Ships Air Defence weapon tests

[Seaeagle]

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

I thought I was the only one who took issue with how DCS names things!

Heh no.

 

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Also, ships, why aren't they named by class? If they're a class of one or it only depicts a particular, then fine go for the individual name.

You could do both for consistency - for entries with unrestricted numbers it could be e.g. "1135M (Krivak II)" and for "singletons" you could add in the name of the ship like e.g. "1144.2 Pyotr Velikiy (Kirov)". 

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

I had no idea what a "1135M Rezky" was, I didn't realise that the number was a project number, but when I spawned one in I instantly recognised it as a Krivak II frigate.

Well the project number is fine, but considering that you can add multiple ships of this class to a mission, it would be better to leave out a particular vessel name......and instead add the NATO reporting name as suggested above.

 

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Wouldn't it be better to call it something like: Krivak II-class FF (Pr. 1135M "Burevestnik-M" SKR) i.e in English localisation use the NATO reporting name, with the native designation in parentheses? And for Russian localisation swap them around i.e: пр. 1135М «Буревесник-М» СКР (Кривак 2 фф/Krivak II FF).

Well I am not sure there would be room for such a long label :D . But anyway, IMHO the Russian designation should be first(since its the actual one) with the NATO one added for "clarification" :) .

 

[Tippis]

17 minutes ago, PoorOldSpike said:

Incidentally, the game's FSG Molniya's encyclopaedia entry (below) says it's got SAM Strelas but during all my tests it never fired any. 

And I can't see any SAM launchers on the vessel.

I've circled possible suspects, are they Strela launchers? If they are they must be empty-

 

No. None are defined in the Lua files — only Vympel-A (AK-630 CIWS), P-270 Moskits (SS-N:-22:s), and a 76mm main gun. The 3D model is decorated with anti-sub mortars and an MLRS system, but neither is functional.

 

e: A lot of (primarily the eastern) ships have those kinds of decorations without any functionality coded in — anti-sub weapons in particular are ubiquitous — most likely because they are all very old units and it wasn't until recently that subs could do anything at all. Oh, and there were to western subs to defend against to begin with.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Tippis

[Seaeagle]

53 minutes ago, PoorOldSpike said:

 

1- Thanks, yes ED's  names are confusing, for example I've abbreviated their 'SM 330 Tor (SA-15 Gauntlet)' to just 'Tor'..:)

Yeah I know - I just cringe when I see "Tor" and "Tunguska" mentioned in relation to ship's ADs - these are the names of particular ground AD vehicles and shouldn't be referenced just because the ship systems use the same basic missiles.

53 minutes ago, PoorOldSpike said:

 

2- These tests took me 10 days to do, so regrettably I don't have the time to run more tests with every variable like altitude, different skill settings, different aircraft target types and size, weather, day/night, target aspect and so on or they'd take forever, I'm 72 years old so the 'doomsday clock' is ticking down for me..

LOL I know the feeling.

 

[Seaeagle]

42 minutes ago, PoorOldSpike said:

Incidentally, the game's FSG Molniya's encyclopaedia entry (below) says it's got SAM Strelas but during all my tests it never fired any. 

And I can't see any Strela launchers on the vessels graphic.

I've circled possible suspects, are they Strela launchers?

 

 

No those are counter meassure launchers - PK-16 at the rear and PK-10 forward of the AK-630s. There is no Strela launcher on the model - this should be situated between the two launchers for the PK-16....see below.

 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Seaeagle

[Northstar98]

53 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

You could do both for consistency - for entries with unrestricted numbers it could be e.g. "1135M (Krivak II)" and for "singletons" you could add in the name of the ship like e.g. "1144.2 Pyotr Velikiy (Kirov)".

 

Yeah that's what I meant, the Kilo we have right now in DCS is a ship class of one - the B-871 "Alrosa", or Pr. 877V. And then the Pr. 636.3 would be called something like Improved Kilo SSK (Pr. 636.3 Varshavyanka DEPL) - if it ever got implemented.

 

Quote

Well the project number is fine, but considering that you can add multiple ships of this class to a mission, it would be better to leave out a particular vessel name......and instead add the NATO reporting name as suggested above.

 

I'm okay with the project number, but without the prefix "Pr." I simply didn't recognise it as such; though that's probably just me. Not that I'm particularly familiar with project numbers.

 

Quote

Well I am not sure there would be room for such a long label . But anyway, IMHO the Russian designation should be first(since its the actual one) with the NATO one added for "clarification" .

 

Meh, I've changed some of the .luas to try it out, it honestly is plenty fine - and I'm on a 1080p 15.6" display - there's plenty of room for it, only place where it's trouble is in the debrief, but then you're probably more interested in the unit game (user definable) than unit type, and if you aren't, you can always name the unit something smaller.

 

SF2:NA ship mods did a similar thing, though they also included a year) Only reason I put the NATO designation first, is in english speaking countries they're probably more familiar with the NATO reporting name; though it doesn't matter either way. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Northstar98

[Northstar98]

12 hours ago, Tippis said:

No. None are defined in the Lua files — only Vympel-A (AK-630 CIWS), P-270 Moskits (SS-N:-22:s), and a 76mm main gun. The 3D model is decorated with anti-sub mortars and an MLRS system, but neither is functional.

 

They're actually decoy launchers, AFAIK only the Pauk class (which is what the Tarantul III Mod. was based off of) should have anti-submarine equipment/MLRS.

 

Mind you DCS doesn't have countermeasures for ships either... Only one that seems implemented is jamming, though exclusively for the Viggen (even then U-boats and S-130s seem to be able to jam it, when the former only has RWR/ESM (and WW2 at that) and RADAR, and the former has no EW equipment at all AFAIK.

 

12 hours ago, Tippis said:

e: A lot of (primarily the eastern) ships have those kinds of decorations without any functionality coded in — anti-sub weapons in particular are ubiquitous — most likely because they are all very old units and it wasn't until recently that subs could do anything at all. Oh, and there were to western subs to defend against to begin with.

 

Even the new Kuznetsov model doesn't have it's decoy launchers (PK-2) animated, nor are it's Udav-1/RBU-12000 system animated. Though like you said, no appropriate adversary submarines (though 2 Los-Angeles Flt. II and Flt. III, as well as a submarine tender are IRL stationed at Guam naval base on the Marianas map).

Edited February 1, 2021 by Northstar98

[Silver_Dragon]

14 hours ago, PoorOldSpike said:

Incidentally, the game's FSG Molniya's encyclopaedia entry (below) says it's got SAM Strelas but during all my tests it never fired any. 

And I can't see any Strela launchers on the vessels graphic.

I've circled possible suspects, are they Strela launchers? If they are they must be empty-

 

 

 

That launcher has chaff / flare rockets (2x Front and 2x Middle ship PK-10 / 2x aft Pk-16). Pk-2 Decoy launchers has on Slava, Kutnesov and others with other Pk Systems. On CVN-70s, O.H. Perry and Arleigh Burke Flight IIA, appears Nulka active decoys and Mark 36 SRBOC Chaff / Flare rocket launchers. No modeled floating decoys as AN/SLQ-49 Chaff Buoy Decoy System and Mk 59 decoy launching system on NATO ships.

Other systems has the missing of all ESM / ECM / ECCM suite:
- AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare suite modeled on US Navy suite and other EW on Soviet / russian ships.

 

Arleigh Burke Flight IIA has modeled torpedo tube animations but not ASW weapons modeled on any Us Navy Ship, as ASCOD VT on VLS. The same situation happens with RBUs, ASW missiles and Torpedos on Russian Ships. Towed Decoys as AN/SLQ-25 Nixie, AN/SSQ-95 decoy bouy and the Prairie / Masker. Main problem, no Sonar "engine" on DCS. That enable build Hull and Towed sonar systems.

 

That system has none implement animations, "connectors" and assocciate funtionality on DCS Core to build them. The Cooperative Engagement Capability (NIFC-CA) on UsNavy ships.

 

Other point on AAW warfare, big guns as 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun, AK-130, AK-176, AK-726 has capable to attack air targets, and some of more moderns versions antiship missiles with antiair / VT shells.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Silver_Dragon

[Tippis]

3 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

They're actually decoy launchers, AFAIK only the Pauk class (which is what the Tarantul III Mod. was based off of) should have anti-submarine equipment/MLRS.

 

Mind you DCS doesn't have countermeasures for ships either... Only one that seems implemented is jamming, though exclusively for the Viggen (even then U-boats and S-130s seem to be able to jam it, when the former only has RWR/ESM (and WW2 at that) and RADAR, and the former has no EW equipment at all AFAIK.

As with everything DCS, that's what it's supposed to have, yes, but the thing that they've stuck on the model is an ASW mortar and what is listed in other places as BM-14-17s even though it should have neither — you see them repeated on numerous other ships where its purpose is clearly defined (but again, not in-game since they don't function) and where it should be… well… exactly that.

 

It's probably more that they've kept the 3D model around and cobbled together ships with what they have rather than what exactly should be on the class or the specific ship. Hence why you come across hull numbers that don't even apply for the series, or mixtures of capabilities that should apply to both earlier and later builds of a class at once.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Tippis

[PoorOldSpike]

 

The 3 warships have SAMs and anti-ship missiles but the Dock has none.

The warships and Dock all have Gatlings which fired at up to a couple of miles.

 

 

CHINESE WEAPON LAYOUTS

Note: the AI automatically launches SAMs at extreme range but rarely gets a hit because the missiles usually lose their lock and are wasted.

However when they launch at closer ranges (if they've still got any missiles left), the hit chance increases)

The SAM tests are against incoming Hornets, results may differ against other aircraft types and sizes, eg larger/smaller.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by PoorOldSpike

[Seaeagle]

On 2/1/2021 at 2:11 PM, Tippis said:

As with everything DCS, that's what it's supposed to have, yes, but the thing that they've stuck on the model is an ASW mortar and what is listed in other places as BM-14-17s even though it should have neither..

What model are you talking about?

 

[Tippis]

3 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

What model are you talking about?

 

Oh! You're right. I had it completely mixed up in my mind with the Grisha and I've seemingly applied copy-paste a bit too liberally with those RBU-6000s since I got the number wrong on a couple of other ships. That should be fixed now, and for good measure, I added in a bunch of non-functional bits and bobs on the models.

[Seaeagle]

24 minutes ago, Tippis said:

Oh! You're right. I had it completely mixed up in my mind with the Grisha and I've seemingly applied copy-paste a bit too liberally with those RBU-6000s since I got the number wrong on a couple of other ships. That should be fixed now, and for good measure, I added in a bunch of non-functional bits and bobs on the models.

Ah ok - I was just a little confused :) .

 

BTW on the RBU-6000 - the Pyotr velikiy and Kuznetsov do not have this. The Kuznetsov has two KT-153 launchers(at the rear) for the "Udav-1" system, while the Pyotr Veliky has a single KT-153 launcher(at the front) and two RBU-1000 on either side of the superstructure further back.

[PoorOldSpike]

News- i've edited some 'Weapons Layout' screenshots for US vessels into my thread starter post.

Edited February 3, 2021 by PoorOldSpike

[PoorOldSpike]

More exciting news- i've edited some Chinese Weapon Layouts ino my earlier Chinese post.

[PoorOldSpike]

Have just edited extra range and weapon data into my earlier Weapons Layouts pretty pics like this one-

(PS- my next series of tests will analyse ships air defense systems against incoming anti-ship missiles)..

 

 

 

 

 

[Looney]

The MK13 GMLS has its reload time totally wrong in DCS, it's specified at 8 seconds after reaction, see https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk13-gmls.pdf

 

Also, NATO ships operate on the doctrine LOOK-SHOOT-SHOOT so you will almost always launch two missiles at one threat.

The other thing that's a bit missing is the layered defense tactic. You start with long range SAMs, after that comes short range SAMs, cannons and lastly point defense weapon systems.

 

What I see is that a ship will fire a couple of missile and then wait, only to begin firing its CIWS but not using its 76mm or 100mm guns at a longer range.

 

Oh well, there's a lot to be said and done in ship defense, I can only hope we can provide info to the ED team to model ship defenses as it should be and not have a whole fleet go PANIC mode once a threat is detected and empty their magazines...

[Silver_Dragon]

On 2/1/2021 at 1:11 PM, Tippis said:

As with everything DCS, that's what it's supposed to have, yes, but the thing that they've stuck on the model is an ASW mortar and what is listed in other places as BM-14-17s even though it should have neither — you see them repeated on numerous other ships where its purpose is clearly defined (but again, not in-game since they don't function) and where it should be… well… exactly that.

 

It's probably more that they've kept the 3D model around and cobbled together ships with what they have rather than what exactly should be on the class or the specific ship. Hence why you come across hull numbers that don't even apply for the series, or mixtures of capabilities that should apply to both earlier and later builds of a class at once.

 

 

About Russian ASW weapons:
- Project 1164 Atlant (Slava)

MGK-335 Platina Sonar
P/S(5)2 533mm TT w/5 SET-65M F, can carry 53-65K torpedoes
F(12)2 RBU 6000 Smerch-2 w/6 salvoes
Aft Pad with Ka-25Ts Hormone B or Ka-27PL Helix A

- Project 1144.2 Pyotr Velikiy

MGK-355 Polinom, MGK-355TA Polinom-T Sonar

F(10)1 RBU 12000 (UDAV-1) w/6 salvoes
P/S(6)2 RBU 1000 Smerch-3 w/5 salvoes
P/S(5)2 533mm TT w/5 SET-65K or 83RN Vodopad (carry 30 weapons), can carry 53-65K torpedoes
Aft Pad(1)3 Ka-27 Helix A B

 

- Project 1143.5 Admiral Kuznetsov

MGK-365 Zvezda-M1 (bow only), MGK-355TA Polinom-T Sonar

PQ/SQ(10)2 RBU 12000 (UDAV-1) w/3 salvoes (Two salvoes for the RBU 12000 are 1st Gen ATT defense)
Air Group Oct 16: 10 Su-33, 3 MiG-29KR, 1 MiG-29KUBR, 4 Ka-27PL, 4 Ka-29PS, 4 Ka-29, 2 Ka-31R, 1 Ka-52K

 

- Project 1135M Burevestnik-M [Krivak II]

MG-332 Titan 2, MG-325 Vega Sonar

F(12)2 RBU 6000 Smerch-2 w/4 salvoes
F(4)1 85R Metel//2 Sprut E
P/S(4)2 533mm TT w/4 SET-65M
Can carry 18 IGDM-500 or 14 KAM or 14 KB or 10 KSM or 7 MTPK-1 or 4 PMR-1 or 7 PMR-2 or 14 RM-1 or 10 Sepei or 12 UDM-2 mines.

 

- Project 1154 Yastreb [Project 11540 Neustrashimyy on DCS]

MGK-365 Zvezda-M1 sonar
PB/SB(3)2 torpedo catapult w/12 USET-80K, 83RN Vodopad
F(12)1 RBU 6000 Smerch-2 w/6 salvoes
Aft Pad with Ka-27PL Helix A

Can carry 16 - 20 mines. RPK-8 available for RBU-6000, 4 salvoes

 

- Project 1124MEh and 1124MU [Grisha V] [Project 1123.4 Grisha on DCS]

MGK-335 Platina (keel only) or MGK-335MS Platina-M (keel only), MG-339 Shelon Sonar

F(12)1 RBU 6000 Smerch-2 w/4 salvoes
2 DC Rail w/6 BB-1 or BPS DC
P/S(2)2 533mm TT w/2 SET-65M or TEST-71M

Can carry 18 mines vice DC, RBU 6000 can carry RPK-8 with 90R projectiles

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Looney said:

The MK13 GMLS has its reload time totally wrong in DCS, it's specified at 8 seconds after reaction, see https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk13-gmls.pdf

 

Also, NATO ships operate on the doctrine LOOK-SHOOT-SHOOT so you will almost always launch two missiles at one threat.

The other thing that's a bit missing is the layered defense tactic. You start with long range SAMs, after that comes short range SAMs, cannons and lastly point defense weapon systems.

 

What I see is that a ship will fire a couple of missile and then wait, only to begin firing its CIWS but not using its 76mm or 100mm guns at a longer range.

 

Oh well, there's a lot to be said and done in ship defense, I can only hope we can provide info to the ED team to model ship defenses as it should be and not have a whole fleet go PANIC mode once a threat is detected and empty their magazines...

 

Yep, plus the STIR is absent... Naval guns don't engage air targets even when they have the ammunition for it (the majority of REDFOR ships have HE-VT and HE proximity rounds for A/A and just HE with an impact fuse (+ self destruct) for engaging surface and land targets.

 

Spoiler

76mm (on the AK-176 as used on the Tarantul-III Mod./Pr. 12411 and Grisha-V/Pr. 1124M)

• UZSB-62RP AA round - ZS-62 HE projectile with AR-51L RADAR proximity fuse (8m range) 
• UOFB-62 HE round - OF-62 HE projectile with 0.48kg of AI-X-2 with impact fuse and self destruct (self destructs after ~30 seconds)

100mm (on the AK-100 on the Krivak II/Pr. 1135M and Neutrashimyy/Pr. 11540))

• UZS-58 AA round - ZS-58 HE projectile with a DVM-60M1 remote fuse (presumably similar to VT)
• UZS-58R AA round - ZS-58R HE projectile with AR-32 RADAR proximity fuse (variable range between 5-10m) 
• UOF-58 HE round - OF-58 projectile with an impact fuse (V-429). 1.58kg of AI-X-2, total mass being 15.6kg

130mm (on the AK-130 used by the Slava/Pr. 1164 and Peter-the-Great/Pr. 1144.2)

• ZS-44 - AA round with DVM-60M1 fuse.
• ZS-44R - AA round with AR-32 RADAR proximity fuse
• F-44 - HE round with 4MPM impact fuse.

Each projectile has a common mass (33.4kg), explosive mass (3.56kg AI-X-2) and total mass (52.8kg).

 

[Tippis]

3 hours ago, Looney said:

Also, NATO ships operate on the doctrine LOOK-SHOOT-SHOOT so you will almost always launch two missiles at one threat.

The other thing that's a bit missing is the layered defense tactic. You start with long range SAMs, after that comes short range SAMs, cannons and lastly point defense weapon systems.

 

What I see is that a ship will fire a couple of missile and then wait, only to begin firing its CIWS but not using its 76mm or 100mm guns at a longer range.

This probably comes down to how their radar trackers are implemented. Unless anything special is implemented, it's a simple case of 1 radar = 1 tracked target = 1 missile in the air.

 

Slightly more advanced systems have multiple missile channels (but rarely more than 2 per tracker) that lets it guide more missiles at once. And particularly troublesome platforms have multiple trackers that let it go after multiple targets.

 

What you're seeing is most likely a consequence of all trackers and missile channels being occupied at the moment, and unless those slots are freed, nothing else will fire even though there might be better weapons available to deal with bigger threats. Realistically, things like CIWS should have their own trackers, but this isn't always (in fact, I'd say very rarely) how they're defined in the individual units or in the weapon systems themselves.

[Northstar98]

39 minutes ago, Tippis said:

This probably comes down to how their radar trackers are implemented. Unless anything special is implemented, it's a simple case of 1 radar = 1 tracked target = 1 missile in the air.

 

Slightly more advanced systems have multiple missile channels (but rarely more than 2 per tracker) that lets it guide more missiles at once. And particularly troublesome platforms have multiple trackers that let it go after multiple targets.

 

What you're seeing is most likely a consequence of all trackers and missile channels being occupied at the moment, and unless those slots are freed, nothing else will fire even though there might be better weapons available to deal with bigger threats. Realistically, things like CIWS should have their own trackers, but this isn't always (in fact, I'd say very rarely) how they're defined in the individual units or in the weapon systems themselves.

 

Yeah the database for ship RADARs is really quite shocking IMO; like with the Ticonderoga and Arleigh-Burke having the MPQ-53 (which is the STR/FCR for the Patriot) approximate SPY-1. The SPG-62 FCRs (used to provide CWI for the terminal SARH mode of the SM-2) don't seem to be defined at all, and the Oliver Hazard Perry doesn't even have its STIR present on the 3D model, let alone defined in the .lua

 

Then there's thing like the Kuznetsov and Nimitz-Roosevelt using the generic 'carrier search RADAR' being used as a stand in for Mars Passat + Fregat MA in the former and the SPS-48E and SPS-49 in the latter.

Edited February 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[Looney]

There's a lot of work to be done....

[Чарик80]

23.01.2021 в 19:17, PoorOldSpike сказал:

An SM-2 from Tico takes down an SU-25T

 

 

 

A RIM-7 Sea Sparrow launch from a carrier.

Note the 8 missile launcher box and the Gatling next to it-

 

 

A RIM-116A launch from carrier

Note the 21 missile launcher box

 

 

 

RIM 7 someone gets shot down at least

[Top Jockey]

Hello everyone,

I've been doing several experimental missions, against the CGN Pyotr Velikiy, to know more about its different armament types (sending constant waves of different fighters to attack it).

 

Hoewver, after a very long time expermenting, it seems that its short-range SAM - 9M311 "Tunguska" is of almost infinite stock ?

... as the 2 rear left side batteries keep re-suplying several times,  when all the 4 others stay pointed up after expending all their ammunition.

[Seaeagle]

27 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

Hello everyone,

I've been doing several experimental missions, against the CGN Pyotr Velikiy, to know more about its different armament types (sending constant waves of different fighters to attack it).

 

Hoewver, after a very long time expermenting, it seems that its short-range SAM - 9M311 "Tunguska" is of almost infinite stock ?

... as the 2 rear left side batteries keep re-suplying several times,  when all the 4 others stay pointed up after expending all their ammunition.

I don't know why there seems to be a difference between individual Kortik modules on the ship in the sim, but the real system comes with an under-deck magasine for each combat module from which the missile cannisters are loaded and off-loaded again when not in use. The magasine has storage for 4 loads of 8 missiles, so the total amount available for each combat module is 32 missiles.

Edited October 19, 2021 by Seaeagle

[Top Jockey]

3 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

I don't know why there seems to be a difference between individual Kortik modules on the ship in the sim, but the real system comes with an under-deck magasine for each combat module from which the missile cannisters are loaded and off-loaded again when not in use. The magasine has storage for 4 loads of 8 missiles, so the total amount for each combat module is 32 missiles.

Thank you Seaeagle,

So, by 'combat module' I assume you are refering to each Kashtan (Kortik?) CIWS 'battery'.

Keeping in mind that the ship does have a total of 6 of these modules, we are talking of a total: 192 x "Tunguska" missiles ?