I see that there is a question about the difference between the 9M31 and the 9M37 missiles.
Could someone please explain in a bit of detail how the performance differs between them? This would make the decision process over this vehicle a bit clearer.
9M31 is smaller, shorter range, about 4km effective range(9m37m is 5km)
no-full aspect ability on IR channel, only optical mode can get a head-on lock
anyway, when there is Chaparral and other manpad carrier choices
Why don’t they give Israel the top-tier air defense system?The Spider air defense system is quite good,but because its performance is better than that of the Pantsir,the developers don’t want to include it.Otherwise,Soviet faction players wouldn’t be able to enjoy close air support(CAS)as much.
2 Likes
So the 9M31 would be IR only, rear aspect 4km range. What about IRCCM?
clearly no IRCCM. but optical mode should be able to ignore some flares
6 missiles not 4, which becomes double with ammo boxes. On top of this, the missile outranges and outpreforms existing SAMs for this TT. That’s the whole reason its addition is desired. It’s not much but it’s better than what we got, so somewhat “much needed”.
3 Likes
Are you sure this variant of the missile is capable of optical tracking, such as photo-contrast?
no. they SHOULD NOT add it.
there is enough copy paste ground vehicles,
there is so much more spaas ( M113 ADMS, Magach Marksman, HVSD/ADAMS),
that should be added instead
this is it’s way of achieving all-aspect tracking in 1960s
No, it’s 4 missiles. The “6 missiles” thing comes from a museum piece that bolted extra missiles they had lying around to the outside of the vehicle. Actual ones in service only ever had 4.
And the MIM-72G definitely outperforms the 9M31M. The 9M31M’s only got a 1kg warhead, 4.2km front-on lock range, 420m/s top speed. It’s only really capable of intercepting subsonic targets, with a maximum target speed of 310m/s (mach 0.9 at sea level)
Until or if it ever gets a gimble limit, it’s practically useless for a variety of reasons o shall list below. The Machbet is a better SPAA than it at the moment because of just how ineffective its missile is for HOBS or maneuvering targets in general, and especially targets in close range above the battlefield. The only thing that made up for it was the extra range and smokeless motor.
Since it’s missing the motor and gaijin still hasn’t given it back the only advantage it has now is range, which isn’t even that much of an advantage compared to this vehicle which has more than enough range paired with a more maneuverable missile that has a gimble limit.
On top of this, if what the user suggest above is true, it has optical tracking. This means it completely and entirely resistant to flares, another major upside of this platform over the Chaparral. (I would also like to bring up the fact the MIM-72G takes awhile to start turning and gathering speed, which hinders its close range performance even further).
Finally it also has trouble getting locks at range, something optical tracking suffers from less so. Again if what the user above suggested is true, this is a major advantage as it improves the lock range of the missile significantly.
Thank you for sharing, would you be willing to provide more information about this? Just saying it isn’t enough especially when the museum that may have done this could actually be used as a primary source, and with the appropriate information we can have this suggestion appropriately adjusted to be corrected.
1 Like
First on optical tracking. The 9M31M’s optical tracking was very rudimentary- it could only be used against clear blue skies or level overcast, clouds would render it useless. Additionally, even in-game optical tracking isn’t particularly reliable- all it is in-game is FoV gating. Like on an air-to-air missile this is quite effective at close ranges but beyond a couple kilometers it can be defeated by a single flare. Remember, it’s essentially the same tech as an AGM-65B or Walleye. The strength of the 9M37M is its flight performance and not it’s seeker- the Type 93’s Type 91 missiles also have optical lock and are much more comparable to our 9M31M.
As for the ammunition count, the 9K31 carried 4. There wasn’t space inside the BRDM-2 for any additional missiles- it’s a rather small car. The argument for 6 missiles only comes from the museum 9K31 below (at the Pintér Works Military Park, Kecel, Hungary) where empty 9M31 boxes were welded onto a folding travel lock. These missiles wouldn’t be useable. Additionally, there are no history images of such an addition.
This is another museum (Ukrainian) 9K31, located in Lutsk
I highly doubt that both museums, one in Hungary and one in Ukraine just have it “welded”
Not to forget the document I shared also depicts the 9K31 with 2 missile boxes on it, which is even seen in the suggestion as I included an image of the page
2 Likes
where the hell are you seeing additional ammo boxes in that image?
My bad, saw it incorrectly, however still, the other museum also has it. There are also “drawings” of 9K31’s having 2 missiles on their hull, but do not show actual pictures
strela detected opinion rejected (please not more of them god)
This is not the same one found ingame. Different missile, downgraded one
1 Like
do you have those drawings? I’d like to see.
But I really think that these two museums are simply mistaken. For those two examples of extra missiles (in museums) there are dozens, hundreds, of historical photos of in-service 9K31s in service with a huge number of nations, all with a notable lack of external stowage.
And museums do make mistakes. Hell, the Tank Museum thought that the TOG, one of their most iconic pieces, had a 17pndr until very recently.
oh in that case i dont mind it
2 Likes
Maybe they do not have external missiles out, as well, it wouldn’t be a good idea in some scenario. I’ll still be on the lookout for one that’s not in a museum.
As for the drawings (I’ll also include some model), I would take them with a grain of salt, as once again, I cannot find an original image:
If I had to guess, maybe only the ones with the racks could have them