drone-operating.html
