Ukranian S200 launch

[Nickkerkwijk]

Hi, i found this video on the internet of a S200 Launch in Urkaine. Its simulated quite well in DCS 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Nickkerkwijk

[Dragon1-1]

Beggars can't be choosers, I suppose. The S-200 is a nice SAM, but it's seriously old. The range is good, but it's not all that maneuverable.

That said, DCS simulation of it is really good.

[falcon_120]

Beggars can't be choosers, I suppose. The S-200 is a nice SAM, but it's seriously old. The range is good, but it's not all that maneuverable.
That said, DCS simulation of it is really good.

Not so much, last time i checked S200 in DCS is seriously overmodelled. Its using a proportional navigation and withstanding 9g orthogonal roll defense easily. Its basicly as deadly as a SA11/SA10. Ive learned that the hard way in DCS.

In the other sim that shall not be named, you can evade the missile with a higher than 6 g orthogonal roll towards the missile and dropping chaff+ecm, thanks to its pure pursuit guide and medium resistance to chaff. Ive hardly seen any effect of chaff against the SA2 in DCS.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Northstar98]

On 10/3/2023 at 9:06 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

That said, DCS simulation of it is really good.

Probably wouldn't go that far...

• The acquisition radars we have for it are completely wrong (Flat Face B (SA-3) and Tin Shield B (SA-10), instead of Tall King C + Odd Pair/Group).
• The guidance profiles it uses appear to either not be present or at least modelled incorrectly:
  • For close targets (< 70-80 km), it should use proportional navigation as soon as the missile's flight control enable (0.45-0.85 s after launch), using a low-thrust profile for the sustainer*
  • For distant targets (> 70-80 km), it should fly at a constant elevation angle (35°) and constant lead angle (0-15° in the horizontal plane) for 30 seconds using a maximum-thrust profile of the sustainer. The missile should then switch over to proportional navigation (this would cause the missile to loft higher than it does in DCS), though presumably the pitch and the onset of proportional navigation is gradually changed to preserve energy.

Ausairpower also refers to a shallow profile and a steep profile, presumably these alter the thrust profile used, in order to keep kinetic heating below some threshold and minimise drag losses.

In DCS, it seems to do a mix of both - it always seems to assume more of a lofted trajectory pretty much regardless of target parameters but the elevation angle isn't constant, it flies in more of an arc and seems to adjust for target range and altitude. For thrust profiles, the burn time seems to always be around ~63 s, regardless of which profile is appropriate for the target.

• The missile seems to do a hard (12 G) pitch down immediately after booster burn-out.

*I'm not entirely confident on the specifics, the only thing I've found so far is that the sustainer can be throttled between 32 - 100 kN. Vestnik-PVO gives 3 profiles:

• Sustainer operates at maximum thrust until propellant is expended.
• Sustainer operates at maximum thrust, then decreases linearly to minimum.
• Sustainer operates at 82% maximum thrust, then decreases linearly to minimum.

However, it then goes onto state that a combination of profiles can be used, but unfortunately it doesn't give specific examples.

21 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

Not so much, last time i checked S200 in DCS is seriously overmodelled. Its using a proportional navigation

As it should - it's SARH. So far all sources I've found online state that proportional navigation is used (either in totality or after the mid-course phase).

I'm not sure exactly what the maximum G of the missile is (in DCS, 12 is what the missile is capable of pulling, so far haven't found a figure for it) and I'm also not sure what you mean by a "9 G orthogonal roll defence".

Edited October 30, 2023 by Northstar98

[falcon_120]

An orthogonal roll is a defense technique involving 2 out of plane maneouver against an incoming missile.

it consist on putting the missile in the 3-9 line in a shallow dive, and as it comes closer (if you are seeing the missile cause it close), you pull up hard at the sametime you roll and turm towards the missile while still pulling up. Seen from the front you are painting a sort of octagon in the sky.

This technique, is not too effective against modern highly agile missiles, but it work amazingly way, or it should, against older SAM types (2/5/3/6...) as long as you manage to have enough distance to avoid a fuze detonation.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[okopanja]

8 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

constant elevation angle (35°)

My information is 48 degree, rest is the same. Perhaps a version difference?

[okopanja]

Here, now lets stop talking nonsense.

null

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, okopanja said:

Here, now lets stop talking nonsense.

null

And Ausairpower (supposedly quoting translated operator manuals) states a constant elevation angle of 35°.

It could be a different version, or one could be describing a shallow profile, while the other a steep profile - I don't know without additional information.

But whatever the case is - DCS does neither.

In DCS the launcher is elevated to 48°, which the missile flies at until booster burn out (~5-6 seconds) and then does a 12 G pitch down to <30° which is slowly reduced throughout flight.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Northstar98

[okopanja]

11 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

And Ausairpower (supposedly quoting translated operator manuals) states a constant elevation angle of 35°.

It could be a different version, or one could be describing a shallow profile, while the other a steep profile.

But whatever the case is - DCS does neither.

In DCS the launcher is elevated to 48°, which the missile flies at until booster burn out (~5 -6 seconds) and then does a 12 G pitch down to <30° which is slowly reduced throughout flight.

 

Ausairpower might not be always 100% accurate, and I think 48 is correct + 30 sec is correct, but if someone has a better source (e.g. original soviet documents), lets have it here. As for not nonsense: I did not mean the 35 even if inaccurate. You explained pretty accurately how it works.

 

 

[TheFreshPrince]

This missile specifically, according to several sources, was reprogrammed for ground targeting. So you cannot compare the missile behaviour to anti-air launches in DCS. That's why posting a video without sources is.. well..

Edited October 31, 2023 by TheFreshPrince