But wasnt the early version the SLS? Thats what I could gather
The SL (now SLM) was the standard variant and the first version to be developed in 2007 AFAIK. Later the SLS was developed as a shorter range option using the default IRIS-T missile. The SLX was announced 2024. So to be in line with the others the SL was renamed to SLM.
1 Like
At the start there was only IRIS-T (air launched) and IRIS-T SL as the “M” was the only surface launched version. When the “normal” air launched IRIS-T started being used as surface launched they named them SLS and SLM. So SLS = IRIS-T (Air launched) and SL (old designation) = SLM and then newer version after that came as well.
1 Like
Production and Deployment Years
IRIS-T SLS Development began in 2007, with initial test flights in 2009. Series production started in 2014, and the first delivery was made to Sweden in 2019.
IRIS-T SLM After a successful test series in 2015, the German military began its own trials in 2017. Operational readiness was achieved in 2022, and the first delivery to Ukraine occurred in October 2022.
IRIS-T SLX Development began in 2021, with planned introduction starting in 2028.
Acording to the german Wikipedia.
I’m reading the german wikipedia too and it states these development dates for the SLM and not the SLS. That whole part about the development history talks about the SLM.
I think here lies the problem: The development of the SLM (under the name SL) started before the SLS but the SLS entered service earlier than the SLM (2010 vs 2017), because the development was easier/faster by using the standard missile.
Your right, its a bit confusing. There is a good amount of information about the missile but I think some sources got some specs mixed up. I guess the only thing we should take for granted is the Diehl Defense documents.
Yes and if some missile is called “SL” it refers to the “SLM”.
By the way, the SLX would be one mighty missile.
He’s massive haha
IRIS-T SLM began as part of MEADS. It was supposed to be the secondary missile for the TLVS. At that time, it was just called IRIS-T SL. After the TLVS got canned and the shorter range IRIS-T SLS got made, the SL was renamed to SLM.
2 Likes
it does not.
152 is to small. the 152mm claim comes from a very early newspaper article about SLM; it is not accurate. real figure is likely 7 inches or 177.8mm
it is going to be a mighty missile but its far from done.
Egypt is the first customer and theres interest from others as well, including Germany. Do know thought that this model shown here is… well… it does not match the model they showed in some powerpoint slides…
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
I tested the missile again today, and I have to say it’s far too slow. In real life, you wouldn’t even see this missile coming but on the dev server, it’s so slow that it moves almost like the OSA-AK missile. That’s quite disappointing. According to Diehl Defence, the missile should travel at 1,029 meters per second — and that’s exactly what we need. Without that, you launch the missile and can literally watch it fly, while everyone has enough time to turn and escape.
1 Like
At this point given whats in this thread and the other threads im in it seems projected to be DOA. Like who would use it from what ive seen the FlaRakRad seems to be the objectively best SPAA at the moment for Germany but Pantsir it seems will get to hold the Dominance for maybe another 2 years again.
1 Like
what about the TanSam ARH and Spyder AIO?
Stop Nerfing the IRIS-T SLM— It’s a Cutting-Edge Missile, Not a Firework!
Here’s what needs fixing to reflect real-world performance:
- Speed & Range Buff
Current (WT): 710 m/s (Mach 2.1) | Lock Range: 9–12 km
Should Be: 1,100+ m/s (Mach 3.3) | Lock Range: 10–25 km (rear-aspect).
Why? This missile outruns most in-game threats IRL.
- Warhead & Lethality Fix
Current (WT): 4.5–5.76 kg TNT (weak splash damage).
Should Be: 11.4 kg HE-Frag (near-miss = kill).
Why? Even older missiles like the AIM-9X have bigger warheads in-game.
- IRCCM (Flare Resistance)
Current (WT): Easily duped by flares.
Should be near-flare-proof (like IRL IIR seeker).
Why? If R-73s get magic IRCCM, so should IRIS-T.
- All-Aspect Engagement
Current (WT): 9 km frontal lock.
Should Be: 15 km all-aspect (cold jets = 10 km, hot exhaust = 25 km).
Why? It’s a 2020s missile, not a 1980s Sidewinder.
- Add Datalink Mid-Course Updates
Current (WT): Fire-and-forget (dumb trajectory).
Should Be: Launch → Update Track → Adjust in Flight.
Why? This is its real superpower—it doesn’t just yeet and pray.
TL;DR for Gaijin:
Speed = Mach 3+, not Mach 2.
Warhead = 11.4 kg, not 4.5 kg.
Flare resistance = YES (IRCCM).
Lock range = 25 km rear, 15 km frontal.
Datalink = Mandatory (it’s not a Strela).
If R-27ERs get UFO physics and Pantsirs get auto-aimbot, at least make IRIS-T SLM historically accurate.
P.S. If you won’t buff it, at least explain why modern NATO missiles get nerfed while 1980s Soviet ones get fantasy stats.
9 Likes
But is does have DL
If you have any proof from sources that are up to Gaijins standard then please provide them so that we can all create a report to get them fixed (Datalink is already implemented on dev server).
You can bug report it here (just search a bit first so that you don’t report something that is already reported and known about): (Gaijin.net // Issues)
A guide on how to report bugs can be found here: ([Navigation] Technical Knowledge Base | War Thunder Wiki)
Why would you nerf it into 40G pulls only
Does it even make sense to nerf an extremely good AAM into a mid-performing one in game?
40G is enough especially from a ground launched platform, you straight up don’t need more than 30G overload to effectively kill a maneuvering plane.
Issue is that it can’t reach that 40G overload because wings/autopilot, especially when the missile is accelerating this is a problem.