Is there an explanation why Russian SPAA is vastly superior than Western ones? Why is there a delay in all these missile systems that make it impossible to hit anything nearby whilst Russian missiles leave the barrel pre-angled.
25 Likes
something something russian bias
Maybe there is one IRL? I’m not sure, but I wouldn’t mind seeing SPAA buffs.
7 Likes
Ah you see, Soviet engineers were simply better than western engineers and thus there is no way the US or any other nation could build something equal or better than the soviets.
27 Likes
I’ve never heard of such a thing, but I’d like to see the evidence of that at least.
At best I assume it’s another nonsensical thing like adding a safety feature for barrel collision to the Leopard that creates an almost 180 degree deadzone in a game without barrel collision, some sort of safety feature that has a delay for igniting the missiles that Russia as usual wouldn’t have.
It definetly gets injected from the tube before firing the main motor at least with the handheld version, but its a fraction of a second. But shouldnt be any guidance delay after the motor fires
2 Likes
Well, we all know if Russia couldn’t have done better, it cannot exist, that’s what Gaijin taught us.
8 Likes
Something weird in the Igla. Maybe something similar to this?
6 Likes
You don’t exactly understand what that “loud noise” does, do you?
1 Like
I love seeing Iglas and the Strela missiles being able to pull 50G’s and maneuver immediately upon launching, while Stingers continue to be castrated and have no ability to turn whatsoever!
10 Likes
Am I to assume only Russia knows what gyroscopes are?
2 Likes
No, it’s that it has a powerful enough all axis gyro, and never computers to do its job more effectively and turn its seeker head towards its target after launche.
1 Like
Gaijin was so kind as to give M4 a Igla version that has a Thrust Vectoring system. It puts missile in a position where it can lead to hit the target, even if it is not uncaged. TBH im not sure if that feature is real or not, no bias agains russia here, i just have not seen any proof it does happen.
As for Streal, out of all of them, it is a one that is not a Rolling Airframe, so it has better pull. All NATO RA missiles are underperforming, as Gaijin models them incorrectly (after the Igla).
5 Likes
If you’re interested in the true performance of MANPAD, then check out comments from user @tripod2008 in this thread. Very insightful
4 Likes
Once again an artificial buff for Russia.
Like back then when the ammunition was buggy, from the Russian tanks BVM T80U where the ammunition didn’t explode hahahahah as always Gajjin hahaha
2 Likes
I mean it surely makes a better argument to the performance of the missile than Gaijin saying… well Russia couldn’t do it so we think, we believe that the West could not either.
Who ever asked what they think or believe or what their interpretation is of the design of a missile, when was that ever grounds to buff or nerf a weapon because of their personal view of something, load of nonsense.
-We believe that
-Therefore, we assume
We hope that we were able to explain the principles of calculating the overload parameters for MANPADS
Calculating, as in they looked at the design and decided it couldn’t be better because it looked the same.
I think it’s pretty likely the Stinger is artificially nerfed, but none of it goes to explain why the Russian ones are vastly outperforming them, especially when these are FIM-92E’s from 1990 and beyond and the Strela is using a missile from the late 60s?
1 Like
I know you’re taking the piss, but there are some areas where the Soviets/Russians are more advanced in missile technology. Especially when it comes to ICBM. Not saying that Western SPAA isn’t under-performing in-game, but if there is one thing Soviets/Russians can do - it is missile tech (especially SPAA). Makes sense when you’ve got the US being held back by wars against insurgents and nations that pose no threat in the last 30 years, and political pressure to not upgrade missile tech in other areas (such as ICBM).
Well, if the documents didn’t explicitly say that 20G load is the average, you’re also only thinking and believing it is.
I’m all for SPAA buffs, but you’re giving Gaijin a hard time because their assumptions, all the while your arguments are also assumptions.
At no point is it mentioned that 20g is peak, and logically one would deduce that it makes the most sense that it’s not peak either considering the nature and intention of the document, and other missiles are also listed as average and not peak.
Assuming 20g is peak seems like a disingenuous interpretation of the documents.
Regardless, even if we go along with their narrative, which means Gaijin’s assumptions and believes outweigh official documentation and logic, which appears to be the norm, the Stinger underperforming so Russia can look better in comparison doesn’t begin to explain my original post where nothing is able to hit the close range air target in the test drive as it reacts too late, but the Russian missiles react so fast, it actually needs to counter act the initial reaction.
2 Likes
Is it mentioned that 20g is average, that’s my whole point ?
If it’s not, you’re just fighting assumptions with more assumptions, just thinking that yours are more true.
Maybe the Russian missiles are better at closer ranges ?
I don’t have an issue with Strela having the best IR missiles (except that Japanese thing), it’s like one or two steps higher in BR than Stinger slingers.
They are, as they were almost purposefully built for dealing with CAS and helicopters.
1 Like