Assuming that the reference for evading the Aim-9L wasnt in the context of it being used as a SAM, and instead being used by an enemy aircraft, then comparing it and any documents to that for defending against a ground launched stinger, would of course have signficant and meaningful differences and thus shouldnt be used for comparison in this case.
5 Likes
It can. It depends on the launch conditions.
Right now in-game Stinger is able to hit 7G target at 300 m/s in some situations.
For example:
- TCA = 0 deg (pure tail-on), launcher speed = 0, target speed = 300 m/s, altitude of both = 200 m, 7 G turn
Launch from 1000 m - miss
Launch from 1500 m - hit - TCA = 90 deg (abeam), launcher speed = 0, target speed = 300 m/s, altitude of both = 200 m, 7 G turn on the missile
Launch from 1000-3500 m - miss
Launch from 4000 m - hit
2 Likes
So it is entirely and completely useless for hitting anything within a minimum distance?
It doesn’t matter. AIM-9L launched from enemy aircraft in common case is more dangerous than AIM-9L launched from the ground and at least not less dangerous than Stinger launched from the ground. Of course if you have flares you can defeat AIM-9L easier than Stinger, but it is not about maneuvering.
Since it is somewhat relevant to the topic, the Magic currently underperforms in maneuverability according to the documents … should be able to peak at 35G as soon as 1.25 mach speed for the missile. Currently in-game the turn radius is huge and it doesn’t maneuver quite that well off the rail when launched at 1.25 mach.
There is also the concern of the magic 2, which should be 50G. I understand it is slightly off topic, but perhaps you’re not properly considering seeker limitations for the AIM-9D/G/H… the latter having improved track rates and actuators which (to me) indicates enhanced maneuvering envelope.
Then, the stinger. Perhaps if you underestimated the maneuverability of the aforementioned missiles you are being too restrictive on the available overload by speed of the stinger? The peak overload may not be 22… But I suspect it should be capable of 13G maneuvering much sooner than it currently is.
What are your thoughts on this?
1 Like
In the case of escaping the 9L it does mention that in tail aspect the aircraft must be moving at a minimum of mach 1.33 ASL, 1500 feet per second ASL, which would be under the peak cruise velocity of even the FIM-43, which is mach 1.7 ASL, 1913 feet per second ASL. Given the XFIM-92A is cited as having a superior motor section to the FIM-43, it could be speculated that the lateral performance needed to evade the XFIM-92A in the same launch conditions is much higher, given the inferior predecessor of the XFIM-92A already outperforms the AIM-9L in a ground launch scenario, at least in sheer energy retained.
3 Likes
That is my greatest issue with the stingers currently, They have a minimum effective range. To me, no matter whether the 22G is just for the first few seconds, or the entire flight time. The fact they cannot hit something that is too close tells me something is deeply wrong with their current state and likely lacking in the amount of G they can pull
1 Like
The aim-9L is to be beat with energy depletion strategy when it is fired from air, instead of trying to ‘‘outmaneuver’’ the G load of the missile. The above mentioned tactic bleeds all of the speed from the missile. When being engaged by a stinger, it is very likely that the missile is not going to run out of energy and you have to employ different strategies against it. You have to maneuver harder to beat this type of missile, even when it has less G load, as you are working against the G load itself instead of the energy it has.
While it is specific to the situation which missile is a more dangerous threat, you work differently against them which is why the maneuvers against each missile and the G load’s used for maneuvering can’t be used for comparison of the missile’s differences.
Making the 9L pull its full 30g with those big fins will cause the missile to lose its energy. Forcing the stinger to pull G’s in most engagement situations won’t affect the energy state in a negative way due to the way how the stingers are employed. You have to beat the G load factor. This is why you have to maneuver harder, yet by duration, your maneuver can be shorter instead of dragging the G’s constantly.
This explains the differences between the maneuvers and the specifics of how they want you to maneuver. It is not because ‘‘one missile more dangerous than other’’. It is because they are to be beat differently.
4 Likes
It is difficult to find such data, more often we find out this by examining min launch range from envelopes. Would be interesting to see.
In that case tracking rate is not a limiting factor - it is lower than limit even for AIM-9D.
No references claim that AIM-9 G and H pull more G.
1 Like
May be for Stinger something there needs to be tuned. And not only for Stinger.
For Igla this looks more or less Ok according to the performance references.
4 Likes
It is difficult - yes. Now only uncaging helps Stinger not be worser than Igla in situations like launch on beaming targets.
Thats the thing though and what has left me personally the most confused from the dev-blog. Assuming for a moment that you are correct and that the Stinger has an “average” G of 13G. Then what is the Stingers “max overload” in game?
Can it still initially hit 20-22G before dropping off rapidally to 13G?
There is only 3 ways to interpret the data provided by Flame on this matter
-
The missile can pull 20-22G
-
The missile has a max G pull of 20-22G but drops off rapidly to 13G
-
The data hes provided (and by extension both the US mitliary and the RAF) are wrong/inaccurate.
Based upon, Bug reports, the Dev blog and the stat cards in game. The Max G = 13G. Not the average. Even if the average is 13G, it should still intially hit 20-22G. That could make a massive difference for getting onto target if its closer. I’ve had stingers miss shots against a target nearly in line with my heli (or even coming straight at me) because it simply couldnt line itself up in the few seconds it takes a jet to go from 3km away to shooting their guns at you. (especially as it seems to always loft slightly as well)
14 Likes
Does in game thrust vector angle corespond with real life angle? Because if files are interpretated correctly, R-73 has only 4.05° thrust vector angle in game and it seems to be too small.
How is UV related to photo contrast? Dual band seeker (IR+UV) is used for IRCCM that’s already modeled in game.
1 Like
@k_stepanovich
Is there a reason man-portable anti air missiles haven’t received the reduced-time for warm up of standard air to air missiles?
Always wanted to know the answer to this.
2 Likes
That would help too. If there is a min range for these missiles, having a long spool up time really doesnt help
3 Likes
Do you have the lunch perimeters for the Stinger or is this still supposition?
Additionally, when a DevBlog says something like “we feel” it removes credibility with the audience reading it.
7 Likes
In the case of said seeker it also provided a substantial acquisition range boost against targets in all conditions as well.
As stated above, it allowed the seeker to acquire targets in poor conditions as if the system was engaging them in a clear sky.
1 Like
yeah, they should see in the real war and accept it because Stinger already combats proven but i’m surprise that even Stinger already proved it effectiveness in recent war they still don’t believe that how good stinger really are SU-30 SU-25 KA52 cruise missile etc. yep, they are victim of Stinger what more do they need shootdown UFO?
Dev you can’t have any excuse when thing already combat proven and there many source people provided why even try to close eyes and ears? just admit it because combat proven are one of the best sources how it perform.