SA-19 Tunguska smoke/radar aim circle

[GumidekCZ]

DCS 2.5.3.22877 Open Beta

As already stated here:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3663892&postcount=13

Plus the missing smoke from solid rocket booster stage of rocket.

As also clearly seen on picture from the link.

But once again... here is it:

[GumidekCZ]

PLEASE ADD SMOKE TO FIRST ROCKET STAGE!!!

Watch this vid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ict-4jJEnjo

[GumidekCZ]

Is there somebody reading this? Any reply from ED staff? No?

SA-19 is so deadly in DCS. Defending it would be possible if the rocket engine have the same amount of smoke like a real thing have.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, ADJUST THE SMOKE !!! :helpsmilie:

Edited May 27, 2019 by GumidekCZ

[Kang]

So, the real ones do have smoke during the first (booster) stage then? That makes sense.

Also explains why the SA-19 is by far the SAM I get hit by the most.

[HC_Official]

SA-19 ....... the stealth SAM

[GumidekCZ]

Тунгуска need some SMOKE!!!!

Edited June 15, 2019 by GumidekCZ

[dcs76]

I created a support ticket and hope they get the message this way.

[Harlikwin]

Yeah, for the love of god this needs to get fixed. At least a puff of smoke or dust cloud or something. I'm flying helos, and I'm getting murdered in VR, I can sometimes even see the missile right before impact so its coming from directly ahead, but no visual indication of launch means I've got 0 chance.

[pepin1234]

You want the Tunguska less deadly? Or only less smoky missiles?

 

Less Smoky missiles will not help to you much. You will keep your eyes in cockpit. What you need to do is get a wingman buddy. I am able to spot the Tunguska launch. Maybe you should change the how to?

[Tippis]

You want the Tunguska less deadly? Or only less smoky missiles?

I don't see anyone asking for less deadly Tunguskas, so that's a pretty odd question…

 

 

I am able to spot the Tunguska launch.

Given the lack of indication demonstrated in the screenshots above, maybe you could share what you did to make that happen?

[Kang]

They do give you a flash of light, which - maybe pepin1234 disagrees on that - is just visible if you happen to look right at it when it launches, as it's gone very quickly.

[Shadow KT]

Well you should know to look out when dealing with a Tunguska

 

Another bug which is shown in the screenshots is the lead indicator for when using the missiles

[Harlikwin]

They do give you a flash of light, which - maybe pepin1234 disagrees on that - is just visible if you happen to look right at it when it launches, as it's gone very quickly.

 

I think there should at least be a visible dust cloud from a sam launch. As seen in the vids.

[SFAL]

Add the solid booster smoke sure....

Also add the electro optical guidence with networked radar picture.

 

In real life the SA 19 operates as a point defence unit protecting high value assets. The likes of SA 300/400 power plants, airfields, ammo dumps etc...

It one of the last layers of the air defence NETWORK. The bigger radars provide picture to the units like SA15/19 and these will not turn their search locators on untill the target is in the NEZ.

To make the SA19 even more deadly it can search/track/engage with the EO system and only turns the firecontrol radar on in the terminal phase of the engagement. The LAST 4-5 SECOND.

 

So yes i like to see the booster smoke.. but also this network logic.

[Tippis]

There are some semblances of networking logic going on, but they're not overly complex. A regular SA-19 setup should consist of 6 launchers and a Dog Ear (CP 9S80M1 Sborka) command unit — the latter being the only indication up and until it's firing time.

 

Now, the actual official mechanical and empirical evidence that this work is… ehm… sketchy, let's say, but anecdotally, it seems like that command radar does indeed let grouped TELARs stay off their own radar until the target is within firing range. With the SA-19 in particular, this can be particularly harrowing since all you see is a nondescript [DE] on the RWR that could be hiding just about anything, and only see the slightest <S6> blip before bits of the plane starts falling off… :D

[pepin1234]

They can be controlled at distance from a Sborka control unit ( which is not implemented in the Sim ). That mean you will not be able to get her in your RWR because they will be off at the right distance they will not let you kill the Sborka unit. But to be honest an ARMY well equipped will let you keep in touch with more advance units before reach this zone. That’s why his primary target are the low altitud target as helicopters and so on.

 

In this video you can see is not so smoky.

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by pepin1234

[Northstar98]

... a nondescript [DE] on the RWR...

 

AFAIK this [DE] is for 'Dog Ear' the NATO reporting name for the PPRU-1/9S80 Sborka series

 

And yes SAMs (even if AI) could do with a fidelity upgrade in the future

Edited June 23, 2019 by Northstar98

[Tippis]

AFAIK this [DE] is for 'Dog Ear' the NATO reporting name for the PPRU-1/9S80 Sborka series

Ehm, yes. Like I said: lots of units are supposedly and anecdotally able to benefit from being paired up with a Sborka — the -19 being one of them — but the exact mechanics of if/how/when that works in-game have never received any dev comment.

 

It's the same with the manpad commander units, the P-19, and even the flak rangefinders for the WWII units. The game has them; you can group them up with their respective systems; there seem to be some behavioural change, but exactly what isn't fully known.

 

In the context of this discussion, though, the Sborka is a neat way of unnerving pilots: they will see the DE warning early (and it will see them early too) but they don't know what it means — what units is that icon hiding? If you fly close, will it suddenly shift into a <15> or an <S6> symbol, at which point you'll almost immediately start dodging missiles, or will it not change to <S6> at all because they no longer need their own radars? Or will it turn out it's running search duty for a bunch of SA-8s, -13s or SA-24s? Regardless of actual AI functionality, that uncertainty of what else will be around is a neat way of using the Sborka unit. I don't mean that it's nondescript because you don't know what it is — it's nondescript because it is unhelpful in telling you what's about to shoot you, because it can be almost anything.

[Pikey]

Could we get back on topic though, that the Tunguska fires stealth missiles with no smoke trail or launch visuals that I can see, without Dog Ears anyway.

 

 

Pretty evil unit right now.

[pepin1234]

Could we get back on topic though, that the Tunguska fires stealth missiles with no smoke trail or launch visuals that I can see, without Dog Ears anyway.

 

 

Pretty evil unit right now.

 

I think we have been very clear. The smoke IRL is not easily spoted. It is light brown smoky, not white... if you want pure hardcore real stuff you gonna need the whole army in the other side and they are trying you get some fun at the same time. That’s why we talk about sborka that make even more harder things because then to be fair you should add and take things for gameplay.

[Tippis]

I think we have been very clear. The smoke IRL is not easily spoted. It is light brown smoky, not white.

The point is that it exists, which isn't how it's depicted in DCS. “Not easily spotted” is a very different thing from the wholly inaccurate state of having no launch indications at all.

Edited June 23, 2019 by Tippis

[Northstar98]

...

 

Ahh, right - yeah I got what you were saying and yes I agree, but I misinterpreted nondescript :doh:

 

And yes the 9M311 should receive more accurate effects, the light brown/orange smoke is clear from videos and will certainly be more noticeable than the completely clear plume currently observed.

 

 

 

 

Compared to:

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ict-4jJEnjo&t=1m27s

 

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Northstar98

[Kang]

In this video you can see is not so smoky.

 

It isn't belching out smoke like some other systems do, I don't dispute that, but that very video shows a whole lot more booster smoke than the zero-smoke Tunguska in DCS.

 

You are also right that in a realistic scenario there would be a lot of other units around and a Tunguska would not be an isolated lonely defence system, but that is a problem of mission design in my opinion.

[Harlikwin]

Does the dcs version have minimum engagment alt for the missiles? Wiki says 15m. Also which version do we even have?

Edited June 24, 2019 by Harlikwin

[dcs76]

Wow, today I received an answer to my support ticket from ED:

 

From Andrey Filin

 

 

Hello,

 

thanks for waiting so long time

 

Our developers have fixed the bug with the smoke trail and the patch will be in the next DCS updates

 

Good luck!

 

 

--

Best regards,

Andrey Filin

Eagle Dynamics IT Team