New NATO battlefield Air Defense of latest gen.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

BAE Sky Ceptre SAM from UK, German/US MEADS, US PAC-3 MSE Patriot. Polish MANPADS, HMMWV USHORTRAD SAM (Polish MANPADS) podded.

[Mike_Romeo]

On 3/19/2022 at 5:29 AM, DmitriKozlowsky said:

BAE Sky Ceptre SAM from UK, German/US MEADS, US PAC-3 MSE Patriot. Polish MANPADS, HMMWV USHORTRAD SAM (Polish MANPADS) podded.

The problem with latest gen stuff is that they are often too classified to be realistically recreated for DCS

[Tippis]

2 hours ago, Mike_Romeo said:

The problem with latest gen stuff is that they are often too classified to be realistically recreated for DCS

Given how utterly simplistic the various representations of all air defences are, that's not much of a problem, really.

You can derive just about all of it from public numbers and it will not be any more or less realistic than even the most ancient and well-known systems.

[Dragon1-1]

Yeah, but DCS environment is set for roughly 2000s, anyway, except for a few outliers like post-2012 A-10C2 and the Harrier. We need to complete the 2000s era, rather than jump at the latest developments.

[bies]

It would be totally unrealistic working completely different than the real counterpart. Pure fantasy. Everything of importance for real combat is strictly classified and publically available information is totally guesed estimates or straight up disinformation purposely published by producers.

1980s/1990s Patriot or S-300 we have in DCS are extremely simplified right now, but at least they can be modeled in reasonably realistic way given ED have some free resources or together with the new Integrated Air Defense module being in development.

Edited March 22, 2022 by bies

[DmitriKozlowsky]

AFAIK , and I may be wrong, in DCS its all computed down to PK. Those new systems, S350, S400, MEADS, PAC-3 MSE, Sky Ceptre, NAASMS (which we got) have very high PK. ASRAAM, and IRIS-T, Python-5, AIm-9X Block2, Evolved SeaSparrow(naval Iris-T) are more or less have no escape zones . But I would ask DCS to make PK less then 90%. So there no more SEAD dance, from Hollywood. You have to use standoff weapons, pods, terrain masking approach, decoy drones are in now. SEAD now is more of sanitation work, then suppression, those enemy SAM's have to die, or your aircrews will. Not just accuracy their warheads are superefficient. Just analyzing that unfortunate MI-24 crew that got hit by Polish provided MANPADS, a tiny shoulder launched missile, and it destroyed armor around powerplants and trans, perforated and ignited fuel, separated hub from tran, and fire balled entire MI-24 even before it hit the ground. These Polish MANPDS have minimum range of 100 meters, to be usable against drones. THe missile is armed out of the tube. 100 meters is what we trained with rifles in BCT, and in my case, artillery officer qualification course.

[Tank50us]

On 3/20/2022 at 11:54 AM, Tippis said:

Given how utterly simplistic the various representations of all air defences are, that's not much of a problem, really.

If I understand correctly, isn't the Patriot PAC3 missile compatible with the existing equipment, just more maneuverable to hit smaller and more maneuverable targets? If that's the case than implementing the PAC3 should be as simple as making the models for the launcher and missile, and testing to get the parameters correct.

[Tippis]

17 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

AFAIK , and I may be wrong, in DCS its all computed down to PK.

Weeeeeeeeeell… no.

In DCS, anything outside of an onboard system on a full-sim aircraft is usually very simple. In the case of anything related to EWAR (including most sensors), it's very very simple.

SAM systems are essentially just a handful of sensors (very simply modelled) that are hooked up to a (very simple) decision tree depending on 1) whether a potential target is detected by the simple sensors, b) whether its general position relative to the launcher suggests that it's (very naively calculated) within range, and iii) whether it will simply fly out of range because during the missile flight time. On top of this, there are the missiles themselves, which have a pretty bog-standard simplified flight model, occasionally with some fancy characteristics such as a lofting profile and whether it pulls any kind of lead or not. Oh, and whether they should trigger some kind of on-board warning system or not — in some cases, they don't even have any guidance of their own, even in instances where they should.

Any kind of countermeasure is just RNG, very simply modified by the missile's and/or underlying sensor's susceptibility to countermeasures, measured as a scaling factor to be applied to the RNG. This is why chaff is just radar flares, why CM programs don't matter — just dump to get more dice rolls — and why blinking ECM always works eventually — again, more RNG dice rolls = more opportunities for the missile to fail.

PK is comparatively complicated to use as a basis for any of this (except maybe to tweak the CM-factor).

 

9 hours ago, Tank50us said:

If I understand correctly, isn't the Patriot PAC3 missile compatible with the existing equipment, just more maneuverable to hit smaller and more maneuverable targets? If that's the case than implementing the PAC3 should be as simple as making the models for the launcher and missile, and testing to get the parameters correct.

Depends on how far down the upgrade path you want to go, from my understanding. Then again, they could always just do what they did to the SA-24, where it's exactly the same in every way as the SA-18, except that the in-game unit is called Igla-S. The system itself is pure copy-paste.

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Tippis

[Exorcet]

On 3/20/2022 at 1:18 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

Yeah, but DCS environment is set for roughly 2000s, anyway, except for a few outliers like post-2012 A-10C2 and the Harrier. We need to complete the 2000s era, rather than jump at the latest developments.

DCS doesn't really have a timeframe, the modules are what they are, and are spread over a number of years. I think for AI, because as previously mentioned how simple it is, newer units are less of a problem than cutting edge modules. Then again it would be nice to see more detailed AI units.

Improving AI unit realism should probably be the priority here, as that also makes including specific AI versions meaningful. I question a few of the units we currently have (SM-2 missile behavior is wild if you watch what they can actually do in the sim, and the Patriot seems to be very underwhelming).

[Dragon1-1]

3 hours ago, Exorcet said:

DCS doesn't really have a timeframe, the modules are what they are, and are spread over a number of years.

That's one of the biggest problems with it. The greatest number of modules fit the mid-2000s timeframe, but they are all over the place. IMO, 2000s and 80s-early 90s era are the two it should focus on. That's the most logical way to do it. New units that do not fit with the rest of the selection, simply aren't needed.

[QuiGon]

On 3/19/2022 at 5:29 AM, DmitriKozlowsky said:

German/US MEADS

MEADS is not really a thing. It was a project between Germany and the US (and I think Italy for some time), but it was cancelled. Germany then planned their own sucessor system based on MEADS, called TLVS, but this project is also stuck because funding is lacking.

Edited March 23, 2022 by QuiGon

[DmitriKozlowsky]

12 hours ago, QuiGon said:

MEADS is not really a thing. It was a project between Germany and the US (and I think Italy for some time), but it was cancelled. Germany then planned their own sucessor system based on MEADS, called TLVS, but this project is also stuck because funding is lacking.

 

According to all knowing never wrong Internets, its an active program with systems replacing Patriot as NATO Corps level air defense. Uses two missiles. Iris-T interceptor and PAC3 MSE for long range and theater ABM (like Iskander) capability.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

When I was graduating and getting commissioned, I requested Armor, Military Intelligence, and Infantry as my top three branch desires. My eyesight disqualified me from Army Aviation branch. Not a single male cadet in my class requested Air Defense Artillery. ADA was seen by us, who qualified for combat branches, as less desirable then Combat 5 (Infantry, Armor, Field Artillery, Army Corps Of Engineers, and Aviation branches). ADA was classed as Combat Support branch along with Military Police. Both branches allowed female officers and enlisted to serve in direct combat billets, shooters, which Combat 5 did not. This was 1993. Air Defense was not seen as sufficiently high tech and exciting. They had Patriot, Avenger, and Guard units retiring Hawk. Wow! Egg on our faces. Now Air Defense is a prestige branch that is very selective, and they have highest tech in U.S. Army. Now Air Defense has THAAD, PAC3, modernized Avenger, light infantry MANPADS. Also Signal Corps became MIT of Army. All the Army braniacs are getting branched or MOS'ed into Signal Corps, as it picked up counter-Cyber, and Offensive Cyberoperations missions. Signal guys also operate Army's battlefield drones. 

[Dragon1-1]

Don't forget the Vulcans.  Though admittedly, that one was the least hi-tech of them all. Effective, though, and not just against aircraft. I heard they managed to bring down a barracks (with enemy infantry in them) during Operation Just Cause. 

Also, OT, but check this out: 
https://old.reddit.com/r/MilitaryStories/new/
The guy going by BikerJedi was in ADA, as a Vulcan driver. Most of the time in Korea, but also in ODS. The guy's stories are pure gold.

[WinterH]

Yeah, we need neither NATO nor Russian latest gen air defense. What's the point? We neither have, nor will in foreseeable future things they are supposed to defend against as modules. We are less likely to have the numbers to simulate these modern air defense stuff even semi faithfully either. So the best way to get them in DCS imo, is through mods, and high digit sams mod does that for the most part, tho more so with Russian SAMs.

If anything, we should get things like Redeye, early block Stinger, Strela-2 and 3 (SA-7) etc older MANPADS and older NATO AAA, so that some of the cold war modules will have more proper threats to play with/against.

Edited March 24, 2022 by WinterH

[QuiGon]

14 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

According to all knowing never wrong Internets, its an active program with systems replacing Patriot as NATO Corps level air defense.

That's very outdated intel. MEADS is dead after the US pulled out and later Germany as well.
Germany has then started the TLVS project as a successor project, which makes use of the MEADS tech, but it is also stuck as I mentioned above. Maybe that changes with the new special fund for the Bundeswehr that was announced recently by the German government.
 

5 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Don't forget the Vulcans.

They are already ingame. I thought this thread is about adding new stuff?

Edited March 24, 2022 by QuiGon

[DmitriKozlowsky]

On 3/24/2022 at 4:12 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

Don't forget the Vulcans.  Though admittedly, that one was the least hi-tech of them all. Effective, though, and not just against aircraft. I heard they managed to bring down a barracks (with enemy infantry in them) during Operation Just Cause. 

Also, OT, but check this out: 
https://old.reddit.com/r/MilitaryStories/new/
The guy going by BikerJedi was in ADA, as a Vulcan driver. Most of the time in Korea, but also in ODS. The guy's stories are pure gold.

C-RAM would be worthwhile addition to DCS. As C-RAM is just a Phalanx CIWS mounted on truck flat bed. M163 Vulcan vehicle is long retired. IMHO Vulcan , C-RAM, and its Dutch 30MM GAU-8 based brother Goalkeeper are timeless weapons. I regret their retirement. I think that the only timeless weapon that outlasted Vulcan in ground applications is M2 BMG .50 caliber heavy MG. That weapon will never be retired. We used to that in 100 years US Army OrbitBorne (future airborne) and US Marines will be dropping on planets in this Solar system, from all sorts currently sci-fi'ish dropships, pods, STO aerospacecraft , will have railguns, lasers, and they will still bring Ma Deuce with them. Ghost Of John Browning.

[FlankerKiller]

I believe CRAM is coming. CRAM, linebacker, NASAMS, and Patriot provide a pretty good blue IADS. It doesn't have the tactical SoRAD to match the reds but that is also realistic. 

[Northstar98]

LPWS [Centurion C-RAM] is coming, but presumably there's some core changes to be made to enable it to actually function as a C-RAM system (namely by giving all weapons a reflection limit).

Though the other issue is that the naval Phalanx has had the wrong dispersion, fired the wrong round, while having none of its own sensors modelled since forever; I hope that changes with LPWS (though that fires a different round).

Edited March 28, 2022 by Northstar98

[FlankerKiller]

Man I hope that the Naval units benefit from the C-RAMs development. Also fucking sick. Dose that mean the C-RAM will be shooting down rockets and Morters in DCS. Because that is gonna look awesome as we lift off for some payback. 

[Northstar98]

9 hours ago, FlankerKiller said:

Man I hope that the Naval units benefit from the C-RAMs development. Also fucking sick. Dose that mean the C-RAM will be shooting down rockets and Morters in DCS. Because that is gonna look awesome as we lift off for some payback. 

It should be, right now there are no systems capable of actually acting as a C-RAM system, because air defences won't engage anything that doesn't fall under the 'missile' category, because apart from that category, nothing else has a 'reflection limit' (RCS) defined.

So they won't engage mortars, artillery rounds, or rockets - only aircraft and weapons classified as missiles.

This leads to some silliness where things like the SA-15 and 2S6 will try to engage things like APKWS II configured Hydra 70 rockets, because they're classified as a missile; but won't engage much larger rocket artillery, because they're classified as a rocket.

[WinterH]

I do vaguely remember ED saying at some point that these will get looked at, and hopefully we'll have a more detectability based system than the legacy "missile can be countered, rocket and bomb not" we have.

C-RAM was seen in a few ED trailers last few months. Also, we were to get a Pantsir too last year but then we didn't hear about it again.

Really though, I'd much rather we get older air defense from both sides of the fence before 2010+ ones.

Edited March 28, 2022 by WinterH