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;
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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 ?
1 Like
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?
1 Like
I don’t know it’s capabilities so I won’t comment.
Thermals help with finding enemies.
Autocannon help you against sudden, low-flying attacks.
Those things also increase the overall efficiency of the vehicle and should be looked at when determining the BR.
I’m talking about it if all those changes get implemented. At that point Stinger would be equivalent to 9M37M, which would mean Strela is, at best, equivalent to Ozelot.
That would put it down to 9.7 from 10.3.
1 Like
It’s the “Double V” Stryker hull(Think M1128), Noteworthy features include;
MHR radar(AN/RPS-42)
~15~30Km S-Band radar w/ 360 degree (4*95 degree) AESA coverage.
RIWP Modular turret
Standard configuration is the M914(M230 30mm cannon as found on the AH-64, downrated to 200RPM and Proxy / Airburst fuse added to the M789 HEDP (XM1223) as found on the AH-64 (51mm flat pen))
Missile configuration is either the Early 1x (4x) FIM-92 pod + 2x AGM-114L-C8 (has proximity fuse); or Late with 2x (4x)Stinger pods
Alternate configurations exist, some potential configurations are shown below.
The RWIP turret & MHR radar setup is also similarly utilized on the “C-UAS” AMPV variant.
Alternately the C-UAS DE prototype is also an option which adds a later variant of the MHR radar, a 70mm rocket (APKWS II) launcher, and a 26Kw laser.
And? how does that impact the Stinger? Improved Anti-Air capability isn’t a bad thing.
2 Likes
The variant with 30mm gun with proxy shells, 4x Stingers and 2x FnFs for AT use look pretty good for a multi-role vehicle.
That thing should definitely be higher than LAV-AD and looks like a perfect vehicle to fill the gaps between LAV and now-planned better AAs (probably ARH slingers), after we finally get some decompression in ground.
It impacts air vehicles that go against Strela.
Air vehicles as low as 8.3 could be seeing buffed up Stingers (Machbet 9.3), I don’t think that’s particularly fair.
Air vehicles as low as 8.7 could be seeing 9M37M, which I also don’t think it’s fair.
In order to implement this with your way of thinking, we first would need some serious decompression happening.
It won’t care about a jammer or active flare drops?
The game is such trash!
Go play Germany, you’ll have fun
1 Like
Nope, The jammer doesn’t operate in the UV band, and so the UV or Contrast channels bypass the emissions.
And the Flares are spatially separated from the aircraft which the Pseudo-Imaging takes care of since it can separate the target spatially from the flare, and that the Fare takes some time to reach peak brightness.
So a moving, flaring, ircm active aircraft should be hit by a stinger eh? Then those vehicles should be higher in br.
It’s totally unfair against helicopters
Why, is it not like Ground forces should some counter to the all powerful aircraft at any BR?
They should still only have an engagement range of 4~6km or so, so most of what they face would outrange them.
Also helicopters are always going to be more vulnerable to Anti-Air systems so to some degree that should be expected, since It’s not like the higher BR Helicopters perform any better against TELARs.
1 Like
6km is more than enough to completely shut down most helicopters they’d commonly face.
They’ll be able to face earlier helicopters with < 4km of range and some more advanced ones with Shturms that have 5km range.
2 Likes
They’re definitely higher than 4-6 km. I got hit about 3.5 miles away in a Mi-24D, and at a range of about 4.37 miles, an Lav-AD was locking my Su-34 earlier and firing.
So yeah the lock on range is way higher. In fact, some of those stingers almost got me, even pulling 10g+ turns, and flaring while flying away.
2 Likes
It’s due to the way Thermal emissions are simplified / modeled in game, which is proportionally related to thrust, which is not the case IRL.
Do you have the replay for sensor view? As per datamined values the FIM-92 is still limited to 13G.
In game the Stinger’s seeker (including basic ATAS, which I’ve just noticed is wrong.) Is modeled as Seeker Shutoff + FoV reduction, as it uses both the same methods as the AIM-9M and R-73, simultaneously.
1 Like