fixed PATRIOT has grossly overestimated launch range

[Default774]

The patriot's launch range at the moment seems grossly overexaggerated for the kinematics of the missile. The patriot will launch at targets from pretty much double the range that an S300 will engage the same target at, despite the S300 having a significant advantage in missile kinematics.

patr_range_sa10.trk patr_range.trk

This overexaggerated launch range results in the missile reaching the target at extremely slow speeds at terminal stage, often subsonic and only travelling a few hundred knots. This obviously heavily affects the Pk of the patriot system when firing at manoeuvring targets, as only a slight turn will make the incoming missile miss at longer ranges due to the lack of energy that the missile has when firing from maximum range.

patr_maxrng.trk

When comparing to other REDFOR SAM systems, this overestimated launch range becomes especially evident.

patr_range_sa11.trkpatr_range_sa2.trk

Reducing the patriots maximum engagement range to ~40-50% seems to yield better results in terms of having the missile have some reserve energy in the terminal stage.

patr_40%range_sa2.trk

[ngreenaway]

what distance is it actually launching at?

40 minutes ago, Default774 said:

The patriot's launch range at the moment seems grossly overexaggerated for the kinematics of the missile. The patriot will launch at targets from pretty much double the range that an S300 will engage the same target at, despite the S300 having a significant advantage in missile kinematics

 

 

[Exorcet]

I'm pretty convinced that the problem is actually the drag on the Patriot. Unfortunately I don't have information indicating what the real value should be, I've tried to ask ED to confirm if the drag value is correct as is according to their info, but I never got an answer.

[Default774]

5 minutes ago, ngreenaway said:

what distance is it actually launching at?

 

For example. target @30000ft M1.0, the patriot will fire at ~42nm with the missile hitting the target at M0.81

patr_range_example.trk patr_range_example.acmi

[ngreenaway]

42nm = 77km is way too far. theres no way it should be firing at targets 80km away

[ngreenaway]

31 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I'm pretty convinced that the problem is actually the drag on the Patriot. Unfortunately I don't have information indicating what the real value should be, I've tried to ask ED to confirm if the drag value is correct as is according to their info, but I never got an answer.

this appears to be a problem of launching way to early rather than a function of drag

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, ngreenaway said:

this appears to be a problem of launching way to early rather than a function of drag

If the missile is modeled correctly, yes. The MIM-104 slows down far faster than the S-300 though, and the effective range is tiny for what is supposed to be a long range SAM system. The missile that the Patriot replaced had ranges up to 100 miles. This doesn't mean that the Patriot has the same range, but having around a 3rd of the range seems questionable.

We can also look at the placement of Patriots in the real world:

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20130207_130207-map_nato-support-to-turkey.pdf

From NATO, it seems like The Turkey/Syria border is covered primarily by a pair of Patriot sites. The distance between them being ~120 miles. That could imply a 60 mile effective range, otherwise it would be possible to fly between the Patriots without risk of being attacked.

[ngreenaway]

35 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

 

We can also look at the placement of Patriots in the real world:

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20130207_130207-map_nato-support-to-turkey.pdf

From NATO, it seems like The Turkey/Syria border is covered primarily by a pair of Patriot sites. The distance between them being ~120 miles. That could imply a 60 mile effective range, otherwise it would be possible to fly between the Patriots without risk of being attacked.

no, that is not correct. youre basing your assumption on creating an impenetrable wall of air defense. thats not how the system is used

the system is employed to protect specific defended assets- think critical infrastructure, APODs/SPODs (airports and port facilities), troop concentrations...stuff like that. theres no point in placing an air defense site where theres nothing of strategic importance to defend, thus you will see gaps in coverage at times

 

 

[ngreenaway]

ok, i tested it and im not having too much of a problem with range

what i would like to see is no launches occur until where the roadblock is located which is about 35-40 ish KM...thats not right, but its not bad

the aav-7a1 is located at 42nm/80 km out, so im not seeing the problem @Default774is , but the missile is losing energy sort of where i would expect it to, it just shouldnt engage that far out.

 

where i am seeing a problem is the initial engagement was 3 missiles, none were successful, followed by 3 more one of which got the kill. thats 6 interceptors expended on an su-25t flying at 5000m . it should take no more than two. the missiles that hit were the ones that launched at an appropriate time. im attaching a .miz file, if someone doesnt have combined arms, i suppose they could just throw a pilotable plane in the mix

 

 

 

i recently caught up with some old buddies of mine from the army. they had a photo of one our patriot sites in iraq '03. enjoy!

pat_test.miz

[Exorcet]

38 minutes ago, ngreenaway said:

no, that is not correct. youre basing your assumption on creating an impenetrable wall of air defense. thats not how the system is used

the system is employed to protect specific defended assets- think critical infrastructure, APODs/SPODs (airports and port facilities), troop concentrations...stuff like that. theres no point in placing an air defense site where theres nothing of strategic importance to defend, thus you will see gaps in coverage at times

 

 

The border with a hostile nation could very well be considered important to defend. If you prevent the crossing of the border, you've essentially protected the rest of the country without needing to deploy missiles everywhere.

[ngreenaway]

3 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

The border with a hostile nation could very well be considered important to defend. If you prevent the crossing of the border, you've essentially protected the rest of the country without needing to deploy missiles everywhere.

Yes, but that's not how patriot works/is used, nor is it the only (or even the best) asset to defend an entire border 

[NineLine]

Have you checked this recently? There were some changes made to this system. Thanks. 

[Default774]

11 hours ago, NineLine said:

Have you checked this recently? There were some changes made to this system. Thanks. 

I checked this after the january patch which fixed the inaccuracy issues I'd reported previously. Kinematics and launch ranges are the same as before the january patch. Unless it has somehow been stealth changed nothing should be different.

[Default774]

@NineLineAny chance of this getting looked at again?

[ngreenaway]

i hadnt noticed any difference either.

the two primary problems are :

- the system launches on targets too far out. when the engagement occurs at about half the current range, accuracy is improved

- the system should not launch more than two interceptors per target, and shouldnt re-engage further unless the first two interceptors failed (anything other than this is possible, but wrong)

Edited April 5, 2023 by ngreenaway

[Default774]

Good news!

Kinematics for the Patriot seem to have changed in the last update! Don't get me wrong, the guidance is still absolutely terrible, but its a lot better now. The Launch range is now lower and the catastrophic drag is now gone. Good progress.

 

patriot_30k_m1_rng.trk patriot_30k_m1_rng.acmi

[NineLine]

I'll check the new tracks soon, thanks. 

[ngreenaway]

it shouldve fired two interceptors at that track, spaced about 2-3 seconds apart

i just did a test and the results were disappointing: 2 bursts of three interceptors apiece against a lone su25. the 4th missile finally hit (6 missiles against a single target is pretty wasteful when you only have 36 interceptors onsite)

ill attach tracks later

[Default774]

It is still being very wasteful with missiles, firing 3 missiles per time at both cruise missiles and fixed wing threats

patriot_fw.acmi patriot_cm.acmi patriot_fw.trk patriot_cm.trk

[Default774]

Addional bit of testing using SCUDs to test it in ABM. The terrible guidance makes it basically incapable of intercepting scuds unless they are fired directy at it(See abm1 miss, abm2 hit). This SAM system is really overdue some updates.

patriot_abm2.trk patriot_abm1.trk patriot_abm2.acmi patriot_abm1.acmi

[okopanja]

Just now, Default774 said:

Addional bit of testing using SCUDs to test it in ABM. The terrible guidance makes it basically incapable of intercepting scuds unless they are fired directy at it(See abm1 miss, abm2 hit). This SAM system is really overdue some updates.

patriot_abm2.trk 209.96 kB · 0 downloads patriot_abm1.trk 310.29 kB · 0 downloads patriot_abm2.acmi 178.89 kB · 0 downloads patriot_abm1.acmi 189.12 kB · 0 downloads

LOL, looks consistent with IRL performance. It did not shine in 90s, and in recent Saudi-Hutis conflict.

Although against aircraft it looks to have worked well, except IFF did not quite work as expected, so for better realism we may need that modeled as well.

[ngreenaway]

7 minutes ago, Default774 said:

Addional bit of testing using SCUDs to test it in ABM. The terrible guidance makes it basically incapable of intercepting scuds unless they are fired directy at it(See abm1 miss, abm2 hit).

wow, thats really bad. i cant even keep track of how many missiles if fired, and i dont know why it keeps firing in groups of three

 

theres three modes of fire in patriot & each of those only uses two missiles per engagement

[Default774]

7 minutes ago, okopanja said:

LOL, looks consistent with IRL performance. It did not shine in 90s, and in recent Saudi-Hutis conflict.

Although against aircraft it looks to have worked well, except IFF did not quite work as expected, so for better realism we may need that modeled as well.

I believe the gulf war issues were due to the timing unit in the missile system heating up too much causing late detonations of the missile, and the SCUDs breaking up upon re entry, neither of which are a factor in DCS.

When are we fixing R-27 to align with real life performance? (1% Pk in Eritrea)

When are we adding IFF issues to modern russian sams considering fratricide issues in a certain modern conflict?

Ridiculous argument.

[okopanja]

27 minutes ago, Default774 said:

It is still being very wasteful with missiles, firing 3 missiles per time at both cruise missiles and fixed wing threats

patriot_fw.acmi 45.75 kB · 0 downloads patriot_cm.acmi 82.3 kB · 0 downloads patriot_fw.trk 69.9 kB · 0 downloads patriot_cm.trk 93.33 kB · 0 downloads

While I agree the drag was likely too high,  but I kindly ask you to remain civil and stick to both the topic and the facts.

Do you have some actual data on performance of these missiles? Since 90s I am listening about magic bullet that ends under-performing every time.

In reality these systems did not prove themselves against the price they were sold to a number clients.

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/1092scud/

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/04/patriot-defense-system-likely-failed-in-saudi-ballistic-missile-attack.html

 

[ngreenaway]

6 minutes ago, okopanja said:

LOL, looks consistent with IRL performance. It did not shine in 90s, and in recent Saudi-Hutis conflict.

Although against aircraft it looks to have worked well, except IFF did not quite work as expected, so for better realism we may need that modeled as well.

theres a lot of reasons for that. it does well against aircraft because thats what its designed to do

the pac2 series missile (what we have in DCS) is essentially a flying claymore mine, and with all the blast fragments thrown by the interceptor, an aircraft is an easy kill

 

against ballistic missiles is another story: by the time one of those enters patriots engagement envelope, its an empty gas tank with a warhead on top- theres few critical systems to be damaged by a proximity kill. what would be lethal against a plane could leave an inbound missile damaged but intact, just knocked off course

There wasnt effective (if any) debris filtering at the time, so falling debris from the engagement would be seen by the radar and presented to the operator as a valid target. leading sites to engage missiles that had already been hit

gulf war was before my time in patriot, but i *think* urban low altitude threshold wasnt in place at that time, which was a cutoff to prevent interceptors from following their targets to ground level & causing additional damage

the system underwent widespread changes between 91 gulf war & 2001 when i was in patriot, and the WCC - the brains of the whole operation - really got cut down to half its size, leaving a 3'x'3' x2'deep bay completely open & empty. the infamous clock error had been cleared, & weather mode was gone but i cant recall how many other changes were in place