Request for Information from ED about in-game SAMs

[GGTharos]

Hi guys,

 

Would it be possibly for you to reveal following information:

Which SAMs can reload after their internal magazine is empty, and how long does this take?

Additionally, how can a SAM be made to reload? Does it require to have a specific unit nearby to do so, and if so which unit and how close?

 

 

Also, a request: SAMs that are out of ammo should shut down their radars until they reload.

 

Also if possible, to model a player-enabled 'datalink' between radars so that say, an EWR radar or a bigger SAM radar (the 'parent') would allow other SAMs to remain silent until a signal is send that a target is well within their lethal range - that signal would be sent from the bigger radar.

 

It would also be nice if for SEAD, the ARMs did not self-destruct as soon as the radar shuts off or is destroyed but, instead, it continues ballistic flight attempting to INS itself to last known signal position (random perturbations of the flight could cause a good CEP so that the missile would rarely strike the shut-down radar but it would land within some small radius near it, eg. 200m.) The missile (depending on the missile, ie. AGM-45 is not capable of this) should 'recapture' the target if it is in its FOV and it comes back online and should continue guiding towards it.

Similarely, some SAM logic for shutting down radar when under attack would be nice as it would make SEAD more realistic and much more interesting.

 

Please consider these for 1.2, they are a very big part of making the simulation more complete :)

[GGTharos]

Er, PS, also addition of HUMRAAM and Chapparal to NATO side would be very much appreciated, as well as addition of TWS-like radar operation modes for the AI (eg. for F-15s, S-300, Patriot, Su-30, etcetc. where you would expect no 'lock or launch' tone for the given weapon system in use, such as R-77 and AIM-120)

[Chizh]

I have put down it in a wish list. There can be somebody will make model of Chapparel? :wink:

[GGTharos]

Wish I could ... sadly my 3D skills have rotten after about 10 years of non-use. (Imagine 3.0 on amiga last time I did anything 3D)

 

However I have provide the FAS link, which includes pictures.

 

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/chaparral.htm

 

Does ED have a model of a tracked vehicle available that could be quickly modified to suit the role? ... Perhaps an M113?

 

Thanks for adding this to the wish list though! We could really use some good short-range SAMs on the NATO side.

 

Also if you wish, I have a movie of the HUMRAAM where it demonstrates that the radar itself is used in a TWS-like mode, thus probably capable of engaging multiple targets.

[Chizh]

it's interesting. Could you send me that movie?

[GGTharos]

I will once I get home, Chizh!

 

I will email you a link to my linux server where you can download it - it's too big to send by email.

 

Also, I was just reading the FAS page for the HUMRAAM and it looks like most of the time it will use the HAWK system search radar or an AEGIS class cruiser radar datalinked to it to select and fire on targets, thus never using its own puny onboard radar ...

 

the link is here:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-120.htm#CLAWS

 

And, HAWK system link:

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/hawk.htm

 

While I know that FAS sucks for info, particularely for anything non-US related, it seems to have good info on the US stuff.

[Chizh]

Thanks.

I already saw these links. We frequently look on this site. :)

[D-Scythe]

Aegis and the SM-2MR need a major rework too, IMO. It should be more like a Patriot battery at sea ;)

[GGTharos]

Cool, Chizh.

 

Also perhaps this will be of some use :)

 

http://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/public/documents/legacy_site/cms01_046391.pdf

 

This is Raytheon's HUMRAAM brochure. This seems to suggest that HUMRAAM itself has no built-in radar, but is controlled from basically an EWR type radar ... it would help to rework SAM and EWR radars to have slight more complex modelling if possible (Especially EWR/Awacs radars, to fix the LOS and range problems they experience at this time. Eg: you do not pick up AWACS radar at long range even though the radar itself can see you, which IMHO is not correct, plus they can see through mountains and I -think- that they can see too far as well, but I am not certain of this! Unofficial talk about E-3 radar range is 500km so ... )

[GGTharos]

Aegis and the SM-2MR need a major rework too, IMO. It should be more like a Patriot battery at sea ;)

 

Hehe, agreed ... the AEGIS right now is a bit neutered.

[D-Scythe]

Hehe, agreed ... the AEGIS right now is a bit neutered.

 

Just a bit? :wink:

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

...looks like most of the time it will use the HAWK system search radar or an AEGIS class cruiser radar datalinked to it to select and fire on targets, thus never using its own puny onboard radar ...

 

Reading that FAS article, I dont think it says anywhere that the HUMRAAM has an onboard radar on the launch vehicle. I believe an engagement would consist of target data crosslinked to the AMRAAM on the launch vehicle. A missile is then launched, (possibly inertial guided at first if need be), but uses the missiles own radar for terminal guidance.

I dont think the aim of this cheap and cheerful lash-up is to get a 40 mile range system. It is merely to do better than the 4 mile range of a Stinger.

 

But this is a system that isnt even in service and is probably 2-4 years away from being fielded, so why add it to Lockon. It is a sad fact that Western and especially US and UK battlefield ADA is woeful, and always has been. US and UK have always relied on having air dominance and thus lagged behind.

Shilka equivalent? The Germans have the excellent Gepard, UK has nothing, US has Vulcan (a joke and overmodelled in Lockon IMHO).

Short range missiles? Russians have too many to list,both IR and Radar. Germans have Roland, UK has Rapier, US has Chapparal (25 yrs old?)

 

If you want to add anything, add systems that fit (and I dont want to start this timescale argument again) the approx Lockon timescale eg. the UK Rapier and US Chapparal.

 

 

While on the wish list subject of SAM sites switching off, for 1.2 or whenever, it would be neat for ALARM to zoom to altitude and deploy its parachute and drift down waiting for the hapless site to switch back on again...

[GGTharos]

HUMRAAM is mostly done with trials AFAIK and no one said anything bout a 40nm system ... I don't see where you're getting that. I said we need it to do better than the Avenger.

 

As for 'timescale' ... who cares - it seems to apply to flyables more than AI units for the most part anyway.

 

Also AFAIK the HAWK can now engage multiple targets as well.

[D-Scythe]

It is a sad fact that Western and especially US and UK battlefield ADA is woeful, and always has been. US and UK have always relied on having air dominance and thus lagged behind.

 

I fail to see how this is the case. Lagged behind? There are a few things you need to get straight:

 

1) The HUMRAAM was never intended to be a 40 nm range SAM. An AIM-120 fired from a supersonic fighter at 40 000 ft would have a hard time taking down aircraft from 40 nm, so why would an AMRAAM fired from ground level from a stationary hummer reach just as far? You obviously have no clue as to what the HUMRAAM is designed for: it's more of a short range radar SAM designed to kill EVERYTHING (fighters, missiles, bombs, etc.) at 6-10 nm range.

 

2) A ground launched AMRAAM is already in service in Norway. NASAMs or something.

 

3) There is AMPLE evidence that the Patriot PAC 2 is every bit as deadly as the latest S300s, if not more so. Thus, in terms of battlefield air defense, aircraft on both sides of the FLOT are just as likely to fall victim to long range Patriot/SA-10 shots.

 

4) Ever hear of the 15-20nm PAC 3? After having been shot at by a PAC 3, you won't even remember the SA-11's name. Due to problems with IFF in Iraqi Freedom in the PAC 3s, Coalition pilots were literally $hitting their pants every time they were spiked by a Patriot.

 

5) Even without the PAC 3, NATO's short/medium range radar SAMs are formidable. The most feared AD system in the Gulf War was not the SA-6, but the French Roland - and the French sold it to Iraq in the 1970s; i.e. early model of the system.

 

6) The SM-2 Standard missile is the most capable SAM in the world. Even in the late 1980s/early 90s, Ticonderoga and Burke missile destroyers were being equipped with models of the SM-2 with BOTH IR and RF guidance.

 

No way in hell are NATO anti-air systems in any way sorely lagging. Just because they don't develop a lot of SAMs just reflects different tactics, rather than technological inferiority.

[Trident]

Still, HUMRAAM does not really fit the timeline in LOMAC very well. NASAMS is also a stationary system dedicated to the defense of Oslo AFAIK, so it would be a bit hard to justify its inclusion in LOMAC.

 

I'd love to see the Chaparral though, I've always wondered why Flanker/LOMAC didn't model it.

[GGTharos]

Time constraints. AFAIK unless someone models the Chapparal we're not getting it, which leaves us with the HUMRAAM.

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

D-Scythe - "...you obviously have no clue..."

That hurt a little! It was late, I'd been out for a few beers, I didn't express my thoughts as well as I should've. My meaning was more about short range front line systems and the numbers of them deployed, especially from my perspective as a Brit. I wasn't really talking about theatre level weapons like Patriot / Hawk / Buk / S300, but UK hasn't any of those either. Most NATO countries and even France bought HAWK, and despite the cost, several NATO countries even bought Patriot.

 

Scene1: Russian front line - Ivan and his officer Lt. Dimitri in their foxhole.

 

I: I can hear enemy planes and helicopters, we are going to get killed!

D: Dont worry, we have multiple layers protecting us.

I: Like what?

D: There's Oleg over there, he's got an Igla.

W: Is that all?

D: Look over there, its a Shilka.

I: Is that all?

D: Look over that way, its a Strela-10.

I: Is that all?

D: Over there is an Osa.

I: Is that all?

D: Over there.....Tunguska, Tor, Kub, Buk, etc. etc.

 

Fade and pan right to....

 

Scene 2: British front line - Wayne and his officer Lt. Rupert in their foxhole.

 

W: I can hear enemy planes and helicopters, we are going to get killed!

R: Erm, yes, probably. But there's Barry over there, he's got a Starstreak.

W: Is that all?

R: Yes, I'm afraid it probably is.

 

 

Your point about naval SAM's is an interesting aside. Soviet naval SAM's historically have been mostly poor navalised versions of land based systems. The UK looked into going in the opposite direction and using Sea Dart for theatre air defense, it was to be imaginatively named Land Dart. Lack of funds meant the MoD killed the idea - what a surprise. The most that has ever happened in this regard was that the Blindfire radar for Rapier was developed from SeaWolf technology in the 1980's (while I was at Marconi Radar Systems).

[D-Scythe]

That hurt a little! It was late, I'd been out for a few beers, I didn't express my thoughts as well as I should've. My meaning was more about short range front line systems and the numbers of them deployed, especially from my perspective as a Brit. I wasn't really talking about theatre level weapons like Patriot / Hawk / Buk / S300, but UK hasn't any of those either. Most NATO countries and even France bought HAWK, and despite the cost, several NATO countries even bought Patriot.

 

Sorry, maybe I should've clarified a little...I didn't really mean it (but if someone did think HUMRAAM was a 40 nm system, then they really don't have a clue ;) ).

 

Anyway, the only thing I was surprised and disappointed at was the cancellation of RIM-116 RAM.

[SwingKid]

4) Ever hear of the 15-20nm PAC 3? After having been shot at by a PAC 3, you won't even remember the SA-11's name. Due to problems with IFF in Iraqi Freedom in the PAC 3s, Coalition pilots were literally $hitting their pants every time they were spiked by a Patriot.

 

I'm not sure this is something to be proud of... :?

 

No way in hell are NATO anti-air systems in any way sorely lagging. Just because they don't develop a lot of SAMs just reflects different tactics, rather than technological inferiority.

 

In BRD's defense, NATO is behind in ramjet technology of the sort used on SA-6 and SA-11, and the PAC-3 has demonstrated that despite the hype, it's defenseless against ARMs, in addition to being unable to identify what it's shooting at. While indeed, fielding numerous redundant systems isn't proof of superiority (witness the ICBM and submarine races), NATO SAMs are effectively a paper tiger - the USAF and USN vote together to prevent even Stingers being deployed with US ground forces at the front, for fear of "friendly fire." Stingers are designated "for defense of the rear," together with PAC-2, PAC-3 and all others.

 

-SK

[GGTharos]

But how does this compare to the Russian SAMs? Do they have a better way of avoiding FF's?

 

Is there something to show that they do better in their IFF's or that they can defend themselves against ARMs, or is there simply 'no record'?

 

In the latter case I would submit that they are 'no better' in those areas.

[GGTharos]

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-66.html

 

This suggests that the RIM-66/67 do not cause a 'lock' (possibly no launch tone either) until the homing phase, which I would -guess- is 10-20 seconds ... could this be modelled in-game?

[SwingKid]

Is there something to show that they do better in their IFF's or that they can defend themselves against ARMs, or is there simply 'no record'?

 

"US and NATO aircraft fired at least 743 HARMs against radars supporting these enemy SAMs... Even during the operation’s final week, NATO spokesmen conceded that they could confirm the destruction of only three of Serbia’s approximately 25 known mobile SA-6 batteries."

 

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj02/sum02/lambeth.html

 

-SK

[GGTharos]

Yeah, I'm aware of this, but Serbians were using HARM-busting techniques and frankly I don't think that the guys running the patriot believed the 'Magnum on that patriot' call when and if it came over the radio, while apparently magnum calls were often sent in the clear over serbia, allowing the radar operators to begin their countermeasures by doing such things as shutting down one radar and squawking with another.

 

This isn't really a very good answer to my question SK, as the Patriot battery wasn't oeprating under the same sort of circumstances AFAIK, or perhaps it was being operated by poorly trained personnel (something I heard form one of the Patriot operators on frugal's) but either way - very different circumstances IMHO, and not really comparable.

 

I thought you were referring to the ability to shoot ARMs down - whereas in this case, I really -doubt- the Patriot operators expected an ARM to head their way, while the Serbian operators worked with the exact opposite assumption.

[SwingKid]

This isn't really a very good answer to my question SK, as the Patriot battery wasn't oeprating under the same sort of circumstances AFAIK, or perhaps it was being operated by poorly trained personnel (something I heard form one of the Patriot operators on frugal's) but either way - very different circumstances IMHO, and not really comparable.

 

I thought you were referring to the ability to shoot ARMs down - whereas in this case, I really -doubt- the Patriot operators expected an ARM to head their way, while the Serbian operators worked with the exact opposite assumption.

 

Yeah, I know. I was sort of hoping to hook you into this line of argument. :wink:

 

It's the same argument why I think Russian RWRs should give a lock warning when detecting Patriot radar emissions, despite that Western RWRs might not. As I interpreted mirv's statement, whether it signals a "lock" or not is a function of the RWR, and how it is programmed to interpret that threat, not the threat radar itself. I think it's only natural that Russian RWRs would handle the situation differently than friendly RWRs, just as it's only natural the PAC-3 did not shut down when faced with HARM. It's not evidence of incapabilities, but rather just that friendly forces don't see each other as threats.

 

-SK

[D-Scythe]

I'm not sure this is something to be proud of...

 

Well, the Patriot PAC 3s were rushed into service for Iraqi Freedom, so there was bound to be some bugs that needed to be ironed out. Nonetheless, indeed, it is not something to be proud of ;)

 

And I believe that the PAC 3 does have some formidable defenses against SEAD, because it seems to be designed to shoot down ARMs. In some official report in AFM, it was stated that in the incident where a PAC 3 shot down a Tornado striker in Iraqi Freedom, the operators thought it was an anti-radiation missile. So go figure.