Thanks fore responding. I value your experienced opinion over the opinion of 18 year old online gamers who don't listen too well when someone with 'real time' experience says something. I guess kidlets only skateboard in realtime these days. :D Merry xmas all! :)
Served in a unit shooting the bloody thing. The HE and the "ball-bearing" warhead I have seen what they could do. Remember, in that time most infantery units were transported in trucks, soldiers slept in tent. I assure you they were "bloody" effective, then.
@eogg25 Yeah, and my point was that the "frag missile" thing is a largely useless replacement for a more powerful warhead, a cheap cover so the military didn't appear to be preparing to use nuclear warheads wherever they could.
@Keinlicht keep in mind that SCUD missles such as those from the first gulf war were basically the same thing, and worked far better than you would think. it's not guided, but neither is a howitzer shell (both are aimed). in this case it was an area weapon for dismounted troops after lessons from WWII and Korea. these also get mobility kills on vehicles even tracks by not allowing the driver to see to drive, striping antenna's, and in some cases damaging fuel tanks.
@weaponeer True enough, I didn't mean to say it was entirely impotent.
Its just plain that this thing was developed more as a PR stunt such that the military could appear not to be preparing to put atomic devices in every weapon they could find, and less as a pragmatic tactical solution.
american can make many honest john missiles / pershing missiles and can hit destroy all iran missiles, china missiles, north korea missiles, ussr russia missiles
General conversation: The tactical HE warheads were just public relations cover for what was really a tactical nuclear weapon. No commander considered the tactical HE warheads significant in terms of ground combat weaponry. The Soviet Union knew what the real purpose of the Honest John was, and fielded their own family of battlefield [nuclear] rockets (FROGs).
APC´s or not. The damn thing was to inaccurate to hit anything except with a nuclear warhead, so this warhead along with the conventional unitary HE warhead was next to useless.
Problem is that the Soviet Union was to invade western Europe with troops INSIDE APCs, stupid little ball bearings won't do anything to an armored vehicle.
Thanks fore responding. I value your experienced opinion over the opinion of 18 year old online gamers who don't listen too well when someone with 'real time' experience says something. I guess kidlets only skateboard in realtime these days. :D Merry xmas all! :)
marmaloon 2 months ago
i served in the first unit sent to germany and they were potent, the only problem was after we fired it we were considered infantry.
eogg25 2 months ago in playlist Field Artillery
Served in a unit shooting the bloody thing. The HE and the "ball-bearing" warhead I have seen what they could do. Remember, in that time most infantery units were transported in trucks, soldiers slept in tent. I assure you they were "bloody" effective, then.
hans2406 3 months ago
what is the point of a ballistic frag missile, honestly.
If this thing doesnt have a nuke on it it shouldve been just plain HE or anitstructure. BTR-1's could deal with those pussy ball bearings no problem
Keinlicht 5 months ago
@Keinlicht We had an a bomb warhead.
eogg25 2 months ago in playlist Field Artillery
@eogg25 Yeah thats the point tho, this thing needs some punch behind it to be useful.
The plan for early soviet invasion was masses of BTR-1's attacking, so frag missiles would be useless.
Keinlicht 2 months ago
@Keinlicht what i meant was we had an a bomb warheads for the honest john in our ammo dump.
eogg25 2 months ago
@eogg25 Yeah, and my point was that the "frag missile" thing is a largely useless replacement for a more powerful warhead, a cheap cover so the military didn't appear to be preparing to use nuclear warheads wherever they could.
Keinlicht 2 months ago
@Keinlicht keep in mind that SCUD missles such as those from the first gulf war were basically the same thing, and worked far better than you would think. it's not guided, but neither is a howitzer shell (both are aimed). in this case it was an area weapon for dismounted troops after lessons from WWII and Korea. these also get mobility kills on vehicles even tracks by not allowing the driver to see to drive, striping antenna's, and in some cases damaging fuel tanks.
weaponeer 1 month ago
@weaponeer True enough, I didn't mean to say it was entirely impotent.
Its just plain that this thing was developed more as a PR stunt such that the military could appear not to be preparing to put atomic devices in every weapon they could find, and less as a pragmatic tactical solution.
Keinlicht 1 month ago
Remember, folks... there were no such things as body armour. Card board boxes were a cheap but accurate test.
rockethound69 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'
come on american,,,
american can make many honest john missiles / pershing missiles and can hit destroy all iran missiles, china missiles, north korea missiles, ussr russia missiles
bestamerica 11 months ago
General conversation: The tactical HE warheads were just public relations cover for what was really a tactical nuclear weapon. No commander considered the tactical HE warheads significant in terms of ground combat weaponry. The Soviet Union knew what the real purpose of the Honest John was, and fielded their own family of battlefield [nuclear] rockets (FROGs).
Molotovist 1 year ago
i didn't know this thing really existede the only time i've seen this is in rodan and that is it.
guyverdx94 2 years ago
APC´s or not. The damn thing was to inaccurate to hit anything except with a nuclear warhead, so this warhead along with the conventional unitary HE warhead was next to useless.
schr75 3 years ago
They must have just been trying to scare them!
Tumbleweed1954 3 years ago
Re: inaccuracy - that's not what I heard about them.
marmaloon 3 years ago
@schr75 wrong missile (of that period) the honest john was veary acurate
marcuspinson 1 year ago
Problem is that the Soviet Union was to invade western Europe with troops INSIDE APCs, stupid little ball bearings won't do anything to an armored vehicle.
AmericanDreamer1 4 years ago
lol it's true!
kaiserm 3 years ago
Effective against troops wearing cardboard boxes.
Tumbleweed1954 3 years ago
@AmericanDreamer1 The russian APCs had shit armour apart from frontal.
bluenail90 1 year ago
@AmericanDreamer1 Russian APCs had really crap armour (apart from frontal), they were a blag themselves.
bluenail90 1 year ago