legacy 9M31 for SA-9 / Strela-1

[twistking]

Based on it's performance, i assume that we have the Strela-1 shooting the modernized 9M31M.

To better cater for cold-war jets and missions it would be nice to also get the Strela-1 with its legacy 9M31, as the M version is super brutal in anything that's not packing 200 flares...
I'd hope that the legacy version could be "survivable" in an F-5 or similar...

Edited July 26, 2022 by twistking

[bies]

Plus early NATO launcher like Redeye.

[Northstar98]

17 hours ago, twistking said:

Based on it's performance, i assume that we have the Strela-1 shooting the modernized 9M31M.

To better cater for cold-war jets and missions it would be nice to also get the Strela-1 with its legacy 9M31, as the M version is super brutal in anything that's not packing 200 flares...
I'd hope that the legacy version could be "survivable" in an F-5 or similar...

Okay, fairly sure you're correct when looking at ausairpower and comparing it with the SA9M31.lua file:

• The maximum altitude looks correct for the 9M31M.
• The minimum altitude looks correct for the 9M31M.
• The minimum engagement range doesn't match with either.
• The mass doesn't appear to match with either.

Edited July 26, 2022 by Northstar98
corrected

[twistking]

@Northstar98 thanks for checking! I just tested within the Sim and concluded that the performance has become so good (It used to be more susceptible to flares when i started with DCS) that i couldn't see any of those shortcomings that directly led to the development of the modernized version very early in the system's life. The legacy missiles hit probability was deemed not high enough back then; the DCS version on the other hand kills everything that's not pumping out flares en masse.

Like with the first gen manpads, i'm looking at this more from a gameplay and less from a historical accuracy perspective, because the systems we have in the sim are just too strong for cold war jets, while weaker systems would also add much variety for modern jets too.

I think currently the 3d model is of the legacy missile, although i'm not sure, since i could not find pictures of the M. I would not really care, if in the future the legacy and M would share the same model even. Of course different models for each would be appreciated still...

Edited July 26, 2022 by twistking

[Raviar]

On 7/25/2022 at 8:27 PM, twistking said:

Based on it's performance, i assume that we have the Strela-1 shooting the modernized 9M31M.

To better cater for cold-war jets and missions it would be nice to also get the Strela-1 with its legacy 9M31, as the M version is super brutal in anything that's not packing 200 flares...
I'd hope that the legacy version could be "survivable" in an F-5 or similar...

 

DAMN, Until now I thought this guy is using OLD missile 9M31!
No wonder why its damn so deadly! I wish for SA-7 and OLD heat seeking SAMs. we have mostly AC from 60s to 80s, and a few 90s(Except Heilos and JF), but the SAMs all are 2000s ! 
 

 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Raviar

[Northstar98]

9 hours ago, Raviar said:

DAMN, Until now I thought this guy is using OLD missile 9M31!

Yeah, that's the problem when DCS uses completely ambiguous names in the unit list. Though the 9M31M is early 70s.

I'm guessing though its a lack of fidelity that causes it to behave as it does. It uses a photocontrast detector, operating in the visible spectrum, not IR (400 - 650 nm according to this - within the visible band).

This grants limited all aspect capability, with the downside of being more limited by weather conditions. My guess is that its a lack of fidelity in DCS that results in what we see. Looking at the same source above, the 9M31 (and 31M as it uses the same type of seeker), can only track targets against clear sky, away from the sun and away from the horizon.

9 hours ago, Raviar said:

No wonder why its damn so deadly! I wish for SA-7 and OLD heat seeking SAMs. we have mostly AC from 60s to 80s, and a few 90s(Except Heilos and JF), but the SAMs all are 2000s !

Most of our aircraft is from the late Cold War and into the 2000s. Apart from the HQ-7b and Igla-S (EDIT: and NASAMS II), none of our air defences are newer than the 90s.

The 9K31M Strela-1M is from the early 70s.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Northstar98
corrected - thanks WinterH

[WinterH]

Based on my DCS experience with it, I really don't know if I'd put current SA-9 and super brutal in the same sentence myself, and I'm a mediocre virtual pilot imo :))

But I really think that we need more early generation anti air missiles in DCS. Especially old MANPADS are crucial in my opinion. Redeye, Strela-2 and 3, Blowpipe, early block Stinger etc. Some BLUE towed and/or emplacement AAA for Cold War would be great to have too.

[Northstar98]

1 minute ago, WinterH said:

Based on my DCS experience with it, I really don't know if I'd put current SA-9 and super brutal in the same sentence myself, and I'm a mediocre virtual pilot imo :))

But I really think that we need more early generation anti air missiles in DCS. Especially old MANPADS are crucial in my opinion. Redeye, Strela-2 and 3, Blowpipe, early block Stinger etc. Some BLUE towed and/or emplacement AAA for Cold War would be great to have too.

Completely agreed.

[twistking]

6 hours ago, WinterH said:

[...] I really don't know if I'd put current SA-9 and super brutal in the same sentence myself, and I'm a mediocre virtual pilot imo :)) [...]

Fair enough. What i ment was that it's a system that you would absolutely avoid in - for example - an F-5, while it would be more fun to have SAMs that you could "brawl" with a bit even in the lower-tier / older jets. I did not know however that the M uses the same seeker. I was just assuming that the legacy missile had a worse seeker, that would have made it a more interesting missile in that regard, since my issue with the current implementation is its resistance to flares. However this is maybe even realistic with the nature of the seeker and it's just the other limitations (that northstar pointed out) that are not modelled at all...

Edited July 27, 2022 by twistking

[WinterH]

7 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Apart from the HQ-7b and Igla-S, none of our air defences are newer than the 90s.

Hmm wouldn't NASAMS be kinda later? 

[Baco]

I agree fully we need legacy air defenses for cold war era jets. Gameplay in DCS is getting ridiculus either WWII or ultramodern and all teh FF mdules are in between... Please give use coherent toys to play sandbox with.

 

Thanks!

 

[Northstar98]

39 minutes ago, WinterH said:

Hmm wouldn't NASAMS be kinda later? 

You're absolutely right, forgot about that one.

We have NASAMS II, which I think  is somewhere around the mid 2000s.

[twistking]

*bump*

With more and more cold war jets being released, we need earlier generations of IR-SAMs!

Not a lot development effort needed, as the launcher could use the same model and only the missile itself would need to be redone.

[WinterH]

Bump for legacy SA-9, but also legacy MANPADS of both West/East origins. Really necessary for a lot of mission making opportunities, as well as greater enjoyment of a lot of the modules.

I would love to bring an idea to attention, if we are to get these at the current visual standards ED pursues for new AI assets, they will take an incredibly long time, and a lot of effort/cost. Thus, they may be deemed lesser priority with other such things already in the pipeline. But I personally would be extremely happy to just get another unit with current SA-9 model, but with the other missile, as well as older MANPADS systems wielded by current US, Ru, and Ins infantry. Waiting for the "up to scratch" artwork for them would be they wouldn't be anytime soon, or even not planned. If, however, we get these needed assets available in the sim, we can enjoy our existing modules a lot better already fairly quickly, and at a minimum development cost to ED, and their visuals can be updated as time and resources/priorities allow.