Re: Surface to Air Missile Inconsistencies
I think there's some confusion regarding the Igla variants.
As far as I know it goes like this:
-9M39 Igla is the "final" variant, IOC 1983, with the definitive seeker and fuel fusing charge. I've modelled this one slightly better than the FIM-92A in accuracy and significantly in EW due to dual-mode (IR and UV) seeker mostly.
-9M313 Igla-1 is the "interim" variant, IOC 1981, with less advanced seeker, fuel fuzing charge as well. I've made this one slightly inferior to the Stingers but well above the Strela-3. These two versions have equal range and HE values, right?
Then it gets weird:
-9M313 Igla-1E should be the export variant. I'm not sure about the name or designation. This is apparently a 9M313 without the IFF and the fuel charge. I considered it had an less-capable seeker as the 9M313, but it looks like I was wrong.
So the only difference with the 9M313 above should be less HEK, right?
-9M313M (?) Igla-M (?) is apparently similar to the Igla-E above, except maybe for the IFF. No big deal here.
-What I was considering Igla-M in my previous post should have another name. It is supposed to be an improved Igla-1, still inferior to the Igla-S. Maybe I should call it Igla-1S?
-All I have for the Igla-N is the following: heavier warhead, lower range.
I see why you gave it a higher HEK, but why better accuracy and same range?
Anyway I haven't modeled this one as I don't know if it is produced at all.
-9M342 Igla-S is a new development based on the 9M39 Igla, and largely superior to all previous models. Is that the one you called Igla-N?
|
Threaded Mode