Khrizantema

[BTR]

Let’s talk Khrizantema-S.

Today I got to finally use Khriz-S in anger over proper distance. Let’s first examine what the vehicle is and then see how that clashed with its performance in CMBS.

Khrizantema-S is a battery sized ATGM system made of 9P157-2 launchers, 9P157-3 platoon command vehicle and 9P157-4 battery command vehicle. 9P157-2 launcher vehicle is based on BMP-3 chassis which grants it all the mobility, including amphibious capabilities, of its progenitor. A launcher vehicles has a millimeter radar array, a laser guidance array and a two-tube retractable, auto-loaded weapon station. This weapon station and the radar are retracted when the platform is on the move. Weapon station and radar deployment time from a retracted state is 20 seconds. 9P157-3 is only different from the launchers in communication equipment, having an extra radio-set. 9P157-4 battery command vehicle has a panoramic station, thermal station, GLONASS CnC plugins, PNSR-5 recon radar station, advanced higher level comm system. This vehicle is crewed by five men and effectively acts as a recon-command node for the battery. It cannot fire ATGMs though, and has a PKT for self-defense.

The millimeter radar array on launcher vehicles is used for location, target acquisition and automatic guidance of the missile to target. There is zero input (and this is important) from the operator after the missile has been launched, as such the radar-guided missiles are fire-and-forget. Laser system is a SACLOS system that is independent from the radar array, as such, both systems can be used in tandem with one another, but only one requires operator control. The launcher also has a thermal imager that is used for target acquisition and simultaneous operation of both tracking stations.

There are four types of missiles available 9M123, 9M123F, 9M123-2 and 9M123F-2. Missiles carrying F designation have thermobaric warheads instead of super-caliber tandem AT warheads. Dash two designated missiles are radar guided. Weapon station operator can select and automatically load any time of missile from the ammo rack in any combination. As such the missile combination can be only radar, mixed, or only beam-riding. Radar guided missiles have 1km distance advantage over laser guided counterparts. Each missile tube can be loaded separately, and a reload cycle for one tube is around 8 seconds.

As you have probably gathered, a pretty advanced system that aims at minimizing operator input while providing multiple ways to locate and engage target. How did it perform for me today?

• Out of four total missiles launched (from one vehicle) - zero hits with regular trained crew at about 1650m at an unobstructed target with a clear line of sight.
• To add insult to injury, all four missiles were radar guided (fire and forget) as they did not trigger enemy laser warning systems.
• All four missiles impacted at completely different points, all nowhere close to their intended target.
• Vehicle first came loaded with only one missile and took around a whole minute to reload two tubes and re-engage the target for a second try with the target not moving.

Currently the Khrizantema is not worth its points in H2H games, and feels severely under-represented in accuracy, speed of reload and engagement flexibility. Crew training levels should only affect laser-guided accuracy since radar requires no input from the operator, yet it feels like all guidance systems are human-controlled. Perhaps it is worth a look for improvement in the next patch?

Edited July 13, 2016 by BTR

[BTR]

Visualisation

[John Kettler]

BTR,

What's missing from your system description is that the 9P157-2 has a thermal sight, not just an optical one. You can clearly this this from the display in the track starting at 1:18. Unfortunately Firefox is having issues and won't let me paste anything. The short title is 9P157-2 Krizantema-S Tank Destroyer (Russian text after that), and the poster is Husar101. Sublime routinely takes the Kriz, but I think it's somewhat porked because of the way sensors are treated. In action, all the Kriz has to do is expose the sight, radar or both and can engage with only this/those and the elevated ATGM launcher exposed.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

 

[BTR]

I did mention that 9P157-2 has a thermal sight Perhaps I haven't worded it right. 

[AttorneyAtWar]

8 minutes ago, BTR said:

I did mention that 9P157-2 has a thermal sight Perhaps I haven't worded it right. 

You worded it fine he just missed it. Nice post on an interesting piece of kit thanks BTR, with more testing BFC will probably take a look at it!

Edited July 13, 2016 by Raptorx7

[MikeyD]

I've never tried firing those missiles through bad weather before.

[Kinophile]

Lol @ #3 miss.  Man that must have been maddening.

I've personally never taken the Khriz,  not once,  in a QB. I've played scenarios with it and while it performs fairly OK,  it is most definitely a shoot n scoot. One shot and MOVE. 

However, far too often (my anecdotal experience) it seems to fire it's missile into the ground on the first shot, a totall suicidal behaviour. Just like in your pic,  above. 

Its double wham is great,  especially with another staggered fire Khriz nearby. That volley effect alone is almost worth it. But I tend to avoid units that require special attention,  as I play real time. 

Edited July 13, 2016 by kinophile

[John Kettler]

1 hour ago, BTR said:

Khrizantema-S is a battery sized ATGM system made of 9P157-2 launchers, 9P157-3 platoon command vehicle and 9P157-4 battery command vehicle. 9P157-2 launcher vehicle is based on BMP-3 chassis which grants it all the mobility, including amphibious capabilities, of its progenitor. A launcher vehicles has a millimeter radar array, a laser guidance array and a two-tube retractable, auto-loaded weapon station. This weapon station and the radar are retracted when the platform is on the move. Weapon station and radar deployment time from a retracted state is 20 seconds. 9P157-3 is only different from the launchers in communication equipment, having an extra radio-set. 9P157-4 battery command vehicle has a panoramic station, thermal station, GLONASS CnC plugins, PNSR-5 recon radar station, advanced higher level comm system.

BTR,

You did talk about a thermal station, but per the above, you only said it in reference to the 9P157-4 command station. Nowhere in your above description which pertains to the 9P157-2 launcher do I see the word "thermal" appear. Neither does it appear with regard to the 9P157-3 platoon command vehicle. Bold mine.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Ivanov]

From my experience, the ATGM's are not very effective in CMBS. Just buy more tanks if you want to win. It's ok to have some cheap, expendable infantry teams, that sometimes may sneak upon the enemy, but with the tanks and APS's seeing inside the buildings, most of them will die anyway. There's a similar issue with the ATGM's launched by the BMP's. Even if they manage to fire, they are unable to hit anything.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

ATGMs are pretty miss or miss.  Javelins are pretty awesome, but the rest are not entirely reliable.  With that said, there's reasons why large caliber direct fire guns remain relevant despite the significant cost and difficulty in fielding them.  The great advantage to ATGMs is the complexity of the weapons system is carried in a self contained, fairly modest weight projectile (with some burden on the launch unit), but it does exchange that for a certain loss of reliability, and much greater impact of "friction." 

Also I'd say as a general rule the closer to 0 feet above the ground, the increasingly less useful anything radar based gets. 

[antaress73]

3 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

ATGMs are pretty miss or miss.  Javelins are pretty awesome, but the rest are not entirely reliable.  With that said, there's reasons why large caliber direct fire guns remain relevant despite the significant cost and difficulty in fielding them.  The great advantage to ATGMs is the complexity of the weapons system is carried in a self contained, fairly modest weight projectile (with some burden on the launch unit), but it does exchange that for a certain loss of reliability, and much greater impact of "friction." 

Also I'd say as a general rule the closer to 0 feet above the ground, the increasingly less useful anything radar based gets. 

SO in your opinion, 0 out of 4 is a realistic result for a weapon system such as the Khriz ? 

[Chudacabra]

I have had fairly good luck with the Khrizantema in a current PBEM. It doesn't work miracles, but in a good hull-down position two of them managed to bag 3 Bradleys and hit an Abrams twice to unknown effect. I feel they are quite good against Bradleys, but I haven't had great success against Abrams'. Although when playing as the Russians I have not had particularly good luck killing American tanks with any weapons system.

As for Russian ATGMs, well, they are cheap and sometimes work. But the Javelin is simply horrible death from the sky.

[Codename Duchess]

43 minutes ago, antaress73 said:

SO in your opinion, 0 out of 4 is a realistic result for a weapon system such as the Khriz ? 

He didn't say that anywhere, he just said that in game ATGMs, Javelin excluded, are unreliable. The closest to what you imply is that he said ground based radars are not as useful as one would think, which is true. 

I'm inclined to agree as my own experiences with non-Javelins have more often than not been an exercise in frustration and dead pixeltruppen.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Codename Duchess

[gnarly]

37 minutes ago, Codename Duchess said:

I'm inclined to agree as my own experiences with non-Javelins have more often than not been an exercise in frustration and dead pixeltruppen.

I must admit (as a primarily UKR player) that my experiences with the Corsar have been excellent. In fact, the only PBEM in which I've encountered Khriz's,  my Corsar's dispatched i think 3 out of the 4 Khriz's my opponent fielded....

 

I also work on the philosophy that pretty much any ATGM system (infantry or mechanized) is unlikely to get more than 1 missed shot off in the modern CM battlefield before they are neutralized, unless they are supremely lucky, or the opponent badly orientated (or hasn't got their vehicles working in teams/pairs). So I would rather a cheap (=disposable) effective infantry system, than an expensive (though admittedly quite mobile) vehicle (=easily spotted) system. But the Russians don't have a Corsar equivalent (in-game at least)?

 

 

Edited July 14, 2016 by gnarly

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

1 hour ago, antaress73 said:

SO in your opinion, 0 out of 4 is a realistic result for a weapon system such as the Khriz ? 

I'm saying it's not at all an unreasonable worst case output, and I've seen the darned things work often enough to know they don't go 0/4 often.   

Missiles are rather by their nature somewhat of a gamble, they're a highly precise weapon made as cheap as possible, with a guidance package that can work perfectly fine but be defeated by a wide variety of terrain that may or may not cause loss of track, that's various issues all become more acute the farther they have to fly.  There's a reason many countries train ATGM volley fire after all.  

Radar introduces its own bag of problems, and there's a reason why ground launched radar guided ATGMs are so uncommon.  

Javelin is it's own special case in that being that it's a self contained missile with a fairly novel seeker system.  But ATGMs are in life, and in realism, complicated often risky tools to use, that often do not work like you want them to.

[antaress73]

Actually, I've had pretty good success with the kriz against the Abrams.. BTR actually experienced a bug where the kriz's missiles go flying widly everywhere. I've experienced it myself when three khriz at 3kms (hull down) had the chance and time to fire their 45 missiles load and they ALL went widly missing. I thought they fixed this in the latest patch but it seems they didnt. I'd say accuracy is normally in the 80% range and what I like about it is that it doesnt "warn" the Abrams with a laser warnign like the Kornet does. Hull down is absolutely necessary for success. I've just played a hunting game where a khriz platoon fought against an abrams platoon in downpour conditions and it ended 2-2. EVen got a full penetration on the front right turret where the DU armor plates are because the missile hit the plate at just the right angle to minimize armor thickness LOS. 

Edited July 14, 2016 by antaress73

[BTR]

8 hours ago, kinophile said:

I've personally never taken the Khriz,  not once,  in a QB. I've played scenarios with it and while it performs fairly OK,  it is most definitely a shoot n scoot. One shot and MOVE. 

However, far too often (my anecdotal experience) it seems to fire it's missile into the ground on the first shot, a totall suicidal behaviour. Just like in your pic,  above. 

Its double wham is great,  especially with another staggered fire Khriz nearby. That volley effect alone is almost worth it. But I tend to avoid units that require special attention,  as I play real time. 

I've taken a total of one Khriz before, perhaps because I always tend to PBEM smaller scenarios. That was a long time ago and I never managed to use it properly (<800m is not what this system was designed for). This time the map seemed perfect for such a system, but looking back, I'd never take Khriz again. It just isn't worth the points with reliability like that. This time I will disagree with Panzer. For a purpose built system with a dual-channel digital FCS structured around a first hit this is not an acceptable worst case output. Less so at these ranges and in clear LoF. I'm fine with that being a bug though, bugs happen.  

Edited July 14, 2016 by BTR

[Vanir Ausf B]

I just tested 40 Khirz missile shots against T-90AMs at 2000 meters. 37 hit.

If the flight path even touches upon tree canopies, bushes or any other type of foliage accuracy will be severely degraded. From what I can see of the OPs pics that may have happened.

My own experience in PBEMs is that they are worth every penny, especially if you take advantage of their unique ability to target through multi-spectral smoke.

Something could be done about reload time if an authoritative source can be cited.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Vanir Ausf B

[BTR]

15 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Something could be done about reload time if an authoritative source can be cited.

The manufacturer states  up to 4 msls/min (15 sec. per cycle), so I assume that is the maximum (technical) reload rate for two missiles. Even if we assume 15 sec. per one missile loaded as cycle that is still faster than current CMBS time.  

[Vanir Ausf B]

The Khriz in-game seems to average around 40 seconds to reload both missiles, so it actually can already fire 4 in one minute, it just can't reload 4 in one minute.

[BTR]

All's in order then, I guess its just non-descriptive that I had zero hits of four in over three minutes of engagement with stationary launcher and target. Oh well, we'll see how many hits I get over the course of this particular game. 

[Sublime]

My experience with the Khriz has been either complete and utter failure with catastrophic losses; they dont get used; and occassionally insanely good luck and success with them. But yes I think AFTER  the BMP2M missiles WHICH DONT EVEN FIRE (at least the khriz does..) get fixed. I dont think you guys really realize how much thatd tip the game more equally twds Redfor given the ability to make 2Ms very ubiquitous on the players part if he decides and the 2Ms ATGM lethality.

If the khriz could.properly shoot as intended in ideal conditions i.e. hull down mast anf sensors only above a rise it.d make it much more lethal.

I dont see how BFCs gonna make em be able to engage 2x targets at once like they can IRL but thatd be a boon for it as well.

That said I absolutely take one vet or crack or often 2 on any defense expecting armor and often on attacks as well.

The khriz has to be sitting still ready to fire when any target comes into view you CANNOT treat it like a tank and roll it into enemy LOS- it wont spot **** and blow up.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Sublime

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

I think you need to break it up into two lines of thinking:

1. Is it realistic/possible for an advanced weapons system to 0/4 what it was shooting at?

And the answer is yes.  Yes it is.  This is not the standard, but history is rife with examples of people and things failing to hit what they're pointed at, and there's a not at all short list of things that will make missiles especially opt to jihad against the terrain vs their targets.

So it is a realistic, although should not be frequent output.

2. Is it something that is unreasonable to expect to occur in the game?

And the answer is no.  Looking at how the CM series tries to emulate warfare, it takes "science" type stuff like projectile trajectory, armor thickness, etc and then runs it through "soft" numbers much like dice roles to ensure the output matches the inconsistent behavior of objects in the real world.  Sometimes this series of numbers outputs things that are unlikely because the dice roles tank, or the "science" part is intentionally somewhat opaque at times and will work in ways we didn't expect.

I once watched a stationary Abrams firing at a slowly moving T-72B3 at sub 800 meters range.  It put two rounds over, one into a tree, and then the T-72B3 engaged and firepower killed the tank on the move.  This is not a common outcome in game or in reality, and the words I used when it occurred greatly concerned the household dachshund.

However outcomes like that will occur in life and game, and it sounds like in terms of missiles leaving platforms that the vehicle works as intended most of the time which leaves me to think you just had a bad set of dice rolls, or ran afoul of some firing through trees rules.  That this game side stuff occurred replicated some real life variables or something.

  

[Kinophile]

Sounds like the proper analysis will use more than one example. 

That scenario where I showed that 3Ms at least do fire their missiles properly also contains two flanking Khriz in ambush setup.  They fire properly,  with perhaps a 15-20% (guestimate) miss/Oohlookanicepieceofdirt of error.

They DO work,  and will badly whack an M1.

On your same map above,  try repo'ing the Khriz and fire again.

I'll do some QB maps rests here also.  

[akd]

11 hours ago, antaress73 said:

SO in your opinion, 0 out of 4 is a realistic result for a weapon system such as the Khriz ? 

It's a possible result for any weapon system.  Only testing can determine if typical results are, or are not, realistic.