• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Ref the Eryx

Scoobie Newbie

Army.ca Legend
Inactive
Reaction score
1
Points
410
Are we stilling using these things.  I've been informed they are no longer taught on the Sgt's course.
 
I've been informed the R22eR were using them to whack grapehuts.
 
I think the Army of the West realised it for the White Elephant it is...
 
Infidel-6 said:
I think the Army of the West realised it for the White Elephant it is...

A white elephant that knocks the crap out of the average 'ghani mud house and grape drying hut.
 
MG34 said:
A white elephant that knocks the crap out of the average 'ghani mud house and grape drying hut.

Whacking huts at $20 000 a pop. Ah well, might as well use them for something.
 
Do we really need a wire guided missle to take out a non-moving grape hut?  I guess if we have the rounds why not but the Eryx is cumbersome with more kit then a Karl G.  I can't speak on the warhead between the two though.
 
Hmmm.... isn't there a You tube video of the R22R firing off an Eryx missle.... only for the missile to come dribbling out of the launcher tube and landing inches from the crew?

Maybe we should leave the Eryx missiles home and use the Leo2A6s to take out the mud huts
 
A Leo 2 round can not penetrate up to 9 meters of earth, and 2.5 meters of concrete would be a real stretch.

I would think that the Eryx would be a fantastic weapon for blasting thick mud bricked walls to kingdom come.  Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that one of the things it was designed for?
 
Warhead
137 mm diameter 3.6 kg tandem HEAT (penetrating 0.9 m through RHA behind reactive armour, or 2.5 m through concrete)
 
geo said:
Hmmm.... isn't there a You tube video of the R22R firing off an Eryx missle....
Hmmm ... you think you saw a video of one missile and therefore the whole system is bad. 

geo said:
Maybe we should leave the Eryx missiles home and use the Leo2A6s to take out the mud huts
Are you sufficiently naive as to think that a single weapon system can meet all needs?  I suppose you think that there is a Leopard available for every rifle section?  Maybe you think there will always be leopards just hanging around when they are needed?    ....  or is it possible that a weapon might be needed for all of those infantry that don't happen to be with part of the tank squadron?
 
If they both do the same job I would persoanlly rather use the lighter version of the Karl G vs the Eryx system.
 
Lone Wolf Quagmire said:
If they both do the same job I would persoanlly rather use the lighter version of the Karl G vs the Eryx system.

Carl, while a good lad can not come anywhere near Eryx for bunker busting.  As far as accuracy and engaging moving targets goes, I don't know of a single person who is as accurate with a Carl G after years of training as a novice is with the Eryx after just a little training.
 
Lone Wolf Quagmire said:
If they both do the same job I would persoanlly rather use the lighter version of the Karl G vs the Eryx system.

They don't do the same job, you should know this. ::)
The Eryx at least packs a punch that will take out any fortification one is likely run into. The Eryx for the most part will take out anyting the bad guys can pile together and hide behind, the 84mm not so much the much ballyhooed 84mm HEDP was in my experience a total failure  at doing anything but either not penetrating the target or becoming a dud when it did.
.
 
Thermobaric 84mm...

  I says to myself, self lets not just knock a hole in that there hut, lets incinerate the occupants  ;D

I guess there is not much point in letting the Eryx rot on the shelves - may as well fire them off at badguys and replace them with a decent system.
 
By doing the same job I was referring to the penetrating power and I started my sentence with an "If" meaning I wasn't sure.  Sorry I left my Pam at work.  ::)
 
Back
Top