World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

FGM-148 Javelin


FGM-148 Javelin

FGM-148 Javelin
Two United States Army soldiers fire an FGM-148 Javelin
Type Anti-tank missile
Place of origin United States
Service history
In service 1996–present
Used by See Operators
Wars Operation Enduring Freedom (2001–present)
Operation Iraqi Freedom / Operation New Dawn (20 March 2003 – 15 December 2011)
Production history
Designer Texas Instruments and Martin Marietta
(now Raytheon and Lockheed Martin)
Designed June 1989
Manufacturer Raytheon and Lockheed Martin
Unit cost US$246,000(FY2014)[1] (FGM-148F)
Produced 1996–present
Number built 40,000[2]
Weight 22.3 kg (49.2 lb) (carry weight)
Detachable CLU: 6.4 kg (14.1 lb)[3][4]
Length Missile: 1.1 m (43 in)
Launch tube: 1.2 m (47 in)
Diameter Missile: 127 mm (5.0 in)
Launch tube: 142 mm (5.6 in)
Crew 2

Effective firing range 75 to 2,500 m
Maximum firing range 4,750 m (tested)[5]
Warhead Tandem shaped charge HEAT
Warhead weight 8.4 kg (18.5 lb)[6]
Impact force

Engine Solid fuel rocket
infrared homing

The FGM-148 Javelin is an anti-tank missile fielded to replace the M47 Dragon anti-tank missile in US service.[7]


  • Overview 1
  • Development 2
    • Test and evaluation 2.1
    • Qualification testing 2.2
  • Components 3
    • Missile 3.1
      • Warhead 3.1.1
      • Propulsion 3.1.2
      • Seeker 3.1.3
        • Focal plane array (FPA)
        • Cooling/Calibration
        • Stabilization
      • Tracker 3.1.4
    • Launch Tube Assembly 3.2
    • Command Launch Unit 3.3
      • Day Field of View 3.3.1
      • WFOV (Wide Field of View) 3.3.2
      • NFOV (Narrow Field of View) 3.3.3
      • Seeker Field of View 3.3.4
      • Lightweight CLU 3.3.5
  • Training 4
  • Advantages and disadvantages 5
    • Advantages 5.1
    • Disadvantages 5.2
  • Combat history 6
  • Operators 7
    • Current operators 7.1
    • Failed bids 7.2
  • See also 8
  • References 9
  • External links 10


Javelin is a fire-and-forget missile with lock-on before launch and automatic self-guidance. The system takes a top-attack flight profile against armored vehicles (attacking the top armor, which is generally thinner), but can also take a direct-attack mode for use against buildings. This missile also has the ability to engage helicopters in the direct attack mode.[7] It can reach a peak altitude of 150 m (500 ft) in top-attack mode and 60 m in direct-fire mode. It is equipped with an imaging infrared seeker. The tandem warhead is fitted with two shaped charges: a precursor warhead to detonate any explosive reactive armor and a primary warhead to penetrate base armor.

The missile is ejected from the launcher so that it reaches a safe distance from the operator before the main [6]

The missile system is most often carried by a two-man team consisting of a gunner and an ammo bearer, although it can be fired with just one person if necessary. While the gunner aims and fires the missile, the ammo bearer scans for prospective targets, watches for threats, such as enemy vehicles and troops, and ensures that personnel and obstacles are clear of the missile's back blast.


In 1983, the United States Army introduced its AAWS-M (Advanced Anti-Tank Weapon System—Medium) requirement and, in 1985, the AAWS-M was approved for development. In August 1986, the Proof-of-Principle (POP) phase of the development began, with a $30 million contract awarded for technical proof demonstrators: Ford Aerospace (laser-beam riding), Hughes Aircraft Missile System Group (imaging infra-red combined with a fiber-optic cable link) and Texas Instruments (imaging infra-red).[9] In late 1988, the POP phase ended and, in June 1989, the full-scale development contract was awarded to a joint venture of Texas Instruments and Martin Marietta (now Raytheon and Lockheed-Martin). The AAWS-M received the designation of FGM-148.

External images
AAWS-M Candidates Fact Sheets
Texas Instruments
Hughes Aircraft
Ford Aerospace

In April 1991, the first test-flight of the Javelin succeeded, and in March 1993, the first test-firing from the launcher succeeded. In 1994, low levels of production were authorized,[7] and the first Javelins were deployed with US Army units in 1996.[7]

Test and evaluation

Development test and evaluation (DT&E) is conducted to demonstrate that the engineering design and development process is complete. It is used to reduce risk, validate and qualify the design, and ensure that the product is ready for government acceptance. The DT&E results are evaluated to ensure that design risks have been minimized and the system will meet specifications. The results are also used to estimate the system’s military utility when it is introduced into service. DT&E serves a critical purpose in reducing the risks of development by testing selected high-risk components or subsystems. DT&E is the government developing agency tool used to confirm that the system performs as technically specified and that the system is ready for field testing.

DT&E is an iterative process of designing, building, testing, identifying deficiencies, fixing, retesting, and repeating. It is performed in the factory, laboratory, and on the proving ground by the contractors and the government. Contractor and government testing is combined into one integrated test program and conducted to determine if the performance requirements have been met and to provide data to the decision authority.

The General Accounting Office (GAO) published a report questioning the adequacy of Javelin testing. The report, called "Army Acquisition—Javelin Is Not Ready for Multiyear Procurement", opposed entering into full-rate production in 1997 and expressed the need for further operational testing due to the many redesigns undergone.

In 1995, Secretary of Defense William Perry had set forth five new operational test initiatives. These included: 1) getting operational testers involved early in development; 2) use of modeling and simulation; 3) integrating development and operational testing; 4) combining testing and training; and 5) applying concepts to demos and acquisitions.

The late-phase development of the Javelin retroactively benefited from the then new operational test initiatives set forth by the Secretary of Defense, as well as a further test conducted as a consequence of the Army's response to the GAO report. Before the Milestone III decision, and before fielding to 3rd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment at Fort Benning (also Army Rangers, Special Forces, airborne, air assault, and light infantry), the Javelin was subjected to limited parts of the five operational test and evaluation initiatives, as well as a portability operational test program (an additional test phase of the so-called Product Verification Test),[10] which included live firings with the full-rate configuration weapon.

Per initiatives and as a DT&E function, the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) and the Defense Department's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) became involved in three development test activities, including: 1) reviewing initial operational test and evaluation plans; 2) monitoring initial operational test and evaluation; and 3) structuring follow-on test and evaluation activities. The results of these efforts detected problems (training included) and corrected significant problems which led to modified test plans, savings in test costs, and GAO satisfaction.

Qualification testing

The Javelin Environmental Test System (JETS) is a mobile test set for Javelin All-Up-Round (AUR) and the Command Launch Unit (CLU). It can be configured to functionally test the AUR or the CLU individually or both units in a mated tactical mode. This mobile unit may be repositioned at the various environmental testing facilities. The mobile system is used for all phases of Javelin qualification testing. There is also a non-mobile JETS used for stand-alone CLU testing. This system is equipped with an environmental chamber and is primarily used for Product Verification Testing (PRVT). Capabilities include: Javelin CLU testing; Javelin AUR testing; Javelin Mated Mode testing; Javelin testing in various environmental conditions; and CLU PRVT.[11]

The All-up-Round Test Sets include: Extreme temperature testing; Missile tracker testing (Track rate error, Tracking sensitivity); Seeker/focal plane array testing (Cool-down time, Dead/defective pixels, Seeker identification); Pneumatic leakage; Continuity measurements; Ready time; and Guidance sections (Guidance commands, Fin movement).




Missile components.
 Two marines walking along the edge of a field, one of them carrying a Javelin missile tube
US Marine carrying a Javelin missile during Operation Moshtarak in Marjeh, Afghanistan 2010

The Javelin missile’s tandem warhead is a HEAT type.[7] This round utilizes an explosive shaped charge to create a stream of superplastically deformed metal formed from trumpet-shaped metallic liners. The result is a narrow high velocity particle stream that can penetrate armor.

The Javelin counters the advent of explosive reactive armor (ERA). ERA boxes or tiles lying over a vehicle’s main armor explode when struck by a warhead. This explosion does not harm the vehicle’s main armor, but causes steel panels to fly across the path of a HEAT round’s narrow particle stream, disrupting its focus and leaving it unable to cut through the main armor. The Javelin uses two shaped-charge warheads in tandem. The weak, smaller diameter HEAT precursor charge pushes through the ERA without setting it off, and punches a channel through it for the much larger diameter HEAT warhead, which then penetrates the target’s primary armor.

A two-layered molybdenum liner is used for the precursor and a copper liner for the main warhead.

To protect the main charge from the explosive blast, shock, and debris caused by the impact of the missile's nose and the detonation of the precursor charge, a blast shield is used between the two charges. This was the first composite material blast shield and the first that had a hole through the middle to provide a jet that is less diffuse.

A newer main charge liner produces a higher velocity jet. While making the warhead smaller, this change makes it more effective, leaving more room for propellant for the main rocket motor, and thus increasing the missile's range.

Electronic arming and fusing, called Electronic Safe Arming and Fire (ESAF), is used. The ESAF system enables the firing and arming process to proceed, while imposing a series of safety checks on the missile. ESAF cues the launch motor after the trigger is pulled. When the missile reaches a key acceleration point (indicating that it has cleared the launch tube), the ESAF initiates a second arming signal to fire the flight motor. After another check on missile conditions (target lock check), ESAF initiates final arming to enable the warheads for detonation upon target impact. When the missile strikes the target, ESAF enables the tandem warhead function (provide appropriate time between the detonation of the precursor charge and the detonation of the main charge).

Though the Javelin's tandem HEAT warhead has proven efficient at destroying tanks, most threats it was employed against in Iraq and Afghanistan were weapon crews and teams, buildings, and lightly armored and unarmored vehicles. To make the Javelin more useful in these scenarios, the Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center developed a multi-purpose warhead (MPWH) for the FGM-148F. While it is still lethal against tanks, the new warhead has a naturally fragmenting steel warhead case that doubles the effectiveness against personnel due to enhanced fragmentation. The MPWH does not add weight or cost and has a lighter composite missile mid-body to enable drop-in replacement to current Javelin tubes.[12][13]


U.S. soldier firing Javelin.

Most rocket launchers require a large clear area behind the gunner to prevent injury from backblast. To address this shortcoming, without increasing recoil to an unacceptable level, the Javelin system uses a soft launch mechanism. A launch motor using conventional rocket propellant ejects the missile from the launcher, but stops burning before the missile clears the tube. The flight motor is ignited only after a delay to allow for sufficient clearance from the operator. To save weight, the two motors are integrated with a burst disc between them; it is designed to tolerate the pressure of the launch motor from one side, but to easily rupture from the other when the flight motor ignites. The motors use a common nozzle, with the flight motor's exhaust flowing through the expended launch motor. Because the launch motor casing remains in place, an unusual annular (ring-shaped) igniter is used to start it; a normal igniter would be blown out the back of the missile when the flight motor ignited and could injure the operator. Since the launch motor uses a standard NATO propellant, the presence of lead beta-resorcinol as a burn rate modifier causes an amount of lead and lead oxide to be present in the exhaust; for this reason, gunners are asked to hold their breath after firing.

In the event that the launch motor malfunctions and the launch tube is overpressurized—for example, if the rocket gets stuck—the Javelin missile includes a pressure release system to prevent the launcher from exploding. The launch motor is held in place by a set of shear pins, which fracture if the pressure rises too high and allow the motor to be pushed out the back of the tube.


As a fire-and-forget missile, after launch the missile has to be able to track and destroy its target without the gunner. This is done by coupling an on-board imaging IR system (different from CLU imaging system) with an on-board tracking system.

The gunner uses the CLU’s IR system to find and identify the target then switches to the missile’s independent IR system to set a track box around the target and establish a lock. The gunner places brackets around the image for locking.

The seeker stays focused on the target’s image continuing to track it as the target moves or the missile’s flight path alters or as attack angles change. The seeker has three main components: focal plane array (FPA), cooling and calibration and stabilization.

Focal plane array (FPA)

The seeker assembly is encased in a dome that is transparent to long-wave infrared radiation. The IR radiation passes through the dome and then through lenses that focus the energy. The IR energy is reflected by mirrors on to the FPA. The seeker is a two-dimensional staring FPA of 64x64 MerCad (HgCdTe) detector elements.[14] The FPA processes the signals from the detectors and relays a signal to the missile’s tracker.

The staring array is a photo-voltaic device where the incident photons stimulate electrons and are stored, pixel by pixel, in a readout integrated circuits attached at the rear of the detector. These electrons are converted to voltages that are multiplexed out of the ROIC on a frame-by-frame basis.


The FPA must be cooled and calibrated. The CLU’s IR detectors are cooled using a Dewar flask and a closed-cycle Stirling engine. But there is insufficient space in the missile for a similar solution. So, prior to launch, a cooler mounted on the outside of the launch tube activates the electrical systems in the missile and supplies cold gas from a Joule-Thomson expander to the missile detector assembly while the missile is still in the launch tube. When the missile is fired, this external connection is broken and coolant gas is supplied internally by an onboard argon gas bottle. The gas is held in a small bottle at high pressure and contains enough coolant for the duration of the flight of approximately 19 seconds.

The seeker is calibrated using a chopper wheel. This device is a fan of six blades: five black blades with very low IR emissivity and one semi-reflective blade. These blades spin in front of the seeker optics in a synchronized fashion such that the FPA is continually provided with points of reference in addition to viewing the scene. These reference points allow the FPA to reduce noise introduced by response variations in the detector elements.


The platform on which the seeker is mounted must be stabilized with respect to the motion of the missile body and the seeker must be moved to stay aligned with the target. The stabilization system must cope with rapid acceleration, up/down and lateral movements. This is done by a gimbal system, accelerometers, spinning-mass gyros (or MEMS), and motors to drive changes in position of the platform. The system is basically an autopilot. Information from the gyros is fed to the guidance electronics which drive a torque motor attached to the seeker platform to keep the seeker aligned with the target. The wires that connect the seeker with the rest of the missile are carefully designed to avoid inducing motion or drag on the seeker platform.


Top attack flight profile.
Direct attack flight path.

The tracker is key to guidance/control for an eventual hit. The signals from each of the 4,096 detector elements (64x64 pixel array) in the seeker are passed to the FPA readout integrated circuits which reads then creates a video frame that is sent to the tracker system for processing. By comparing the individual frames, the tracker determines the need to correct so as to keep the missile on target. The tracker must be able to determine which portion of the image represents the target. The target is initially defined by the gunner, who places a configurable frame around it. The tracker then uses algorithms to compare that region of the frame based on image, geometric, and movement data to the new image frames being sent from the seeker, similar to pattern recognition algorithms. At the end of each frame, the reference is updated. The tracker is able to keep track of the target even though the seeker’s point of view can change radically in the course of flight.

To guide the missile, the tracker locates the target in the current frame and compares this position with the aim point. If this position is off center, the tracker computes a correction and passes it to the guidance system, which makes the appropriate adjustments to the four movable tail fins, as well as six fixed wings at mid-body. This is an autopilot. To guide the missile, the system has sensors that check that the fins are positioned as requested. If not, the deviation is sent back to the controller for further adjustment. This is a closed-loop controller.

There are three stages in the flight managed by the tracker: 1) an initial phase just after launch; 2) a mid-flight phase that lasts for most of the flight; and 3) a terminal phase in which the tracker selects the sweet spot for the point of impact. With guidance algorithms, the autopilot uses data from the seeker and tracker to determine when to transition the missile from one phase of flight to another. Depending on whether the missile is in top attack or direct attack mode, the profile of the flight can change significantly. The top attack mode requires the missile to climb sharply after launch and cruise at high altitude then dive on the top of the target (curveball). In direct attack mode (fastball), the missile cruises at a lower altitude directly at target. The exact flight path which takes into account the range to the target is calculated by the guidance unit.

Launch Tube Assembly

Both men carry a disposable tube called the Launch Tube Assembly, which houses the missile and protects the missile from harsh environments. The tube also has built in electronics and a locking hinge system that makes attachment and detachment of the missile to and from the Command Launch Unit a very quick and simple process.

Command Launch Unit

Command Launch Unit.
CLU after action.

The gunner carries a reusable Command Launch Unit (in addition to the Launch Tube Assembly) more commonly referred to as a CLU (pronounced "clue"). The CLU is the targeting component of the two part system. The CLU has three views which are used to find, target, and fire the missile. The CLU may also be used separately from the missile as a portable thermal sight. Infantry are no longer required to stay in constant contact with armored personnel carriers and tanks with thermal sights. This makes infantry personnel more flexible and able to perceive threats they would not otherwise be able to detect. In 2006, a contract was awarded to Toyon Research Corporation to begin development of an upgrade to the CLU enabling the transmission of target image and GPS location data to other units.[15]

Day Field of View

The first view is a 4× magnification day view. It is mainly used to scan areas for light during night operation, because light is not visible in the thermal views. It is also used to scan following sunrise and sunset, when the thermal image is hard to focus due to the natural rapid heating and/or cooling of the Earth.

WFOV (Wide Field of View)

The second view is the 4x magnification night view, and shows the gunner a thermal representation of the area viewed. This is also the primary view used due to its ability to detect infrared radiation and find both troops and vehicles otherwise too well hidden to detect. The screen shows a "green scale" view which can be adjusted in both contrast and brightness. The inside of the CLU is cooled by a small refrigeration unit attached to the sight. This greatly increases the sensitivity of the thermal imaging capability since the temperature inside the sight is much lower than that of the objects it detects. Due to the sensitivity this causes, the gunner is able to "focus" the CLU to show a very detailed image of the area being viewed by showing temperature differences of only a few degrees. The gunner operates this view with the use of two hand stations similar to the control stick found in modern cockpits. It is from this view that the gunner focuses the image and determines the area that gives the best heat signature on which to lock the missile.

NFOV (Narrow Field of View)

The third field of view is a 12x thermal sight used to better identify the target vehicle. Once the CLU has been focused in WFOV, the gunner may switch to NFOV for target recognition before activating Seeker FOV.

Seeker Field of View

Once the best target area is chosen, the gunner presses one of the two triggers and is automatically switched to the fourth view; the Seeker FOV, which is a 9x magnification thermal view. This process is similar to the automatic zoom feature on most modern cameras. This view is also available along with the previously mentioned views, all of which may be accessed with press of a button. However, it is not as popular as a high magnification view takes longer to scan a wide area. This view allows the gunner to further aim the missile and set the guidance system housed inside the actual missile. It is when in this view that information is passed from the CLU, through the connection electronics of the Launch Tube Assembly, and into the missile's guidance system. If the gunner feels uncomfortable with firing the missile, he can still cycle back to the other views without having to fire the missile. When the gunner is comfortable with the target picture, he pulls the second trigger and establishes a "lock”. The missile launches after a short delay.

Lightweight CLU

The U.S. Army is developing a new CLU as an improvement over the Block I version. The new CLU is 70 percent smaller, 40 percent lighter, and has a 50 percent battery life increase. Features of the lightweight CLU are: a long-wave IR sensor; a high-definition display with improved resolution; integrated handgrips; a five megapixel color camera; a laser point that can be seen visibly or through IR; a far target locator using GPS, a laser rangefinder, and a heading sensor; and modernized electronics.[13]


A great familiarity of each control and swift operation needs to be achieved before the unit can be deployed efficiently. Georgia, for two weeks. The soldiers are taught basic care and maintenance, operation and abilities, assembly and disassembly, and the positions it can be fired from. Soldiers are also taught to distinguish between a variety of vehicle types even when only a rough outline is visible. The soldiers must accomplish several timed drills with set standards before being qualified to operate the system in both training and wartime situations. There are also smaller training programs set up on most Army bases that instruct soldiers on the proper use of the system. At these courses, the training program might be changed in small ways. This is most commonly only minor requirements left out due to budget, the amount of soldiers vs. simulation equipment, and available time and resources. Both types of training courses have required proficiency levels that must be met before the soldier can operate the system in training exercises or wartime missions.

Advantages and disadvantages


Javelin's backblast

The portable system is easy to separate into main components and easy to set up when needed. Compared to more cumbersome anti-tank weapon systems, the difference is noticeable. For example, a TOW requires a heavy tripod stand, a bulky protective case for the thermal sight, a larger, longer launch tube, and much more time to assemble and prepare. The Javelin (although still very heavy) is lighter than the other missiles and their necessary parts.

Although the CLU's thermal imaging may hinder aiming, its thermal targeting allows the Javelin to be a wire-guided system where the firer must stay stationary to guide the missile into the target.

Another advantage is the Javelin's power at impact. The missile's tandem shaped charge warhead is made to penetrate reactive armor. With the top attack mode, it has an even greater ability to destroy the tank because it can attack where most tanks are weakest.[7]

The soft launch capability of the Javelin allows it to have only a minimal backblast area. In addition to reducing the visible launch signature from the enemy, this enables the Javelin to be fired from inside structures with minimal preparation, which gives the Javelin advantages in urban fighting over the widely used AT4 (which has a very large backblast area, although this is lessened in the AT4 CS). A large backblast area would seriously injure personnel if fired from inside an unprepared structure, and may betray the location of the launch to enemy observers.

The missile also has a greater range than the US ATGM it replaces, the M47 Dragon.[7]


The main drawback of the complete system (missile, tube, and CLU) is its 49.2 lb (22.3 kg) total weight. The system is designed to be portable by infantry on foot and weighs more than that originally specified by the US Army requirement.[16]

Another drawback is the reliance on a thermal view to acquire targets. The thermal views are not able to operate until the refrigeration component has cooled the system. The manufacturer estimates 30 seconds until this is complete, but depending on the ambient temperature, this process may take much longer.

Also, Javelin launchers and missiles are rather expensive. In 2002, a single Javelin command launch unit cost $126,000, and each missile cost around $78,000.[17]

The operator of the complex has no opportunity to correct the flight of the rocket after launch (when the target heat contrasts poorly with the terrain, the missile can miss).

Javelin has a stated effective range of 2,500 m, which does not exceed the range of its international predecessors and competitors; MILAN 3,000 m, Swingfire 4,000 m, TOW 4,200 m and Kornet-EM 8,000 m. However, Javelins fired in combat have been observed to hit targeted vehicles at ranges up to 4,200 meters.[18]

Combat history

The Javelin was used by the US Army, the US Marine Corps and the Australian Special Forces in the 2003 Invasion of Iraq[7] on Iraqi Type 69 and Lion of Babylon tanks. In one short engagement, a platoon of U.S. special forces soldiers equipped with Javelins destroyed two T-55 tanks, eight armored personnel carriers, and four troop trucks.[19]

During the War in Afghanistan, the Javelin was used effectively in counter-insurgency (COIN) operations. Initially, soldiers perceived the weapon as unsuitable for COIN operations due to its destructive power, but trained gunners were able to make precision shots against enemy positions with little collateral damage. The Javelin filled a niche in U.S. weapons systems against DShK heavy machine guns and B-10 recoilless rifles - weapons like the AT4 and M203 were powerful enough, but had insufficient range; conversely, while medium and heavy machine guns and automatic grenade launchers had the range, they lacked the power; and heavy mortars, which had both a good range and more than enough power, lacked precision. The Javelin, as well as the TOW, had enough range, power, and accuracy to counter standoff engagement tactics employed by enemy weapons. With good locks, the missile is most effective against vehicles, caves, fortified positions, and individual personnel; if enemies were inside a cave, a Javelin fired into the mouth of the cave would destroy it from the inside, which was not possible from the outside using heavy mortars. The psychological effect of the sound of a Javelin firing sometimes caused insurgents to disengage and flee their position. Even when not firing, the Javelin's CLU was commonly used as a man-portable surveillance system.[20]


A Norwegian soldier with the FGM-148 Javelin.
Map with FGM-148 operators in blue

Current operators

  •  Australia: 92 launchers.[21]
  •  Bahrain: 13 launchers.[22]
  •  Czech Republic: Purchased 3 launchers and 12 missiles for its special forces (intended for use in Afghanistan).[23]
  •  Estonia: 120 launchers and 350 missiles will be taken into service by 2016.
  •  France: 76 launchers and 260 missiles for use in Afghanistan.[24] Was replacing MILAN anti-tank missile,[25] no follow-on order in favor of the missile moyenne portée (MMP).[26]
  •   [27]
  •  Indonesia[28]
  •  Ireland; Irish Army, replaced MILAN anti-tank missile.[29]
  •  Jordan: 30 launchers and 116 missiles were received in 2004, and another 162 JAVELIN Command Launch Units (CLUs), 18 Fly-to-Buy Missiles, 1,808 JAVELIN Anti-Tank Guided Missiles and other support equipment was ordered in 2009. The estimated cost is $388 million.[30]
  •  Lithuania: 40 launchers.[31]
  •  New Zealand: 24 launchers[32]
  •  Norway: 100 launchers and 526 missiles. Delivered from 2006, in use from 2009.[33]
  •  Oman: 30 launchers.[34]
  •  Qatar: In March 2013, Qatar requested the sale of 500 Javelin missiles and 50 command launch units.[35] The deal was signed in March 2014.[36]
  •  Saudi Arabia
  •  Taiwan: In 2002, Taiwan bought 360 Javelin missiles and 40 launcher units for $39 million. The contract also included training devices, logistics support, associated equipment and training.[37] In 2008, the United States issued a congressional notification for the sale of a further 20 launchers and 182 more missiles.[38]
  •  United Arab Emirates[39]
  •  United Kingdom: In January 2003, the UK Ministry of Defence announced that it had decided to procure Javelin for the Light Forces Anti-Tank Guided Weapon System (LFATGWS) requirement. It entered UK service in 2005 replacing the MILAN and Swingfire systems.[7][40][41]
  •  United States: In 2003, the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) reported that the Army could not account for 36 Javelin command launch units totaling approximately $2.8 million.[42] The New York Times later reported supply chain problems at military armories and warehouses in 2004 and expressed concerns of weapons falling into enemy hands.[43]

Failed bids

  •  India: India had planned to buy some of the systems off-the-shelf and a much larger number was to be indigenously manufactured under licensed production.[44] But, the plan to go in for the American FGM-148 Javelin ATGMs had "virtually been shelved" because of Washington's reluctance to provide full military knowhow—licensed "transfer of technology (ToT)"—to allow India to indigenously manufacture the "tank killers" in large numbers after an initial off-the-shelf purchase.[45] In September 2013, the U.S. proposed co-development of the next version of the Javelin with India as a way to deepen defense ties between the two countries.[46] In 2014 the United States offered to transfer fourth-generation technology for the missile, an improvement over the previous third generation.[47] However, India chose to buy the Israeli Spike missile in October 2014 instead of the Javelin.[48]
  •  Germany

See also

Comparable systems

Related development


  1. ^
  2. ^ 40,000 Javelin Missiles Delivered and Counting -, 2 December 2014
  3. ^ [1]
  4. ^
  5. ^ Javelin Man-Portable Anti-Tank Missile Demonstrates Extended Range Capability -, February 6, 2013
  6. ^ a b Javelin Antitank Missile
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h i
  8. ^ Javelin Antitank Missile
  9. ^ Jane's Weapon Systems 1988–1989 page 153
  10. ^ JAVELIN, Redstone Arsenal (archived from the original on 2001-02-15)
  11. ^ Javelin Environmental Test System (JETS), Redstone Technical Test Center (RTTC) (archived from the original on 2008-01-26)
  12. ^ Javelin warhead redesigned for future threats -, 3 July 2012
  13. ^ a b
  14. ^ 64 × 64 LWIR Focal Plane Assembly (FPA) Highly Linear, Rapid Operation Staring Array, Raytheon. (archived from the original on 2009-02-27)
  15. ^
  16. ^ Raytheon/Lockheed Martin FGM-148 Javelin
  17. ^
  18. ^ Battle of Debecka Pass
  19. ^ THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ: COMBAT; How Green Berets Beat the Odds at an Iraq Alamo By THOM SHANKER Published: September 22, 2003, New York Times
  20. ^ Javelin in Afghanistan: The Effective Use of an Anti-Tank Weapon for Counter-Insurgency Operations
  21. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 418 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group. Australia was one of the first countries that the US government gave "unrestricted" permission for the export of the Javelin.
  22. ^ Bahrain Requests 160 Javelins & 60 CLUs
  23. ^ (Czech)A-report (archived from the original on 2009-02-27)
  24. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 136 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  25. ^ France replacing Milan –
  26. ^ France Orders Anti-Tank Missile from MBDA -, 5 December 2013
  27. ^ Georgia to buy weapons from US: Voice of Russia
  28. ^ Indonesia & Jordan; Javelin missile order -, May 26, 2013
  29. ^ Jones, Richard D. Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009/2010. Jane's Information Group; 35 edition (January 27, 2009). ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5.
  30. ^ Jordan to buy Javelin anti-tank missiles from USA of worth $388 million : Defense news
  31. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 174 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  32. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 423 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  33. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 184 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  34. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 286 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  35. ^ Qatar Requests Sales of 500 Javelin Anti-Tank Missile Rounds and 50 Launch Units -, March 28, 2013
  36. ^ $23.9B in Deals Announced on Last Day of DIMDEX -, 27 March 2014
  37. ^ Lockheed Martin press release (archived from the original on 2007-03-27)
  38. ^
  39. ^ The World Defence Almanac 2010 page 298 ISSN 0722-3226 Monch Publishing Group
  40. ^ MOD press release
  41. ^ Javelin Medium Range Anti-tank Guided Weapon
  42. ^
  43. ^
  44. ^
  45. ^
  46. ^ United States and India could start the co-development of new version of Javelin anti-tank missile -, 22 September 2013
  47. ^
  48. ^ India will purchase 8,000 Israeli Spike anti-tank guided missiles and 300 units of launchers -, 26 October 2014

External links

  • Javelin, Lockheed Martin (archived from the original on 2008-01-20)
  • Designation Systems
  • FAS article on Javelin
  • Javelin tank killer
  • AAWS-M: from the DRAGON to today's JAVELIN Story
  • Javelin Lockheed Martin Anti-tank infrared guided missile on
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.