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.
1 Like
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.
3 Likes
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
2 Likes
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
1 Like
Giving M1a1s a 5 sec reload and the T-80s not the correct 6.0 sec reload is egregious.
2 Likes
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)
3 Likes
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;
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