US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

User avatar
KattiValk
General
Posts: 6320
Joined: Tue 19 Nov 2013 03:39
Location: Houston, Texas (CST)
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby KattiValk » Mon 17 Oct 2016 06:43

The Stinger Post
Image

Currently, Stinger teams and platforms suffer from an absolutely anemic range that they do not really deserve, and as such, are pretty much ignored as pointless fluff by almost every deck you can take them in. This ought to change.

Stinger A (FIM-92A)
  • 2450m range
  • 50% accuracy
    MANPADs to 20 pts (SAS stay at 35)
    Effectively a worse Igla-N. If consistency is necessary, it can go to 55% to become a clone, but it's fine staying at 50%.

Stinger C (FIM-92C)
  • 2625m range
  • 60% accuracy
    MANPADs to 25 points
    Effectively a Mistral clone, just with MANPAD teams of 2 instead of 5, thus the cheaper price.
OR
  • 2625m range
  • 65% accuracy
    MANPADs to 30 points
    Since Mistrals for cheap is not necessarily a great idea, it wouldn't be amiss to simply make the Stinger better by a hair to somewhat justify a matching price. This accuracy can be justified by the ReprogramableMP nature of the missile.

This not only improves US/NORAD SHORAD (heh) but also improve those of almost all of BLUFOR, specifically helping out minors like BDs and the like. This will not be a massive detriment to balance, but help expand the options available. Currently, the meta favors ADNs almost entirely composed of medium systems like Crotale and Osa, with the only MANPAD seeing common use on infantry being the Igla, simply because Lstr are just that good.

Also, it's not as if viable Stingers will lock down air defense on their own, as most nations only really get them on fragile teams and vehicles (exceptions being SAS and Gepard, neither of which would become OP with better Stingers). Regardless, even if there is an overperforming unit, it can simply be priced properly.

Another thing that can be addressed is the Avenger and Type 93 (which we can address at a later time).
M1097 Avenger
  • 5 HP > 10 HP (I know this will be changed, but nonetheless it is worth mentioning)
  • x16 ammo (8 ready to fire, and 8 stored) > this can be redacted for a -5 pts buff to both of the listed prices
  • Very Good (air) optics (it uses FLIR, and has an advanced FCS, it was commonly used as a surveillance vehicle as a result of its advanced optics, and yet it has the same detection range as a Fasta-4, which is quite literally some Iglas mounted to a truck with little modification)
  • Stinger C stats
  • 55 pts
    OR
  • Stinger C stats + 2800m range
  • 60-65 pts
    The Avenger is a remarkably advanced system that isn't given nearly enough credit. This would make the Avenger become a viable option to take as general use and opening AA.

Now, the fun part: realism!
There is an important fact to understand here: later versions of the Stinger are able to engage aircraft at longer ranges. There are two ranges relevant to IR missiles like the Stinger, lock-on and kinematic range. The Stinger (and similar systems like Igla) are limited more so by their lock-on range, and this can be seen by the much larger range found on later Stingers.

Looking a little bit into Tsiolkovsky's Rocket Equation, the Stinger's 17 second self-det time at Mach 2.2 (remember to account for acceleration), gives a ~8,000-10,000m max range before the missile destroys itself. That is already a lot of room to work with for possible range to be filled by lock-on capability (especially given the Stinger is a very fast missile with a small cross section). The Stinger C (RMP) and previous iterations (POST) are all primarily seeker enhancements, and this ought to be represented. The Mistral and other systems of the like does not really have a vastly superior lock-on system and it shouldn't be expected to be very difficult to get a good tone out to the ranges justifying 2625m with RMPs.

Even discounting everything else, the fact that the modern US ADN is utterly incapable of advancing into anything better than an Mi-24W is laughably nonsensical. The US may have had a gap in SHORAD, but removing helicopter threats was always considered sufficiently covered by the Stinger. It's not even an issue with a lack of funding or USAF pressure, as neither of those proved to be detrimental to the Stinger's development. This gap in capability is stupid, plain and simple.

Some light reading on the Stinger if you're interested:
Spoiler : :
https://fas.org/asmp/campaigns/MANPADS/2005/redeye.pdf
http://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/cdg_resources/manuals/fm/fm44_18_1.pdf
http://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/Publications/MCRP%203-25-10a.pdf
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/stinger.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/stinger.htm
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-92.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_american_missile_system_vehicle_uk/stinger_fim-92_fim-92a_man_portable_air_defense_missile_system_manpads_technical_data_sheet_picture.html
http://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=598
http://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/fim-92-stinger.php
http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/weapons/stinger.php
http://pakdef.org/fim-92-stinger-surface-to-air-missile-system/
http://www.airdominance.nl/index.php/sams/23-fim-92-stinger.html
http://salw-guide.bicc.de/pdf/report-weapon-47-en.pdf
http://fas.org/asmp/campaigns/MANPADS/MANPADS.html
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a413880.pdf
https://dfat.gov.au/international-relations/security/non-proliferation-disarmament-arms-control/conventional-weapons-missiles/Documents/MANPADS_countering_terrorist_threat.pdf
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/fy1999/pdf/army/99stinger.pdf
http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/G-Issue-briefs/SAS-IB11-MANPADS-use-control.pdf
http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/07/DTP-033.pdf
https://fas.org/asmp/resources/govern/GAO_Stinger_POST.pdf
https://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-ADA-Handbook.pdf

User avatar
Bougnas
Major-General
Posts: 3699
Joined: Sat 26 Apr 2014 18:24
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Bougnas » Mon 17 Oct 2016 08:26

I like the idea.
Image

Guggy
General
Posts: 8645
Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 02:53
Location: peaceful skeleton realm
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Guggy » Mon 17 Oct 2016 08:33

Agreed, good post.

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby wargamer1985 » Mon 17 Oct 2016 08:38

#MakeMotorizedGreatAgain

Edit: an absolute +1 though, these changes would really help out minors that need that extra anti-helicopter edge, while also making a lot of US specializations a lot more viable.
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

User avatar
Sir Typhoon
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat 30 Jan 2016 13:17
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Sir Typhoon » Mon 17 Oct 2016 11:17

kiheerSEDMAN wrote:The Stinger Post


+1 :P.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Fade2Gray » Mon 17 Oct 2016 11:31

Sir Typhoon wrote:
kiheerSEDMAN wrote:The Stinger Post


+1 :P.


I think SEDMAN deserves to become an honorary 14S for this.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

GARGEAN
Brigadier
Posts: 3496
Joined: Wed 9 Apr 2014 14:19
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby GARGEAN » Mon 17 Oct 2016 15:33

kiheerSEDMAN wrote:The Stinger Post

Agh!!!!!! For thousand time: Stonger is NOT manpad with 8 km range. Been explained many times, and if you want, will be explained again (but honestly I'm tired doing this). It may have buff to Igla's range in RMP iteration, but that alrealy is stretching. Having so superior range is just ridiculous.

Maybe(just maybe) manpad Stinger should be buffed. Avenger buff would definitely be appreciated. But not in that way.

User avatar
Desty
Warrant Officer
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed 23 Jul 2014 16:22
Location: Austria
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Desty » Mon 17 Oct 2016 15:41

kiheerSEDMAN wrote:The Stinger Post

+1

GARGEAN wrote:Agh!!!!!! For thousand time: Stonger is NOT manpad with 8 km range. Been explained many times, and if you want, will be explained again (but honestly I'm tired doing this). It may have buff to Igla's range in RMP iteration, but that alrealy is stretching. Having so superior range is just ridiculous.

Maybe(just maybe) manpad Stinger should be buffed. Avenger buff would definitely be appreciated. But not in that way.


and here we go again...
MUH IGLA SUPERIOR IN ANY WAY :lol:
If you explain it again, how about some sources this time ;)
Image

Scheintot887
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 15:54
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Scheintot887 » Mon 17 Oct 2016 15:46

The Stinger was responsible for a lot of destroyed Hind helicopters back in the 80s - Soviet Afghanistan War.

The representation of the Stinger is by far not satisfying. I agree, there should be a change to it. Not a huge one but to make it better against helicopter. That would also reduce the danger of a helicopter rush. You cannot overrun the US military with a couple of Hinds and Cows.
That is simply not possible. (Or any other military).

User avatar
Yakhont
Colonel
Posts: 2870
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2012 04:33
Contact:

Re: US Changes: The Compiled and Proposed

Postby Yakhont » Mon 17 Oct 2016 17:02

I dont think the Avenger Stinger should have better be at the range than the MIM-72F Chaprael when the later also have a FLIR camera for surveillance and better missile.

The sources are hard to find and I have tried in other languages and since sources on this forum remain piously silent there are few good ones left.

There are supposed to be tests compared to other MANPADS which would be very useful for Wargame but i have not found any more information than unsourced Wikipedia pages.

According to the manufacturer, South African tests have shown[citation needed] the Igla's superiority over the contemporary (1982 service entry) but smaller and lighter American FIM-92A Stinger missile. However, other tests in Croatia did not support[citation needed] any clear superiority, but effectively equal seeker performance and only marginally shorter time of flight and longer range for the Igla.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K38_Igla#Igla-1
Last edited by Yakhont on Mon 17 Oct 2016 17:14, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests