this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2025
103 points (99.0% liked)
Ukraine
10549 readers
654 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
Community Rules
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human involved must be flagged NSFW
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³ Defense Aid π₯
π³ Humanitarian Aid βοΈβοΈ
πͺ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
See also:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Same reason the TOW antitank operator guided missile was produced in 1968 which works on the same principle for precisely the same reasons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-71_TOW
This is an old strategy reborn.
I don't know about the TOW2, but I was an Infantry tester in 1988 when the Army was evaluating the TOW replacement contenders; I was in the Bofur's Bill team. No wires, and double the range of the wired alternatives.
The Army went with the TOW2, in the end, which surprised none of us. And Bofur's was tight-lipped about the technology, but us gunners were fairly sure that it was fly-by-laser.
That was so long ago, I wonder if any details have been published in the meanwhile. They acted as if there construction was a state secret, at the time.
It was waaay before any sort of flexible fiber optics; copper wire seems like it'd be cheaper.