Will we have the 9M120 Ataka(AT-9) for the Hind?

[NightTrain]

The Hinds were equipped with them in the mid to late 80's. They have more range and hitting power than the AT-6 and are radar guided. Can't get out of range fast enough of the mobile SAM systems like the Avenger and portable SAMS like the Stinger.  It presents a challenge but one you stand a good chance at losing with the AT-6's effective range and the AI simulating a human operating it and providing guidance which means the success of hitting is even less.  Accurately modeled though and no real complaints about it.  It gives you the level of technology that was being used at the time. My understanding is the late 70's.  

[sublime]

Yes it's confirmed to come later.

No it's not radar guided or fire and forget.  It's SACLOS just like the Sturm it has longer range and hits harder but it's not a different type of missile to attack with or anything like fire and forget.

[NightTrain]

1 hour ago, sublime said:

Yes it's confirmed to come later.

Thanks. The guidance details I got wrong. It's part of the AT-6 "family" of missiles.  

[sublime]

 

11 hours ago, NightTrain said:

Thanks. The guidance details I got wrong. It's part of the AT-6 "family" of missiles.  

Sure

[Avimimus]

There were rumours of a radar directed 9M120 for the Mi-28N... but I don't think anything came of it.

[sublime]

7 hours ago, Avimimus said:

There were rumours of a radar directed 9M120 for the Mi-28N... but I don't think anything came of it.

I highly doubt we ever will see it but I'd love a mi28 sim

[ttenor12]

Now that it is available, what's the range of these compared to the AT6?

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, ttenor12 said:

Now that it is available, what's the range of these compared to the AT6?

Identical. Both can reach 6km before battery runs out. With a crucial difference 

the Ataka is a heavier missile by 37%, it has a weaker boost stage but stronger sustain. The increase of inertia means it takes longer to build up speed and never reaches the speed of the Shturm, but maintains that speed for longer also with the help of the stronger sustain stage. The practical difference here is when both missiles reach 6km, the Ataka will be going faster. This faster speed will mean that it flies a smaller tighter spiral spinning faster, making it more accurate and able to respond to guidance inputs faster(since both missiles only have control surfaces on axis, it has to wait .5 Revolutions between making corrections when the control surfaces are pointed the right direction). 
 

so same range and roughly same speed over 6km, but Ataka will be more accurate at long range. A friend did an active pause launch and recorded on tacview both missiles, Shturm room 12.25 seconds to reach 5km, 15 seconds to reach 6km. Ataka took 12.75 seconds to reach 5km, and 15.5 seconds to reach 6km. This was a low altitude around 100m low speed launch I believe around 80kmh, so worst case scenario almost.

in comparison, the manufacture data for 0 speed 0 altitude launch has them both reaching 5km at 14.5 seconds, and the Ataka reaching 6km at 17.6 seconds .4 seconds before battery runs out. Apparently one real life manual for Mi-24V lists speed of Shturm being 390-520 m/s, and Ataka as 350-400 m/s. My friends tacview test has 530 m/s speed for Shturm and 500 m/s for Ataka. 
 

So it’s complicated, they both go as far, but for the increased weight the Ataka seems worth it and will have less CEP at 6km. If you go to Wikipedia and see that they list Ataka as Mach 1.6 missile and Shturm at Mach 1.2, this is a mistake where they list max speed for Ataka and average speed for Shturm 

Edited January 11, 2022 by AeriaGloria

[ttenor12]

12 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Identical. Both can reach 6km before battery runs out. With a crucial difference 

the Ataka is a heavier missile by 37%, it has a weaker boost stage but stronger sustain. The increase of inertia means it takes longer to build up speed and never reaches the speed of the Shturm, but maintains that speed for longer also with the help of the stronger sustain stage. The practical difference here is when both missiles reach 6km, the Ataka will be going faster. This faster speed will mean that it flies a smaller tighter spiral spinning faster, making it more accurate and able to respond to guidance inputs faster(since both missiles only have control surfaces on axis, it has to wait .5 Revolutions between making corrections when the control surfaces are pointed the right direction). 
 

so same range and roughly same speed over 6km, but Ataka will be more accurate at long range. A friend did an active pause launch and recorded on tacview both missiles, Shturm room 12.25 seconds to reach 5km, 15 seconds to reach 6km. Ataka took 12.75 seconds to reach 5km, and 15.5 seconds to reach 6km. This was a low altitude around 100m low speed launch I believe around 80kmh, so worst case scenario almost.

in comparison, the manufacture data for 0 speed 0 altitude launch has them both reaching 5km at 14.5 seconds, and the Ataka reaching 6km at 17.6 seconds .4 seconds before battery runs out. Apparently one real life manual for Mi-24V lists speed of Shturm being 390-520 m/s, and Ataka as 350-400 m/s. My friends tacview test has 530 m/s speed for Shturm and 500 m/s for Ataka. 
 

So it’s complicated, they both go as far, but for the increased weight the Ataka seems worth it and will have less CEP at 6km. If you go to Wikipedia and see that they list Ataka as Mach 1.6 missile and Shturm at Mach 1.2, this is a mistake where they list max speed for Ataka and average speed for Shturm 

 

Awesome response, was curious about why I should choose one over the other, and you provided everything. Thank you.