Search the Community

Hi everyone, The MIM-23 missile is currently named MIM-23K. This is incorrect for the battery components and the general capabilities of the system. The MIM-23K belongs to the I-HAWK PIP Phase III, which uses the AN/MPQ-62 ICWAR (not the 55) and the AN/MPQ-61 IHIPIR (which not only can track targets in angle completely passively, but can also illuminate multiple targets simultaneously at low altitude). The AN/MPQ-50 IPAR is retained (though given the limited TBM capability of the MIM-23K, the AN/TPS-59 can be used). To compound things however, the AN/MPQ-46 IHIPIR in DCS has the model of a HEOS-equipped AN/MPQ-57 from the I-HAWK PIP Phase II. If you wanted to keep the AN/MPQ-46 designation, the missile should be renamed MIM-23B and HEOS on the AN/MPQ-46 model should be deleted. If the HEOS-equipped AN/MPQ-57 model is to be kept, then the IHIPIR should be renamed AN/MPQ-57 (HEOS) and the missile renamed to MIM-23C or MIM-23D. The AN/MPQ-50 IPAR and AN/MPQ-55 ICWAR are both accurate for both PIP Phase I and Phase II systems. If it was ever implemented, all 3 would use the same IROR (AN/MPQ-51)

Hi everyone, Something that's bugged me is that the variant of the I-HAWK seems to be quite inconsistent: We have a missile designated MIM-23K (i.e. the Enhanced Lethality Missile), from the mid 1990s and belonging to I-HAWK PIP Phase 3 systems. We have a HIPIR that's designated AN/MPQ-46 (IHIPIR) - this is from the I-HAWK PIP Phase I from the late 1970s (which fires the MIM-23B missile). However, the 3D model actually depicts a HEOS-equipped AN/MPQ-57, which is from the I-HAWK PIP Phase 2 from the early-to-mid 1980s (which fires the MIM-23C/D missile), as operated by Norway, the Netherlands and Germany. We have a CWAR designated AN/MPQ-55 (ICWAR), which is from the I-HAWK PIP Phase I and II. The remaining radar, the AN/MPQ-50 IPAR is accurate to Phase 1, 2 and 3 systems, so it's accurate regardless. So, from that, we either have: An I-HAWK PIP Phase I, with the correct designation for all the radars, but the HIPIR has the wrong model and the missile has the wrong designation (but otherwise, aside from issues with its flight model, appears to be aligned with Phase I capabilities). An I-HAWK PIP Phase II, with the correct designation for 2 of the radars and the right model for the 3rd (but which has the wrong designation) as well as a missile that's also designated incorrectly. An I-HAWK PIP Phase III, with the correct missile designation and the right PAR, but the HIPIR has the wrong model and lacks the low-altitude multi-target engagement capability, while also lacking anti-TBM capability and lacking the radar used for said anti-TBM capability (AN/TPS-59(V)3). For the PIP Phase I, all that would need correcting is to rename the missile to MIM-23B and to remove HEOS from the AN/MPQ-46 and we'd have an accurate PIP Phase I (see here for what an AN/MPQ-46 should look like, compared to a HEOS-equipped AN/MPQ-57 (what we have in-game). a TAS-equipped AN/MPQ-57 is externally identical to the AN/MPQ-61 (see below) but withouth the boxy LASHE antenna seen on the left of the image (adjacent on the right of the transmitting antenna)). For the PIP Phase II, we would need the missile renamed to MIM-23C (or D) and the HIPIR renamed to AN/MPQ-57 IHIPIR or AN/MPQ-57 IHIPIR [HEOS] or something. The only thing here is that the main upgrades of the system were in ECCM capability - not only does the missile have improved resistance to jamming, but the HEOS (or alternatively the OD-179/TVY TAS, which is day-only) allows for passive angle tracking, defeating angle deception jamming (both the Phase I and II feature range-only radars to provide ranging when the HPIR cannot measure it). Right now, HEOS isn't defined as a sensor and ECCM capabilities (especially relating to angle deception jamming) isn't really relevant to DCS as it currently stands, without a substantial EW overhaul. For the PIP Phase 3, the HIPIR and CWAR would need to be redesignated. The HIPIR should also have the LASHE antenna added and HEOS replaced with I-TAS (see here for an image of the AN/MPQ-61) and given the ability to engage multiple targets (up to 12) at low altitude wthin a certain area. Though I'm not sure what the parameters of that "certain area" is. If ED were to give the MIM-23K the anti-TBM capability it should have, then the AN/TPS-59(V)3 radar should also be implemented. This though was only a thing for the USMC (at least as far as US operators are concerned).