reported S-300 Missile Flight Path Issues

[Shadow KT]

When defending against HARMs (I suspect the result will be the same against other weapons as well), the SA-10 consistently flies its missiles substantially higher than their target. Meaning the SA-10 missiles arc high, when engaging incoming AGM-88Cs (difference between missiles and target altitude increases with range). The delta can be in the tens of thousands of feet.

I've attached two tracks (with stationary and mobile radars), as well as an example Tacview file.

SA-10 Miss High #1.trk SA-10 Miss High #2.trk Tacview-20231118-173404-DCS-VX NTTR .zip.acmi

[BOBBER_REBBOB]

Can confirm i've also encountered this problem. When engaging planes the missiles steer as soon as they leave the tube, and can shoot down aircraft flying fast low directly at the site even under 10nm, but when firing at HARM the missile climbs too much and then tries to pull 16g missing most times, even HARMs that are quite high and far away

[Skyhammer]

I wondered, is the S-300 underperforming/nerfed? It can´t even defend itself against a single F16 with 4 HARMS. F16 is shooting 3 HARMS from 10km altitude, Mach 1,6 at ~117km from the SA-10. The SA-10 TR detecting the HARMS only at about 22km in 9.600m ALT and can´t even shot down 1 HARM.

S300 .trk S-300 vs 1 F16.acmi

Edited January 8, 2024 by Skyhammer

[NineLine]

Thanks, I will take a look. 

[Exorcet]

Recently the S-300's self defense capability was reduced. You really want SA-15's around it for HARM defense, but even that isn't as perfect as it used to be.

[Skyhammer]

vor 26 Minuten schrieb Exorcet:

Recently the S-300's self defense capability was reduced. You really want SA-15's around it for HARM defense, but even that isn't as perfect as it used to be.

yeah could be possible but its way to weak to only detecting them at 22km because the HARMs are at any time in iterecept parameters for the SAM...but its doing pretty much nothing only in the last few moments ...an is unable to shot 1 down ... I tried that also with SA-15 but they barely  can react  to intercept the Harms

Edited January 10, 2024 by Skyhammer

[Skyhammer]

vor 44 Minuten schrieb Exorcet:

Recently the S-300's self defense capability was reduced. 

Why? the patriot even outperforming the S-300 ....its first Missile gets of at 102km range compared to the S-300 at 22km

Patriot SAM .trk

[NineLine]

I have moved this to AI Ground non-CA, I have asked the team if there has been any changes. 

 

[NineLine]

Ok, my findings so far are that the team has not made any changes (or nerfed) anything.

If I create a similar mission on the Caucasus map the S-300 site intercepts some 88s.

The flight trajectory is odd, and it turns out that this is known, the missiles do not fly an optimal intercept they shoot a little high first making it hard for them to get back down in time to intercept. 

So I have recreated the above track in Caucasus and added it to the current report. Thanks all. 

[Skyhammer]

vor 29 Minuten schrieb NineLine:

Ok, my findings so far are that the team has not made any changes (or nerfed) anything.

If I create a similar mission on the Caucasus map the S-300 site intercepts some 88s.

The flight trajectory is odd, and it turns out that this is known, the missiles do not fly an optimal intercept they shoot a little high first making it hard for them to get back down in time to intercept. 

So I have recreated the above track in Caucasus and added it to the current report. Thanks all. 

uhmmm thanks for your time ...but what is with the low detection ranges at only 22km compared to the patriot which detects similar anti radiation missiles at over 100km an engages them?

[Whiskey11]

22 hours ago, NineLine said:

Ok, my findings so far are that the team has not made any changes (or nerfed) anything.

If I create a similar mission on the Caucasus map the S-300 site intercepts some 88s.

The flight trajectory is odd, and it turns out that this is known, the missiles do not fly an optimal intercept they shoot a little high first making it hard for them to get back down in time to intercept. 

So I have recreated the above track in Caucasus and added it to the current report. Thanks all. 

Can you please have someone from your team look at the following book (in German only, sadly): Der Fla-Raketenkomplex S-300PMU in der NVA"  by Bernd Biedermann, Juergen Gebbert, and Wolfgang Kerner

In the book, written by some East Germans trained on the system, they say the Flap Lid B of the S-300PMU could not engage targets with RCS less than 0.2m^2 which is way bigger than a HARM RCS.  And that makes sense given that the original design parameters for the S-300PS/PT was to be able to engage the low flying cruise missiles of the era (late 70s and early 80s), which were massive.  

I'm not convinced the S-300PS could engage HARM even under ideal conditions. This seems to be playing out in real life in which both sides struggle(d) to engage incoming ARMs during the conflict.  Heck, more modern systems struggle to engage HIMARS M31 GMLRS rounds which are about the same diameter and slightly shorter than a HARM.

[NineLine]

Thanks, I will ask about this.

[NineLine]

On 1/13/2024 at 1:58 PM, Whiskey11 said:

Can you please have someone from your team look at the following book (in German only, sadly): Der Fla-Raketenkomplex S-300PMU in der NVA"  by Bernd Biedermann, Juergen Gebbert, and Wolfgang Kerner

In the book, written by some East Germans trained on the system, they say the Flap Lid B of the S-300PMU could not engage targets with RCS less than 0.2m^2 which is way bigger than a HARM RCS.  And that makes sense given that the original design parameters for the S-300PS/PT was to be able to engage the low flying cruise missiles of the era (late 70s and early 80s), which were massive.  

I'm not convinced the S-300PS could engage HARM even under ideal conditions. This seems to be playing out in real life in which both sides struggle(d) to engage incoming ARMs during the conflict.  Heck, more modern systems struggle to engage HIMARS M31 GMLRS rounds which are about the same diameter and slightly shorter than a HARM.

Thank you once again for the suggested manual above, after discussion with our team, it was stated to me that we have newer documentation that suggests that the S-300 can defend against ARM in two ways, firing on the aircraft delivering the ARM or firing on the flight path of the ARM. As I stated above, it is a known issue right now that the flight path of missiles launched from the S-300 is not optimal for the interception of smaller targets. 

EDIT: Sorry there are 3 ways to defend, I was not thinking about this but you can set the S-300 site to detect ARM missiles in the mission Editor and have it shut down for a short period of time. I have done this in my testing as well and it works very well. 

Thanks

[Napillo]

10 hours ago, NineLine said:

firing on the aircraft delivering the ARM or firing on the flight path of the ARM.

that sounds like someone updated the manual with some copium. it could maybe guess the flight path of the ARM, but if it can't detect it, idk how it would even know.

10 hours ago, NineLine said:

S-300 site to detect ARM missiles

but it couldn't could it?

Edited January 16, 2024 by Napillo

[NineLine]

Our team has documentation that says it is possible, how good it is at it I am unsure. 

[Whiskey11]

20 hours ago, NineLine said:

Thank you once again for the suggested manual above, after discussion with our team, it was stated to me that we have newer documentation that suggests that the S-300 can defend against ARM in two ways, firing on the aircraft delivering the ARM or firing on the flight path of the ARM. As I stated above, it is a known issue right now that the flight path of missiles launched from the S-300 is not optimal for the interception of smaller targets. 

EDIT: Sorry there are 3 ways to defend, I was not thinking about this but you can set the S-300 site to detect ARM missiles in the mission Editor and have it shut down for a short period of time. I have done this in my testing as well and it works very well. 

Thanks

I appreciate you taking it up with the team. If possible, is the documentation they are using available publicly somewhere or could you provide the name?  I'm always curious to learn more about these systems, how they were used, etc.  The German book was of great curiosity to myself and another who built the entire Soviet Era IADS on Google Earth.

 

I share a little bit of the skepticism with putting a missile in the flight path of an ARM the Flap Lid can't even see.  I'm not sure the Clam Shell could detect it given the altitude an ARM is typically fired at and the emphasis on low altitude detection of cruise missiles and jets.  I don't know about the Tin Shield seeing it either, maybe the Big Bird could but that kind of detection is traditionally outside the expected use of those systems given the long wavelengths for longer range detection.  Sure, hypothetical a command guided launch could put a missile there, but how would it know its even coming in or roughly where to put it.  That's why I'm curious about the documentation. 

 

As for the scripting in DCS, I use Skynet anytime a SAM is in a mission to create that behavior and many other ones. It would be nice,  hint hint, if DCS had some of that natively without scripting or triggers!  If you need a certified psychopathic SAM site rivet counter to help test, I'll gladly put the time in. 

[BOBBER_REBBOB]

On 1/12/2024 at 11:57 PM, NineLine said:

Ok, my findings so far are that the team has not made any changes (or nerfed) anything.

If I create a similar mission on the Caucasus map the S-300 site intercepts some 88s.

The flight trajectory is odd, and it turns out that this is known, the missiles do not fly an optimal intercept they shoot a little high first making it hard for them to get back down in time to intercept. 

So I have recreated the above track in Caucasus and added it to the current report. Thanks all. 

Thanks for the report

[BOBBER_REBBOB]

The problem is still present in current patch

[NM3GEE]

With the latest upgrade, the SA10 / S300 battery in the Quickstart vs RUS SAMs Nevada mission doesn't appear to correctly engage the HARMS.  It tries (summary screen shows 4 were launched at the HARM), but the missiles launch vertically and don't appear to track anything or fly toward the incoming HARM.  Thus an S300 is now an easy target to take out. 

Would be great if this could be looked at?

SA10_vs_HARM_fail.trk

[Tholozor]

Already reported: 

 

[itn]

On 1/16/2024 at 8:06 AM, NineLine said:

you can set the S-300 site to detect ARM missiles in the mission Editor and have it shut down for a short period of time. I have done this in my testing as well and it works very well

Just to clarify, are you talking about a feature in the Mission Editor, such as an advanced waypoint action? Or did you refer to the same old scripting ways we're currently doing manually or with the excellent MANTIS/Skynet scripts? I could not see any new features like this in current DCS which is why I'm asking.