Best SEAD aircraft?

[Hobel]

F16.
Harmpod
2 AGM88
6 AGM 65H

[BaD CrC]

Pretty much any helicopter against long range AAD. A Huey can take down a SA-10 just by opening the door and unload one M249 on it. Nothing can beat this from a cost and effectiveness point of view, lol.

[statrekmike]

9 hours ago, BaD CrC said:

Pretty much any helicopter against long range AAD. A Huey can take down a SA-10 just by opening the door and unload one M249 on it. Nothing can beat this from a cost and effectiveness point of view, lol.

 

  This only really works if the SAM battery isn't defended (as it should be) by everything from short range IR SAM's to anti-air artillery of various types.

[SharpeXB]

SAMs are just about invincible and can just shoot down any weapon that comes at them, even AGM-65s. So the only good way would be to use more aircraft in the attack and just overwhelm the site. Maybe the A-10 because it can carry so much. HARMs are kinda useless because the radar can just shut off to avoid them. 

[Steel Jaw]

The Viper is a natural weasel, the CJ variant especially 

Edited December 9, 2021 by Steel Jaw

[LooseSeal]

13 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

HARMs are kinda useless because the radar can just shut off to avoid them. 

In reality that would be true. As it stands in DCS, the AI doesn't understand that it should just stop emitting and instead tries to shoot down every HARM that comes its way.

This is basically how I deal with S-300 sites in Liberation. 4 x flights of 4 Hornets with HARMS so they waste all their missiles, followed by a single Viper flight with CBU-105s from altitude. Done.

[SharpeXB]

3 hours ago, LooseSeal said:

In reality that would be true. As it stands in DCS, the AI doesn't understand that it should just stop emitting and instead tries to shoot down every HARM that comes its way.

This is basically how I deal with S-300 sites in Liberation. 4 x flights of 4 Hornets with HARMS so they waste all their missiles, followed by a single Viper flight with CBU-105s from altitude. Done.

Maybe it depends on their skill setting or something. In MP the very instant I press the pickle button the radar turns off. 
 

I think mission designers overdo the SAM sites, taking them down would require a number of players or AI that realistically isn’t available in the game. The end result, in MP, is that the game becomes PvE instead of PvP

And the real answer to this thread is an F-117!

[Steel Jaw]

Dan Hampton says he considered HARMs useless since you cant know if they hit their intended target.  His idea of real weaseling was to use clusters and his gun, getting right down into their chilli.

https://www.amazon.com/Viper-Pilot-Memoir-Air-Combat/dp/006213034X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=dan+hampton+viper+pilot&qid=1639081066&s=audible&sr=1-1-catcorr

Awesome book BTW for anyone interested in Weaseling...or Iron Hand as we say in the (v) Navy.

 

[bmbpdk]

6 minutes ago, Steel Jaw said:

Dan Hampton says he considered HARMs useless since you cant know if they hit their intended target.  His idea of real weaseling was to use clusters and his gun, getting right down into their chilli.

https://www.amazon.com/Viper-Pilot-Memoir-Air-Combat/dp/006213034X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=dan+hampton+viper+pilot&qid=1639081066&s=audible&sr=1-1-catcorr

Awesome book BTW for anyone interested in Weaseling...or Iron Hand as we say in the (v) Navy.

 

Agree that HARM´s arent a kill-guarantee.
Too many, including some ED personel, believes that just because a radar goes silent when the HARM counter reaches it equals a kill.
That is not correct, actual warfare have proven that many times and giving many Generals and intelligence some explaining to do.
Perhaps it equals a kill in game world, but in the real world, which this simulator should reflect, it does not.
And as you said, CBU´s are very good at giving that "more-than-likely" "guarantee".

If you are interested in the subject of SEAD/DEAD/Wild Weaseling from persons who actually know their stuff, i recommend the following readings:
Missileers against the stealth ISBN 9781775395362

Air Defence Artillery in Combat - 1972 to the present ISBN 1526762048

NATO´s air war for Kosovo ISBN 9780833030504

Viper Pilot - Memoir of air combat - ISBN 9780062130358

Vipers in the storm - ISBN 9780071346702

[divinee]

14 hours ago, bmbpdk said:

Agree that HARM´s arent a kill-guarantee.
Too many, including some ED personel, believes that just because a radar goes silent when the HARM counter reaches it equals a kill.
That is not correct, actual warfare have proven that many times and giving many Generals and intelligence some explaining to do.
Perhaps it equals a kill in game world, but in the real world, which this simulator should reflect, it does not.
And as you said, CBU´s are very good at giving that "more-than-likely" "guarantee".

If you are interested in the subject of SEAD/DEAD/Wild Weaseling from persons who actually know their stuff, i recommend the following readings:
Missileers against the stealth ISBN 9781775395362

Air Defence Artillery in Combat - 1972 to the present ISBN 1526762048

NATO´s air war for Kosovo ISBN 9780833030504

Viper Pilot - Memoir of air combat - ISBN 9780062130358

Vipers in the storm - ISBN 9780071346702

Yeah that's the case in real life. In DCS context, HARM's are insanely good because of the SAM AI and absence of IADS, like said earlier. In real life, it also depends on the type of the mission. If the mission is to suppress air defences and allow strike flight to get in and out, HARMs are quite a good. If the enemy turns off their radars and strike gets to AO, SEAD mission is success. If the point is to invade enemy country and get the air superiority, the CBU's and stuff are the weapon of choice and DEAD is the only choice. Those differences in philosophies must be taken into account when reading those books and when "building" the context. Persian gulf war was never total invasion of the enemy country so HARM's did quite fine to accomplish the SEAD mission. Second Iraq's war was total invasion and the only choice to get air superiority was total destruction of all enemy air defences (also Iraq's air defences were already in a quite bad condition when comparing to Persian Gulf war, allowing DEAD flights to get into AO more easily).

Also one good books is "Magnum! The Wild Weasels in Desert Storm" ISBN 9781473899001

and "The Hunter Killers" ISBN 9780062375124

Those books you suggested are quite good. Hampton is just a little bit "braggy" in Viper Pilot for my taste but still a good book  

Edited December 10, 2021 by divinee

[bmbpdk]

Yes Hampton is a person that i would never have a beer with.

I actually didn finish the book due to his personality and attitudes.
He is not able to comment here (Well at least i dont think so), so i wont comment that further.
Arh yes, the "Magnum" book i forgot, thank you for mentioning it.

I dont have "The hunter killers" book, i will take a look at it, thank you.

And yes, those who are in the thick of it, clearly differentiate between SEAD and DEAD, too many dont know the difference and frankly dont care, those person i dont listen too.

Many put DEAD as part of/under SEAD category, its not, there is night and day in difference.
(H)ARM´s as i understand it, is nothing more than a SEAD weapon, its a threat that you can use actively, if the enemy have EMCON or turned off completely or jammed beyond effective useability, the SEAD mission have been succesfull, SEAD does not require a physical kinetic attack to be succesfull, hence the "S" as in "Suppression", while DEAD requires the physical destruction of the target.
The perfect strike would be to SEAD platforms and weapons being used to force the enemy to EMCON or turn off their radars completely so DEAD can be implemented relatively safely.

[whiteladder]

This is a great book that covers everything from Vietnam, Yom Kippur through to Kosovo,  has loads of detail about the weapons, jammers, tactic etc.  Sits very nicely with the other books mentioned.

 

[Dragon1-1]

5 hours ago, bmbpdk said:

The perfect strike would be to SEAD platforms and weapons being used to force the enemy to EMCON or turn off their radars completely so DEAD can be implemented relatively safely.

That's how real SEAD/DEAD missions against long-range SAMs are flown, now as well as back in 'Nam. Killing a SAM site without suppressing it first is only doable if you have something like SDBs or a lot of JSOWs, or against short range systems which you can ripple Mavs or loft CBUs against. Very few weapons can touch something like a SA-10 without it being thoroughly suppressed. 

[bmbpdk]

7 hours ago, whiteladder said:

This is a great book that covers everything from Vietnam, Yom Kippur through to Kosovo,  has loads of detail about the weapons, jammers, tactic etc.  Sits very nicely with the other books mentioned.

 

Thank you for the headsup, i just ordered one together with another book and some other stuff.
Theres nothing like sitting in the sofa with a hardback book and a cup of coffee next to a stove.

[WinterH]

I don't have F-16, but with HTS added now, it should be one of the best.

F/A-18C: Up to 4 HARMs, you can use HARMs in 3 different modes, two of which allows targeting a specific type of radar. If the SAM site isn't far, you can still take a couple of cluster bombs for the DEAD part of the mission once the radars are taken care of. Though, on a properly defended SAM site that has SHORAD too, this would get hairy.

JF-17: 4 anti radar missiles with 3 modes of operation, though arguably not as useful modes as Hornet's or HTS equipped F-16's. Still has 2 more free pylons to have long range gliding submunition dispensers to more or less flatten whatever remains on the SAM site, but these weapons can be intercepted if there are things like Roland, TOR, SA-8 etc still surviving on the site.

Su-25T: Up to 6 anti radar missiles, two of which can be very fast and long ranged with a really large warhead. Can still have rockets, or S-25L missiles on top of those. Relatively easy targeting using the (mandatory) Phantasmagoria pod. Also, whereever you point the Phantasmagoria, Shkval camera will look there too, enabling use of non ARM weapons to be used on hostile radars as well.

AV-8B N/A: Sidearms are probably even a little too good, as unlike other SEAD missiles, they tend to never miss, but their employment is just simple "point, shoot, hope for the best" kind of deal without advanced modes, and their range is kinda short. You can have 4 of those, and can still have a TGP or a jammer pod, and some guided bombs, lots of guided APKWS rockets, or many unguided stuff to clean up after the radars are gone.

A-4E: This community mod, is a mod, yeah, but at this point it is essentially a free module in my opinion, and I don't approve easily :P. This little thing is the best! Well, ok, it is by far the worst, but also the best in being challenging and fun. You can have up to 4 Shrike missiles, which are crap! You get very little in the way of targeting, missiles track only when fired less than 10 nm away, even then not always, so fire a salvo and hope for the best is the way! If you don't need a very long endurance to and fro the target, you can have up to 3 rockeyes on centerline, or 6 iron bombs, or lots of rockets, so it can flatten most of whatever remains if you have somehow managed to get all the radars. Better bring your friend(s) though, because shrike is definitely a spray and pray kinda ARM . Having a waypoint at the SAM site really helps, so you can align, and know the ideal distance to shoot. Audio only RWR makes things extra spicy

Honorable mentions:

F-14: TALD decoys can be used to keep the SAM site busy, and other assets with anti radar missiles can shoot at the radars relatively safely. Or, you can duck down and head for the site to drop your rockeyes on them.

AJS 37 Viggen: Go down super low and fast if you know the SAM site's location and have it as a waypoint. Then send BK 90 Mjölnirs from 7ish kms away, and turn back, they'll probably flatten most, perhaps all the site.

[statrekmike]

On 12/9/2021 at 3:18 PM, Steel Jaw said:

Dan Hampton says he considered HARMs useless since you cant know if they hit their intended target.  His idea of real weaseling was to use clusters and his gun, getting right down into their chilli.

https://www.amazon.com/Viper-Pilot-Memoir-Air-Combat/dp/006213034X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=dan+hampton+viper+pilot&qid=1639081066&s=audible&sr=1-1-catcorr

Awesome book BTW for anyone interested in Weaseling...or Iron Hand as we say in the (v) Navy.

 

 

  I have read that book a couple of times now and to be brutally honest, I think it serves as a great example of why you shouldn't just trust stuff you read in military memoirs at face value. Hampton's whole thing about the HARM's effectiveness isn't exactly wrong but it isn't exactly right either. He makes it VERY clear throughout the book that he doesn't really place a lot of value on the idea of suppressing a SAM site. This makes sense. His job is to kill the sites and since the HARM isn't really meant to actually do that, he obviously won't care much for it when other weapons better suit his specific mission. If he were in squadrons that favored SEAD specifically, I strongly suspect his rather strong opinions would have been different. Hampton obviously knows a great deal about flying Wild Weasel missions and like every other pilot's memoirs I have read, there is obvious pride taken in that specific role. 

  I think of it like this. If I were to sit down and watch a marathon of old Discovery channel Wings episodes, I would hear a great many pilots say how their various aircraft were the most important, their specific roles were the most important, and their fellow pilots the most talented in their various branches. Not all of them can be 100% right. Hampton took great pride in his specific job and that comes through in his lack of regard for weapons that are not really designed to do that job. 

 If the HARM were as useless as Hampton makes it out to be, there is a pretty good chance that the Navy and Air Force would have long since moved on to another weapon system. SEAD is a major, high-profile role in modern air campaigns so it isn't exactly something the USAF and USN can afford to slouch on. If you read his words about the HARM carefully, you can tell that his issue isn't so much that it doesn't do its job, it is that it doesn't do his job because they are obviously not bombs or mavericks. He has a lot of romanticism for the role he played and while that is totally understandable, it also means that one needs to be careful and not just take any one single pilot's words as law. 

 What Hampton doesn't really talk about in his book is that sometimes all you really need to do is suppress the SAM. Sometimes you don't need to kill the entire site to complete the larger mission. I would even be willing to bet that a few HARMs suppressing a SAM's radar allowed him to get in close and kill more than a few SAM sites. 

 

  To be clear. I am not saying that Hampton is wrong. I am saying that he is right in his own very, very specific experience as a DEAD focused combat pilot. Obviously he is extremely experienced and extremely well trained but that doesn't make him immune to making ego-fueled hot takes that don't give the complete picture to the reader. His ego is very, very much on display in that book so it isn't exactly a surprise. I am sure that a pilot who largely shot HARMs in their career would write a similar book but would also have a pretty different take on the HARM missile as a whole. Likewise. I am sure that a general in charge of a larger air campaign or even dedicated mission planners would have a much better "high-level" understanding of how each weapon fits into the overall airpower ecosystem. 

  

[mkellytx]

The definitive Weasel book is First In, Last Out:  Stories by the Wild Weasels.  First Person Stories By Wild Weasel Pilots, EWO's and Their Associates, The Society Of Wild Weasels.  ISBN 1-4208-1620-9.  About five years ago on a IAH to ORD flight I sat next to one of the authors, it was almost as good as the good old days when I flew bombers...