SA-15 questions

[ScAvenger001]

So a buddy and I were flying our A-10s with a mission to strike a pair of SA-15s and we had an interesting time of it. After launching all of our Mavericks and apparently having them vanish en route, we quit the mission and watched the tacview report, and discovered that our missiles were being shot down in flight. I was surprised! I could swear that the last time I played tag with a Tor, several patches ago, they didn't do that.

 

So, questions.

 

1. Are Tors meant to be able to intercept Mavericks this way? Wikipedia says that they're designed to shoot down guided missiles, but it cites the AGM-86 which is a much larger and slower target than a mav. If they are, I think it's a great feature and it definitely will make for some interesting tactical challenges to defeat.

 

2. What's the guidance on a 9M330 missile supposed to be? The DCS encyclopedia says both "radio command guidance" and "semi active radar" which seems like an odd combination, while Wikipedia only mentions the command guidance. My RWR didn't seem to think that the SA-15's radar was directly supporting the missile launches that came my way.

 

2.a. On a related note, will chaff and jamming affect SA-15s? The recording from tacview seems to indicate that it does. I was under the impression that missiles controlled by their ground stations (as opposed to homing onto a radar beam) were almost impossible to decoy because the controller on the ground compensates for that interference.

 

3. What's the ceiling supposed to be for 9M330 missiles? The DCS encyclopedia doesn't say, and Wikipedia claims it's 20,000 feet. But at the end of the mission, I had run out of Mavericks and was trying to do a bomb run, and got shot down from 24,000 feet by a missile launched from sea level. Is this a bug, or have I misunderstood something?

 

4. Any recommendations for defeating these Tors? Our plan for the next time we fly this mission is to ripple off all of our Mavericks at once and wait for the screaming to stop. Is there a more elegant solution to this, or is overwhelming them the way to go?

 

Thanks in advance for sharing your expertise with us.

[Archer7]

Interesting and I have no expertise to offer but when it comes to 24'000 ft the sams weren't 4'000 ft above sea level by maybe?

[BitMaster]

Makes we wanna try a Ka-50 Vikhr attack vs. Tor and see what happens. The Vikhr is smaller and depending on the range up to 4-5 faster...hmm

[Pikey]

Yes this is normal. Need to flood them with multiple launches and use force correlate to get a longer ranged shot.

 

never found an altitude that could avoid them.

[ScAvenger001]

Interesting and I have no expertise to offer but when it comes to 24'000 ft the sams weren't 4'000 ft above sea level by maybe?

 

I thought of that, but the launchers are basically right at sea level. At the time I was shot down, I was flying at 23,917 ASL and the missile that got me came from a launcher parked at 36 ASL. They're more or less right on the coast, near Kobuleti.

[ScAvenger001]

Man it's been ages... you have to realize that a given range in Wiki.... isn't always accurate, especially within the sim, so if it pops you at 24,000 try 25,000 and higher until you don't.

 

I liked this idea, so I set up the mission editor to do some SCIENCE! for me. I had an AI-controlled F-15 fly laps back and forth over an SA-15 site at ever decreasing altitudes.

 

Setup: one Tor SA-15 at 13.4 feet ASL, on the coast due west of Senaki. F-15C with no armament fliest east-west-east laps at 400kts TAS.

 

Results:

 

Test 1: Tor fires while F-15 is at 24000 ASL. Lowest unengaged lap was 26k.

 

Test 2: Tor fires while F-15 is at 25,500 ASL. This was the first lap, so that's the highest altitude recorded.

 

Test 3: Tor fires while F-15 is at 25,600 ASL. Lowest unengaged lap was 25,700.

 

Assuming the SAMs don't treat AI controlled aircraft differently than player aircraft, it looks like 25,700 is the safe altitude, or 26k with some safety margin. A little strenuous for a loaded A-10, but not impossible. It's worth noting that the missiles still had more than a thousand knots of energy left on impact, so it looks like the limiting factor here isn't the missile itself. Maybe it's the radar, or maybe the AI's ROE. Also note that I didn't test what happens if the launcher is substantially above sea level, though if it's all that high it's probably better to try and use the terrain for defense instead of climbing over it.

[will-]

Yeah and the fact that the Mav has a pop up profile instead of a direct profile (I used D models, but need to try H's though in a bit) as they should or at least I assume they should. I'm thinking get a lock on it and get lower (but higher is always good), but remember its also distance + Elevation which changes everything as well. So the key is to get a better angle on it (higher may work and if you can lock onto it from a far distance and when you get the launch cue, launch one. I'm going to try a high-low approach, but getting high and far may be the key, even though it's missiles may shwack them. At the last resort send in a Wild Weasel flight, as sometimes Bear hunts you :D

 

Also use (I do so far) an ALQ-184 and run it as soon as you takeoff or before you get near the thing as well. Once I get a good shot in I'll post the track, but that thing is 2/0 right now and I'm not winning :(

 

H's you can launch further out if thats your game plan.

[ScAvenger001]

H's you can launch further out if thats your game plan.

 

Can the Mav-H force correlate in the dark? It's a night mission, you see.

[GGTharos]

1. Are Tors meant to be able to intercept Mavericks this way?

 

Yes, they are capable. It might be a touch over-done in-game if they are facing a mass of targets, but it's working as it should.

 

2. What's the guidance on a 9M330 missile supposed to be? The DCS encyclopedia says both "radio command guidance" and "semi active radar" which seems like an odd combination, while Wikipedia only mentions the command guidance. My RWR didn't seem to think that the SA-15's radar was directly supporting the missile launches that came my way.

 

I don't know what to make of this. If you're launched on by an SA-15 the RWR will certainly chime in with the missile launch warning, so I'm not sure what you believe it to be thinking :)

 

2.a. On a related note, will chaff and jamming affect SA-15s? The recording from tacview seems to indicate that it does. I was under the impression that missiles controlled by their ground stations (as opposed to homing onto a radar beam) were almost impossible to decoy because the controller on the ground compensates for that interference.

 

Yeah, the missile are 'almost impossible to decoy' ... until you decoy the launch platform :) They say the same thing about Vikhr, but in a RL a dazzler and even particular flare displays will eat it up. Not all modeled in game, but in any case, you can certainly decoy SA-15s with chaff and ECM.

 

3. What's the ceiling supposed to be for 9M330 missiles? The DCS encyclopedia doesn't say, and Wikipedia claims it's 20,000 feet. But at the end of the mission, I had run out of Mavericks and was trying to do a bomb run, and got shot down from 24,000 feet by a missile launched from sea level. Is this a bug, or have I misunderstood something?

 

A ceiling is just a number. What does a ceiling mean? For aircraft, it means something very specific and is defined by the manual of that aircraft. What does it mean for missiles? Does it mean the missile will just give up and stop flying? .... highly unlikely :) Usually any range/altitude is implied to be describing a high-pk limit. You can go beyond it, but the Pk diminishes the further out you go, until the missile can't steer at all for any number of reasons (speed to low, out of electrical or hydraulic power, etc).

 

4. Any recommendations for defeating these Tors? Our plan for the next time we fly this mission is to ripple off all of our Mavericks at once and wait for the screaming to stop. Is there a more elegant solution to this, or is overwhelming them the way to go?

 

It's a way to go. How about a drag-and-bag? You can think up a whole bunch of scenarios.

[RIPTIDE]

 

3. What's the ceiling supposed to be for 9M330 missiles? The DCS encyclopedia doesn't say, and Wikipedia claims it's 20,000 feet. But at the end of the mission, I had run out of Mavericks and was trying to do a bomb run, and got shot down from 24,000 feet by a missile launched from sea level. Is this a bug, or have I misunderstood something?

.

Try 27,000+ feet. For me preferably, fly in at 30,000 to give you room to manoeuvre if something bad happens on the A2A front.

[ScAvenger001]

I don't know what to make of this. If you're launched on by an SA-15 the RWR will certainly chime in with the missile launch warning, so I'm not sure what you believe it to be thinking :)

I mean that if I'm against, say, an SA-10, the RWR will show a blinking circle around the 10 diamond to show that it's supporting a missile launch. Against the SA-15, the RWR knew that I was locked up by the 15 diamond and the MWS successfully detected the missile launch, but there was no further correlation between the two. I assume that's because it's being guided by the ground station, that is, it's looking backward for instructions from the launcher rather than looking forward for the launcher's radar reflection. Is that correct?

 

If nothing else, it'll mean that I need to be careful selecting countermeasure programs. Just because a missile came from the direction of the SA-15 doesn't necessarily mean the actual missile didn't come from his pal with the Igla who doesn't care about chaff or ECM. One reason to consider going high over going low.

 

 

It's a way to go. How about a drag-and-bag? You can think up a whole bunch of scenarios.

That's something I hadn't considered. Googling drag-and-bag, it seems like the idea is that one aircraft plays bait while the other sets up the kill? Wouldn't the launchers immediately re-target themselves on the incoming mavericks, though? Or did you mean in terms of using ourselves as additional potential targets to overwhelm their missile defense? Or something else entirely?

 

Thanks for your advice!

[fixen]

Just a thing about ecm. It isn't properly modeled ingame right? I thought I read something about it a while back. Ecm had no effect on the range of launching of a sam.

[T_A]

From testings i did vs Tor , from 15-20K ASL i fired 2 mavs (with force correlate ) almost at the same time (as much as possible anyway...) and it was enough to take it down , it was verified with repeated attempts

 

i did not change the default experience level of the Tor.

 

also on at least half of the attempts the Tor was not in range to return fire , and only a few of the times it did fire i was hit since i immediately bugged out of the area releasing CM.

[Eihort]

I mean that if I'm against, say, an SA-10, the RWR will show a blinking circle around the 10 diamond to show that it's supporting a missile launch. Against the SA-15, the RWR knew that I was locked up by the 15 diamond and the MWS successfully detected the missile launch, but there was no further correlation between the two. I assume that's because it's being guided by the ground station, that is, it's looking backward for instructions from the launcher rather than looking forward for the launcher's radar reflection. Is that correct?

 

Yes. This is why Wiki says command guided, and the encyclopedia in-game says both command guided and semi-active, and they're both correct in their own ways.

 

It works as you described (although the SA-10 is a poor example to use as it's a different type of system altogether).

 

1. TOR uses search radar to find you.

2. TOR locks you with the TER.

3. TOR launches missile.

4. TOR sends guidance commands to missile where to go to intercept the target.

 

Personally, I wouldn't feel bad about not being able to kill all the SAM threats with an A-10 flawlessly. It's not really made for that.

Edited November 13, 2014 by Eihort

[mr_gorilla11]

What seems to work for me is flying in the direction of the Tor while I've got a Maverick locked on it, and then waiting for it to fire on me (usually no more than 10k ft altitude.) As soon as it fires, I return fire with one Maverick, and then I perform a split s away from the target, releasing chaff to defeat the incoming missile (without ECM, as the missile is already tracking.) Of course this is risky as I've already been shot at, but if you can find a big hill or some other terrain to hide behind, you should be good. You can also try diving towards the ground in hope that the missile will crash.

But I think the trick is (or at least what has been consistent for me) is shooting your maverick AFTER it has shot a missile. My guess is that it doesn't worry about tracking your missile once it's already supporting a launched missile towards your aircraft.

[GGTharos]

I mean that if I'm against, say, an SA-10, the RWR will show a blinking circle around the 10 diamond to show that it's supporting a missile launch. Against the SA-15, the RWR knew that I was locked up by the 15 diamond and the MWS successfully detected the missile launch, but there was no further correlation between the two. I assume that's because it's being guided by the ground station, that is, it's looking backward for instructions from the launcher rather than looking forward for the launcher's radar reflection. Is that correct?

 

I think it's just some inconsistency in the game. Don't try to read too much into it.

 

If nothing else, it'll mean that I need to be careful selecting countermeasure programs. Just because a missile came from the direction of the SA-15 doesn't necessarily mean the actual missile didn't come from his pal with the Igla who doesn't care about chaff or ECM. One reason to consider going high over going low.

 

That is an excellent observation. Without going too much into it, you should generally prioritize flares.

 

 

That's something I hadn't considered. Googling drag-and-bag, it seems like the idea is that one aircraft plays bait while the other sets up the kill? Wouldn't the launchers immediately re-target themselves on the incoming mavericks, though? Or did you mean in terms of using ourselves as additional potential targets to overwhelm their missile defense? Or something else entirely?

 

No, they won't immediately re-target the mavericks. You'll have to think a little bit about how you want to execute this though, as drag-and-bag is very heavily dependent of near-perfect timing and positioning. For some systems it might even be best to come from very different directions ... but that of course is even more difficult to coordinate.

 

Just to be up-front, I'm not going to give you all the answers (I don't have them all anyway :) ) but I'm just steering you in a direction ... and I'll add that you're in the realm of difficult stuff that requires some serious cooperation and flight knowledge. Mutual support is difficult and you have to work at it quite hard to get it right :)

[GGTharos]

Yeah, I'm going to have to get that annoying bug fixed. Your changes of hitting a vehicle by using scene/FC should be next to nothing.

 

From testings i did vs Tor , from 15-20K ASL i fired 2 mavs (with force correlate )

[GGTharos]

BTW GGTharos, Drag and Bag applies to fighters when you can "Drag" the enemy fighter (using the less capable fighter as bait) into the waiting arms of your friendly fighters, and "Bag" (kill them). You can't force the SAM system to do that, matter of fact it probably doesn't do survivability moves, i.e. change position, as sim logic keeps it in the same spot, something the AI has done since... Flanker 1.0? (Correct me if I'm wrong Ironhand). But if you apply that logic to SAM huntin' you'd get your buddy killed in the slower aircraft.

 

I disagree. I've executed this tactic for clearing a SAM corridor in DCS with the SAMs programmed to run a fairly capable IADS, so I know for a fact it works, and it was done with 25T's only, A-10C's only, and most successfuly by combination of both.

 

The stock 'survivability moves' of the SAMs in game are certainly just an attempt to shoot down your missiles at best, but you can set them up to do much more interesting things within reason. For extra challenge, you can have your buddy running CA and making an even bigger mess for you.

 

There are limitations - no self-screening is possible for the SAMs because the game does not employ track-breaking methods like smoke, flares or dazzlers vs. IR/TV guided weapons, nor radar decoys or side-lobe manipulation.

But you can at least position the SAMs well, you can make them move if you want, and most importantly you can easily make them be a little smarter about when they turn their radar on.

[GGTharos]

I'll clarify that I'm referring to an MP environment. These tactics are not really possible to execute with AI wingmen in some circumstances (though Su-25T's or F-16's with ARMs as an AI SEAD group can work well IF you set them up well).

[vicx]

How DCS presents air defense has been my fun study subject for the last two weeks. :smartass:

 

I'm a student of the sandbox (not a serious pilot) so its interesting to read comments from pilots commenting about the threat represented by SAMs as depicted in the sim.

 

I did some reading on the Tor and it is an impressive system, BUT it is only a point defense unit, and it's capabilities are focused on that. IRL Tors would be foolish to reveal their positions trying to defend air space, or engage targets of opportunity because they are there only stop particular things getting blown up.

 

That said when it is in a battery and networked with other radars and man portable IR launchers it would be defending that POINT, very strongly indeed. Probably more aggressively than modeled in the sim.

 

IF you have problems with it being able to shoot down AGMs you are going to be unhappy if it ever shows it's full capabilities in DCS as just one part of an air defense network.

 

===

 

Interested to read your comments on IADS Tharos.

 

I've been looking into IADS scripts in DCS and so far, I have found BAntDit's work on IADS in MSF to be by far the most advanced. Still his work operates within the limitations that DCS places on ground units. If ground units become first class objects then perhaps scripts could take greater advantage of the individually modeled sensors and systems.

 

Here is one small example: Search radars can only be turned on and off via a ROE switch but using that switch stows the radar on mobile units instead of just spinning them cold. This can cause a 10-20 second delay switching between cold and hot.

 

*---

The delay can be a lot longer than this.

*---

 

That and the fact that each time a unit goes hot or cold it re-orients the turret inline with its chassis means that DCs pilots get very very generous grace periods before being ambushed.

 

Ideally a ground unit would have some systems available to scripts, BUT would SAMS become too evil?

Edited November 19, 2014 by vicx
*--

[GGTharos]

I'm not too worried about the delay. Really, within this particular environment and aircraft involved, you'd probably get your delay out of the ECM/CM equipment.

 

As for SAMs becoming 'too evil' ... again there are ways to fly that help you out. Also, it's a matter of making your own defenses actually be effective. This isn't easy, because now you're trying to have a machine simulate a human trying to operate a simulated machine and you're trying to simulate problems within the machine that the human can solve, but you also need to simulate some human limitations :)

 

So, yes, I think SAMs could be enhanced for sure, but I don't think it's easy and I don't know what sort of value it would bring.

 

You'd definitely want the option to dumb them down - think of it as a playability selector.

[Mike5560]

Set the sa-15 as SPI through your TGP, slew AGM-65Ds to SPI, launch two mavs and turn around with chaff. Works every time. Getting in close through terrain masking is a little more dangerous IME since the tor acquires, tracks and fires so quickly.

 

As far as vikhrs go, I think it'd be rather difficult. Unless a hovering KA-50 somehow is in the doppler notch.

[Looney]

A KA50 below 8 meter can safely approach the SA-15 without getting shot at and still launch its Vihkrs or going balls deep with guns and destroy the SA-15.