Kvek

in my case it happens when there is a carrier

@BIGNEWY @NineLine Hi, could you please take a look on this important bug. Thanks

Hi Egypt has 2 special EWR with over the horizon capabilities. Both site aren't modeled. Would be nice to add this custom EWR to the map Greetings

Hi Sierra99. What type of SAM do you think is on the second picture you showed?

It's imperative an update to SAM logic. Right now in DCS, SAM work the more simplistic way. Always launching at max range, constantly emitting, zero communication between batteries, IADS not at all, no configuration through ME, SA-5 has wrong search radar, no reveatment, maps focus on churches but not a single sam site is modeled (sinai being the exception), etc. Thank you Mad_Shell, very interesting information and nice documentation. I hope ED starts giving some attention to SAM/SEAD

Hi Very nice buildings, and good to know you are adding all those new airports. But, I think that more efforts should be in creating millitary stuff rather than civil building with almost none strategy importance. For example, SAM sites (altough they are the best we have in DCS), are prety standard, with almost no differences with each other. In Egypt, there are 2 EWR sites with quite particular EWR (Rezonans) that have over-the-horizon detection capabilities. But, the sites aren`t modelled at all. So, instead of doing custom civil building with no strategy relevance, I would suggest doing custom millitary SAM/EWR sites, military bases, power plants, industries, ports.

Hi All the maps in DCS have a common problem, developers focus on wrong things like cities, churches/mosques, civil airport, etc. DCS focus on military, then the maps should focus in air bases, military bases, chopper bases, civil assets with strategic importance (power plants, train stations, some ports, goverment buildings, etc), SAM and EWR Sites with their corresponding revetment (please dont put trees on sam sites). Please dont focus on mosques/churches, archeological sites or other assets with no military importance. Persian Golf have multiple custom buildig at Dubai, but there isn't a single SAM/EWR site depicted, ILS are still broken on multiple bases, multiple power plants, ports, refineries not modeled, etc. Syria and Sinai have the same problem but they are 3rd parties developers so Im not going to mention more details. Thanks, I really enjoy this simulator, but please take this in consideration.

But a similar SAM battery would be a patriot and/or S-300 restricted to weapons. AI fighter can be restricted to A/A or A/G, the option that I'am asking for isn't that different.

Arrow II, arrow III, thaad

Anyway, there are SAM system that are intended to engage weapons only(not modeled in DCS). I know that there are SAM in DCS that can engage weapons. All I am asking for, is to add an option to only engage weapons so we could simulate that kind of air defenses.

Hi Israel has a SAM network exclusive for air weapons defense. Could you add an option to restrict SAM to only engage weapons? Thank you

Hi Thera are few SAM sites depicted in the scenery. Would be nice that more SAM sited could be added and if is possible with custom object, like high ground, revetments, etc. Maybe start with the more "iconic" and large SAM sites, like: - Patriot at Incirlik, at the mountain in Haifa city and west of Rosh Pina airport. - S-300/400 at the mountains near masyaf - S-200(SA-5) at the mountains near Masyaf, south of Homs(this one is depicted but with random revetments), east of damascus and north of Khalkhala air base. This scenery is awsome, probably the best one, but SAM sites are very important assets and a recurrent target. I think that this is important thing to add. Thank you

Hi, thanks for the answer. SA-10 also target gbu-38, is that ok or it will change too? Thank you

The new C-RAM, show an "U" at the RWR, also.

In DCS, SAM work totally indepently and lack any useful configuration. Interception range is lame because SAMs drop missile tracking if the target exit the specified range. But this option should only reduce the launch distance, and not tracking distance. So, would be nice to have more configuration options (no interception zones/borders, fire when certain heading, altitude, etc (nasams shoot targets at 35.000ft but the missile has no kinetic energy to go that high), move after fire... And the IADS to connect different SAMs

But the problem is that against Harm, it fire but misses almost all the time

I think that we can't compare with actual conflict. Harms could be more advanced that our version, probably they used electronic warfare and there is a human factor (lack of training, not paying attention, etc). Second, how reliable is the information that defence24 is showing? Finally, did you see the track or the tacview? I fired 1 Harm at 60-70nm at 3 different sa10 batteries, none of them hit the harm.

Hola DCS Chile es una comunidad con múltiples escuadrones de diferentes países de América. Se realizan campañas PVE y PVP a gran escala. https://discord.com/invite/xfWsdnJr

Hi, when the engagment radar has no LOS with launchers, missiles self detruct right after launch. When there is no LOS, launchers shouldn´t launch at all. This is important because, SAM batteries in different groups (Mission editor) don't communicate into each other and often launch to the same target. One option to fix that problem is to put the SAM batteries in the same group. But if the batteries have no LOS with each other, when the engagment radar of one batterie "use" the launchers of the other this problem arrise. The best way to fix this would be developing IADS functions, but it seems that it ain´t going to happen. So, I would be happy if the engagment radar and the launcher have no LOS, just dont launch at all. The first track "displaced launchers" it´s only to show that launcher can be far away from the engagment radar, but if there is LOS, it work ok. The second track "launchers bug" show the bug that I explain before. PD: English isn´t my native language. SA10 displaced launchers.trk SA10 launchers bug.trk

Hi, Since 2.9 patch SA-10 can´t destroy inbound Harms. SA10 bug.trk Tacview-20231020-222441-DCS.zip.acmi

The max launch altitude of the sa-6 is around 26.000ft, like said before. But the missile will follow you to 37.000ft at least, keeping enough energy to hit you. I think (dont have evidence) that if the missile have the energy to reach 37.000ft, the system should fire at this altitude too. Sorry for the english