reported SA-15's ability to engage certain bombs ( GBU-38, APKWS, Durandal and GBU-54 Reported )

[bal2o]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi all, 

after speaking with the team the SA-15 will try to engage projectiles with a RCS of 0.04 or higher. 

So what about mk82 versus gbu38, both have same RCS no ? (true question)

[Mad_Shell]

2 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi all, 

after speaking with the team the SA-15 will try to engage projectiles with a RCS of 0.04 or higher. 

mmmh, that doesn't explain why it will engage some bombs, but not others with a similar size.

It also doesn't explain the Skyhammer's observation in this thread about the difference in detection capability between AI Tor and human controlled Tor.

[BIGNEWY]

8 minutes ago, Mad_Shell said:

mmmh, that doesn't explain why it will engage some bombs, but not others with a similar size.

It explains that the 0.04 is the RCS minimum it will engage. 

8 minutes ago, Mad_Shell said:

It also doesn't explain the Skyhammer's observation in this thread about the difference in detection capability between AI Tor and human controlled Tor.

Im going to split that issue from this one as it is a slightly different issue. 

 

[Nealius]

Slight tangent, but does the advanced waypoint action "engage air weapons" function so that we can disable this interception capability? It's great for realism when flying with a dedicated group in multiplayer where you can swarm the target, but for single-player it stretches the limits of playability. 

[Mad_Shell]

10 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

It explains that the 0.04 is the RCS minimum it will engage. 

I still think there is some problem here.

According to Killshot's testing, Tor will intercept the GBU 38 (500 lbs), but not the GBU 12 (500 lbs), GBU 16 (1000 lbs), Mk 83 (1000 lbs), CBU 105 (1000 lbs).

It seems pretty weird it is able to intercept some bombs, but not others 4 times heavier. I've looked in the lua files, and it appears the RCS is defined for some bombs, but not for all. It may explain some observations.

[BIGNEWY]

On 10/20/2023 at 12:09 AM, Killshot0597 said:

It can't intercept the following:
1. GBU-12, 16
2. MK-82, 83
3. MK-99, CBU-103, CBU-105

I have checked and this is correct, they all have RCS values below 0.04 

thank you

[Vakarian]

Might it be worth to take another look at the RCS values? When looking at it from pure layman perspective, it is impossible that a smaller object will have smaller RCS than an object that's larger version of it.

In this case, GBU-38 will be intercepted (Mk-82 bomb body), but GBU-12 will not (same body, but with guiding fins equals to more things "sticking out of it" and increasing the RCS), let alone Mk-83 and Mk-84 class bombs and its derivatives.

I am only speculating, but with the size and shape of CBU-103/105 canisters, they should be roughly in the same category as Mk-83s

[BIGNEWY]

probably a different discussion to be had, but as far as the SA-15 is concerned the projectiles it is engaging is correct based on the values we have. 

[Blackfyre]

28 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

I have checked and this is correct, they all have RCS values below 0.04 

thank you

What RCS GBU-38 has?
According to dcs-lua-datamine/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_38.lua at master · Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine · GitHub it doesn't have any, and default value is 1, I guess. I think it should have the same RCS as GBU-12 (0.03). If not - why so?

[BIGNEWY]

10 minutes ago, Blackfyre said:

What RCS GBU-38 has?
According to dcs-lua-datamine/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_38.lua at master · Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine · GitHub it doesn't have any, and default value is 1, I guess. I think it should have the same RCS as GBU-12 (0.03). If not - why so?

I will check 

 

[bal2o]

ya i think the problem is there are

11 minutes ago, Blackfyre said:

What RCS GBU-38 has?
According to dcs-lua-datamine/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_38.lua at master · Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine · GitHub it doesn't have any, and default value is 1, I guess. I think it should have the same RCS as GBU-12 (0.03). If not - why so?

ya there is no logic where gbu38 is shoot and not 82. i think problem is shooting gbu38. if rcs is 1 by default, it's explain why

[SlipHavoc]

Looking through Quaggles datamine, there seem to be quite a few bombs that don't have a "reflection" value, but most missiles seem to.  So far, that value does agree with the results we're seeing in game.  I noticed that the SA-15 doesn't engage Hellfires (although I think it used to before this patch), and they have a reflection value of 0.3, but it does engage APKWS rockets, which don't have a reflection value and so presumably use the default.  I see the LS-6-250 has a reflection value of 0.3, so that might be the best standoff weapon against SA-15s now...

[BIGNEWY]

I have created a report for the team regarding the GBU-38 RCS value

thanks

[BIGNEWY]

GBU-38 RCS value will be corrected, 

thank you 

[SlipHavoc]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

GBU-38 RCS value will be corrected, 

thank you 

It looks like there might be other incorrect or missing RCS values for various weapons; will those be updated as well?

[BIGNEWY]

2 hours ago, SlipHavoc said:

It looks like there might be other incorrect or missing RCS values for various weapons; will those be updated as well?

which other ones do you think are missing? 

[SlipHavoc]

3 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

which other ones do you think are missing? 

Just from a quick browse through the Quaggles datamine (assuming that's accurate of course), here are a few that don't have a "reflection" value:

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/Durandal.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_24.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_2B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_3B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_4B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_32_V_2B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_54_V_1B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/LS-6-100.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/Mk_84AIR_GP.lua

I'm sure there are others.  A developer with direct access to these files should, I think, pretty easily be able to find which ones have a "reflection" value.  I may need to revisit the script I made to automatically extract data from the datamine though, to make questions like this easier to answer...

Then there is the question of the APKWS, which being much smaller than even a Hellfire, let alone a 1000 lb bomb, seems like it should have a smaller RCS, but it's "reflection" value is 0.04, and the SA-15 engages it:

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/missiles/AGR_20_M282.lua

And the BRM-90 (laser guided rocket carried by the JF-17) is 0.05, so the SA-15 should shoot at it as well, although I haven't tested that one specifically yet.

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/missiles/BRM-1_90MM.lua

Are those the correct values for these small rockets?

I also see that none of the Hydra rockets seem to have a "reflection", e.g. https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/nurs/HYDRA_70_M151.lua

I will try to test this afternoon to see if the SA-15 will engage the unguided Hydra rockets, or maybe it's still coded to ignore those...

Edit: SA-15 doesn't seem to engage unguided Hydras.

Edited October 24, 2023 by SlipHavoc
tested unguided Hydra rockets

[BIGNEWY]

13 hours ago, SlipHavoc said:

Just from a quick browse through the Quaggles datamine (assuming that's accurate of course), here are a few that don't have a "reflection" value:

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/Durandal.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_24.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_2B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_3B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_31_V_4B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_32_V_2B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/GBU_54_V_1B.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/LS-6-100.lua

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/bombs/Mk_84AIR_GP.lua

I'm sure there are others.  A developer with direct access to these files should, I think, pretty easily be able to find which ones have a "reflection" value.  I may need to revisit the script I made to automatically extract data from the datamine though, to make questions like this easier to answer...

Then there is the question of the APKWS, which being much smaller than even a Hellfire, let alone a 1000 lb bomb, seems like it should have a smaller RCS, but it's "reflection" value is 0.04, and the SA-15 engages it:

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/missiles/AGR_20_M282.lua

And the BRM-90 (laser guided rocket carried by the JF-17) is 0.05, so the SA-15 should shoot at it as well, although I haven't tested that one specifically yet.

https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/missiles/BRM-1_90MM.lua

Are those the correct values for these small rockets?

I also see that none of the Hydra rockets seem to have a "reflection", e.g. https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/weapons_table/weapons/nurs/HYDRA_70_M151.lua

I will try to test this afternoon to see if the SA-15 will engage the unguided Hydra rockets, or maybe it's still coded to ignore those...

Edit: SA-15 doesn't seem to engage unguided Hydras.

 

I will ask the team. 

The APKWS value is wrong and being changed currently 

[BIGNEWY]

From the team 

Any weapon without the reflection value will default to 0.05 which in most cases is correct. 

However 

APKWS, Durandal and GBU-54 need to be adjusted and have been reported. 

thanks

[Kvek]

On 10/24/2023 at 6:55 AM, BIGNEWY said:

Hi all, 

after speaking with the team the SA-15 will try to engage projectiles with a RCS of 0.04 or higher. 

Hi, thanks for the answer. SA-10 also target gbu-38, is that ok or it will change too?

Thank you

Edited October 25, 2023 by Kvek

[okopanja]

@BIGNEWYWe know the SAMs and their ability to engage targets are not in great state as this topics proves.

But is there any white paper that actually focuses on a single SAM, let's say in this case SA-15 that takes into account:

- supported modes of operation

- known operational parameters

and is able to estimated scientifically the minimal RCS/speed/distance/altitude the target has to have in order for SAM to detect, track and guide missile?

 

[BIGNEWY]

8 minutes ago, okopanja said:

We know the SAMs and their ability to engage targets are not in great state as this topics proves

I dont agree with your statement, this thread only shows we need to adjust some weapon RCS values. 

I will ask the team about passing some more information, but "white papers" take time and I dont think it is necessary here.

[okopanja]

13 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

I dont agree with your statement, this thread only shows we need to adjust some weapon RCS values. 

I will ask the team about passing some more information, but "white papers" take time and I dont think it is necessary here.

Yes but is the reference value correct?

You see we have SA-3 SAM which can not hit F-117 (which has a way lower RCS than any of these bombs) even if it gets overflown.

So why would SA-15 not be able to hit low RCS target class it was specifically designed to hit?

Also I would like to point out that modeling the SAMs with great graphics is sort of superficial when their true internal modeling is on the level lower than FC3.

Instead of just modifying these values blindly, and thus possibly disrupting content based on existing values, why not refactor SA-15 to be for a start FF with it's systems? This would not cause 3D modelling costs, but only takes time to figure out true capabilities and implement those.

Later on you can just add FF cockpit on that and sell it as a module.

[BIGNEWY]

6 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Yes but is the reference value correct?

You see we have SA-3 SAM which can not hit F-117 (which has a way lower RCS than any of these bombs) even if it gets overflown.

So why would SA-15 not be able to hit low RCS target class it was specifically designed to hit?

Also I would like to point out that modeling the SAMs with great graphics is sort of superficial when their true internal modeling is on the level lower than FC3.

Instead of just modifying these values blindly, and thus possibly disrupting content based on existing values, why not refactor SA-15 to be for a start FF with it's systems? This would not cause 3D modelling costs, but only takes time to figure out true capabilities and implement those.

Later on you can just add FF cockpit on that and sell it as a module.

I think it would be best to create a different thread so we dont derail this one, if you think something is wrong and have some evidence we will happy to take a look at it. 

thank you

[okopanja]

24 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

I think it would be best to create a different thread so we dont derail this one, if you think something is wrong and have some evidence we will happy to take a look at it. 

thank you

As a loyal customer I wanted to provide the feedback and not derail this. I hope we all share the desire that DCS should provide as authentic experience as humanly possible.

Based on large number of reoccurring topics on SAMs topics, I really do believe that you within ED need to have internal discussion on this topic beyond simple editing of a value. The original author did correctly notice this is a missing value, but I think this will break the game in some aspects.

In this case I did state that in my opinion the method of using comparative size/RCS is a wrong methodology. The values seam to be chosen at some point for some weapons are now being augmented with additional information, without considering the actual SAM itself.