it is still quite situational, most of the time you wont be able to use photocontrast on a heli as they fly low, and there the ir seeker of the strela isnt able to pick them over a km or even less
The Type 93 and 81 are imaging infared not photocontrast, their seekers are superior in every way to the strelas, but in game they are identical which should not be the case.
Photocontrast in game is immune to countermeasures, that is a giant boon over other comparable IR missiles currently.
The strela should be 10.0 as of now, it’s performance at it’s BR is comically better than it’s contemporaries at that bracket, its not even a contest anymore.
4 Likes
Strela is 9.7 BR max. The rockets have a range of only 5km which is somehow not much.
Type 81 is at 10.0, and should be at least at 11.0.
This is currently F&F’s best SPAA. Rockets 10km range, lock range targets practically from very far away.
But this is not a topic for such chitchat.
Here it’s about adding passive detection for Strela-10M2
No, it was changed cause one of the tech mod’s found document’s that supported it had gen three thermals.
Can any other of the other vehicles in game use passive detection.
If they modeled IRST for Ozelot then why not for strela-10?
They could introduce something like this for Strela-10 without the spinning marker
1 Like
What? That it had 3rd generation was known for years. First reported in March of 2021 by Yedidya from Justin’s squadron. This had nothing to do with a tech mod finding anything, when they were hand fed all the information ages ago.
Here you go, a couple of them in fact by many people, all included primary sources that the camera is of 3rd generation, but “not a bug”;
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9V25FzwYqvd6
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/seoXUq7kbCS6
One of the reports was closed down on the basis of “wikipedia is not a source”, while the document presented was the manufacturer’s datasheet for the camera, lmfao.
What does IRST have to do with passive detection?
I detailed my take on how the passive detection of the Strela-10M2 works in another discussion. Since the topic got moved back here, I am reposting it. I am no expert of the Strela, I only wrote this based on the documents I read. Anyway, I hope this helps.
Do you see those pairs of boxes on the hull of the Strela? From what I understand each one of them scans with radio waves a certain radius around the vehicle to spot aircraft. When one is found, the system will warn the commander and give him the direction. The launcher is then pointed towards the target, either automatically or by the gunner. The box at the launcher’s base (right side of the gunner’s window in the last picture) gives the exact azimuth of the target, I guess for communication between the crew and other batteries. Imagine an RWR or a laser warning system that warns you of nearby aircraft by giving you their direction.
It sounds quite complicated, but one way I think this could be modeled into the game would be by copying the radar HUD of the Ozelot and removing the bar that spins like a clock hand since there’s nothing spinning, just stationary radars all around the Strela.
This feature would be handy since unlike most other nations, Russia doesn’t really have an AA with a good radar dish (the Chaparral lacks that but the US has the M247 which has HE-VT and scans much better than the Shilka and the LAV-AD which has thermals). This means you must mostly rely on your eyes to find targets since sound isn’t that reliable with supersonic jets.
I hope this helped a bit, passive detection isn’t that simple to understand and there’s not much information about it outside of manuals.
If I made any mistake, be sure to correct me @Smoak741
4 Likes
This doesn’t explain how they found a document “supporting it”… he just figured out output resolution isn’t the means to an end…
The lower resolution was also explained in a bug report 2 years ago by Yedidya, meaning it took them two years to acknowledge it, crazy innit? At the same time BVM with the same exact resolution IRL got third generation camera from the get go, lmao.
The Ozelot’s IRST is a active search system, it is not at all the same as what is displayed here as RWRs cannot provide anything but a general direction unlike the Ozelot’s IRST. No RWR can provide anything more than a general direction. You can see the search system spinning ontop of the Ozelot while using the vehicle scanning for targets.
To the same end, the system on the Strela only receives radar emissions, it cannot emit itself, otherwise it would be a active search system as you cannot be a passive radar related system if you emit radiation.
Neither system should be compared because the Ozelot’s can provide a direct azimuth, range and elevation, this system cannot, as RWRs cannot provide either of the former.
2 Likes
There are passive methods for range determination, a known threat database and observed power used as a reference for example.
Range rate systems that observe Doppler-Shift and the rate of change of Azimuth among others.
The AN/ASB-19 for example solves a similar problem without any form active range determination.
The only issue is that I don’t think that the system could provide elevation since there are apparently only two receiver locations and they are not offset in elevation.
“Only” 1 year.
Strela doesn’t use IRST, nor does the visual model have IRST equipment.
@Shadow_Monarch
That’s more about making decisions without knowing why things are the way they are.
They knew BVM’s thermals was accurate but didn’t know why.
Now they know why, and can make more informed decisions about thermals on vehicles.
They don’t scan anything with radio waves. They are radio direction finders, they don’t emit anything. Thay detect any radio emittions (not only from radars, any).
1 Like
Weird how you used a picture with the old testdrive for the M163. Could it - just maybe - be that you are being disingenuous and trying to claim the M163 has search radar when it never had and never will have?
The HUD on the M163 was purely a remnant of the early radar implementation, it NEVER had any search functionality and because of that got removed AGES ago, which is why you had to pull out such an old screenshot …
3 Likes
wtf? i just gave an example that strela and m163 both have radio tracker radar (that big satelite) but m163 had this HUD. I didnt know that they removed it.
1 Like
Like that stopped them from keeping the Israeli Chaparral at 10.3 lol.
Which is now worse than the Strela mind you lol.
1 Like
Performance and BR of most SPAAs around this range is questionable to say the least.
Strela and Wiesel should share the same BR to begin with, Type 81 is undertiered by several BR steps, all the while IR missiles are trash and will get outranged by helis at or below their BR, which is comical.
Why would someone even spawn, let’s say, LAV-AD and then not being able to lock a 9.3 heli at ~3.5km distance, while his missiles are more than capable of reaching you in return.
Total disgrace.
3 Likes
I took the Strela out for a ride yesterday, the performance difference was so massive that, if not for Strela’s lack of scanning radar, it would be unironically better than Rolands. I got air kills that I’d never get with Stingers, ever.
Then there’s the Israeli Imp. Chap at 10.3, to which the current Strela is straight up superior (no joke).
TAN-SAM - > 11.0 (could actually go higher, I’ve faced it on the dev server and had problems in a MiG-29… A MIG-29).
Imp. Chap (ISR) - > 9.7
Strela - > 10.0
The only way I see it.
If Gaijin ever fixes Stingers to 22G pull and gives them DL and their fancy mechanics, I can see Ozelot going to 10.3
Why would someone even spawn, let’s say, LAV-AD and then not being able to lock a 9.3 heli at ~3.5km distance, while his missiles are more than capable of reaching you in return.
Something something IR seeker can’t pick up their signature at longer ranges… yea, if they’re FIM-92A, but we have FIM-92E & K.
Like, 92K uses Data Link for targeting, it should NOT CARE about the seeker’s limitations, and be able to engage all sorts of target out to the missile’s kinematic range limits.
5 Likes