Really good question, doesn’t the Stinger have IRCCM?
When trying to lock a Ka-52 from any angle with a 9M, it doesn’t work. Could’ve sworn the 9M has IRCCM as well.
I seem to remember different angles from the front/sides the Su-39 that I was also able to not lock.
The Mi-24P in the German tree ALSO has IRCM, but it seems to not work as well.
Could it be that IRCM is really only functioning for certain aircraft…? If so, the point stands.
T80 hull with amazing turret armor an pen agianst m1 abrams that doesnt even have 400 pen
Just sad
Giving 5s reload to M1A1 without doing the same to Merkavas is egregious.
I have no idea why it “needed” reload buff in the first place.
I think our MANPADS in the game have much stronger IRCCM than missiles like 9M or R-73.
I don’t think I ever seen Stinger getting flared while using them, meanwhile defeating 9M/R-73 is pretty common.
Correct my guy! The Su-34 should be 14.0 or 13.7
Interesting.
wonder if anyone here might know the difference in the 9M IRCCM vs a MANPAD one. Info probably easy to find on MANPADS, 9M maybe not so much.
Same, only time my stingers fail is too much G
I think the point is, ircm only seems to really work on planes, not helicopters.
Which means half of Russian aircraft aren’t working at they should.
As IRCM should Jam IRCCM a good bit, mix in the fact I was flaring. There should’ve been no way an ozelot or LAV-AD should’ve been able to nail me with an atgm.
I honestly think it’s for balancing. But it’s totally BS for the Mi-24D as it doesn’t have good ATGMs, and to add to it, it’s massive, gets hit by anything and falls apart, not to mention the fact of it gets hit by a .50 cal it will generally knock out all the weapons systems.
Then all the spaa which can easily counter it.
All in all, helicopters are treated poorly compared to planes
Giving M1a1s a 5 sec reload and the T-80s not the correct 6.0 sec reload is egregious.
Optical lock ignores IRCM doesn’t it?
The missile would need IRCCM and ECCM to burn through a dazzler style IRCM
(these acronyms are annoying lol)
As far as I can tell, only the strela has optical lock.
Strela, Type 93 and Type 81.
That makes even less sense then, that a stinger hits helis so reliably
Merkava armor just need to be fixed its should have amazing armor but gaijin keep ignoring all the bug reports
Facts. Also an issue in sim rn with ai ground forces just being way way too quick to acquire targets and way too accurate. You approach a target, even in vietnam br, and at 3km, far before you can say fire a rocket(only agm works) you will be one hit sniped out of the air. No evasive flying or flying low will save you. Even if you avoid detection and appear at the last second over these units, they insta lock and snipe you faster than you can press the trigger. Approaching off their radar SHOULD result in a surprise attack.
The POST Seeker on the FIM-92B and later variants uses a dual band (IR/UV) Pseudo-imaging (Rosette scan) technique.
Especially with the later Reprogrammable memory variants, it’s not going to be caring about a Jammer. Of course this is if it was modeled properly;
This would make them great 11.0 AAs (not).
Why would any of them be that high when the Strela, which remains the superior system(due to lacking detailed IR modeling) is 10.3 /10.7?
And anyway they should set the yardstick for SAMs so things above them should come down in BR instead of going up considering their role and the upcoming Static / Multi-Vehicle systems, since a significant expansion to the maximum BR to account for them is unlikely.
With all of that modelled 9M37M wouldn’t be superior to Stinger.
Why would LAV-AD sit at the same BR as the Strela (with on-par missiles) when it’s also much more mobile, has thermals, autocannon and Hydras ?
Makes absolutely no sense.
You do realize this would push Strela down, right ?
Because the Sgt. Stout (M-SHORAD Increment I) exists? and none of those extra features help kill Aircraft.
And how exactly does that impact the fact that the current implementation of the FIM-92, ATAS & MIM-72G is wrong?