Ship attack

[joojoo]

Hey to all 

 

Despite the fact that I know that strike against a frigate is a very difficult task, could anyone tell me any idea? I have tried from very low alt but the frigate still shoots at me.

 

Thanx 

[leon737]

The raw point is never ever plan to engage a frigate by a single attack aircraft of any type.
Plan your mission by assigning different tasks to the packages. One package will be SEAD, other will be strikers, thrird will be CAP and so on.
The strike package would probably consist of two flights, 4 jets each. Each unit will be armed with 2 AGM-84 for pri target.
Check if this works.

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by leon737

[Stearmandriver]

Couldn't tell you anything about real world tactics, but in DCS the Kuznetov can be killed by a single flight of 2 Hornets, each carrying 4 GBU-24s, performing a level release at 35,000ft which seems to put you above their SAM envelope.  Of course this requires escort to deal with their CAP first. 

[Topper81]

Hi is it possible strategy to attack a ship with HARMS first to disable it's radar and use Harpoons in the second wave? When I tried to attack the moscwa with Harms and even if I got some hits, it's radar is still working... But maybe hits of Harms are not considerd in the "radar damage modell" of ships...?

Edited March 11, 2021 by Topper81

[Tholozor]

At the moment ships have a simplified damage model, so attempting to damage/disable specific parts of a ship isn't going to yield the results you want.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Tholozor

[Topper81]

Ok :-(. But it's a realistic tactic? Is the Harm able to disable ship radars? And is it possible to select a special radar of a ship? (I guess not in the sim but I guess some ships have not just one radar). If yes I could create a wish list item

Edited March 11, 2021 by Topper81

[Bunny Clark]

Yes, in theory HARMs would be a valid tactic against a ship. They can certainly detect and track the ship's radars, and should absolutely be able to destroy them with a hit. Attacking a ship with multiple radar systems would be much like attacking a SAM site with multiple radar systems: just select the system you want to target.

 

I expect someday this will work in DCS. Once the ship damage model gets a rework. That'll probably happen after the new damage model gets implemented for modern jets. 

[Northstar98]

If you look at tests of HARMs, engagements against ships aren't infrequent - so presumably yes, it is a valid tactic (or it was at least tested for it).

Personally, in some ships the damage model is kinda there. The problem is more due to how RADARs are simulated in DCS (i.e very basic and crude, simulating nothing about the actual beam itself or where it's coming from). This means that the HARM doesn't actually guide on antennae themselves, it just targets the geometric centre of whatever unit which has the targeted RADAR.

Meaning that it doesn't really make a difference if the damage model gets improved, until there's better simulation of RADARs and thus a better simulation of the HARMs guidance, the HARM won't even target the RADARs properly - it's pointless upgrading damage models or even warhead effects if it's not even hitting the thing you're targeting.

To really get this right, it looks like we'll have to simulate the actual RADAR beam themselves and not just the scan zone, as well as actually attaching it to antennae and have it move as antennae move. This will most likely necessitate a major upgrade to how RADARs are handled in DCS, as well as a major upgrade to near enough every single RADAR in DCS that isn't a player module (and even some of them could do with an upgrade). I'm hoping this can tie in with numerous other improvements to RADARs across the board - right now they're incredibly simplistic and crude, overly so in my opinion. It not only affects the guidance of ARMs, but also compromises what we can do in regards to EW (though that would also require other things that I won't go into here).

There are some modules like the F-14, which I think uses a raycasting scheme for its RADAR, which allows it to simulate clutter basically perfectly IMO - maybe a similar-ish scheme can employed here.

Unfortunately though this sounds like a lot of development workload, as well as being even more taxing on are already taxed hardware - which means that in turn, we might have to wait until DCS is much more optimised, perhaps with multi-core (which it almost certainly needs anyway).

I'll go over each aspect in detail:

Damage Models

Spoiler

Checking the database entries for ships, at least some of them (the minority though) have damage models that are split up into multiple zones. Don't get excited though, most (I'd say 60-75% - just pulling a number out of my backside) of the time, it's purely graphical and isn't attached to a physical subsystem whatsoever.

An example that does is the Tarantul III (called Molniya in DCS, the .lua file is called molniya.lua). We can actually see that the MR-123 (NATO: "Bass Tilt") RADAR for the AK-630 does have a damage model zone attached to it, as do the AK-630s. The AK-630s also have a dependency on the RADAR being operational (even though it has a manual optical director, which is present on the model, and is defined).

Spoiler

GT.DM = {
    { area_name = "NOSE_R", 	area_arg = 70, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {18.0,2.3,2.3}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "BORT_R", 	area_arg = 71, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {-3.0,1.0,5.0}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "KORMA_R", 	area_arg = 72, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {-17.5,1.2,4.7}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "NOSE_L", 	area_arg = 73, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {18.0,2.2,-2.3}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "BORT_L", 	area_arg = 74, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {-3.0,1.0,-5.0}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "KORMA_L", 	area_arg = 75, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {-17.5,1.5,-4.7}, size = 0.3}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "KABINA", 	area_arg = 76, area_life = 110, area_fire = { pos = {4.0,6.0,0.0}, size = 0.5}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "RUBKA", 		area_arg = 77, area_life = 44, area_fire = { pos = {0.0, 9.5, 0.0}, size = 0.5}}, [MR-123 RADAR]
    { area_name = "NADSTROYKA",	area_arg = 78, area_life = 55, area_fire = { pos = {-19.0, 4.0, 0.0}, size = 1.0}}, [graphical only]
    { area_name = "TOWER_F", 	area_arg = 97, area_life = 33, area_fire = { pos = {14.5, 5.0, 0.0}, size = 0.5}}, [AK-176]
    { area_name = "ZA_01", 		area_arg = 99, area_life = 27, area_fire = { pos = {-15.85,6.76,2.27}, size = 0.5}}, [starboard AK-630]
    { area_name = "ZA_02", 		area_arg = 100, area_life = 27,area_fire = { pos = {-15.85,6.76,-2.27}, size = 0.5}}, [port AK-630]
    { area_name = "TPK_01_R", 	area_arg = 109, area_life = 16, area_fire = { pos = {-3.0,6.0,4.5}, size = 0.4}}, [starboard SS-N-22 launcher]
    { area_name = "TPK_02_L", 	area_arg = 110, area_life = 16, area_fire = { pos = {-3.0,6.0,-4.5}, size = 0.4}}, [port SS-N-22 launcher]
}

 

For individual subsystems, there's this as an example (the MR-123):

Spoiler

GT.WS[ws] = {}
set_recursive_metatable(GT.WS[ws], GT_t.SS_t.VYMPEL_TRACKER[1]);
GT.WS[ws].pos = {-2.0, 16.0, 0.0};
GT.WS[ws].drawArgument1 = 4;
GT.WS[ws].LN[1].min_trg_alt = 4;
GT.WS[ws].area = "RUBKA"; [we can see the MR-123 is attached to the 'RUBKA' zone defined above] 
ws = GT_t.inc_ws();
GT.WS[ws] = {}
set_recursive_metatable(GT.WS[ws], GT_t.SS_t.VYMPEL_TRACKER[2]);
GT.WS[ws].LN[1].min_trg_alt = 4;
GT.WS[ws].base = ws-1;
GT.WS[ws].area = "RUBKA";

 

Presumably, if that area loses enough HP (presumably that's how it works), that subsystem will be disabled.

Obviously this is only one type of ship, and it's one of the only ones that even have multiple zones for the damage model. It's also one of the subsystems actually attached to a damage model.

The AK-630s have a 'depends_on_unit' line, which in this case is defined as the MR-123 (I wish DCS would actually name the system specifically, it would make checking much easier). Though it should be said that the AK-630s can be fired in a purely manually directed mode, using a manually operated gunsight (which can be seen on the model). 

You can check this for yourself, if you navigate to your main DCS installation, go to Scripts -> Database -> navy and then there's folders for red (eastern) and blue (western). Inside those you'll find .lua files for each ship. (Not sure why it doesn't separate them by country which would make more sense, but whatever).

If the one you're looking for isn't there chances are it's in CoreMods -> tech

 

Ship Sensor Modelling

Spoiler

Here's where I think half of the issue lies; here's what DCS cares about when defining RADARs.

• What kind of RADAR is it? Types include: RADAR_AS (design to detect airborne units), RADAR_SS (designed to detect surface units) and RADAR_MULTIROLE (which can do both).
• The scan volume
• The scan period (essentially update rate - presumably for RWRs)
• Detection distances (typically divided into 2 hemispheres (upper and lower, presumably this is look-up/look-down) and each is further subdivided into hot/cold aspect.
• Velocity limits (i.e notch filter)
• Lock on distance coefficient (i.e at what multiple of the maximum distance should the RADAR transition from acquisition to track and vice versa).

That's it, there's nothing about where emissions come from specifically, nor is there anything about the actual beam itself whatsoever (i.e type (i.e pulse/CW), beam width, frequency band, PRF etc).

As far as I can tell, the sensors also aren't attached even attached to anything in particular and in the case of the Tarantul III, the MR-123 is present but isn't actually defined in the sensors portion - maybe it's only there for the damage model, and isn't actually functioning as a RADAR (though it does look in the direction of a contact).

 

When it comes to ships, they're the worst offenders for RADARs; they almost always don't have each of their RADARs present in their sensors field, instead taking the RADARs and combining them into one system

IRL, the Tarantul III has 2 main RADARs:

• MR-123 (NATO: 'Bass Tilt') - this is the only RADAR this ship has AFAIK that's capable against airborne targets. The RADAR is mainly the target-tracking/fire-control RADAR for the AK630 CIWS. I'm also pretty sure it can guide the AK-176 against air-targets. The RADAR also has an acquisition mode (though limited). In DCS however, this RADAR doesn't seem to be actually implemented as a RADAR. The acquisition mode, as well as AA capability for the AK-176 is not implemented. 
• Monolit-T (NATO: 'Band Stand') - this is the primary surface search and targeting RADAR for the SS-N-22, it is an upgrade of the early Titanit RADAR on the Nanuchka class missile boats. It's actually a very capable system, operating in 2 different bands, is OTH backscatter capable (giving it a long-range as it's not limited by LOS) and has a capable receive only/ELINT mode. The Russian wikipedia page on the system has quite a few details. In DCS however, none of this is simulated at all.

 

I think there's also a navigation RADAR ("Kivach"?) which is surface-search and navigation RADAR only (might be in the radome at the top, though that might be a SATCOM antenna or an ESM system).

Here's the sensors field for the Tarantul III:

Spoiler

GT.Sensors = {  OPTIC = {
                            "long-range naval optics", --[purely generic, every ship has this]
                            "long-range naval LLTV", --[generic, every ship has this]
                            --"long-range naval FLIR", [generic, commented out]
                        },
                RADAR = {
                            "molniya search radar", [what RADAR is it referring to? The MR-123 or the Monolit-T?]
                            --"KKS R-790 Tsunami-BM" --комплекс космической связи Р-790 "Цунами-БМ" РКР "Москва" класс "Слава" [translation: 
space communications complex R-790 "Tsunami-BM" RKR "Moscow" class "Slava - this doesn't sound like a sensor at all... It's a communications/DL system]
                        }
            };
GT.DetectionRange  = GT.airFindDist;
GT.ThreatRange = GT.airWeaponDist;
GT.Singleton   ="no";

And here's how that 'molniya search radar' is defined in db_sensors.lua:

 

["molniya search radar"] = 
		{
            type = RADAR_MULTIROLE,
            scan_volume =
            {
                azimuth = {-180.0, 180.0},
                elevation = {-4.0, 70.0}
            },
            max_measuring_distance = 28430.0,
            scan_period = 12.0,
            air_search = {
                detection_distance =
                {
                    [HEMISPHERE_UPPER] =
                    {
                        [ASPECT_HEAD_ON] = 28430.0,
                        [ASPECT_TAIL_ON] = 18000.0
                    },
                    [HEMISPHERE_LOWER] =
                    {
                        [ASPECT_HEAD_ON] = 28430.0,
                        [ASPECT_TAIL_ON] = 18000.0
                    }
                },
                velocity_limits =
                {
                    radial_velocity_min = 100.0 / 3.6,
                    relative_radial_velocity_min = 100.0 / 3.6,
                },
				lock_on_distance_coeff = 1.0,
            },
			surface_search = {
				RCS = 100.0,
				RBM_detection_distance = 28430.0,
			},
        },

Looks like they've combined a surface search and an air search RADAR into one system. With a range of approximately 15.3 nautical miles, a scan period of 12 seconds. In air search it's equally capable in look-down and look-up situations, but only has a ~9.7 nautical mile range against cold targets.

There's a notch filter around ±54 knots, and the RADAR will immediately track targets within the detection distance, at least that's how I think it works. Most RADARs in DCS have this set to 0.85, so at 0.85x the detection distance, the RADAR will transition from a search/acquisition mode to a track mode and then a fire-control mode when inside weapons range.

For surface search, the range is the same, but requires the target have an RCS of >=100.0m^2 (presumably to stop it from firing AShMs at small craft). IRL the Mololit-T (and the Titanit the Monolit is an upgrade of) is apparently much more capable against surface threats. It might be the case however that DCS isn't simulating the monolit-T at all - leaving it undefined, and is using the navigation RADAR for surface search. 

Overall, ship RADARs and RADARs in general in DCS are very crude and often pretty disappointing. Ships in particular often having their RADARs absent and undefined - even the Nimitz-Roosevelt subclass we got in the supercarrier module is the same.

Often however, (and I personally find this even more disappointing) ships will take an existing RADAR off of a ground unit, and use that as a stand-in. An example of this is the AN/SPY-1 onboard the Arleigh-Burke Flt. IIA and the Ticonderoga-class (which both have 4); in DCS however, they use 'patriot str' or in other words the AN/MPQ-53 STR/FCR of the Patriot SAM system, despite the 2 being very different RADARs as well as all the problems of the above.

 

HARM Guidance

Spoiler

Here's where the 2nd half of the issue lies and it strongly relates to the above. Because nothing about the actual beam of the RADAR is simulated at all, including where it emanates from, the HARM doesn't actually home in on antennae - it guides on the geometric centre of whatever unit has the targeted sensor. What it should actually do is home in on antennae specifically.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[silverdevil]

There is a story of a friendly fire incident when an F-4G hit a B-52 tail gun radar. So to a HARM, radar is radar.

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10314/the-time-a-f-4g-wild-weasels-anti-radiation-missile-blew-apart-a-b-52s-tail

Edited March 12, 2021 by silverdevil

[MrReynolds]

I say we Nuke it from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure!

 

On a serious note - It's quite a sight following up a flight of 4 B-52s attacking an s300 SAM site.

[Northstar98]

On 3/12/2021 at 1:37 PM, silverdevil said:

There is a story of a friendly fire incident when an F-4G hit a B-52 tail gun radar. So to a HARM, radar is radar.

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10314/the-time-a-f-4g-wild-weasels-anti-radiation-missile-blew-apart-a-b-52s-tail

 

True, so long as the RADAR is in a band the HARM can receive, it should be able to guide on it regardless of platform. AA or anti-ship missiles operating in a HOJ mode are also essentially acting as ARMs.

If I tried to do this in DCS however, repeating your example of the B-52 I can look at the Tu-22M3 - that aircraft has RADAR in its tail which is used as a tail warning RADAR, and a gun director for the turret. The turret also has a TP-1 director which is a TV system.

In DCS however, the RADAR isn't present - it's undefined. So we wouldn't be able to repeat this. It's also why you don't get RWR warnings when you're behind the Tu-22M3, especially when it's firing its tail gun at you.

Spoiler

Here's the sensors defined for the Tu-22M3

Sensors = {
            RADAR = "PNA-D Leninets", [This is a surface-search RADAR]
            OPTIC = nil, [so the TP-1 optical system isn't present either]
            RWR = "Abstract RWR" [this is a generic RWR]
        },

And here's how the RADAR is defined in db_sensors.lua:

["PNA-D Leninets"] = {

            type = RADAR_SS, [i.e surface search only]
            scan_volume =
            {
                azimuth = {-150.0, 150.0},
                elevation = {-20.0, 10.0}
            },
            max_measuring_distance = 300000.0,
            scan_period = 10.0,
			RCS = 100.0,
            RBM_detection_distance = 210000.0
        },

So yes, surface-search RADAR, 300km maximum range. Targets must have an RCS ≥100.0m² to be detected (presumably to stop it from firing on small craft).

As for the RWR, here's how it's defined in the db_sensors.lua

["Abstract RWR"] =
        {
            detection_dist_to_radar_detection_dist_max_ratio = 0.85,
            lock_on_detection = true
        }

So very simply, if the detection distance is ≤ the maximum range of the offending RADAR, the RWR can pick it up. And the RWR is capable of determining whether the RADAR in question has transitioned into a track/fire-control mode.

The real aircraft has the following sensors:

• PNA-D Leninets [NATO: "Down Beat"] - Surface search RADAR (also has DBS and TA modes, though they're not really relevant for AI).
• PRS-4KM Krypton-B [NATO: "Fan Tail"] - Tail warning RADAR and fire control RADAR for the GSh-23 tail gun.
• Avtomat 2/3 - RWR
• L-082 Mak-UL - MAWS
• TP-1 - TV gun director

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[silverdevil]

@Northstar98 it's coming in version 2.7

[Northstar98]

25 minutes ago, silverdevil said:

@Northstar98 it's coming in version 2.7

 

I wish...

[Spurts]

On 3/12/2021 at 8:37 AM, silverdevil said:

There is a story of a friendly fire incident when an F-4G hit a B-52 tail gun radar. So to a HARM, radar is radar.

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10314/the-time-a-f-4g-wild-weasels-anti-radiation-missile-blew-apart-a-b-52s-tail

 

Good ol' In HARMS Way