MANPADS Missiles and Overload: The Technical Details

The dev blog itself clearly states available overload

What is “Available” to me, that means max. This is the issue, they are applying the average as the max. So over the course of the 17s flight time, it pulls only 13G. It should peak at 20-22G and then fall off to 13G by second 17.

The dev post should have said something like.

FIM-92 Stinger, ATAS(AIM-92) — Max Available overload has been increased from 10G to 20G. Average G of the missile will be increased to 13G.

1 Like

From above, the target parameters are 310 meters per second and an overload of 8g.

Then there are two curved lines, one labeled “kill zone” and the other “launch zone”

Maybe so, but agree, the problem here is understanding, not Russian bias, which a bunch of morons who couldn’t think with their heads accused them of here

The game’s interface and its informative is not great and I don’t know why they don’t write a max, but it won’t change the behavior of the rocket.

Their formula confirms that while the available stinger overload is 13g, the maximum is 22. They gave us what they asked for.

I just find it weird how the Stinger’s tracking is laughable, sometimes they overshoot or undershoot SLOW turning planes, shots that look to be easy kills, yet the missile just overshoots

you did the thing, it says on the document it’s secret… you just did the thing

So do you agree with me that it’s not helpful to display a 10.2G value because

  1. 10.2G is not the targets maneuver limit the missile can hit
  2. 10.2G is not the missiles maximum overload with which it can attempt to hit a non-maneuvering target
  3. 10.2G is based on an percentage value that the average player will not know, and it is difficult math to calculate.
  4. The speed of a missile affects their turn radius even if otherwise at same G as another different speed missile.

And all the above is completely setting aside that despite missiles looking missile shaped, they don’t perform identically.

Relax, it’s an old document, it’s no longer classified, it’s been used 100 times.

1 Like

No, there is definetly still an issue here. They have said time and time again, that the use of soviet sources to model NATO items can’t be done and vice versa.

They used a soviet missile data. Stated that “there is no way NATO can make anything better than the soviets” and used its data to change the data for a NATO missile.

They just assumed that all these missiles are basically identical, even though they use different tracking methods, likely made out of different materials and not too mention the west is routinely more advanced with these kinds of things. They even admitted that they have data stating that the max should be higher

and yet they still leave it lower. for no reason at all other than that it would leave the Soviets at a disadvantage.


yes, however the developer tried to explain that he felt it was a more useful parameter.

All the accusations are wrong. You can only scold for the strange idea of specifying just available overload, but not for “bias”

Is the Mistral worse than the Igla? They have higher performance, and significantly so.

The developer was talking about how he tried to show the same parameter in missiles.

Can you imagine if one vehicle was advertised with maximum speed and the other with average speed? What would you get from that comparison

I don’t think it’s bias, it looks like lazy development. They should’ve said it was the way it was for balancing purposes. But to write a devblog using “I guess” as a primary source is ridiculous. The Stinger has proved itself as an formidable area denial weapon against low flying and slow targets, yet in game they can miss a su 25 turning at 500kph.

There was a datamine posted here where Western missile guidance is better.

They have yet to state that the “max” is 20-22. They have only stated that the average is 13G with wording that implies the max is also 13G. They need to officially confirm, in no uncertain terms. That the max IS 20-22G, at the moment, the assumption and evidence states 13G


Yep, all of my misses using the ATAS have been I reckon from a lack of initial max G to get the missile onto target, not too mention the tracking is crap and they loose contact easily. Both could be explained by a lack of G to stay on target. We have a source stating that it can hit a target pulling 7G and to do that, you ideally need to pull around 2.5/3x that number. Which is about 20-22G

Flame puts it best

Lateral acceleration is how many g the missile can pull in a turn (axial acceleration is how quickly it accelerates to speed). The math also checks out because as a general rule a missile needs to be able to pull approximately 2.5x - 3x whatever the target is pulling in order to be able to hit. So to hit a 7g manoeuvring target the Stinger would need to pull around 18-21g, which lines up with the 20g stated in the first document.

It may well be realistic. For example, compare VT1 and an Adats missile. Adatsa gets a fraction of a second’s speed and his missile is the best up to 4-5km in terms of controllability in the game.

And VT-1 takes longer to gain speed and reaches a better G only by 5-7 kilometers.

However, the Igla source states target 8g, which means 22-24g

I’m just saying, you guys are a little crazy. I’ve read so many accusations against the developer here from people who don’t even know 10% of it.

Only a few people here with me have come to an understanding of the problem

That formula its wrong if you use it on mistrals and stingers because they are rolling missiles and this formula is used to calculate the average on non-rolling missiles. Simple.

1 Like

All we can know for sure. Is that we have 2 sources that indicate 20-22G, Neither state max.

There are 2 possiblities

  1. This is the max, and they need to state clearly and model the missile accordingly. With an initially peak G of 20-22G, before dropping off to an overall average of 13 (though they need to make damn sure that soviet sources are accurate for use on a NATO missile)

  2. this is the average pull of the missile and the peak is much higher. In which case the missile is horribly wrong.

We’ll need more data and sources to confirm either way, but one thing is for certain. This dev post has only highlighted major issues with how they model things. They cannot be using soviet data, stating that “NATO can’t make anything better than the soviets” and then model based upon that. At which point, this is no longer a “realisitc” game, its an entirely fictional one and the game is dead

1 Like

How is it not true if by using it from an average of 13 we get exactly the same maximum 22 as stated in the manual?