SAMs engage Cruise Missiles

[rnm2000]

Hi,

 

I noticed no Ground Based Air Defense System (GBADS) are able to intercept or destroy cruise missiles fired from aircraft but Naval units can intercept it... Is there anyway how GBADs can intercept cruise missiles or nay body have done it? Thank you

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[near_blind]

Hi,

 

I noticed no Ground Based Air Defense System (GBADS) are able to intercept or destroy cruise missiles fired from aircraft but Naval units can intercept it... Is there anyway how GBADs can intercept cruise missiles or nay body have done it? Thank you

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I ran a few tests with B-52s ripple firing AGM-86 CALCMs.

 

SA-8s, SA-15s, the SA-19 were all able to successfully engage.

 

Advanced long range systems such as the MIM-104 and SA-10 ought to be able to successfully engage, and they certainly tried, but most missiles seemed to self destruct ~3 to 5 miles away from the CALCMs. Perhaps this is a problem with terminal guidance or the tracking radar set? Out of 32 shots, one Patriot successfully destroyed a target. 0 out of 32 SA-10s connected.

 

SA-11s oddly did not attempt to engage, though they should be capable. I did not attempt an SA-6 or HAWK.

[DarkFire]

Not sure about the MIM-104 or S-300P, but with the short range stuff it may have something to do with the alert state of the unit and time-to-fire. Interesting that neither the Patriot or the SA-10 managed it though - I understand that both were specifically designed with this sort of engagement in mind, as well as aircraft of course.

[Weta43]

Maybe try on the flat lands off the edge of the terrain mesh in Turkey to see if it's problems with terrain masking ?

[near_blind]

Not sure about the MIM-104 or S-300P, but with the short range stuff it may have something to do with the alert state of the unit and time-to-fire.

 

Of note, just to rig things in favor of the SAMs, the Red side did have an EWR set, and each of the SHORAD batteries was set to be alert, and had a Dog Ear radar set to increase their SA.

 

 

Maybe try on the flat lands off the edge of the terrain mesh in Turkey to see if it's problems with terrain masking ?

 

I'll try this out tonight. I had set up the mission so the CALCMs were flying up the Rioni River delta from the coast towards Kuitasi air base. The terrain was mostly flat but there were a number of structures that may have effected things.

[DarkFire]

Of note, just to rig things in favor of the SAMs, the Red side did have an EWR set, and each of the SHORAD batteries was set to be alert, and had a Dog Ear radar set to increase their SA.

 

Fair enough, the odds should have been well & truly stacked in favour of the AD units in that case.

 

I'll try this out tonight. I had set up the mission so the CALCMs were flying up the Rioni River delta from the coast towards Kuitasi air base. The terrain was mostly flat but there were a number of structures that may have effected things.

 

I agree, try Weta's suggestion. I'm not sure how much depth the AD modelling goes in to, e.g. IADS track files for the more modern SAM units, but they definitely have electro-magnetic and I think optical LOS modelling which appears to be affected by buildings, at least the larger ones.

[near_blind]

So I made a scenario in the great southern wastes. The SA-10 performed slightly better. 3 out of 32 successfully hit, and I'd say another six made it physically to the CALCMs, but missed for various reasons.

 

The SAM is engaging at ~22 NM, but the first eight or so missiles self destruct after launch. The first successful missile made hit when the targets were ~15NM away. I think it's because the Tracking Radar has a slightly lower mast than the Search Radar, and isn't able to acquire the in bounds, but I have no proof of that.

 

Track attached.

SA-10.trk

[Stuge]

Didn't look at the track, but sounds like a bug at work.

 

At least the Moskva cruiser, which has the S-300 system, was very effective in countering a mass B-52 cruise missile attack. I'm not sure it missed at all.

 

But this test was long ago. Maybe the new SAM firing logic causes too early firings? Maybe something else.. might take a look.. but not now :)

[Ironhand]

So I made a scenario in the great southern wastes. The SA-10 performed slightly better. 3 out of 32 successfully hit, and I'd say another six made it physically to the CALCMs, but missed for various reasons.

 

The SAM is engaging at ~22 NM, but the first eight or so missiles self destruct after launch. The first successful missile made hit when the targets were ~15NM away. I think it's because the Tracking Radar has a slightly lower mast than the Search Radar, and isn't able to acquire the in bounds, but I have no proof of that.

 

Track attached.

Interesting. I ran your track file and watched the SA-10 site launch three volleys of missiles. The first volley had a few self destructing missiles but otherwise most hit. The 2nd volley were all misses and the last volley (when the cruise missiles were closest) were almost all hits again. I didn't count hits but definitely much more than 3 out of 32.

 

 

Rich

[DarkFire]

Something strange is definitely going on here. I also ran the track and saw the S-300 complex launch 3 salvos of 8 missiles each. For each salvo I saw:

 

1st salvo: 1 hit.

2nd salvo: 5 hits.

3rd salvo: 3 hits.

 

Some very odd behaviour that I saw:

 

1. Of the total of 9 hits, only 5 cruise missiles were actually destroyed. This is very odd. Perhaps the proximity fusing isn't working on the 5V55R? The missile has a huge 100Kg warhead! Anything that triggers the proximity fuse should be obliterated!

 

2. The last salvo of SAM launches happened at very short range: the lead AGM-86 was about 19.5 Km away from the S-300 complex. Obviously the low altitude of the cruise missiles will reduce detection range etc. but I've always understood this to be the reason for the 30N6 tracking radar to be mounted on a 100 foot tower.

 

3. Looking closely at some of the missiles that missed, the ones that didn't self destruct and simply missed lost a lot of speed by the end of their flight time.

 

If we look at the 5V55B missile, it's supposed to have a maximum range of 45Km, a maximum speed of mach 6.25 and a maximum G capability of 27. None of these stats were evident in the test I ran. Yes, these are of course ideal performance stats but something doesn't add up here.

 

I wonder if what we're seeing is a combination of Cd being much too high for SAM missiles (as it is for every missile in DCS), thus causing them to lose far too much energy once the sustain motors burn out; poorly or non-functioning proximity fusing and faulty engagement logic.

[rnm2000]

Ive used US ground based SAM against Russians cruise missiles and non engaged

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[near_blind]

Ive used US ground based SAM against Russians cruise missiles and non engaged

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Which SAM? the MIM-72? The HAWK? The PATRIOT?

[rnm2000]

The patriot bro

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bewsher]

Are you using all 6 components of the patriot launcher, radars and powerplants? Also in real life theyre about 20 metres from each other in a oval shap so you have to zoom right in and place them. Just dont place them right beside each other.

[rnm2000]

Ya ive used the 6 components...but maybe the placement ill try to fix,,, have you try,,, patriot engaging cruise missles?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk