blahdy

SA-8 will not intercept Maverick.

Typical fire unit consists of 6 to 8 LSes; it also depends on which configuration of Patriot you're trying to model. RS is typically stationed behind the LSes. If you are modeling configuration-3, LS is remote-launch capable up to some 16-20km and does not have to be located in the same fire unit area (but does need to be assigned to an FU, data-link wise). If you are going after the latest PDB 7+ configuration, LS and RS can be located anywhere and no longer needs to be tied to any particular fire unit (sensor and shooter are both on the IFCnet).

I think the first and the simplest thing we need is IADS data-link between SAM fire units. That would at least provide more cohesion and improve firepower between multiple SAM sites. Right now, if you put down 6 SA-10 or Patriot fire units spread out 10-20km across the theater, all of them will engage the same target.

This is amazing all around; thanks!

Yup. 110 degrees is a huge search volume, it's surprising to see how much stuff falls inside the radar search fan and that's probably the behavior you noticed. Not sure how the AI interacts with more than 1 radar running in game, but in real life doctrine side of things, you have more than one fire unit defending an area. Each fire unit radar is assigned to cover a sector and designated search pattern. (i.e. radar #1 running TBM search, radar #2 in ABT search, radars #3-4 doing same in different azimuth; or radar #1 doing TBM search and other radars in EMCON silent, etc.) So in a typical Patriot deployment scenario, you would have pretty much all azimuth sectors covered as you need; that, and Patriot missiles can turn backwards/maneuver accordingly after launch if the launcher was oriented in the wrong position.

Both are correct. The in-game Patriot radar will only track/search in 110 degrees as noted; however, the game AI actually queues the Patriot radar to turn the other way around, if there is an enemy coming in the other direction, allowing the radar to acquire & track that target by slewing its turret. Likewise, if you have two enemies coming in, each from different direction outside of 110 deg field of view, then Patriot will only engage the first target, while the other one would not be detected until the first target has been prosecuted.

Hey all, I can't seem to enable pilot draw in cockpit in DCS World -- Shift-P does not work anymore? Tried in F-15C, no pilot visible while in cockpit, tried searching for key mappings and can't find an option for it either.

Let me re-phase it for you. You have no data. This whole notion of 'omg! AIM-120 can't maneuver because of puny fins!' is stupid. A check with physics course will allow you to discover that fin sizes alone don't make or break a missile's ability to maneuver.

Both ARMs will get intercepted. As GGTharos said, these systems are designed to handle saturation attacks. If you launch several missiles at them, for as long as they have ammo and guidance channels available, they'll fire back on every one of them. ARMs are well within Patriot target capabilities (as far as success rate, that I don't know). The notion that Patriot cannot engage or much less even detect Kh-25MP (common ARM threat set against Patriot and Hawk sites during late 80's) is just bs. Patriot consistently engages and destroys PAAT targets that are smaller than ballistic missiles and travels at Mach 4+ in non-ballistic, maneuvering SSM profiles. Since we're reviving the old thread, regarding a previous post about clock drift causing Patriot to miss targets during GW1 -- this is actually incorrect. Clock drift had nothing to do with the way TVM functioned. The clock drift was related to placement of range gate while tracking the incoming hostile target (in this instance, a ballistic missile). Having a faulty time while analyzing return pulse will result in the target track being placed out of the range gate, thereby resulting in track being dropped and interception not even being attempted in the first place. This is what happened in Dharan incident in GW1. As for Patriots actually missing the targets during GW1, that was guidance and fusing issue related to a high speed ballistic target where hits were ineffective. (and also remember that MIM-104D PAC-2 developed during late 80's were programmed to fuse primarily against Soviet Tochka TBMs which were widely placed all over Europe -- those missiles travel slower at Mach 5; Scud comes down much quicker -- upwards of Mach 7) During GW2, PAC-2 GEMs and PAC-3s had perfect engagement-to-intercept ratios. Improvements made to GEM seeker head, including low noise seeker and fusing improvements paid off dividends in 2003. PAC-3 ERINT on the other hand was used in only 1 ballistic missile engagement (the other was friendly fire against TACAIR) and it intercepted its target, still giving it 100% success rate to date (as there has not been any further combat firing of pac-3 to date).

pepin: Please note that in real-life missiles do not behave like CoD:MW or Battlefield 3. 120C is not Mach 4 right out of the rail -- that answers your question wrt maneuverability at close range.

Speaking of Missile Dynamics, though somewhat unrelated.. I noticed that AGM-114 Hellfire in DCS has motor burn time of 5 seconds, but in reality, it only burns for 3 seconds. Source: - http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/docs/1helfire.pdf - count the burn time yourself here:

urmmm... shouldn't cbu-87 like... decimate the whole group of tanks ?

yup... learned that the hard way, lol.

Part of the issue is that MWS alerts you of both friendly and enemy launches, so when operating close with friendlies launching missiles, it's full of false positives, and therefore lazy people like me just end up ignoring it altogether XD

Correct, Chaparral is visually/optically spotted and targeted. You'll probably want to engage them with Kh-25ML or Vikhr PGMs.