blahdy

The SAM operators in this instance were smart and used very strict EMCON (if you read articles about Zoltan Dani SA-3 shots, you can see that it's almost like using sonar in a submarine), knowing when to cease radiating. And plus, after they made their announcement and silenced their radars, it was time for them to pack up and relocate before they get hunted down again. The HARMs used INS to mitigate enemy radar shut-offs, but it wasn't perfect -- the terminal seeker still required radiation source, so unless the enemy turns his radar on again, missile will just miss the target or barely hit it. INS was mostly helpful against enemy frequently flipping the radar on/off.. The new recently updated AGM-88E AARGM variant has millimetric-wave radar seeker along with passive radiation homing seeker. Its INS is also aided by GPS to maintain accuracy, so unless the SAM radar physically relocates, missile will lock onto it using millimeter-wave radar and still kill it.

I kind of like it actually. It's more fun/comical seeing helicopters trying to engage jets (lol). If you get shot down by it... well... how did *THAT* happen? :) And yes, Hellfire should have plausible enough capability to try against slow moving aircraft or even CAS craft in optimal geometry. It's just that it doesn't have proximity fuse optimal for AA use; but it can pull some decent maneuvers and also uses PN homing. If you're not maneuvering hard enough, it's entirely believable and well plausible that a helicopter can keep the laser locked onto you using Auto-Tracking.

Setup with following: - 30N6 TR - 64N6 SR - CP (command post) - LNs (there is C and D; one is smart TEL and one is dumb TEL. Dumb TEL should be slaved behind C/smart TEL, so you can setup 6 launchers mixed with both C and D variants) Optionally add 5N66/76N6 Clam Shell to improve low altitude coverage of S-300.

9M311 always has been able to intercept ARMs (since FC2 & DCS BS 1.x) in game.. The only things they changed in recent DCS builds (during DCS A-10C beta) was Tor and S-300 no longer being able to engage HARMs. S-300 can still engage Kh-58, Kh-31P, etc, but it will ignore HARM and get killed by it. Tor will also ignore it, so the only thing to defend S-300 from HARM is Tunguska at the moment (which in reality, Tunguska would have much more difficult time to shoot down HARMs, as opposed to Tor..).

It can certainly target and shoot at it. As far as actually intercepting it, pk is questionable IMO. Tor on the other hand, has monopulse array with greater accuracy, with mean angular tracking error that's over 6 times smaller than baseline SA-19.. I'd put my money on the Tor over Tunguska for shooting down HARMs. :P

9M311 will have very hard time intercepting HARM. Also, both 9M311 and 57E6 do not have guided maneuvers while their booster stage is burning. Only after booster rocket falls off do they receive guidance commands. This kind of limits engagement geometry options on high speed pop-up PGM targets.. In DCS however, 9M311 currently maneuvers even with booster stage attached and seems to use PN rather than SACLOS :)

Right now, there isn't exactly a 'SAM network' modeled per se; but each SAM site (fire unit, consisting of various launchers, radar(s) and associated gear) does function as an independent local IADS system. For example, if you setup 3 Patriot FU sites 10km apart, and send in an Su-34, all 3 sites will open fire and commit 6 PAC-2s on a single incoming Kh-31P missile -- wasting 4 SAM rounds. The minimum you currently need for game if I recall correctly is RS, LN and CP/ECS. EPP, AMG and ICC are more or less eye candy at the moment unless something changed in recent patches.. In the near future when IADS is properly implemented in game (it's in ED's plans iirc), you'd most likely need AMG's in each Patriot FU and an ICC + AMG group to act as C4I chain. Patriots operate as a battalion and ICC performs the necessary target deconfliction and multi-site targeting prioritization between FUs. Lastly, Patriot Conf-3's also support Remote Launch Phase 3 (RLP3). Launchers with ELES hardware can be sited several kilometers away from the radar and can still operate; launchers can also be slaved to multiple radars/control station to act as a 'missile launch farm' for the entire battalion (makes it very annoying to take out with SEAD). RLP3 can be somewhat 'simulated' in game by simply relocating LS units far away from radar, but within the same unit group. (though I've never tried to see how effective it is or whether it even works in game)

It'd be sick if we can have PAC-3 missile in DCS :) (someday..) I'd like to setup 6 LNs loaded with PAC-2 GEMs and 2 LNs loaded with 16x PAC-3 rounds for a nice layered setup. :D

CLOS missiles are often just as affected by terrain avoidance problems. In fact, any missile that employs lead (that includes CLOS, which uses cross-range-error to feed lead bias into guidance command) can be affected by it... But I suppose the guidance computer can keep track of ground horizon level and if the predicted intercept point (PIP) at time-to-go is on or below the horizon altitude, switch the guidance to pure-pursuit; then switch back to PN/lead once target is above horizon again. Ofcourse, this is rather primitive way of doing things, and uneven terrain can present problems (since horizon reference is from command/launcher's POV).

Modern Warfare Mod 3.0 for World in Conflict is now released. http://www.moddb.com/mods/wicmw/news/modern-warfare-mod-30-released (works on both Steam and non-Steam versions; does not require Soviet Assault but game needs to be patched to the latest version) Multiplayer info: http://www.moddb.com/mods/wicmw/tutorials/understanding-multiplayer-for-wic-mw-mod

hahaha

Upcoming MW Mod 3 Trailer: Based on BinaryOrchestra's musical score.

9K79 Tochka and MGM-168 ATACMS

New Patriot IADS modeled in game (upcoming 3.0 version): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtHboRgTKPE Will be fun to work on S-300 next ;-)

Redo of the PAC-3 missile using FLINT engine (will be included in the next version 3.0): http://www.moddb.com/mods/wicmw/videos/pac-3-reloaded Next step: 48N6 for S-300 :D

Yup, it absolutely does work fine on Steam version -- in fact, I'm modding the game off of Steam version ;-)

I see you are quite disconnected from understanding reality. First off, THAAD is not cancelled. If you ever bothered to check facts, rather than sticking to your fanboyism, you'll find that THAAD is in active service and a very real counter-BM system at that. Secondly, with respect to the Patriot PAC-2 engagements you're referring to: First, use of PAC-2 inside Israel during Gulf War (Israelis didn't use them, US did in their soil) was to defend wide area civilian population against incoming TBMs. The falling debris by TBM was enough to kill people and classify it as failure-mode when protecting civilians. But going back to your argument, you're talking about defense of point-fixed targets, such as airfield, which PAC-2s performed very well in Saudi Arabian during GW1. Merely intercepting the missile is all they had to do, to push it out of the way. The new GEM-T enhancement to PAC-2 improved in numerous areas surrounding TBM defense, and during GW2/OIF, PAC-2 GEM's successfully intercepted and destroyed every incoming TBM that it had engaged. Additionally, you're confusing the PAC-2 missile with PAC-3. PAC-3 is a completely different missile that has no resemblance nor historical share with the PAC-2 performance that you're referring to. GGTharos was mentioning PAC-3, and you're sidelining to PAC-2 missiles which are irrelevant to this discussion. Iron Dome is counter-rocket system designed for protecting civilian population from limited rocket attacks, and the system performed extremely well with intercept score of over 70% even during salvo attacks. In a conventional war, Israel would not be counting on Iron Dome to defend armed formations -- standard counter-artillery tactics would be used to destroy enemy artillery units. You're clearly confused as to the actual purpose of this system.

Thanks ;) Redo of the MIM-104 Patriot SAM, along with new Kh-31P anti-radiation missile (for the future 3.0 release): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrX0y91POCE

For those of you who played World in Conflict RTS game, over the course of past 1.5 year, I've been modding the game to increase realism and intensity of modern battlefield, inspired by DCS in many aspects. ;) Web site at: http://www.wicmwmod.com Video here: Presentation about authentic modeling of missiles in MW Mod for World in Conflict (requires PDF/Acrobat Reader): http://download.wicmwmod.com/Fun_Mod/presentations/FLINT%20Jul%202012.pdf

Vehicle launched ATGMs are under-modelled right now, I think they are working on correcting that in the near future. And ofcourse, there are some ATGMs (::cough:: 9M119M Refleks) that are over-modeled :P

I see, thanks! As far as RL, you can see it here firing from F-22:

Hey guys, When I see F-15 CAP flights firing AIM-120C, sometimes I see the missile being cold-launched (missile drops dead cold like a gravity bomb then ignites in mid-air), and other times it's hot launched. Is this completely random or is there like deciding factor (i.e. speed of fighter jet) that determines whether missile is fired cold or hot off the rail?

lol it'll be hilarious to setup a mission with S-300 SAM vs. Mustang spam. I think the cost of a 5V55R round is more expensive than the aircraft it's taking out. :megalol:

World in Conflict makes a massive come back with improved mods :) Now, Tor finally engages PGMs in game and airplanes can be intercepted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlMsgLTCeNY

Nice vid, that's hilarious