at this rate with the devserver closing tomorrow ig its just gona be another “it is what it is” but considering the HIGH speed testing target the SLM would still not be able to engage the target at 40km out with its current flight performance (while flying directly at the launcher)
My question is the following:
What would Gaijin do if they only had the effective range to go by?
They apparently don’t have Thrust or Weight of the missile and they don’t have the burn time. So we basically know nothing. This means that it’s all guess work and boy have they guess wrong.
The current version is FAR short of even reaching the effective range at all, let alone a maneuvering target.
We really gotta hope for 2nd dev or dev continuation, if the radar gets Look Forward - Back Scanning and the stated <1s target refresh it would be miles better.
Also reduced smoke would be a very good buff, just hope they implement them.
The issue is that we shouldn’t have what we currently have as the starting point. The only sources available logically point to a speed of Mach 3 and range upwards of 40km. Where did Gaijin get their initial “sources” to get the missile to where it currently is?
5 Likes
First source here is likely no good, it's third party that links to other sources
I just found this but i don’t know how trustworthy the source is, and it might actually be a third party source perhaps but i’m unsure (though it is written by a Swedish military analyst):
(https://dettyskakriget.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/fangad-i-spelet-natbok-1-version-5.1.pdf) Page 140
Edit:
Just found this as well:
(https://www.cleardesign.se/tidskrift/arkiv/forsvarsutbildaren-05-2015/forsvarsutbildaren-05-2015.pdf) page 21
Edit 2:
one more:
(https://www.portail-ie.fr/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Defense-antiaerienne.pdf) Page 3
Edit 3:
(https://bin.yhdistysavain.fi/1601152/L9PyPMQ7AT9jfDiArSjt0UJan6/Ilmatorjunta%202_17.pdf) page 35
Previously known:
(https://www.luftvarn.se/vlv/1503.pdf) page 10
8 Likes
They don’t have any. I’ve scoured the web for any source that mentions M 2.0 of the SL(M) and that simply DOESN’T EXIST. Be it primary, secondary, or some forum, a speed of M 2.0 is never mentioned anywhere.
Their stats for the SLM are completely made up.
Actual max range according to the Bundeswehr btw is 50km’s, making the effective range of 40km pretty cut 'n clear, well we don’t even get effective range of 15km’s in WT, lol.
10 Likes
Man I have been looking all day, but finding something is really hard.
Your sources look good and if they count as secondary sources, we should have enough, we only need 2, right?
But I am almost certain that this is getting the “It’s just a magazine, unrelated to anything, not a real source” treatment :/
5 Likes
“all sources are sweedish so they must by spewing propaganda”
2 Likes
Perhaps, the first one is a bit… questionable? perhaps.
The second is a magazine that gets released once every two months by the “Swedish Federation for Voluntary Defence Education and Training (Försvarsutbildarna)”. so likely a bit better.
Yeah, i’ve gotten really good at using google to the full potential. It’s amazing what you can find once you know how to tag the search properly.
2 Likes
Gotta love the burn :D
I am trying to find some info in German as that’s my native language anyway, but most info is from random magazines or repeated from the sources we already gave to Gaijin. I am not giving up yet, though :D
Try searching like this:
“IRIS-T SLM” “[the german word for speed]” filetype:pdf
keep the quotation marks and the colon but not the [ ] symbols. That is how i found most of my Swedish sources.
Well F me then.
“Speed” in german?
Fluggeschwindigkeit
Marschgeschwindigkeit
Höchstgeschwindikeit
Maximaltempo
Tempo
…
Well see you in a couple hours xD
2 Likes
Hello
The report was not initally handled by a Technical Moderator.
From what I can see the report (or rather the information within) has already since been linked up with an existing forwarded report by a Technical Moderator:
6 Likes
So… Who handled the report?..
Are there people that shouldn’t simply be closing those reports, yet doing so anyway? :)
2 Likes
and how are they than even allowed to do it?
because in the end its just more work for everyone
6 Likes
The CBR is handled not just by Technical Moderators, but also members of the Alpha Test team, QA team and developers / designers team.
Misunderstanding of sources can occur when its not clear or mistranslations occur.
3 Likes
While we have you here, would it be ok to ask for a quick glance at the sources i just found just to get an opinion if they are usable or not? :)
(Sources posted here: Iris-t slm - #754 by Necronomica)
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate you taking the time.
So I guess we have to get lucky with who is currently online for our reports to go through then :D
As secondary / 3rd party sources. The first one is an Authored work using existing public sources.
3 Likes
Hey smin, just want to say thank you for respondig to the thread.
But i gotta ask
Why even allow for people that are not technical moderators handle bug reports about vehicle/ weapon performance?
1 Like