Some questions about Ataka/Shturm and Vikhrs

[Xeno426]

Hopefully this is the correct forum for this topic, but I'm confused about the designations of the aforementioned weapon systems.

 

I've seen the Vikhr designated 9A1472 (online and on these forums) and 9A4172 (in the manual and the game). Which is correct? Furthermore, why isn't it 9M1472? I've never seen "A" used in the GRAU designation for a missile. To my knowledge, "M" is used for missiles and "K" is used for the complete complex.

 

 

According to Jane's Air Launched Weapons, the AT-12 "Swinger" is the 9M120 Ataka/Vikhr, first making an appearance at the '91 Dubai Air Show. The 9M120M/9M121 is called the Vikhr-M, and carries the DoD designation AT-16. The 9M114 is the AT-6 "Spiral", and the 9M114M1 "Shturm 2" and 9M114M2 "Shturm 2" are both the AT-9 "Spiral 2". The "Shturm 3" is also found in a four-round pod. How much of this information is correct?

 

According to Wikipedia (unreferenced, of course) the AT-12 is the 9K118 Sheksna. However, according to Designation-Systems.Net, there is no 9K118. The "Sheksna" name is instead applied to the 9K116-2, falling under the AT-10 "Stabber" NATO designation.

Finally, in DCS the Mi-28 carries the 9M114 Shturm, IIRC the AT-6 "Spiral".

 

What is the proper designation for these systems? Is the AT-12 really the DoD designation for the 9M120? Is the 9M120 the "Ataka-V" that the Mi-28 supposedly uses? If not, what is the 9M120? Is there any truth to the 9M120M being the Vikhr used by the Ka-50/Su-25T?

Edited August 16, 2011 by Xeno426
clarification

[Xeno426]

Bumping in hopes of a response.

[virgo47]

This one really is funny. Some sources, including Wikipedia, mention 9A1472 (one, four, ...), other sources - including DCS - uses 9A4172 (four, one...). "Google battle" with search result count is mostly 50:50 (not that it necessarily indicates where the truth is), so I have no idea what it really is called. In any case, it makes the searching for more info more... interesting, I guess?

[Northstar98]

Holy thread necro! Oh well, never mind.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

Hopefully this is the correct forum for this topic, but I'm confused about the designations of the aforementioned weapon systems.

I've seen the Vikhr designated 9A1472 (online and on these forums) and 9A4172 (in the manual and the game). Which is correct? Furthermore, why isn't it 9M1472? I've never seen "A" used in the GRAU designation for a missile. To my knowledge, "M" is used for missiles and "K" is used for the complete complex.

The Vikhr is a bit of a problem child when it comes to designations.

The complex is 9K121 (and I think there's also a 9K121M). The baseline missile is the 9M127, there's also a 9M127M and possibly also a 9A1472.

Like you, I've never heard of an 'A' designation in a GRAU index to denote a missile, though apparently both the 9M127M and 9A1472 refer to the Vikhr-1 variant. I've no idea where the "9A1472" designation comes from, it may be a mis-designation or a western invention (it's not the only one, the MiG-29A is another example - there's no such thing as a MiG-29A, it's just MiG-29 (9-12)).

For every variant the NATO designation is AT-16 Scallion.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

According to Jane's Air Launched Weapons, the AT-12 "Swinger" is the 9M120 Ataka/Vikhr, first making an appearance at the '91 Dubai Air Show. The 9M120M/9M121 is called the Vikhr-M, and carries the DoD designation AT-16. The 9M114 is the AT-6 "Spiral", and the 9M114M1 "Shturm 2" and 9M114M2 "Shturm 2" are both the AT-9 "Spiral 2". The "Shturm 3" is also found in a four-round pod. How much of this information is correct?

The 9M120 Ataka is designated AT-9 Spiral-2. I've never heard of a 9M121.

NATO names/designations don't usually change with variants, and they'll usually append a letter on the end of the number.

So far I've seen 9M114M1 Shturm M1 referred to as AT-6b Spiral, and the M2 as AT-6c Spiral.

The Mi-28 can carry 8 on the outer wing stations, but I guess there's nothing stopping them from mounting 4, can't say I've seen a 4-round pod though.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

According to Wikipedia (unreferenced, of course) the AT-12 is the 9K118 Sheksna. However, according to Designation-Systems.Net, there is no 9K118. The "Sheksna" name is instead applied to the 9K116-2, falling under the AT-10 "Stabber" NATO designation.

Never heard of the 9K118.

As far as the missile system goes, it's used on the T-55AM (9K116-1 "Bastion" [AT-10 Stabber]), T-62M (9K116-2 "Sheksna" [AT-12 Swinger]), BMP-3 (9K116-3 "Basnya" [AT-12 Swinger?]). The missile is also used by the MT-12K anti-tank gun, though unsure what variant.

According to this though, it looks like the 9K118 is used to refer to the system mounted on the T-62, so my guess is that it's used interchangeably with 9K116-2, or was superseded by the 9K116-2 designation (which makes more sense, as they all fire the same projectile - the 9M117).

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

Finally, in DCS the Mi-28 carries the 9M114 Shturm, IIRC the AT-6 "Spiral".

Yes, though it should really be firing the 9M120 Ataka-V, (though the helicopter can likely fire both).

But yes - 9M114 Shturm-V [AT-6 Spiral].

The V in both cases just denotes that it's a helicopter fired version.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

What is the proper designation for these systems? Is the AT-12 really the DoD designation for the 9M120?

Yes.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

Is the 9M120 the "Ataka-V" that the Mi-28 supposedly uses?

Yes.

Ataka vs Ataka-V just denotes the difference between ground-fired and helicopter fired systems. Otherwise the missiles are identical AFAIK.

On 7/21/2011 at 6:30 PM, Xeno426 said:

Is there any truth to the 9M120M being the Vikhr used by the Ka-50/Su-25T?

There isn't, likely some confusion between the 2, likely from looking at the Mi-28's 8-round Shturm/Ataka launcher and confusing it with the launchers on the Su-25T.

9M120M definitely belongs to the Ataka family, though may be designated Ataka-M.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Northstar98

[Xeno426]

Holy <profanity>, a question I asked a decade ago finally answered! Lol. I'm guessing Virgo was searching the same question, came across my thread, and realized even I hadn't been answered.

Best part is half that stuff I'd kinda come to similar conclusions about (a decade of growing and learning will do that), but it's nice to hear some confirmation.