that is the problem we all have, we dont exactly know what specific changes externaly and internaly the western missles have compared to iglas. Gajin just saying ehhh good enough will work out somehow just feels wrong to us all. The information we have for the iglas is good, but it shouldnt be the bible for all existing manpads and the main sources we have, should be the targets to implement, like the 20G for Stingers. (In the same way swedish armor trials shouldnt be the bibles for tanks that are 30 years older then it)
12 Likes
Yep, I could accept them “compromising”. Admitting that they had to guess some of the data. But at a minimum we have 2 primary sources that state 20-22G peak G. But Flame makes excellent points suggesting that those were in reference to Average G and not peak. The fact those sources were dismissed because “reasons” is just frustrating
4 Likes
The information, not the missile. Dont quote half of the sentence without context to justify your feelings.
Yes, I did mention CG shift due to spent propellant.
However not just CG but Aerodynamic center shift due to various speeds.
You are ignoring the lift of the missile body…
Btw did anyone mentioned gyroscopic force yet? Igla might be spinning faster then the Stinger therefore it would need to overcome greater centering force form the gyroscopic effect.
There are so many variables in the missile aerodynamic, so if even slightly different when they add up it can easily result in double available overload for Stinger.
How does Gaijin know that the Stinger autopilot is not programmed to do hard turns at the expense of the energy ? Because with with every airframe you can go beyond optimal Cl/Cd ratio…
Which document contains such interesting data such as CL, CD , Autopilot programming etc for the AIM9? Since you know… such document has to be legally available to anyone…
1 Like
Can someone explain to me like i’m five how stinger can have twice as much average g compared to igla but have pretty close efficiency as igla? Because I don’t understand this moment.
Stinger: target 7g and 1110 km/hour
Igla: target 8g and 1116 km/hour
2 Likes
because western and russian countries have a different definition of what is reliable for engaging. The stingers can hit more G targets, but Western countries definition of reliable is just very strict, while russian definition is very lose and exagerating, its that easy. So we have high performance but underplayed capability on one side and low performance exagerated capability on the other side.
And why stingers perform so much better? A pletora of reason just read trough the thread if you are intrested
10 Likes
Do you have at least 1 proof for that? Like any documents with this definitions or something like that? Because without any proof that very bad explanation…
2 Likes
u mean like the several documents stating stinger pulls 20g that are getting ignored and you guys cant proof it isnt meaned as average?
We have official primary sources that state 20g for stingers and 22g for mistrals. While you try to justify worse performance with comparing it to a inferior russian missle. You dont see the problem there?
3 Likes
I don’t care how many G a stinger has on average. 10g, 20g, 30g I don’t care. Let the developers figure it out for themselves. I don’t have enough knowledge to judge them. There is a lot of evidence that speaks both in favor of 20g and against it.
That document everyone is referring to shows the same target g and velocity as the igla documents. I’m just asking for any normal explanation as to why this is so. I’m fine with even with “russian definition is very lose and exagerating” if you give me any proof or at least evidence for that theory.
2 Likes
I don’t know what Russia use as their standard. But in British manuals the performance figures given are nearly always for a 85% - 90% chance of passing within lethal distance. For example:
Skyflash SuperTEMP trial report:
Tornado F.3 Tactics Manual:
Jaguar Tactics Manual:
Phantom Tactics Manual:
13 Likes
Thank you. I will try to find something similar for comparison.
Oh no, If stingers will be buffed than my UK helicopters become stronger. Ofc I don’t want it…
I’m asking for any reasonable response because I couldn’t find answer for this myself. Not for “russian bias” whining without any evidence. As I said i’m fine even with “igla documents is very lose and exagerating” if you bring any evidence fot that claim.
8 Likes
evidence is here on the forum everywhere you just need to look around, same as ingame btw
I mean the best example is the answer from the devs
“We think” that’s all there is to it.
5 Likes
For the record, it’s 22G for Stinger (citing DIA) and 25G for Mistral 1, 32G Mistral 2 and 30G Mistral 3.
2 Likes
Im glad I saved this, but I still think the wildest thing is that by modelling the stinger, mistral, and igla the way they have, gaijin has actually flipped the effectiveness of the missiles entirely in favor of the igla (because of course they did):
Credits are not mine, somebody else made this post, i just have the tables they made saved.
They literally managed to flip MANPAD performance completely by being disengenuous.
How it should be (turn radius)
- Stinger
- Mistral
- Igla
How it is:
- Igla
- Stinger
- Mistral
12 Likes
Somebody ;)
2 Likes
And more,when igla is launched from heli,it would turn after eject from rack before main motor start,which give it a better close range performance.
Is this good enough evidence for you?
Because if that isn’t good enough for you, nothing will be.
6 Likes
So… What happened? This post was first taken seriously but then went nowhere?
People lost interest and moved onto the next topic to complain about. Also, between the comments from one tech mods and devs on the this threads flame’s argument basically fell apart.
1 Like
Lol what comments are you looking at???
Interfleet disagreeing with flame is honestly just more evidence that flame is right.