MANPADS Missiles and Overload: The Technical Details

[Segment]

Wow. Same for Igla. 8g maneuvring target with 310 m/s speed. And missile overload only 10G.

[vizender]

I would guess it’s because of the lower speed of the Igla, thus making it have a much smaller turning radius ? All Stinger, Igla and Mistral have somewhat comparable turning radius (unnerfed obviously). Now, with the IGLA being slower, it will have a harder time chasing fast vehicles compared to the other 2

[Catnip007]

Can any bug report be made out of this mess? That is the way to effect change, form up and submit a comprehensive bug report V2

[Catnip007]

Personally I feel @Flame2512 is best qualified to do so given his excellent synopsis.

[jony12a]

Hmmm…I find it very odd that there is no mention of the TY-90. That missile is not a MANPADS, but it was developed based on MANPADS.
And it currently reigns as the most powerful missile that can be carried by a helicopter (in some cases, more so than an aircraft missile).
I understand the lack of data as Gaijin said, but I find it strange that you did not apply this formula to that missile and do the calculations.
If you don’t want to give preferential treatment, shouldn’t the conditions be the same?

[Flame2512]

Apparently the TY-90 is not a rolling airframe missile (or at least uses two channel control) so Gaijin’s Dev blog doesn’t apply to them.

That said I think Gaijin’s Dev blog is wrong:

Why Gaijin is wrong about the Stinger (it should be 20g in game)

As everyone knows Gaijin recently posted a dev blog explaining their decision to give the Stinger a 13g overload in game. Their view is that the Stinger uses single channel control (which is correct), and that the documents giving a maximum overload of 20-22 g “indicate the peak overload achieved at the moment when the rudders are in the manoeuvre plane” and that as a result the average overload of the missile will be 63% of the peak overload (13 g). It is the second part of their reasoning I ta…

[vizender]

Also, can I mention that the mistral 3 that the French tiger carries is stated at 30G, meaning with those same calculations, it would bring it to 20G.
Also, it’s IRCCM should be very similar to the TY90. Thus, even if we took Gaijing’s values at face value, the Mustral 3 should still at the very least be equivalent to the TY90.
However, as gaijing still models only one mistral instead of 3, the tiger still carries half ass missiles.
Imagine if gaining made all R60 variants just the base R60, or all aim9s just an AIM9G, even for the F15…
But no, for the mistral, it’s apparently okay, even when mass, sensor tech, and advertised G load are so different

[Segment]

Correct. But I’m talking about these strange calculations with a factor of 3. Why 3? Then the Igla also needs to be given 24G = 8 * 3.

@LeGrandSarrazin

8*3=24

Well, wouldn’t you know it, that goes right along with the 25G overload for Mistral 1
Funny… init

7G was for Stinger, btw
Hence 7*3=21; just below 22G for Stinger

[vizender]

@LeGrandSarrazin Would explain it better than me, but that has to do with the speed of the missile itself. In order to track target maneuvering at X Gs, engineers deducted that the missile would need to pull at least 3 times that.
That is, because of the speed of the missile, the missile needs to turn much harder (so higher G load) to get a tight turning radius.
The Igla, going much, much slower, can achieve tight turning radius at far lower maximal G limitations.
That means that while the Igla is only 10.2G and the mistral 16G, the Igla can actually hit target turning at the same G as the Mistral or even better, just that it will have to fly for much longer.

Edit : here you can compare the turn radius (which is probably more important than the G load if you consider speed differences) MANPADS Missiles and Overload: The Technical Details - #437 by Kanelikainalo

[Segment]

@vizender

Would explain it better than me, but that has to do with the speed of the missile itself. In order to track target maneuvering at X Gs, engineers deducted that the missile would need to pull at least 3 times that. That is, because of the speed of the missile, the missile needs to turn much harder (so higher G load) to get a tight turning radius.

Target overload 8G
Mistral - 2.5M, we gets multiplier 3
Stinger - 1.94M, we gets multiplier 3
Igla - 1.7M, we gets multiplier 1.2?

I don’t think it works that way. He is wrong, at least until he shows how it is calculated.

@vizender

Edit : here you can compare the turn radius (which is probably more important than the G load if you consider speed differences) MANPADS Missiles and Overload: The Technical Details - #437 by Kanelikainalo

He use a formula to calculate the turn radius of an aircraft with constant g. This formula is not applicable for rolling airframe missile.

Devs explained it.

@OrsonES

The way the resulting force in the missile maneuver plane changes can be represented in a simplified form as a half-wave of a sine wave. The average resulting force in the maneuver plane over a half-period of rotation is equal to the integral of the change of the resultant force in the maneuver plane. Dividing it by the integral of the resulting force in the plane of the maneuver of a non-rolling airframe missile over the same time period, we obtain the ratio of maximum overload to the average overload over the rotation period.

[dedale_stargate]

ty90 is indeed not an rolling airframe.

Still, i think that missile is overperforming by a large margin, especially in the burn time area. The thing burns at mach 2.2 for its whole 12s flight, which, for a 20 kg missile (18kg for mistral) is a bit suspicious.

Not to mention, the mistral is technically not a manpads either, you need a tripod to fire it, it can’t be fired from shoulder

[dedale_stargate]

@Segment

He use a formula to calculate the turn radius of an aircraft with constant g. This formula is not applicable for rolling airframe missile.

He used the average G overload given by the devs, so it’s very much applicable.

Go in a game and try maneuvering a plane to 8g, the mistral won’t hit, while it should

[Segment]

@dedale_stargate

He used the average G overload given by the devs

No. I just recalculate it, he uses formula for aircraft turn radius.
You can’t get turn radius and overload without sacrificing speed. But for some reason you think that you can get speed and overload and turning radius at the same time. Explain this.

[LeGrandSarrazin]

Honestly, I’m not even gonna bother responding, and I wouldn’t waste your time either lol
It’s obv he’s having coping issues that Maybe Igla might be slightly worse than others, so is trying to justify Gaijin’s made-up nonsense

[vizender]

But when you talk about average G load, it does not matter what type of guidance system is used. That is especially true the faster the airframe rolls. Considering the Mistral rolls at a rate of 15 (corrected by LeGeandSarazin) times per second, the curve can be smoothed out on the average to work in a similar manner as a regular missile, hence why I still believe that the 8G → 24G rule can still be applied, as well as the calculation used above for turn radius.
And I m pretty sure that’s how the missile work in game. I don’t know if people have estimated the turning radius in game yet, bu that’s be interesting to see the difference

[LeGrandSarrazin]

15rps/900rpm*

[LeGrandSarrazin]

Also, I didn’t just make up the “3x rule”, which is more of a guideline and not a given for all missiles, obv:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/762218683266236436/997470423992250398/unknown.png

To be clear, this also says, “to ensure a hit”

You can still have a chance to hit targets with a lower gload, but the chances are greatly diminshed, which probly explains why Igla has about a 30-40% hit rate, vs 93% for Mistral 1 and 97% for Mistral 2…

[vizender]

Could you share the document ? I’d be interested to have a look at it in more details

[LeGrandSarrazin]

Sure, it was one of my sources for my Mistral report, so it was in there anyway:

sgs08zarchan.pdf

[cpt_baguette]

Moderators kindly avoid the topic