Then why bother killing anything ?
2 Likes
Well i can’t just leave blatant lie alone there must be response so it won’t confuse people
1 Like
Your response to it shows otherwise
1 Like
I mean, this is just unfair… They provided the proof and it got accepted so why has nothing changed??? Isn’t that what they want us to do? When we complain about something they forward us to the bug reporting forum but this shows nothing happens anyway.
4 Likes
I don’t wanna get into the potential for Russian bias but i find this highly ironic:
Because it is something people have done as seen here:
Since they are accepted something SHOULD happen yet it has not. I don’t find it irrational that we keep discussing the problems with the stinger if nothing has happened yet even though they are accepted. What more can we really do?
4 Likes
Problem is in the game engine it cannot change missile characteristics during flight so compromise has been picked to set average characteristics instead of maximal and thus we have a underperforming missiles like R-77 with bloated resistance in supersonic speeds and Igla and Stinger and so on.
Every one is gimped but some people here have grandeur delusions so it’s hard them to see that.
Once again The G-Averaging Coefficient should only impact Rolling Airframes Missiles, that use an “Open” feedback loop for guidance corrections, and Bang-Bang Actuators. As the Igla does as outlined in the above article.
The Stinger (and with a very high likelihood the Mistral as well) use both a “Closed” Feedback Loop, and Proportional Actuators, and as such should not be impacted by the G-Averaging Coefficient that has been erroneously and arbitrarily applied, as is evident in the relevant referenced report.
I’m open to comment on where exactly you think any of the following report could be improved, or where the sources do not support any of the claims made.
Due to length constraints on the portal many of the non-primary sources and supporting evidence had to be stripped to make it fix the character and image limits, there is much more supporting evidence if you want it.
14 Likes
According to the invention, a rolling airframe autopilot has been devised wherein a single linear accelerometer provides adequate feed-back to stabilize a rolling airframe. According to a further precept of the invention, a pitch rate sensor may be incorporated with the linear accelerometer to damp the control signals and thereby to permit higher maneuverability without over stressing the airframe or components.
Why ? It says it has better manueverability it can pull more G but it doesn’t says that it not dependant on roll rate am i missing something ?
Because unlike the Igla & Redeye The actuators of the FIM-92 are not a binary system (Bang-Bang), thus the angle of attack of the fins can be modulated in concert with the instantaneous roll rate to create a net force in any direction (nominally aligned with direction commanded by the seeker) regardless of where they are in the rotation.
12 Likes
Mistral’s IRCCM right now feels almost non existent. Bites on flares way more than it previously did at the moment
1 Like
Bro the pilot could throw a lit cigarette out of the cockpit and they’d chase that over the plane, they’re absolutely pathetic missiles. On the Santal you’ve got a bank of 6 missiles ready to go and you’d be lucky if 2/6 hit anything.
not to mention we’re still stuck with the 80s version of the missile.
Mistral 2&3 are remarkable by their absence.
The seeker is also, as on every manpads and IR missiles in general, pathetically bad
2 Likes
Mistral 2 would be a lovely addition to the Santal. I’ve had better luck with lottery ticket than it’s missiles connecting to an aircraft, it’ll miss stuff flying in a straight line. Flares? Forget it… No chance. You could throw a half cooked warm noodle out the window and it’ll chase that instead.
heh tbh i had some success, i quite love santal.
The missiles are meh, but since they burn for very short and are quite fast, they can be quite surprising it seems.
Still they are no where near what they should be.
Regarding flares it’s indeed quite frustrating when the opponent is set on automatic preflare and ou can just stare at him.
In rear shot and once the missile is locked though, it basically has Magic II level of resistence, which isn’t stellar, but not that bad either i’d say
1 Like
I honestly just hate using the thing, had a much better time using stinger systems from other nations.
it’s usually a good idea to wait a bit before firing, because if the plane sees the missile from afar from an expected location it won’t hit.
SANTAL is also great at relocating, so abusing weird spots on some map can be a thing. If the CAS guy does not know where to look and does not see the missile departure, the Mistral will do the rest. If the CAS sees you, yeah it gets more complicated. You either have to relocate and hide, or deplete the plane of its energy by spamming missiles, which is not always efficient nor possible if the opponent knows what he’s doing
I just wish it could have its 24Gs tbh, but then obviously it would go higher in BR
3 Likes
Yeh i get what you are saying. I just don’t seem to have much luck with it, Annoyingly the Roland isn’t much of an upgrade afterwards XD
Roland can be summerized by 1 number :
35 X)
2 Likes
The santal only fires Mistral 1 in game. The mistral 2 would only come on the EC-665 tigers in game currently. There are a few ground vehicles that do carry Mistral 2 and 3 tho that could be added. The mistral 3 could be installed on a griffon, 4x2 missiles, with overall better performances than the strela, and maybe a bit worse than the IRIS-T SLS (but on a much more mobile vehicle)
4 Likes
Has anyone else been having issues with Stingers just straight up stopping tracking? No flares or anything, they just stop
Sorry about the quality, I had to screen record an Xbox clip because it wouldn’t export correctly
1 Like