its not fair that the mi 24v made in the early 80s has to face a 1988 modification of the stinger,i think they should either move up those vehicles such as the ozelot and the gepard 1a2,or limit them to earlier fim 92a stingers as the ircm and the hirss does nothing and also please buff the hirss,since i am horrible at explaining here have ai explanation About how far could a fim 92E stinger lock a mi 24v with no irccm and no hirss
An FIM-92E Stinger (RMP Block I) seeker can achieve an optical infrared lock-on against an unsuppressed Mi-24V at distances between 6.0 km and 8.0 km (3.7 to 5.0 miles) in rear or side aspect, and 4.5 km to 5.5 km (2.8 to 3.4 miles) in head-on aspect.
However, because an unsuppressed Mi-24V presents such a massive infrared signature, the seeker lock-on range actually exceeds the missile’s aerodynamic flight envelope. The practical maximum engagement range remains capped by the missile’s rocket motor and flight-time limits.
Mi-24 Hind attack helicopter. Forrás: ZenitX / Getty Images
Seeker Lock vs. Kinetic Launch Range
| Aspect Angle | Seeker Acquisition Range | Max Effective Firing Range |
|---|---|---|
| Rear / Side Aspect (Tail chase / Cross-flying) | 6.0 – 8.0 km (3.7 – 5.0 mi) | 4.8 – 5.0 km (3.0 – 3.1 mi) |
| Head-On Aspect (Direct approach) | 4.5 – 5.5 km (2.8 – 3.4 mi) | 4.0 – 4.8 km (2.5 – 3.0 mi) |
Key Factors Driving the Range
- Unsuppressed TV3-117 Turboshafts: Without HIRSS (Hover Infrared Suppressor System) or EVU exhaust mixers, the twin Klimov engines dump raw exhaust gas at temperatures exceeding 600°C directly into the surrounding air. The exposed metal of the turbine nozzles and the hot exhaust plume generate a intense mid-wave infrared signature.
- Absence of IRCM / IRCCM: Without active jammers (such as the Soviet L-166 Lipa pulsed IR jammer) or decoy flares, the FIM-92E’s dual-band (IR/UV) rosette-scanning seeker detects a clean, high-contrast thermal image against ambient air with zero signal modulation or optical interference.
- FIM-92E Seeker Sensitivity: Introduced in the mid-1990s, the Block I variant upgraded the seeker’s digital processor and software, allowing it to pick up all-aspect thermal signatures and body skin heating even when hot engine nozzles are partially obscured.
Wikipedia
- The Flight Limit Bottleneck: While the launcher tone will signal a solid lock-on well beyond 6 km, launching at that distance will result in a target miss. The missile’s solid-propellant motor burns out rapidly, and its internal battery/gas generator self-destruct timer triggers after 17 seconds of flight.
Wikipedia
Want to know how adding HIRSS or flares changes the lock-on range?
Igen
What about with hirss and ircm?
Equipping an Mi-24V with HIRSS (EVU exhaust suppressors) and IRCM (L-166V Lipa active IR jammer + ASO-2V flare dispensers) cuts the FIM-92E Stinger’s optical seeker lock-on range by roughly 50% to 60%.
With these systems active, seeker acquisition drops to 2.5 km to 3.5 km (1.5 to 2.2 miles) in rear/side aspect and 1.5 km to 2.5 km (0.9 to 1.5 miles) head-on.
Because lock-on range is now significantly shorter than the Stinger’s 4.8 km maximum aerodynamic flight limit, the seeker acquisition distance becomes the primary bottleneck rather than missile battery or motor flight time.
Mi-24 Hind with EVU exhaust suppressors. Forrás: Jozsef Soos / Getty Images
Comparison: Unsuppressed vs. HIRSS + IRCM
| Target Aspect Angle | Unsuppressed Lock Range | Suppressed Lock Range (HIRSS + IRCM) | Primary Range Bottleneck |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rear / Side Aspect | 6.0 – 8.0 km | 2.5 – 3.5 km (1.5 – 2.2 mi) | Seeker acquisition limit |
| Head-On Aspect | 4.5 – 5.5 km | 1.5 – 2.5 km (0.9 – 1.5 mi) | Seeker acquisition limit |
How Each Countermeasure System Works Against the FIM-92E
- HIRSS (EVU Exhaust Mixers): EVU boxes duct cool ambient air directly into the hot exhaust stream, reducing gas exhaust temperatures from over 600°C down to ~250°C. They also shield line-of-sight to the glowing engine turbine metal from side and rear angles. This drastically reduces the mid-wave IR contrast needed for the Stinger’s seeker to pick up a lock at extended ranges.
- L-166V Lipa Active IR Jammer: Mounted on the spine behind the main rotor gearbox, the Lipa emits high-intensity, pulsed IR signals. While highly effective at spoofing first- and second-generation reticle/spin-scan missiles (like the FIM-92A or SA-7), the FIM-92E uses a rosette scanning IR/UV seeker. Rosette scanners map the target’s physical geometry rather than reading simple light pulses, making the FIM-92E largely immune to Lipa’s optical jamming.
- ASO-2V Flare Dispensers: Pyrotechnic flares create bright IR point sources to pull incoming missiles off target. However, the FIM-92E features dual-channel IR/UV signal processing. While flares emit massive IR energy, they emit almost zero UV light—whereas the helicopter’s body blocks background sky UV (creating a UV “contrast shadow”). The Block I software detects this spectral mismatch and ignores the flare, unless flares are deployed in dense, continuous salvos during aggressive evasive maneuvers.
Want to know how modern Block II / FIM-92K Stingers handle heavy IR countermeasures?
Igen
What about hirss and no ircm?
An Mi-24V equipped with HIRSS (EVU exhaust mixers) but NO active IRCM or flares results in virtually the same lock-on range as one with both systems active: 2.5 km to 3.8 km (1.5 to 2.4 miles) in rear/side aspect, and 1.8 km to 2.5 km (1.1 to 1.5 miles) head-on against an FIM-92E Stinger.
Removing the active IRCM (the Soviet L-166 Lipa jammer and flares) makes virtually no difference to the Stinger’s initial passive lock-on distance.
Mi-24 Hind EVU exhaust suppressor duct. Forrás: Jozsef Soos / Getty Images
Comparison of All Three Configuration Scenarios
| Aircraft Configuration | Rear / Side Lock Range | Head-On Lock Range | Primary Driver of Range Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Unsuppressed (No HIRSS, No IRCM) | 6.0 – 8.0 km | 4.5 – 5.5 km | High contrast raw turbine & exhaust plume |
| 2. HIRSS Only (EVU Mixers, No IRCM) | 2.5 – 3.8 km | 1.8 – 2.5 km | EVU exhaust cooling & structural masking |
| 3. HIRSS + IRCM (EVU, Lipa, Flares) | 2.5 – 3.5 km | 1.5 – 2.5 km | EVU exhaust cooling & structural masking |
Why Removing IRCM Doesn’t Shift the Acquisition Range
- HIRSS carries almost all the weight: The EVU exhaust suppressors cool raw exhaust gases from over 600°C down to ~250°C and physically block direct line-of-sight to the glowing turbine blades. This cuts the overall infrared signature by more than half, forcing the Stinger operator to get significantly closer before the seeker can establish a solid thermal contrast tone.
- The FIM-92E renders Lipa irrelevant for acquisition: Active IR jammers like the L-166 Lipa function by pulsing an IR lamp to trick spinning reticle seekers (like the SA-7, Redeye, or early FIM-92A) into calculating a false target angle. The FIM-92E uses a rosette-scanning dual IR/UV seeker, which maps target geography rather than tracking light amplitude. It completely ignores Lipa’s pulses, meaning turning Lipa off or taking it off the helicopter does not alter the Stinger’s ability to lock on.
- Flares are reactive, not preventative: Flares alter the missile’s trajectory after launch; they do not obscure or lower the physical helicopter’s static thermal output during the initial lock-on phase unless an pilot actively dumps flares before being targeted.
Want to know how Stinger gunners adjust their firing tactics depending on whether a helicopter has HIRSS?
Igen
Yeah but flares are launch to the side no?
Yes, flares on the Mi-24 (dispensed from ASO-2V pods mounted under the tail boom or rear fuselage) are ejected outward and downward to the sides.
Launching them sideways is a deliberate design choice to physically separate the flare from the airframe as quickly as possible—creating two distinct targets rather than one massive heat blob.
However, launching flares to the side actually makes it easier for an FIM-92E Stinger to ignore them, for three main reasons:
1. Kinematic & Trajectory Filtering
When a flare is launched to the side at high speed, atmospheric drag immediately causes it to slow down and fall behind while moving laterally away from the helicopter’s flight path.
The FIM-92E’s RMP (Reprogrammable Microprocessor) runs trajectory-tracking algorithms. Its rosette-scanning seeker doesn’t just measure brightness; it tracks the spatial movement of objects. When it detects a heat source suddenly accelerating sideways and rapidly decelerating relative to the helicopter’s vector, the computer identifies it as a flare and maintains track on the helicopter.
2. Seeker Field-of-View (FOV) Separation
Because the flare is ejected laterally, it quickly leaves the missile’s narrow instantaneous field of view:
- If a flare stayed directly behind the helicopter, it would remain in the same line of sight as the engine exhaust, potentially overloading or blinding the seeker.
- By kicking out to the side, the flare clears the missile’s narrow tracking cone within milliseconds, leaving only the helicopter inside the target frame.
3. The Dual-Band (IR / UV) Trap
Even if a flare passes right through the seeker’s field of view, ejection direction doesn’t solve the fundamental physics problem:
- Flare: Emits massive amounts of Infrared (IR) light, but zero Ultraviolet (UV) light.
- Helicopter: Emits an IR signature while physically blocking background sky UV radiation, creating a distinct UV “shadow.”
The FIM-92E compares the IR and UV channels simultaneously. When a flare fires off to the side, the Stinger sees a bright IR point with no UV signature moving away, while the helicopter retains both the IR heat signature and the UV contrast shadow. The processor rejects the flare and stays locked on the aircraft.
Want to know what flying maneuvers pilots use along with flares to break a Stinger lock?
Igen
When was that version of the stinger made
The FIM-92E (Stinger RMP Block I) was developed in 1992 , with full production and initial deliveries starting in August 1995 .
Military Factory
Rather than manufacturing entirely new airframes from scratch, the U.S. military produced most FIM-92E missiles throughout the mid-to-late 1990s by retrofitting existing FIM-92C/D stocks with upgraded processor hardware and software modules.
Evolution of the Stinger Guidance System
| Variant | Entry Year | Key Seeker & System Upgrade |
|---|---|---|
| FIM-92A | 1981 | Base variant using an optical spin-scan IR seeker. |
| FIM-92B (POST) | 1983 | Dual-channel IR/UV rosette-scanning seeker introduced to ignore flares. |
| FIM-92C (RMP) | 1989 | Added a Reprogrammable Microprocessor for field software updates via plug-in ROM. |
| FIM-92E (Block I) | 1995 | Upgraded digital processor, improved clutter filtering, and better tracking against low-observable targets. |
| FIM-92J / K | 2018+ | Proximity fuze warheads retrofitted to defeat small drones and UAVs without needing a direct hit. |