yup pretty much
the main problem is that mistral 3 launching platforms usually lack a radar, but some can have IRST i believe. in any case, a 8-12km missile with 30G overload and a IIR seeker would be above 10.0 material
as for the current santal BR, i think a CTA 40 could be enough tbh, with proxy fuze rounds, or maybe a “fixed mistral 1 without radar” type of vehicle, if it exists
Sorry but I gotta rant:
I just had a game where I fired 6 missiles at an Alpha Jet with full bomb load who was doing limited maneuvers and flaring a bit and not a single one hit.
They either failed to pull hard enough and if they did, they instantly went for the flares.
These fucking things are legitimately unusable. We have direct confirmation from the manufacturer that they can pull 25Gs, and gaijin’s reasoning that if the Igla couldn’t pull that hard then neither could the Mistral and Stinger is completely wrong because they failed to account for the differences between bang-bang control used on the Igla and PID on the Mistral/Stinger.
So for the love of god, fucking fix this shit. Because between this and the Roland’s handling nerf and the fact that it’s lacking its historical elevation, France has 0 usable missile SPAAs before the Ito.
Hey, we have sources that the Mistral 3 should pull its full G load without the limitations found on the first 2 mistral since its 3 axis controlled. So they could add that. 8km of effective range (mentioned to have hit a drone at 12km), it’d be between the Strela and soon to arrive IRIS-T SLM in performances
Mistral 1 also loses too much speed, and it already has been reported
regarding flare resistance it’s meh, but not unexpected for the first variant. The lock range is already far more problematic in that regard
Regarding the overload, Gaijin’s “logic” is quite hard to contradict, since it just ignores reality and primary sources entirely. As Vizender mentionned, we might be better prepared for the 3rd variant of the missile, whenever it comes.
Mistral 2 should already improve the situation a bit, as even with Gaijin’s logic it should pull 20-21G
to take with a pinch of salt, as he’s the only person mentioning it : a new variant for mistral seems to be in the works, named “Mistral 3+”
https://x.com/ForcesOperation/status/1898639968274203083
For translation : it should be a small upgrade with extended range and better capabilities against drones compared to the current mistral 3. It’s not mentionned in the tweet, but it should enter service in 2027
Mistral just can’t stop evolving it seems
Near the end of the article :
“Le dernier standard du MISTRAL est à peine finalisé que, déjà, le groupe européen planche sur la suite. « Ce que l’on note, c’est qu’il y a une adaptation permanente de la menace », relève Alexandre. Il faut dès lors anticiper tout en conservant cette évolutivité démontrée par le MISTRAL 3. L’avenir s’écrit autour d’une double évolution souhaitée par la Direction générale de l’armement (DGA) : le sol-air basse couche anti-saturation (SABC AS) et le sol-air basse couche longue portée (SABC L), deux pans d’un bouclier à repenser face à des drones proliférants et à l’apparition d’effecteurs hypersoniques. « Les réflexions sont en cours. Il est possible que le SABC L s’inscrive, d’une certaine façon, dans le prolongement du MISTRAL 3 », nous précise-t-on.”
Basically and for non french speakers, it means the mistral development may be split between a short range, cheap, anti-saturation mistral called “SABC-AS” and a longer ranged version to tackle threats further away than today’s mistral 3, called “SABC-L” (Mistral 3 is 8km range and 6km max altitude per public documentation, for reference). Overall, it seems the thought process is still undergoing and it’s not really clear to me in this article if SABC-L will be an enlarged mistral, just an evolution of the internals like MICA NG, or a new missile entirely
The top part of the article mainly mention software upgrades on the existing missiles to better target small surface drones and watercrafts (probably refering to the Mistral 3+ i mentionned in my other post above).
I swear by the time i die of old age that thing will still be around in its 12th version at this pace
Also, thing to note about the Mistral 3 : it is 3 planes maneuverable, so it’s not using the rolling method to aim itself. Gaijin this won’t be able to claim it can only do 16G and would have to give it it’s actually 30G* (32G is stated for mistral 2 not 3 which uses the same rolling airframe guidance as the Mistral 1 mostly) that is claimed by MBDA
Theoretically you could make a rolling airframe missile with three axis turning, I believe the RIM-116 RAM Block 2 has four control axis and (as the name suggests) is a rolling airframe missile.
Either way it’s obvious that western small caliber IR SAMs are underperforming massively even if they’re rolling airframe missiles with one control axis, because the data gaijin used to nerf them is a load of dingo’s kidneys.
PID ? What’s a PID ?
I never heard of such sorcery
Nah they’re just going to apply the good old “looks like igla, gg ez” and strap it 2/3rd of 30G = 20G if we’re lucky
Or they’re just going to say that mistral 3 looks like mistral 1 and strap good old 16G, that would be the unlucky scenario
Call it pessimistic, i prefer to say it’s a realistic view of the situation X)
since there’s a bit of activity i’ll just put that old report here : Community Bug Reporting System
it won’t drastically change the missile but it will at least keep it’s energy (and a bit of turning ability) at longer ranges
The point of my comment is that Gaijin wouldn’t be able to claim the same limitation that they claim for the standard rolling airframes
I don’t see what would be the point of having a rolling airframe aside from stability if you have horizontal and vertical control. Need to look into that. Does that mean that the missile only pulls 60% of the time as gaijin claims ? What is the point of rolling airframe in a 3 axis configuration (roll, pitch and yaw) ? All missiles can technically roll, for exemple to use dual plane maneuvering to pull even more than single plane.
Mistral 3 qualification for USV and UAV with a weak IR signature seems to be complete
Would be so funny if we could target ground, air and surface targets with it in game too, sort of a “anti everything” missile, and could give some very limited self defense against ground targets, like roland and ITO currently have
Ah and regarding the qualification against the UAV. It would seem the test done in spain was against a drone (Shahed type, not very hot) 12 km away : Euronaval 2024: MBDA scales up SIMBAD-RC for saturation attacks
(end of the article)
If this in fact the case, this says everything you need to know about IR seeker performances in this game (Mistral 3 not having datalink or LOBL afaik, it means the missile was most likely locked before firing, 12 or so clicks away)
Could also be fired with initial IOG information