Can we have our 'proper' Mistral missile back?

[Silversmith]

The current Mistral Missile is totally ineffective against flaring targets, a PK around 10-20% which is pathetic.  The mistral missile IRL has excellent flare rejection  due to its advanced Image processing and Narrow FOV.  .   Military Today  quotes  "The Mistral missile has a high kill probability. After firing more  than 3700 Mistral missiles of all variants during training it had a success rate of  92 to 95%" . The Manufacturer suggests 97%.  Other  public sources suggest around 80%.   I suspect that DCS is now using a generic 'Manpad'  seeker model  which is totally inappropriate for a modern missile such as the Mistral.   Its like using an AIm 9b seeker for an Aim 9x !      The ORIGINAL mistral model  used in DCS was pretty accurate representation of actual performance. 

[Ramsay]

57 minutes ago, Silversmith said:

The current Mistral Missile is totally ineffective against flaring targets, a PK around 10-20% which is pathetic.  The mistral missile IRL has excellent flare rejection  due to its advanced Image processing and Narrow FOV.

AFAIK Eagle Dynamics are now responsible for weapon performance in DCS and act as arbiters for what is/is not considered "realistic".

• You'll likely need to give feedback to them, including short tracks, .acmi or videos demonstrating against which targets/aspects you believe the mistral is  under performing.

• IIRC there are know issues vs AI helicopters due to their simplified (health bar) damage model and aggressive (perhaps unrealistic) use of flares.

57 minutes ago, Silversmith said:

After firing more  than 3700 Mistral missiles of all variants during training it had a success rate of  92 to 95%

A success rate of 92% during training says nothing of how well it rejects flares or it's battlefield success rate (just that it functioned well and the troops who used it were well trained).

Edited September 12, 2023 by Ramsay

[Kinkkujuustovoileipä]

We have made the various issues with the Mistrals very clear to ED some time ago. 

[BaD CrC]

ED imposed on PC their version of the mistral and we ended up with a pretty poor and unrealistic model compared to the initial version. I can confirm Pk is around 90%. On the other hand, it seems like the Igla's version has been modeled with a Pk way above the 50% it is in reality.

Edited September 12, 2023 by BaD CrC

[zerO_crash]

On 9/12/2023 at 10:46 PM, BaD CrC said:

ED imposed on PC their version of the mistral and we ended up with a pretty poor and unrealistic model compared to the initial version. I can confirm Pk is around 90%. On the other hand, it seems like the Igla's version has been modeled with a Pk way above the 50% it is in reality.

 

Where did you exactly check Igla-1 performance in DCS BaD? Sure, first generation of manpads have poor PK, that goes for Red Eye/Stinger as well as Igla-1. Surely you don't mean the strelets on Ka-50 which has 9M342?! That is Igla-S, also known as "Igla Super". Back when it was released, it had a unclassified PK of more than 95%. Classified is most definitely higher. It's hard to compare based on loose data, but Polish Piorun is the most efficient manpad in the west based on feedback from Ukraine. Igla-S plays in that realm, hence why aircraft tactics have changed to long range attacks on both sides. For the record, Verba is entering service for some time now, as a successor to Igla-S. They are pretty much the most efficient manpads in the world, bar none.

 

As to Mistral, its claimed efficiency is 96% PK, however those are synthetic tests. I find no actual combat results confirming these statistics in the field. Assume them similar, since little information from wars ever reach disclosure, and plackards are all we have to go off in case of Mistral. 

Edited January 23 by zerO_crash