How do I use the HARM?

[PoorOldSpike]

..wondering how this flight profile comes? I've never seen a HARM doing this terminal stunt over land, or am I missing something? I suspect HARM "becomes" some other weapon? Maybe a Harpoon with FLT and TERM modes?

 

 

I just ran some more tests to check out the HARMs flight profile-

 

PIC 1- The enemy ship is about 15 miles ahead but not emitting so the HUD is blank and the HARM is x'd out.

(Incidentally there are two HARM firing modes, SP (Self Protect), and TOO (Target of Opportunity) I'm not sure what the difference is but I'm firing everything in SP mode)

 

 

 

 

PIC 2- the ship begins emitting, I get a beep and its spike appears in the HUD, and the X is removed-

 

 

 

 

PIC 3- I launch a volley of HARMs from the Hornet flying at 2500 ft, note how they climb way up high, (red circle is the ship)

 

 

 

PIC 4- This one has climbed to over 14000 ft before levelling out.

(however they don't all follow the exact same profile, some climb higher, some lower)-

 

 

 

PIC 5- Showtime, they begin their death dive at around 6 miles from the ship-

 

 

PIC 6- They hit, but despite the fireball, the ship is barely scratched-

 

 

 

PIC 7- More hits follow (I launched about 30 HARMs and the damage cumulation creeps up).

Not all fireballed, some just created an almighty splash in the sea, I don't know if they missed or what-

 

 

 

PIC 8- Drat! The ship still launches a SAM, proving its radar is still working fine. I shall go pout and sulk for a while then run some tests against ground targets.

 

SUMMARY- The HARM flight profile is weird, perhaps its trying to climb above the ships radar and CIWS, I don't know.

PS- I've been meaning to ask, but can real-world ships shoot down HARMS and Mavericks, or are the missiles too small to be spotted by the ships CIWS radars?

As regards larger Harpoons, I think they CAN be spotted and shot down can't they?

Edited May 6, 2020 by PoorOldSpike

[fitness88]

Anyone else notice that the HARM launches when attempting to jettison using stores select?

[panton41]

PS- I've been meaning to ask, but can real-world ships shoot down HARMS and Mavericks, or are the missiles too small to be spotted by the ships CIWS radars?

As regards larger Harpoons, I think they CAN be spotted and shot down can't they?

 

Yes, HARMs can be shot down in real life but it takes a top-of-the-line SAM site to do it. There's a newer version of the HARM called the AARGM-ER that has stealthy characteristics (as well as greatly increased range) to help with that arm's race. I wouldn't be surprised if the AARGM-ER get a new model number because it's as similar to the original HARM as the RIM-126 Evolved Sea Sparrow is to the original RIM-7 Sea Sparrow (which looks exactly like the air-to-air missile).

 

Harpoons are basically obsolete against anything but a defenseless target and probably have been for 20+ years.

[Bunny Clark]

R U sure?

TDC Priority will go to wherever you assign it and generally just stay there. It's a good idea to just assign Priority to whichever system you intend to be using as soon as you bring it up. Don't just assume the jet will do that for you. If you want to be using HARMs select the HARM, bring up the display, and assign it Priority right away.

[PoorOldSpike]

Yes, HARMs can be shot down in real life but it takes a top-of-the-line SAM site to do it. There's a newer version of the HARM called the AARGM-ER that has stealthy characteristics (as well as greatly increased range) to help with that arm's race. I wouldn't be surprised if the AARGM-ER get a new model number because it's as similar to the original HARM as the RIM-126 Evolved Sea Sparrow is to the original RIM-7 Sea Sparrow (which looks exactly like the air-to-air missile).

 

Harpoons are basically obsolete against anything but a defenseless target and probably have been for 20+ years.

 

Thanks..:)

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

Below:- More HARM tests.

 

PIC 1- this mobile SAM launcher is the target

 

 

 

PIC 2- I hold my fire to let it fire at my Hornet just to check it's working-

 

 

 

PIC 4- I launch a HARM, here it is about to hit-

 

 

 

PIC- 5- it hits and the spike vanishes from the HUD-

 

 

 

PIC 6- I overfly it to eyeball it, it looks to be in one piece but even though I stooge around for a while at different ranges and heights, its spike doesn't come back and it doesn't launch any more SAMS so I presume it's dead as a dodo hehe..:)

 

SUMMARY- the test proves radar-emitting ground-based units are easy to kill outright, unlike ship-based radars.

Edited May 6, 2020 by PoorOldSpike

[Bunny Clark]

SUMMARY- the test proves radar-emitting ground-based units are easy to kill outright, unlike ship-based radars.

Yup, right now DCS treats everything as a "unit" which can be either damaged, where they loose some functionality, or destroyed. HARMs are plenty capable of damaging or destroying any land based SAM radar unit. They're not powerful enough to cause any appreciable damage to a large naval ship, and they shouldn't be - no one is ever going to sink a Frigate with a HARM - but right now the only way to knock out a ship radar is to cause significant damage to or destroy the entire ship.

[PoorOldSpike]

Yup, right now DCS treats everything as a "unit" which can be either damaged, where they loose some functionality, or destroyed. HARMs are plenty capable of damaging or destroying any land based SAM radar unit. They're not powerful enough to cause any appreciable damage to a large naval ship, and they shouldn't be - no one is ever going to sink a Frigate with a HARM - but right now the only way to knock out a ship radar is to cause significant damage to or destroy the entire ship.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, and like other guys have mentioned, ships possibly have more than one fire-control radar.

PS- I think I've just realised why HARMs climb high after launch, it's possibly because after their rocket fuel burns out they need all that height to coast onwards to the target and dive on it.

It could also explain why some HARMs don't climb as high as others, as it might depend on what range they're launched at and their computerised brains work out what height is needed to be able to coast to the target. (Incidentally their coasting speed is over 500 kts.)

 

 

Question- do ships pop chaff and flares in the sim? I haven't seen any do it.

Perhaps incoming small missiles like HARMs and Mavericks don't show up on their radar and therefore don't trigger chaff/flares/Gatlings?

[jojo]

Thanks, and like other guys have mentioned, ships possibly have more than one fire-control radar.

PS- I think I've just realised why HARMs climb high after launch, it's possibly because after their rocket fuel burns out they need all that height to coast onwards to the target and dive on it.

It could also explain why some HARMs don't climb as high as others, as it might depend on what range they're launched at and their computerised brains work out what height is needed to be able to coast to the target. (Incidentally their coasting speed is over 500 kts.)

 

 

Question- do ships pop chaff and flares in the sim? I haven't seen any do it.

Perhaps incoming small missiles like HARMs and Mavericks don't show up on their radar and therefore don't trigger chaff/flares/Gatlings?

 

Just for the record, chaffs & flares wouldn't be that much useful Vs HARM.

 

And yes, HARM has loft profile to increase range, like AA missiles (simplified version) :smilewink:

[ianick]

Like this:

https://www.facebook.com/Revenirenenfanceavecgoldorak/videos/2243085302461536/

[PoorOldSpike]

Like this:

https://www.facebook.com/Revenirenenfanceavecgoldorak/videos/2243085302461536/

 

 

 

Haha, "Eat this Manolito"

 

 

Edited May 7, 2020 by PoorOldSpike

[PoorOldSpike]

Just for the record, chaffs & flares wouldn't be that much useful Vs HARM.

And yes, HARM has loft profile to increase range, like AA missiles (simplified version) :smilewink:

 

 

Another thing- surely HARMs would be easy to defeat by any enemy with a bit of commonsense?

For example they could position their radars some distance away from the target (eg a SAM site etc) so that the HARM knocks out the radar and not the site? (They could erect a spare radar within a couple of minutes)

 

PS- mobile SAM launchers are surely sitting ducks because their radars are mounted on the vehicle, don't the enemy realise that?

[Razor18]

In this case how could the radar pass any guidance to the missiles at all? Or what distance you mean?

[jojo]

Another thing- surely HARMs would be easy to defeat by any enemy with a bit of commonsense?

For example they could position their radars some distance away from the target (eg a SAM site etc) so that the HARM knocks out the radar and not the site? (They could erect a spare radar within a couple of minutes)

 

PS- mobile SAM launchers are surely sitting ducks because their radars are mounted on the vehicle, don't the enemy realise that?

 

The thing is when facing US operations, they can send thousands of HARM.

More than 2 000 during Desert Storm,743 during Kosovo, over 400 for Iraqi Freedom.

 

Sure the SAM systems can turn off emissions to loose the missile. But while we strive for the kill in game, having the SAM turned off is good enough to allow the strikers to do their job IRL.:smilewink:

 

Sure they are trying to improve by going from SEAD (Suppression Of Ennemi Air Defense) to DEAD (Destruction of Ennemi Air Defense), but that's not the AGM-88C we have in game...

[PoorOldSpike]

In this case how could the radar pass any guidance to the missiles at all? Or what distance you mean?

 

 

It'd be easy, the radar could be around a hundred yards from the SAM site, feeding data to the site down a cable.

Then when the HARM homes in on the radar and zaps it, the site will be outside the blast radius and not be touched..:)

[PoorOldSpike]

The thing is when facing US operations, they can send thousands of HARM.

More than 2 000 during Desert Storm,743 during Kosovo, over 400 for Iraqi Freedom.

 

Sure the SAM systems can turn off emissions to loose the missile. But while we strive for the kill in game, having the SAM turned off is good enough to allow the strikers to do their job IRL.:smilewink:

 

Sure they are trying to improve by going from SEAD (Suppression Of Ennemi Air Defense) to DEAD (Destruction of Ennemi Air Defense), but that's not the AGM-88C we have in game...

 

 

Okay how about this idea if we were the defender- install a few thousand radars so that no matter how many radars the enemy's HARM-type missiles knock out, there'll probably still be enough radars left to send up the SAMs..:)

Edited May 7, 2020 by PoorOldSpike

[Bunny Clark]

It'd be easy, the radar could be around a hundred yards from the SAM site, feeding data to the site down a cable.

Then when the HARM homes in on the radar and zaps it, the site will be outside the blast radius and not be touched..:)

 

Yup, this is totally possible in real life, and in DCS as well. Many SAM systems have the ability for the search and tracking radars to be quite some distance from the launchers. Some older systems need to be connected by cables between the different radar systems, launchers, and battery command; in that case the separation can be as far as the battery has cable length. Many newer systems communicate over radio datalink and the different components can be potentially miles apart from each other.

 

In practice, there really isn't a lot of benefit to separating the radar systems from the launch and command vehicles by very far; it makes communication more fragile, logistics more complicated, and annoys the battery crew when they need to move from one location to the other. It's common practice to separate the different elements enough that a missile strike on one will not damage another, and in more permanent batteries there are typically berms and barriers erected to prevent an explosion at one point from damaging more of the battery. In DCS this is rarely a problem, even with a relatively small amount of separation HARMs won't typically damage adjacent vehicles.

 

There are certainly other methods to foil incoming strikers. The most common is turning the radar on and off at intervals, or switching radars off when the battery thinks an ARM has been launched against it. Many adversaries of the US have adopted these kinds of tactics since Vietnam. It's one reason why wild weasel aircraft try to get the SAM site to launch on them before firing an ARM, as the battery commander then needs to make the decision to dump a missile in flight to potentially save the radar system. The HARM in particular also has a rudimentary inertial navigation system so that if an emitter it's tracking goes offline it can try to still hit the location it was. Of course with mobile SAM systems, the radar vehicles can also switch off and then move every so often, to make hitting them even more difficult. The British ALARM had a cool feature where it could loiter over a battlefield on a parachute and when it detected a threat emitter it would jettison the chute, fire its motor, and home in on the threat.

 

But, ultimately, it's important to remember that the most important word in SEAD is "suppression." Time a battery spends switching off radars or moving radar vehicles is time that it cannot be engaging aircraft. If a SEAD flight can scare a SAM site into shutting down long enough for strikers to get in, hit their targets, and get out, that's mission accomplished - even if they don't destroy any radars. This is why SEAD and DEAD are different things, and tend to carry different weapons. Unfortunately in DCS SAM sites don't really take any kind of defensive measures like this by default, they can be scripted to do so, but that's even more work for mission creators to add.