Yes. They dont have documentation evidence that the missile is able to track targets turning 16gs. They dont have evidence of the missile being capable of 16g’s maximum overload at all. For all we know the maximum could be anything from 10 to 16gs but there is nothing on the papers of the missile that says it can do 16g
That’s why it has a max of 16g and not 22.
Does that make sense?
Okay, then all tanks, which in the documents speed is specified in mph and not kph we reduce the speed, because it is not known how many kilometers, not miles per hour he goes.
And that doesnt make any fucking sense. One thing is coverting a measurement unit, other is guessing that one system can or cannot do.
You know, if you actually read the thread you would also see my suggestion to remove the efficiency problem of the Igla so it can keep pace with the western systems. Otherwise it’s going to be left behind since it is a poor system. They choose instead to hold back western systems
If 10.2 average, the formula says 16g max. The formula is derived from the documents
You cannot know that because you dont have evidence that the internal systems or even the structure can support 16gs.
Everything is proven according to the number of turns per minute and the principle of operation.
If you don’t like the formula, prove it wrong
yeah, and this is the most ignorant thing up to now, I’ve seen regarding this game.
This is like saying, if I can’t do something, noone else can, without trying to proof or disproof it.
Also this is assuming, that the russian, known tech, is the best possible, which is very unliekely at best (looking at improvements in all technologies in the last decades)
Yeah yeah the formula cannot even be used on stingers and mistrals because they are rolling airframes and the formula is for non-rolling ones.
2 Likes
I didn’t suggest using it on the stinger. According to the formula that is derived from igla data, we can convert igla’s average overload to its maximum overload.
The formula is correct as it is made for igla.
That would be 16g. The stinger has 20 or 22, the mistral 25.
How is this different from the current situation?
this formula makes assumtions though, and those don’t have to hold. With the different sources you can expect, that they don’t hold
My blessed man, how can you not see that applying a formula for a different type of missile, using a different missile, to guess the average g on other systems that don’t have the same control system and control surfaces wrong?
4 Likes
…the way its control method is used IRL contributes to its turn efficiency problem. That’s where this 66.37% efficiency comes from. The bang-bang method.
1 Like
The average on different systems can be higher or lower for what I care, but the method is wrong. Why dont they show the rolling missile calculation and just replace the result with 25g and try to find the medium.
I repeat you can not apply the formula to stinger but apply it to igla in reverse and get 16g
Mathematically yes, but unless they have documentation that sustains the physical ability to do it, it means nothing.
4 Likes
just saying the 2A7V was put into service in 2019
1 Like
Not the place to debate tanks.
not debating just correcting