Integrated Air Defense System

[Cik]

i'm skeptical of when we're getting the SA-5 because it's been over 6mon and we still don't have the scud-b

[Silver_Dragon]

Scud B required first build the ballistic profile and INS guidance to a SRBM. A SAM has actually the functionality to work them.

[Mars Exulte]

KS-19, and Ks-30 has AAA release on 1950 and was operative as far as the Vietnam War and previous, Iran "build" a upgraded automatic version of KS-19 named Sa'ir. Other AAA systems was S-60 57mm and ZSU-57-2 on has been used on the Syria civil war and others wars previously.

 

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a166753.pdf

 

That systems by soviet doctrine was used to cover airfields, depots, airfields and other fixed installations as point defense, with air defense regiments to cover under cold war (from old TRADOC 1994)

 

Yeah, I mentioned the 57s, but they also had a reputation for being near useless even when they were new. They were also not 'high altitude'. That 3rd world militaries continued to use them well after their 'past due date' is not terribly surprising, but they weren't an effective cornerstone of air defense, although I vaguely remember hearing they were sometimes used as direct fire weapons on the ground.

[Harlikwin]

Scared yes :-)

Also wondering about how you take on the proposed integrated air defence system when one of the components is a Mach 4 300 kilometre range missile. It seems a bit daunting with the range and hit probability of the current AGM-88?

 

You dont play aeroquake with it. You use SEAD flights, EW aircraft etc.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Harlikwin

[ShalashakaDS]

You dont play aeroquake with it. You use SEAD flights, EW aircraft etc.

 

You automatically assume he is playing air quake. Right now we are very limited in our capacity to simulate EW and we completely lack any dedicated EW plataform. Hoping that is something they plan to adress in the future.

[Boomer_QLD]

You automatically assume he is playing air quake. Right now we are very limited in our capacity to simulate EW and we completely lack any dedicated EW plataform. Hoping that is something they plan to adress in the future.

Hi,

I am part of a long running Virtual squadron in Australia we are not hard core and certainly know little of actual real world tactics, but we do try to take the sim seriously. My comments were aimed at wondering how you take on an integrated system that would comprise of long and short range systems and EW that are sharing target information and tactics. Currently taking on an SA-10 with Harms and using 4 of our squadron popping up and firing from different points on the compass means we have probably a low to medium chance of getting a hit, as the big SA10 missile is (in the Sim at least) incredibly good at shooting down HARMs that would have the radar cross section of a seagull. :-)

(Yes I’m sure there are many anecdotes of how I’m doing it wrong and SA-10”s are so easy to kill, but in northern Iran when the terrain is flat it can be tricky)

 

But, I now imagine this combined with a 100 -200 kilometre SA-5 umbrella protecting the SA-10 and sharing target information. And yes that seems scary and daunting, kind of like when we were attacking them SA-10 with the Harriers Sidearm because that was the only western anti-radiation missile.

You felt like you brought a knife to a gunfight. :-)

I’m happy to get some constructive ideas around this and hopefully we will get some longer range weapons and functional jamming platforms from ED to balance the fight a bit?

 

I don’t have an answer which was why I asked the question.

[lancerr]

This is going to be epic. I wanted to try and recreate the sam city scene in flight of the intruder and having these sa5's launching at night will remind of that scene. Of course it's not the same with the f14 but oh well.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[StandingCow]

No, it's not... SAMs replaced flak. Flak is 1930s/40s, and to a limited extent 1950s. There is no ''high altitude AAA'' for about 70 years now. I don't think the US even HAS AAA anymore, except for CIWS onboard ships for missile interception. What there is internationally, for the last few decades, is geared around extreme volumes of fire out to a few kilometers. There were a few outliers like 40mm Bofors or thosevSoviet 57sand such in the 1950s, but they were produced in only extremely limited quantities afaik and/or extremely ineffective. It's pretty much Shilka style equipment globally for decades now, sometimes with short range missiles mixed in ala Tunguska.

 

 

Our aircraft are generally more around the Desert Storm and older era. AAA flak was used extensively in Desert Storm, yes it may have all been Vietnam era and older tech but it was used and I believe would be a good addition to DCS.

 

 

 

Stuff like the M1939, ZSU-57-2, KS-19,

[pepin1234]

It is a matter of what kind of missile implement The Fighter Collection company. At the moment we have not the best missiles of the S-300

[nighthawk2174]

I'd more rather that we get the SAM's fixed both in their tactics and in the kinematics of the actual missiles before we start adding super modern variants of the S300. Not that the more modern S300's won't/shouldn't be added latter but I think its just not a good priority right now.

[Rabies]

AAA is an integral part of an air defence network. Even though high altitude AAA is not a common commodity in today’s wars, medium to low altitude is. I’ve viewed plenty of YouTube videos of online players undertaking missions with limited knowledge on air defence systems.

 

Typically air defence systems is a mixture of different components that operate at different altitudes and ranges. The idea is to engage the attackers as far away as possible, this causes the aircraft to go defensive, burn more fuel, set in confusion but more importantly, it causes the attacking aircraft to descend during their evasive manoeuvres. This brings them into range of other air defence systems; again causing them to descend further into the range of Radar guided AAA, unguided AAA, manpads and a multitude of other missiles of greater agility and either radar guided and/or heat seeking. Plus every man and his dog with an AK :)

[Stratos]

I hope they add big gun AAA first!

[wilky510]

It is a matter of what kind of missile implement The Fighter Collection company. At the moment we have not the best missiles of the S-300

I mean it's the same for the Patriot. We are missing newer missiles from that line too.

 

 

Unless EW is integrated correctly, this is basically gonna make SAMs the kings of the sky. DCS doesn't even have the basic aircraft for EW, such as the EA-6B.

[UrgentSiesta]

Scared yes :-)

Also wondering about how you take on the proposed integrated air defence system when one of the components is a Mach 4 300 kilometre range missile. It seems a bit daunting with the range and hit probability of the current AGM-88?

 

Sounds like we'll need the Nighthawk, after all! ;)

 

But more likely, ALCM's will be the way do it. Depending on how modern they make it, Stealth/Low Observable will need to come into play as well.

[twistking]

Great news!!!

[lancerr]

Sounds like we'll need the Nighthawk, after all! ;)

 

 

 

But more likely, ALCM's will be the way do it. Depending on how modern they make it, Stealth/Low Observable will need to come into play as well.

F117 would be an amazing add to the list. Watched a lot of docs on its role during the opening phases on the Persian gulf war and its stealth + deep strike capabilities against heavily defended targets must have felt like magic.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Oceandar]

Oh God..... I'm scared as hell. Imagine in calm sky when you fly then suddenly Tor pops up and shoots you in close range (SAM trap). I really hate Russian double digit SAM.

Edited April 28, 2019 by Oceandar

[Harlikwin]

You automatically assume he is playing air quake. Right now we are very limited in our capacity to simulate EW and we completely lack any dedicated EW plataform. Hoping that is something they plan to adress in the future.

 

Most online servers I see are aeroquake in the sense its a 1 ship or at best 2 ship flight going in to do sead or blow stuff up. In reality what DCS needs is better planning and organization tools for ad-hoc play. I know the dedicated sqdrn guys do a better, but not everyone has the time for that.

 

I also agree that EW modeling in DCS is not great, but its also one of the most sensitive subjects so Im not all that hopeful for a good EW simulation.

[jimiC]

Playability vs realism the age old conundrum

It's up to servers to create the style of play they want

Don't like low alt terrain hugging a2a ? Increase the ir sam density

Loner pilots ? Perhaps some triggers and timers to force spawns in waves or in packages etc

 

There are a few ways to influence the play style . Of course a far better solution could be had via things like an ato system if we ever got something like that

 

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[bies]

This will make SEAD a challenge. Great news.

[Worrazen]

The question is if there will be improvements to the simulation of the communication signals across the board for the AA systems between their radars, launchers, mobile command post, I would really like to see more of the side stuff being actively influencting gameplay. Signal propagation across the landscape, and objects, collision, so that it really does diminish the performance and usability if you have some radar or launcher across the hill or down the valley. Plus some kind of AI would need to know to fire the missiles at the right time and direction for the circumstances, to avoid hitting terrain, terrin avoidance could be part of the improved AI for the AA that do not do this by their own, accuracy of this could also be affected by the AI skill setting for the unit.

 

If you damage the radar/mobile command post there should be some kind of impact on the whole SAM site, like delayed engagement, delayed detection, more such penalty under bad weather, etc.

 

But I'm totally ignorant in this area, it probably varies between types, but do they use sat datalink and you could place them anywhere? I doubt it, the datarate and latency must be small for course-correction and target tracking I would assume that doesn't use sat datalink, but for the command/control it probably does.

 

I think the most obvious thing the Mission Editor needs in this regard, besides target engagement radius and target detection radius, is an ability to show communication radius or more, command posts may have multiple kinds of datalink/comm stuff not just the ground based Line-of-Sight, well sattelite probablly is redundand as you could place it anywhere but I mean the other stuff that I may not know about, to get my point across.

[blkspade]

Tracking and guidance could/would still be handled by the launching SAMs sensors. The IADS is more about getting hostile aircraft in range of SAM that would otherwise be off to prevent them being detected and destroyed. Imagine an SA11 suddenly popping up under you while at 30k', and launching on you.

[nighthawk2174]

Yeah its SAM's AI using EWR sites and other SR's to popup or move to good positions (if mobile). We'll have to see when this update eventually comes out in 2025 what it does.

[pepin1234]

The simulator have not even the half capability for SAMs system. I guess they gonna try AI integration first because coding AI and performance is a challenge. After that they should go straight to the very basic only TOR radar view and of course add TV and Tracking radar display. The SAMs in a basic network don’t really need search radar. Use tracking radar at the last moment just for launch is a feature of an advance SAM network.

 

In a very complex SAMs network they also can work in groups with the same freq signal which make very complicated SEAD task against them. Also launch in overright could be a big trouble for SEAD guys. I don’t believe they gonna set this level for the big public.

 

Implementation of tracking radar only and TV could be good enough to increase the level of the current basic SAMs.

 

Edit: the radio comms menu for CA players is also a must. Awacs/EWR picture call should be implemented from a bullseye reference. So if this improvement go serious radio for SAMs players should be there somehow...

Edited April 30, 2019 by pepin1234

[Weta43]

I think maybe they should get the integration to work effectively and reasonably realistically, and then think about adding GUI for CA Players.

First things first....