Why exactly do some ATGM's appear to "dance" as

>>31999001
The TOW wire is unspooling from the base of the missile. Think of a fishing line unspooling from the reel.

>>31999066

Anyway, can I get a real answer from someone who actually knows what they're talking about?

The missile is very front-heavy.

It's adjusting itself to follow the guidance to the target.

The missile constantly steers over the target resulting in an oscillation, I might be talking out of my ass but I believe it's due to bang bang control of the older missiles

>>31999222
Not him, but it's the missile and the TOW wire unspooling, you uneducated faggot.

>>31999227
>>31999232

Look, if you don't know the answer, don't reply.

>>31999246
Opie didnt specify the missile nor post a video of the dance, I know that certain russian air to ground missiles do it due to the control implementation

>>31999246
>Dont post to me or my thread ever again.

>It's the TOW wire!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here is a video of exactly the motion I am talking about, being performed by a Kornet, a beam-riding ATGM that is not in any way similar to the TOW.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5xKCzdhAC8

Now fuck off already, wirefags.

>>31999001
>>31999246
The motion for the laser guided missiles is due to the way the guidance system for the missile works. The missile is constantly correcting itself to try and center the laser reflection. There's an infographic somewhere that explains how the guidance works.

File: depositphotos_19760379-Happy-missile-cartoon.jpg (105KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1024x1024px

>Why exactly do some ATGM's appear to "dance" as they fly to their target?

it is every missile's dream to blow up a tank! they dance because they are excited

>>31999293

Yeah, I know how SACLOS works.

I'm asking why the missile makes the dancing motion. Is it just because the guidance is shitty and it has to over-correct 2-3 feet at a time? Or what?

What actually causes the thing that I talking about?

>>31999246
It is the wire unspooling from the missile. Some missiles also have small thrusters built into them to help correct direction to calculated target.

The old USMC shoulder fired TOW launchers (dragon gunners) had those thrusters, it gave the appearance of the missile "hopping" as it flew to the target.

But being as this seems to be a bait thread here is the type of response you were looking for:

Cuz dat ATGM was listen'n to some sick beats nigga! Gotta get dat SWAG on when bustin all o'er dat armor!

>>31999246
What part of "it's the missile adjusting itself as it flies" is so hard to understand?

>>31999246
>Missile is in the air
>Missile has wind and gravity working against it
>Missile is trying to follow a specific path
>Missile has to adjust to stay on it

If you don't know, and you're asking the question, then you're in no position to tell others what the answer is you prick

>>31999307
The rocket doesnt know how far away it is from the target, it has to react fast in case if it is close to it and quick adjustment is need, so it is in an kind of over correcting mode the whole time.

>>31999361
All this plus
>operator is making minute adjustments from launch till impact

>>31999246
>>31999222
Question was already answered, it's the LITERAL wire unspooling from the rear of the missile, yes, the wire that is attached to the platform that fired it and is sending it guidance information. the missile is constantly correcting itself and essentially does a spiral around the target point until impact. you can't fire them over bodies of water.

you got your answer already. wikipedia it maybe if you don't trust the people here but want to make a thread about it anyway

>>31999001
Because you're observing the flight path from behind so any correction appears to you as just lateral or vertical motion instead.

>>31999222
Fuck you, cunt.

>>31999307
A minor flinch in the operator with the laser is a substantial movement in impact point, then the missile corrects hard

File: control.jpg (36KB, 770x476px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 770x476px

Probably control systems. Or in case of SACLOS the operator wiggling the sights all over hell.
From a design perspective it wouldn't seem like a little deviation off course during flight would be a bad thing. As long as you're not running the missile into the ground or something it might make it slightly harder to tell where the missile is headed or to attempt to intercept it, however improbable.

>>31999420
>it's the LITERAL wire unspooling from the rear of the missile

There's no fucking wire attached to this missile you retarded piece of shit:

>>31999287

>It's the wire!

How can people be this fucking stupid?

You seriously think a giant missile moving at 300m/s is being HELD BACK IN THE AIR by a tiny wire, that somehow both strong enough to hold the missile back but doesn't cause the launcher to jerk forward and flip over?

On top of that, there are plenty of ATGM's without wires that do this exact thing! So it's clearly not the fucking wire.

Seriously, how is such a humiliating mistake possible?

>>31999420
Repeating yourself when you are proven wrong is not the most convincing argument.

File: 1433008009127.jpg (70KB, 452x342px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 452x342px

>Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided
>latest iterations are wireless

>>31999420
Why can't you fire them over water?

>>31999001
im give you the right answer op, its the control guidance system of the missle,, if your interested look control synchros, computers cant be perfect and there is always error that is why the missle is always adjusting to correct the error

>>31999307
The over-correction is probably unavoidable, since the missile doesn't know how far away it is from the target or the launcher's camera, so it can't change its PID values on the fly. Not to mention every country's ATGM does this so it's clearly an intractable problem. It probably also helps in reducing minimum ranges and for hitting moving targets too.

File: 1478734813484.jpg (379KB, 1106x413px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 1106x413px

>>31999001
It only has one active control surface axis, as opposed to the two that most missiles have. Fixed fins impart a spin so that this single pair of control surfaces can alter the course of the rocket in two axes. Why they did this, I will never know. Probably to reduce the weight and size of the rocket, though. Having only one set of actuators rather than two allows you to make a much more compact weapon, and the energy loss caused by the spiraling motion is probably regarded as acceptable.

>>31999779
>implying it's actually a problem and not just how non-ballistic flying things fucking fly

>>32000010
Actually, it's not hard to design a control scheme that will enable a rocket to gently drift to the target position, it just so happens it's not a good idea in the context of an ATGM. It's not like we're talking errors of a few millimeters here.

>>32000082
>design a control scheme which will gently drift from off target to on target then fly a perfectly straight and level path with no deviation
I don't think you understand flight control systems at all based on what you're saying here.

It's the guidance system overcompensating. A feedback loop, if you will.

Build yourself a missile in KSP, leave the control surfaces at default, and turn SAS on.

>>31999001
Because asking a rocket to move in a straight line via control surfaces is a really fucking hard thing to do.

So in rocketry, there's this thing called "Margin of Safety." MoS is the distance, along the vehicle profile, between the center of pressure and the center of mass.

Basically, and very basically, the MoS must be 1-1.5 times the circumference of the fuselage.

As the motor burns fuel, be it solid or liquid, you are constantly changing the center of mass, and therefore, it's relationship and distance from the center of pressure.

When that happens, a rocket will start to move in seemingly random directions. If center of mass and pressure readjust themselves into the 1-1.5 margin, it stabilizes and goes 'straight' in whatever direction the nose was pointing at the moment of stabilization.

So while the rocket is busy being an aerodynamic nuissance, the control surfaces are busy trying to keep it mostly on track. Making a rocket fly totally straight could also burn up more energy than keeping it -mostly- on course.

>>31999820

Wow, an answer that actually made a lot of sense.

>>32000102
Mathematics doesn't lie. Select appropriate values and it will do it. It will still spiral around in life conditions, but it can be done so that it's not noticeable by the naked eye, but why would you want to? An ATGM isn't meant to win controller competitions, it just needs to hit the target.

>>32000212
You stupid motherfucking nigger I don't think you understand that a rocket flying HORIZONTALLY through air that is not PERFECTLY STILL OR PREDICTABLE is not going to fly a PERFECT FLIGHT PATH.

>>32000212
This
See
>>31999779

>>31999512
>PID in a professional missile
lol no

>>32000222
It also doesn't have to dance around like a nigger on amphetamines, you dumb hick.

>>32000237

>>>32000212
>>>31999779
Are both me.

>>32000239
It doesn't you basement dwelling piss swilling obese smelly disgusting piece of evidence for the failure of the human race to evolve

>>32000260
LOL, hit too close to home huh? You mad?

>>32000282
You just lost good job

>>32000258
I mixed up my >>
I meant to say you were right and referenced him to a picture of a control system response
>>31999512

And also wanted to make fun of that other guy that mentioned PID

>>32000290
Well, PID is a good lie that educates, since it is the basics.

>>32000286
What do you want me to say? Nuh-uh? Yeah-uh ad infinitum?
Also note that I never said it would fly a perfect path, just that the error can be so small to be noticeable.

>>31999603
You can, you just have to know how fast the body of water is traveling such as a stream or river to make up for the correction. You cannot however fire them over fire and should not fire them over powerlines either.

>>31999222
Please kill yourself

>>31999285
Why did I lose

>>32000144
This is the best answer so far, one applicable both to rolling missiles and non-rolling missiles. I can't believe the idiocy of some people on here, who want to just pull an answer out of their ass when they don't actually know anything. Muh wires, fuck you retards

>>31999513
Yes there is you stupid piece of shit.

>>32000175
You sound like a real cunt, and I hope that this thread can impart some sliver of self realization that you are a massive, gaping cunt

You guys are aware that both the TOW and Kornet "dances" when viewing it flying in the air?

>>31999287
AMERICANS BTFO
HOW WILL THEY EVER RECOVER?

>>31999222
Worst fucking trips get of all time.

>>31999578
>Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wirelessly-guided
Still works.

>>31999001
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mfZImzB-cw

2 minutes in and you can see the literal WIRE from the TOW.

I had no idea there was a real wire that came from it. Don't TOWs have range of 3 miles or so? How the fuck do they pack in that much wire? Thats crazy as fuck.

>>31999001
ATGMs use gyro-stabilization to make automatic adjustments to the control surfaces to maintain flight. The dancing is the missile making small attitude (pitch and roll) corrections based on the position of the gyro.

>>32000748
>Don't TOWs have range of 3 miles or so? How the fuck do they pack in that much wire? Thats crazy as fuck.
BGM-71 max range is 4,200m according to wikipedia.

Honestly it's not that surprising if you know wire and electronics, it's thin multistrand wire wound axially (in relation to the missile body) around an open ended spool and it unravels out the back. If you were to take a spool of well wound wire (no crosses and kinks, a proper wind) and snap one of the end plates of the spool off, you would see just how easily that stuff unwinds when you give it a gentle tug.

File: excuseme.gif (3MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x270px

>>31999222
dat answer

>dem trips

>>31999285
LOST
This got me to tears. 10/10 thank you, I needed a solid laugh.

It's the missile correcting its path. Guidance systems of most ATGMs are not meant to be perfect as the targets they're supposed to hit are pretty damn huge - the guidance always overshoots itself and the input gets it back into line, making it dance a bit.

And yes, there is a wire on wire guided missiles, but it has nothing to do with this.

>>31999001
>hey I have a vague question
>gets (correct) answer
>NO THATS FUKING STOOPID
>gets told another (also correct) answer
>GAWD u Guis don't kno anyfing!!
I hope a nigger breaks into your house and throat-punches the shit out of you for me you uneducated smartass faggot.

>>31999297
Underated post

File: planesex.jpg (17KB, 448x331px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 448x331px

>>31999001
>Why exactly do some ATGM's appear to "dance" as they fly to their target?

To evade predators, such as the interceptor bear or chaff salmon, of course.

you see, when an ATGM is born, and the baby missile (called a "shrapnel") wriggles out of its shipping container it must eventually deliver itself to the underside of passing planes, many miles above. This journey is dangerous, filled with countermeasures and congressional committees that prey on the juvenile missiles. Once attached to the underside of a plane, the missiles will spend most of their lives there, maturing into full sized ATGMs in groups known as "payloads".

However, towards the end of an ATGM's life, they'll experience an instinctual pull back towards the ground that they were born on, and the dominant female missile of a loadout will detach first, shortly followed by the highest ranking male missile. A brief courtship dance is performed, with the dominant male and female missiles twirling and jiggling in their flightpath before ultimately converging on a ground target.

The sexual act is over almost immediately, in a pyrotechnic flare the alpha female spreads her payload over a wide area, where it is fertilised by the explosion of the male. Soon, other missiles from the payload will follow, ending their lives so that their shrapnel may in the future begin the life cycle of the ATGM anew.

The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't, by subtracting where it is, from where it isn't, or where it isn't, from where it is, whichever is greater, it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance sub-system uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is, to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position where it was, is now the position that it isn't. In the event of the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has required a variation. The variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too, may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was. The missile guidance computance scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is, however it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subracts where it should be, from where it wasn't, or vice versa. By differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be, and where it was. It is able to obtain a deviation, and a variation, which is called error.

This is one of the worst threads I've seen on /k/. Granted its probably 1 or 2 samefags, but still.

File: jeff-goldblum.jpg (77KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x900px

>>32003020

File: kek.png (56KB, 1811x319px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1811x319px

>>32002841
capped.

File: fFx1qJ6.jpg.gif (2MB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x320px

>>32003112

File: M47 Dragon diagram.jpg (24KB, 400x228px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 400x228px

>>32000531
TOW "dances" a lot less than it's Soviet/Russian counterparts, because the control box has a better sensor, which means it can make more accurate corrections.

>>32000175

I'm not sure if that specific explanation is valid for the Kornet, however, I do know that's the case with the Vikhr, which is another Russian laser-beam-riding missile. To save money, the Vikhr only has one actuated fin for guidance, and the computer makes corrections every time the missile does a rotation in order to keep the missile flying relatively straight.

Another kind of "wobbling" you might see is the Metis-M, which has the tracking flare on one of it's fins, rather than on the body of the missile. It looks like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip4bHhL3LpI

Lastly, for shits and giggle, the M47 Dragon, which is pic related.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-9_EhxfFvY

Which was propelled by 15 pairs of one time use rocket motors mounted on the side of the missile, facing outwards and backwards. The missile is propelled by these small rockets setting off in pairs, boosting the missile upwards and forwards. Direction is controlled by setting off the rockets at different times during the missiles rotation.

Needless to say this over-complication made the Dragon a piece of crap, since it could only adjust it's flight path 15 times before it ran out of rocket motors. Not to mention it was heavy and if one pair of rocket motors failed, the missile would not be able to recover.

You'll never see these used, but just brought them up as an extreme example of a "dancing" ATGM.

File: rb04 lansen.jpg (8KB, 376x200px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 376x200px

Not a anti tank missile but an ASM. The Robot04 (missile number four. Had a tendency to always "dance around" when the tracker in the missiles nose caught the intended target. This was not intentional but a design flaw that worked to the missiles advantage.

The horizontal and the vertical gyros where not perfectly aligned, or placed in the same spot, cant remember correctly. and that made the computer confused, making it wiggle as it moved towards the target.

File: 1478453215674.jpg (27KB, 400x270px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x270px

>>31999820
>>32004880

Thank you, gentlemen, for your answers.

I will dump the remaining two BMP-T pictures that I have as compensation.

File: 1478328308034.jpg (154KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1024x768px

>>32005333

>>31999779
what PIDs are you running bro

File: bruh.jpg (20KB, 436x446px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 436x446px

>>32005341
>>32005333
>>31999001
How fucking dank would it be if the Terminator became more widespread throughout the middle-east
>dual 30mm autocannons
>four Kornet launchers
>two AGS grenade launchers

It's such a fucking orky AFV

>>31999512

What is " a " in this case?

File: Screenshot_20161115-102046.png (832KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 1440x2560px

>>31999001

>>32000394
I don't udnerstand

>>31999646
Finally the correct answer.

>>31999246
Not that it hasn't been answered before, but here's an interesting video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZe5J8SVCYQ
It's constantly trying to correct for multiple factors, including any prior correction, resulting in the oscillation.
Stupid twat.

Literally fucking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire-guided_missile

TOW you stupid shits TOW is WIRE GUIDED

>>31999001
>Why exactly do some ATGM's appear to "dance" as they fly to their target?
Misslie is spinnig, so one stabilizer can be used for both vertical and horizontal control.

LOL dat wirefag samefagging so hard.

>>32004880
>>32000748

That's not a wire causing that, the missile is spin stabilised which ironically gives it that twirling jitter as the missile does mid-flight corrections.

>>32000877

So why isn't the battle field covered in downy threads like a spider bukkake party? People would be tripping over shit all the time, it'd make the battlefield messy and chaotic as fuck.