NOYB

Testing, testing... Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. But would a moderator, please get in touch with me. Thanks- NOYB

Not sure of the extent to which DCS core or your own mods will support it but.. AN/TPS-59 Radar, 700km AN/TPS-77 MRR, 470km AN/TPS-80 GATOR 100km <with CRAM support, to replace MPQ-64 Sentinel in a single radar> LTAMDS Radar <MPQ-65A with GaN AESA, probably over 250km, vs. very small RCS targets> These radars operate at L-Band, <1.2 to 1.4GHz>, S-Band <2-4GHz>, X-Band <10-12GHz> and C-band <4-8GHz> respectively and so, the first two at least are not horizon dependent in terms of detection of lolo threats through tropobounce or surface wave effect. Because they operate at longer wavelengths, TPS surveillance systems' precision is not as great. But their range and thus ability to be emplaced well back from the FEBA allow them to operate as divisional level early warning systems which then cue the FAAD level alerters which then allow the last minute activation of engagement radars like the MPQ-53/65/65A on the Patriot or the <coming> Ghost Eye on the NASAMS 3. It is the networking of multiple radars which makes possible serious ballistic missile threat defense as the cuers tell the engagement systems where to point and batteries can fire missiles along coarse bearings BEFORE the engagement radars come up, with the latter, fire control, radars using their specialist sideband datalinks to refine the missile trajectory and seeker pointing index lines of the interceptors into precise target acquisition cubes once they are stabilized, on bearing, at max speed. As an example of how this works Exercise Rapid Arrow 1 Exercise Rapid Arrow 2 The method for implementing this network control, at the tactical <frontal> level is IBCS or the Integrated Air And Missile Defense Battlefield Command System. Army ccdc domes of protection 0 - United States Army Futures Command - Wikipedia Through a specific system called JADC2 or the Joint All Domain Command And Control network United States Army Futures Command - Wikipedia To use Patriot as a system everyone understands, the whole MIM-104 system is upgraded, much like a Windows Update, through what is called PDB or Post Deployment Build software and hardware changes/replacements. As a result of PDB 7 and 8, Patriot can now act as a center post or hub node for a bunch of other radars communicating over the SINCGARS or Link-16 datalink systems. Where a single NASAMS 1 battery system might have eight launchers and two MPQ-64 radars, that translates to a large coverage area as 2-3 NASAMS units can plug into the network and bring the combined coverage of SIX MPQ-64 Sentinel radars to allow the fixed site Patriot to remain completely radar silent, firing PAC-3 missiles forwards, using handed trackfile data which then cues their own autonomous ARH seekers to acquire the target, even against clutter. Even over the horizon from the Patriot battery which fired them. This is why it is essential to use networking because each radar is vulnerable to ARM attack, LAMs or jamming, but collectively they can multistatically triangulate sensor tracks as 'blink on, blink off' single illuminations to track all sub-horizon threats. Including simple GPS homing systems <i.e. systems without complex TERCOM routed waypoints that swerve and circumnavigate around known radar sites>. And the coordination comes from the hub node which not only collates their data but tells them when to come up and on what bearing, to form instantaneous, triangulated, tracks on threats like cruise missiles, in the brief instances they are within horizon for the FAAD alerter radars like Sentinel. The missile trajectories are then refined to line up their seeker cones <which are very narrowly defined, on the order of 10-15 degrees> to acquire a potentially stealthy target, dead centered in it's scan, rather than having to do a volume search, against clutter. For a high speed intercept of a TBM like the 9M-723, the narrowness of this cone is accompanied by a need to be at a stable Mach point, with minimum jitter as the booster shakes the whole missile. So that ONLY the front end ACM <Attitude Control Motors>, in combination with an initial 'play' by the tail controls, can achieve the diverter thrust impulse to hit a selected portion of the threat weapon's missile body, precisely. At higher altitudes, this is all much simpler because there is less air fighting the control system and a more predictable, constant, effector closure rate to make high accuracy range:rate calculations. But you absolutely have to have the interceptor up, out of it's box and downrange to make this happen. You cannot be turning and twisting with the booster still firing. And as such, the surveillance radars, themselves often cued by DSP or SBIRS satellites, are effectively your launch authorization, based on bearing and target speed. The newer TPS-80 and Ghost Eye radars use AESA and GaN <Gallium Nitride> to increase the accuracy and power of the array in tracking these inbound missile targets with some accuracy. But it is the SAM systems Fire Control Radars which still are talking to the missile specific datalinks with X or S band specific antenna. Not AWACS. With Ghost Eye going to the NASAMS 3 and a choice between AN/TPS-77 or TPS-X for early or late cueing, the kill chain starts to look more complete. And by giving the bad guys more radars to try and defeat, things like ARM attack don't mean as much because the EWRs will defend themselves with SAMs fired from batteries between them and the FEBA penetrating weasel aircraft. Two last factors: First, NASAMS 3 is the equivalent of S-350. It is supposed to be the medium maneuver follow-on to Patriot so that advancing 'Ukrainian Counter Offensive' type maneuver forces are not without mobile AD presence. As such, it can be expected to operate more on it's own than within a cluster of carefully site-surveyed surveillance systems. Because of this, it is likely going to have an MSHORAD or even Centurion close-in defense goal keeper <though NASAMs can also fire smaller, more agile, weapons like AIM-9X>. Iskander and presumably Kinzhal and Tsirkon employ penaids in the form of dispensable repeater decoys which mimic target RCS to active <X or Ka band> missile seekers. You may not be able to emulate the full Iskander kinematic profile, with it's drop to low altitude and offset turn-ins to leave cone on single emitter SAM defenses. But could you mimic the equivalent of highly effective chaff? This would allow you to improve the base SSPK of the SAMs by early launch and tight acquisition cone handoff while still employing an effective EXCM last chance seducer to 'dodge intercepts'. Russia’s Use Of Iskander Ballistic Missiles In Ukraine Exposes Secret Decoy Capability (thedrive.com) Thanks for taking the time to read this far and please continue your excellent work.