There is already a mod called MHD TopDownAttack.

[quote]Attack via top, for improved penetration of tank armor.[/quote]
Not really. Top attack do not has bigger RHA penetration, the only difference is that it hits weaker parts of the tank.

"Not really. Top attack do not has bigger RHA penetration, the only difference is that it hits weaker parts of the tank."
Yes, that is what I meant. The top of a tank turret less armed.

Another advantage is that you can attack vehicles behind obstacles like trees or buildings.

PCML also needs this feature, all its power hides behind the TDA. The NLAW can only penetrate +500mm but the armor on MBTs is significantly weaker on the top, making the NLAW very effective rocket.

If what you're afraid of is that it would become too powerfull, then perhaps you should remove the silly lock on feature and use the system it has in real life. It is not a lock on system, it requires you to "paint" the target for 3-6 seconds and keep following untill impact.

@Shields, the PCML in the game has the most warped realization. Not only that, this weapon is not working as it should work in real life, but also it cannot destroy Mpap, Hunter or Truck!
I have create this ticket - http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=24947
Anti-Tank weapon not able destroy a car, even with two hits!
For me this is a big nonsense, but, BIS says it's okay.

Thus, no any sense to create a vertical attack to PCML, because for BIS this weapon works is perfectly/

Of course there is sense to doing that, its the reason that makes it a very effective AT weapon. Like i said there is a way to buff it by using a realistic target marking system for it. Oh and of course it should be a single use launcher. You're just repeating what i said..

Today (v1.50) The PCML - useless weapon in the game. Even if Bis will do a vertical attack, is unlikely this will rectify the situation. The problem is that PCML has a weak damage effect.

Well by all logic it should cause more damage if it hits the top as armor is thinner up there.

Maybe you're right, but today PCML can't destroy Mrap or Hunter, even after two hits in the front glass! I think, in this case, the frontal hit should cause more damage, than a hit to the armored side, because in the any case the glass should be always weaker than main armor!
Thus, i think, hardly the top tank's armor will be weaker, than the armored glass of cars in the game. Top attack? No sense...

PCML with damaging as we see now, you need to throw it in the trash

57-58 page. In total about - curveball\fastball
http://ru.scribd.com/doc/36176275/TM-91425-688-10-M98-Javelin-Weapon-System

There is no point aiming for the windshield, its best to aim for the engine so you can disable it. Should not take more than one missile to destroy the engine.

I offer, armored glasses let remain whole. This one that has to remain on a place, after explosion of the car from the rocket. )))
Solve behavior of these elements in other ticket. Here the speech only about rockets the titan and request for two modes of flight of the rocket of the titan.
The damage to equipment which is caused by the rocket shouldn't raise doubts.
Even, if to present that glass, and the case of the car will remain whole. The blast wave will turn everything that in the car, into porridge, as in the mixer.

User, This features perfectly realized in the ACE 3 mod!

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=28557

Instead of having to wait years, when BIS will make the game realistic and better, play in the mods.

Arma 3 and without MOD isn't stable, on it I don't like to use MOD. But that isn't the question. Question to characteristics of the AT rockets of the Titan, as to analog of rockets M98 Javelin.

@Lex, unfortunately this question is not interested in BIS/ try ACE3 mod, I have not seen any problems with stability in this mod

I tried ACE3. I can't tell that MOD solves a problem completely.

• a sight - it is excellent
• capture of the purpose - it is excellent
• a rocket trajectory a canopy on the purpose - it is excellent
• the place of hit of the rocket in the purpose - is bad (in a tower it would be excellent). The equipment being behind an obstacle can be struck not in all situations.
• Firing practice on a direct trajectory isn't present - badly.
• The way of guidance of the rocket from the closed zone on the UAV laser is absent - badly.

"Firing practice on a direct trajectory isn't present - badly"
NO!!! direct trajectory in the ACE3 present also! The player can choose fire mode, switching the Tab-key. Of course can be in ACE3 is not all done perfectly, but in any case it looks better and more realistic

The strong kickback fastened to the launcher the Titan wrong. The direct trajectory at rockets in ACE is realized only for the antipersonnel rocket. From strong kickback of installation, the rocket doesn't manage to be deployed when you try to shoot at a short distance to 500 meters. or it is more. To execute a shot and precisely guide the rocket it won't turn out.
The second. Anti-tank missiles in ACE have no direct trajectory. There is no opportunity to make a shot on equipment without capture, in manual control mode on the laser. If the tank stands behind low strengthening from bags with sand, it is visible only a tank tower, the anti-tank missile gets to bags. Without MOD ACE, I can in these conditions put the tank out of action the anti-tank missile in the manual mode of targeting on the sight laser., but at a distance it is more than 500 meters.
MOD ACE the realistichny was presented by the Titan as analog of M98 Javelin. I don't like strong sensitivity of capture of the purpose to trembling of hands.

Yes, in ACE3, you cannot use Titan launcher in manual mode, and this sad. But you can capture other small targets, not only Tanks, vehicles (such as infantry for example)
Despite the cons, I think TL in ACE3 implemented better than in vanilla game