Bug? 9M133(AT-14) hit target behind smoke

[Chibot Mk IX]

Note this from my scenario testing thermal imaging feature

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/135210-ir-optics-in-cm/?do=findComment&comment=1792810

In the testing, AT-14 is able to guide through smoke and hit target. But AT-14 is laser beam riding , the laser should be blocked by smoke screen.

Any thoughts on this?

 

 

 

 

[MikeyD]

Russian laser riders look backward toward the firing platform rather than forward to a 'laser-painted' target. They basically fly down the middle of a ring of laser light and  course-correct if they drift to the edge of the laser tunnel. If the laser gets blocked by smoke the missile will just think its on course and keep flying along its flight path. Which may be straight into the target, or may be into the ground. Interesting thing about ATGMs, they tend to get more accurate at longer ranges. Because the missile's done maneuvering onto the initial flight path and is just flying straight.

Edited June 26, 2019 by MikeyD

[Chibot Mk IX]

Thanks for the explanation 

Here is another test. This is a 200m x 4000+ m map. RedFor has two AT-14 team on south side of the map. They do have total 8 ATGM in inventory. At the first turn BlueFor AI will drop smoke screen 300m in front of RedFor.   One BlueFor's BTR Co. will show up as reinforcement on the north side of the map.

We know that the Thermal sight on AT-14 allows it to see through smoke. Laser should be blocked by smoke,  missile can "remember"  its flight path. An assumption is since the laser is blocked from beginning, the missile should lost it's accuracy after 4000m flight? 

 

The answer is NO, it is still super accurate. 8 Missile will take out 7 or 8 BTRs.

 

 

 

ATGM test field.btt

[Haiduk]

On 8/18/2019 at 4:12 PM, Chibot Mk IX said:

We know that the Thermal sight on AT-14 allows it to see through smoke. Laser should be blocked by smoke,  missile can "remember"  its flight path. An assumption is since the laser is blocked from beginning, the missile should lost it's accuracy after 4000m flight? 

 

Unlike export version "Kornet-E" with 1PN79 IR sight, Russian army uses own "Kornets" with IR sight 1PN80, which maintains opportunity of firing through combat smokes - this is directly says in datasheet.

So, in CMSF-2 such situation is a bug, but in CMBS is normal thing.

Other question - how much often IR sights use on ATGMs in daylight conditions... Both 1PN79 and 1PN80 are OPTIONAL sights for "Kornet". How much of "Kornets" are equipped with IR... also good question.

Edited August 24, 2019 by Haiduk

[Chibot Mk IX]

well, I have no problem for thermal sight to see through smoke, I have question on how does Laser Beam get through the dense smoke.

If the ATGM is guided by radio or wire, it should be able to guided through smoke.  But laser? 

[highlandcharge]

After thinking this through, my thoughts are...

The AT-14 operator would see the vehicles hidden by the smoke using the IR sight, he would then designate them, yes the beam would not penetrate the smoke but because the missile looks back towards the launcher for guidance he can still designate the smoke between him and the vehicle, so unless the target is jinking an swerving like mad its still very probable that it is gonna get hit...

Edited August 31, 2019 by highlandcharge

[IMHO]

On 8/30/2019 at 4:49 PM, Chibot Mk IX said:

I have no problem for thermal sight to see through smoke, I have question on how does Laser Beam get through the dense smoke.

Amusing So you see no problem with IR light going through smoke yet you find it impossible for a laser light to do the same trick?

[Haiduk]

17 hours ago, IMHO said:

Amusing So you see no problem with IR light going through smoke yet you find it impossible for a laser light to do the same trick?

Well, but why in this case 1PN79 thermal sight can't maintain the beam riding through the smoke? 

My familiar Stugna-P operator told me, that this ATGM can  maintain the guidance even through the smoke, until the target is even partially visible for operator both in manual tracking and automatic tracking mode. But when the missile lost the beam, the self-destruction initiates. Alas, he never used thermal sight for Stugna-P, so couldn't say about opportunity to fire through the smoke, when target can be seen only through thermal. 

Edited September 1, 2019 by Haiduk

[IMHO]

3 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Well, but why in this case 1PN79 thermal sight can't maintain the beam riding through the smoke?

@Haiduk, we're of the same opinion. That was the peculiar wording of mine. It's illogical to say thermal sight can see through the smoke yet IR laser cannot go through.

[Kinophile]

So Russian targeting/guidance generally works by directing the ATGM itself, during flight, in a given direction? 

US targeting generally works by designating the end-point for the ATGM, with the expectation that it will self-adjust to match?

Russian is more "hands-on" (for want of a better phrase) all the way to impact, where as US is more hands-off once desired impact indicated (which can change mid-flight). 

Am I fumbling my comprehension? 

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by kinophile

[HerrTom]

I'm a little late to the discussion, but I'd like to point out that if the IR sight can see through the smoke, and the laser is on a similar wavelength, it too will penetrate through the smoke, allowing guidance. From a systems engineering standpoint, this would make sense. If your operator can see the Target, he should be able to fire on it. That would preclude a visual wavelength laser.

Beyond that, you'd want your guidance laser to be on a low wavelength like infrared, since it will be less affected by battlefield obscurants like smoke, dust, and bushes.

On 9/5/2019 at 1:57 PM, kinophile said:

So Russian targeting/guidance generally works by directing the ATGM itself, during flight, in a given direction? 

US targeting generally works by designating the end-point for the ATGM, with the expectation that it will self-adjust to match?

It depends. TOW is wire guided, SACLOS, meaning instead of laser beam riding, the control unit tracks a flare on the missile and sends commands to the missile to fly down the crosshair. Most Russian ATGMs work in a similar way, except the missile itself guides onto a laser instead of the launch unit guiding it.

[Rinaldi]

That's correct Tom regarding laser guidance (our OP seems to have forgotten that MBT lases have no problem going through non IR blocking smoke all the time) though the TOW in Black Sea is the wireless, radio guided variant. Which makes me wonder what heavy jamming does to it - I never had my Bradleys in a position that justified having them fire TOWs during the campaign mission where the Russians have maximum ECM against you. 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Rinaldi