(English Translation)
And if we look here, oh hey, the supposed motors are screws and the actual sensor package of the 9K38 and it’s subsequent variants.
The actual production variants of the 9K310 never acquired either the sensor package or kick motors.
However, their prototype and initial designs did have such motors, yet were never accepted into service.
7 Likes
Its a lot simper than that, all the system does is figure out which direction the contact will be in after the post release roll (e.g. for the recessed stations on the F-4 / F-15, it rolls from the Cruciform to Cross layout for best Planar loading advantage), and subsequently appropriately setting the control surfaces, until the guidance signal is picked back up, or the boost motor burns out, whichever comes first.
It doesn’t use an INS in the truest sense, its also a thing for the entire Sparrow series of missiles, though as the motor changed, the limit on the launch angle was relaxed, from 10, 15, 25 degrees.
1 Like
“Creates a control force that ensures rotation”
Uh, I don’t see any solenoids on this design. Are you 100% sure this isn’t literally just making the missile spin because its a rolling airframe and it needs to do that?
1 Like
Yep, although in WT it would be INS, much akin to how the 114 preforms post launch.
Would be neat to see how it would improve the 7E and F/M, or if it would just mean sparrows dont always self die off the rail if they dont get guidance.
Would explain why the motors dont exist on production makes of the Iglas, as you can just do the same thing by just tweaking the rear fins.
It’s also exactly what the stinger does, which makes sense considering both Igla and Strela before it just stole the US design.
Thinking about it too that charge design is not at all optimal for high flow either, EG the dragon ATGM directly fires a charge in the direction that is needed and they are tiny by comparison.
This is more like a long burn motor, especially with the hollow cavity in it, as you said, this could be a slow burn gas generator to keep the missile spinning during flight, but angle rate, no chance.
New thread for this change here:
6 Likes
So cool soviets and russians publish manuals for curent usage for prototypes instead of production missiles
Missile gains rotation right with launch from tube and later by wings and destabilizers
Yep, just like how the manuals and tech documentation on the Yak-141 cited it’s sensor and ordinance capabilities that never existed or how the M1A2’s manual demonstrated how to arm and set up STAFF shells that were never produced.
3 Likes
Keep coping
Good argument, I guess you have nothing actually productive to add to this discussion then.
1 Like
Lol, I provided MANUALS, you provided nothing but just clear cope
So does the Stinger,
Maybe it’s a rough translation, but this says “To ensure rotation” like its a redundant feature. Is this powder charge system mentioned in the manual at all?
I provided you videos of the missile being used, with no visible turn after launch, before the main motor engages, and the missiles themselves without any visible motors that your manuals claim the missiles have.
Smooth metal and screws aren’t capable of generating thrust my guy, nor are proximity fuses.
2 Likes
Additional little bit too, the Piorun’s primary control fins are slightly curved to achieve the roll effect as well, with no visible motor components present behind the fins as well.
Ah here is a even better one, a 9K39 being fired by a Ukrainian soldier with no visible holes under the primary fins.
Cant get much more accurate than this, given any holes or the gas they would expel would be visible in this picture.
10 Likes
ha this topic is making its great return i see…
Buff to igla heh ? So uh, 22G for stinger, 25G for mistral, and mistral II and III when gaijin ? (just trolling a bit)
1 Like