AGM-45 Shrike Quick Guide by Klarsnow - updated June 5th 2024

[SloppyDog]

2 hours ago, Predator-78 said:

Hi guys can someone describe the steps to do a LOFT launch? Maybe share a video that explains how to do it?
Thanks.

This may help.

However I use Loft mode missiles with Loft mode. 

 

Also, look for WRCS mode in the manual:

https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/stores/air_to_ground/missiles/shrike.html

[ASW]

7 часов назад, SloppyDog сказал:

This may help.

However I use Loft mode missiles with Loft mode. 

 

Also, look for WRCS mode in the manual:

https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/stores/air_to_ground/missiles/shrike.html

Were the smoke is the Direct head, without the smoke(damaged KUB) the LOFT head

Edited May 10 by ASW

[Rongor]

On 5/2/2025 at 8:39 AM, SloppyDog said:

I found the exactly same problem.

I tried with the bomb computer and no joy. I tried manually inputting the data (release Low Angle; pull-up time; release time) in the WSO station, and no joy.
I believe that the computer didn't accept my inputs, since I was going by trial and error. I really don't know how to manually calculate the latter two parameters.

Anyway, what I'm doing with this mode is to help me engage pre-planned targets. I created this SAM site with an SA-2 and an SA-3 and assorted AAA protecting an airport. The SA-3 is easily defeated with WRGS in loft mode. The problem is the SA-2, with its long range.

The best way to defeat this situation was to use LABS mode, setup an IP and the TGT in the Mission Editor. I get very low, at around 500-1000 feet, pass the IP at 20nm from the target, do not push the pickle, otherwise as stated the missiles will be immediately fired. Jester will automatically change to the next waypoint, the TGT, and will start to call out the distance. Once at 16-15 nm, I pop up nose up 30 degrees, fire the missiles then go mid altitude to provide a target. Usually the Shrikes track the target. Closer, they will overshoot the target.

This way I've been able to use LABS mode to loft missiles, with an indication of distance and not being dependent of the WRGS system.

It is the only way LABS mode has been working for Shrikes. Not even close to what is done with bombs or to what is written in the manual.       

and @tekrc

you guys might wanna scroll down the delivery mode in the bombing table...

[DSplayer]

8 hours ago, Rongor said:

and @tekrc

you guys might wanna scroll down the delivery mode in the bombing table...

They're talking about using Loft delivery mode with the LABS and not the WRCS AGM-45 mode.

[koen330]

would most of this discussion also be valid for the A4e firing shrikes?

 

[lee1hy]

This  missile useless in multiplayer

It flies accurately to its target, but has a very weak warhead.

Edited June 18 by lee1hy

[Zabuzard]

This  missile useless in multiplayer

It flies accurately to its target, but has a very weak warhead.

Thanks for your feedback. Please note that the weapon itself is an ED topic. So best post it on their forum section so they have a chance seeing your feedback as well

[MBot]

I did some fresh testing with Mk49 Mod 0 against SA-6:

 

I think a big problem is a discrepancy between the Heatblur model (RWR, weapon seeker pre-launch) and ED model (weapon seeker post-launch).

In my testing, the Phatoms RWR and the Shrike seeker did pick up the SA-6 tracking radar regardless of which direction it is pointing. I think that is because Heatblur simulates receiving radar sidelobes. But once launched and the ED weapon modeling takes over, the Shrike will only track the SA-6 when it is within the mainlobe of the tracking radar. It will track when fired 40° off axis and will not track when fired 50° (or more) off axis.

So unfortunately a seeker tone/ADI bars in the cockpit is no guarantee that the weapon will track after launch.

[BenBenBeartrax]

@MBot Would this be helped if one used the seeker head as a "tracking source" through the appropriate position of the "Msl Rej" switch (I'm unsure of the exact naming of it)?

[MBot]

1 hour ago, BenBenBeartrax said:

@MBot Would this be helped if one used the seeker head as a "tracking source" through the appropriate position of the "Msl Rej" switch (I'm unsure of the exact naming of it)?

It is my understanding that this switch only affects the data source for the computer's range calculations. Both in WRCS and in Direct mode, the needles in the ADI will show where the seeker head is looking at regardless. As such this does not affect the fundamental problem that "Heatblur's missile" will see stuff on the launch rail that "ED's missile" will not see after launch.

[primus_TR]

I have noticed that the AGM45 has a new setting in the seeker head settings screen: WP Marker Charge, where you can choose Installed or Not Installed. Does anyone know what this setting does? 

Edited August 2 by primus_TR

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, primus_TR said:

I have noticed that the AGM45 has a new setting in the seeker head settings screen: WP Marker Charge, where you can choose Installed or Not Installed. Does anyone know what this setting does? 

It installs a white phosphorous marker which will produce white smoke to mark where the missile impacted. This can then be used to provide a visual reference to other DEAD flights.

Edited August 2 by Northstar98

[Kalasnkova74]

On 7/20/2025 at 8:06 AM, MBot said:

I did some fresh testing with Mk49 Mod 0 against SA-6:

 

I think a big problem is a discrepancy between the Heatblur model (RWR, weapon seeker pre-launch) and ED model (weapon seeker post-launch).

In my testing, the Phatoms RWR and the Shrike seeker did pick up the SA-6 tracking radar regardless of which direction it is pointing. I think that is because Heatblur simulates receiving radar sidelobes. But once launched and the ED weapon modeling takes over, the Shrike will only track the SA-6 when it is within the mainlobe of the tracking radar. It will track when fired 40° off axis and will not track when fired 50° (or more) off axis.

So unfortunately a seeker tone/ADI bars in the cockpit is no guarantee that the weapon will track after launch.

In fact, what you’re seeing is not an ED weapon modeling issue. As I understand the AGM-45 wasn’t originally built to track radar sidelobes (the later HARM does). So this behavior, while inconvenient, is accurate. 

In the field, this situation is why the guy in back earned their pay; they could do EW magic and know which signal was a quality one to use for weapons employment and advise the “bus driver” up front when to shoot and when not to.
 

Since Jester never went to EW WSO school & we just have the ALR-46, solving this problem means mission planning where the site is in advance, noting where the radar’s pointing and attacking the site from that direction. Just like the real world nutcases Weasels. 
 

 

[DSplayer]

17 hours ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

In fact, what you’re seeing is not an ED weapon modeling issue. As I understand the AGM-45 wasn’t originally built to track radar sidelobes (the later HARM does). So this behavior, while inconvenient, is accurate. 

AGM-45 should be able to track sidelobes and backlobes since that is a basic requirement for ARM seekers. The HARM in DCS can also suffer from the same issue regarding sidelobes if the HARM were to attack from directly above the radar threat, thus this is indeed an ED weapon issue.

 

Also, if the AGM-45 was able to pick up the SA-6 TR no matter the direction prior to launch but fails to guide post launch, that's a discrepancy between how the AGM-45 works while on the plane (HB side) and when it guides as its own entity (ED side).

[Kalasnkova74]

5 hours ago, DSplayer said:

AGM-45 should be able to track sidelobes and backlobes since that is a basic requirement for ARM seekers. 

That may be true of the later ARMs like the HARM, but in real life the initial AGM-45 was unable to reliably track sidelobes. 

Source: https://ia801900.us.archive.org/26/items/history-of-the-electro-optical-guided-missiles/S-75 family.pdf

[primus_TR]

1 hour ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

AGM-45 was unable to reliably track sidelobes

lol Side or not side,  it is unable to reliably track anything. I'm sure 'skill' may be also an issue, but the agm45 is perhaps the crappiest weapon in whole of DCS. 

[Hobel]

vor 23 Stunden schrieb Kalasnkova74:

That may be true of the later ARMs like the HARM, but in real life the initial AGM-45 was unable to reliably track sidelobes. 

Source: https://ia801900.us.archive.org/26/items/history-of-the-electro-optical-guided-missiles/S-75 family.pdf

Very exciting thanks, but why? SL has the same frq, why should this not be seen, strange.

[Northstar98]

On 8/12/2025 at 3:30 PM, Kalasnkova74 said:

That may be true of the later ARMs like the HARM, but in real life the initial AGM-45 was unable to reliably track sidelobes. 

Source: https://ia801900.us.archive.org/26/items/history-of-the-electro-optical-guided-missiles/S-75 family.pdf

The exact same waveform exists in sidelobes and the missile has no way of telling whether it's in the main or sidelobes.

How well it can detect and track sidelobes should pretty much be entirely dependent on the transmitted power of the radar and its radiation pattern.

Don't forget the Shrike has guidance sections for (even examples exclusively for such as the Mk 37), can and has been used against (albeit less than completely successfully) radars that rotate IRL - or in other words, radars that present a mainlobe a minority of the time and a sidelobe the majority of the time.

Edited August 13 by Northstar98

[Kalasnkova74]

On 8/13/2025 at 1:34 PM, Northstar98 said:

The exact same waveform exists in sidelobes and the missile has no way of telling whether it's in the main or sidelobes.

How well it can detect and track sidelobes should pretty much be entirely dependent on the transmitted power of the radar and its radiation pattern.

Don't forget the Shrike has guidance sections for (even examples exclusively for such as the Mk 37), can and has been used against (albeit less than completely successfully) radars that rotate IRL - or in other words, radars that present a mainlobe a minority of the time and a sidelobe the majority of the time.

Based on the accounts of Wild Weasels who employed the Shrike, the weapon was essentially a psychological deterrent first and a site marking system second. They hoped but didn’t expect it to kill a radar. 

“Shrike was dumb. You could do better with a peashooter. It was only fifty percent reliable, fifty percent accurate, and when you do the probabilities on that you realize it takes a lot of them to hit the target. …We really had to line it up with the target in an almost perfect trajectory…You used Shrike as a marker most of the time.”

-Kim Pepperell, from the book “Iron Hand” by Anthony Thornbourough & Frank Mormillo.

Further, USAF Wild Weasels typically escorted a strike package of other aircraft , so they’d fly interference by operating between IADS sites and the strike force. If one of the IADS locked on with a SAM, the Weasels would fire a Shrike to mark the general location and the hunter-killer flight would do the rest with CBU / bombs. 
 

What does that mean for DCS? Well, employing the Shrike as a one-shot single ship kill weapon against an IADS radar sadly isn’t realistic no matter how well the player flies, especially in MP. Using it that way is , as many of us have discovered the hard way, a recipe for enduring frustration. It’s a supporting weapon used to find camouflaged sites so Someone Else could bomb them. Worse, the psychological “kill” of a SAM site battalion commander turning off his radar to avoid a Shrike visit isn’t part of DCS as a default yet, so the suppression benefit is lost also. 
 

Bottom line- if you’re flying with a team or as a flight , the Shrike makes sense as a SEAD target locating tool. Otherwise , skip it. 

[Ivandrov]

It's reliable enough if you get good with it. I've had success with it as long as the SAM sites aren't too crowded. Otherwise you may find some of the Shrikes wandering off to where they can't reach because they picked up the other site first.

 

The only slight point of frustration for me is that there isn't a seeker head that will target a Fan Song without also targeting the Range Finder for the SA-2. So, it's a bit of a luck of the draw which one the missiles will pick up.

 

But, in general, I like to plan to use all 4 missiles for one site, 2 and 2 for the SR and TR each. Knocking out either one is a success. I usually start to pitch up for loft just within 20 miles.

Edited 10 hours ago by Ivandrov

[primus_TR]

8 hours ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

“Shrike was dumb. You could do better with a peashooter. It was only fifty percent reliable, fifty percent accurate, and when you do the probabilities on that you realize it takes a lot of them to hit the target. …We really had to line it up with the target in an almost perfect trajectory…You used Shrike as a marker most of the time.”

-Kim Pepperell, from the book “Iron Hand” by Anthony Thornbourough & Frank Mormillo.

 

That explains everything  Good to hear that Shrike behavior in game reflects the reality so closely lol! 

[Northstar98]

9 hours ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

Based on the accounts of Wild Weasels who employed the Shrike, the weapon was essentially a psychological deterrent first and a site marking system second. They hoped but didn’t expect it to kill a radar. 

“Shrike was dumb. You could do better with a peashooter. It was only fifty percent reliable, fifty percent accurate, and when you do the probabilities on that you realize it takes a lot of them to hit the target. …We really had to line it up with the target in an almost perfect trajectory…You used Shrike as a marker most of the time.”

-Kim Pepperell, from the book “Iron Hand” by Anthony Thornbourough & Frank Mormillo.

Further, USAF Wild Weasels typically escorted a strike package of other aircraft , so they’d fly interference by operating between IADS sites and the strike force. If one of the IADS locked on with a SAM, the Weasels would fire a Shrike to mark the general location and the hunter-killer flight would do the rest with CBU / bombs. 
 

What does that mean for DCS? Well, employing the Shrike as a one-shot single ship kill weapon against an IADS radar sadly isn’t realistic no matter how well the player flies, especially in MP. Using it that way is , as many of us have discovered the hard way, a recipe for enduring frustration. It’s a supporting weapon used to find camouflaged sites so Someone Else could bomb them. Worse, the psychological “kill” of a SAM site battalion commander turning off his radar to avoid a Shrike visit isn’t part of DCS as a default yet, so the suppression benefit is lost also. 
 

Bottom line- if you’re flying with a team or as a flight , the Shrike makes sense as a SEAD target locating tool. Otherwise , skip it. 

Okay...

All of this I agree with, but I'm not sure what this has to do with anything I've said here.

[Hobel]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Kalasnkova74:

Based on the accounts of Wild Weasels who employed the Shrike, the weapon was essentially a psychological deterrent first and a site marking system second. They hoped but didn’t expect it to kill a radar. 

“Shrike was dumb. You could do better with a peashooter. It was only fifty percent reliable, fifty percent accurate, and when you do the probabilities on that you realize it takes a lot of them to hit the target. …We really had to line it up with the target in an almost perfect trajectory…You used Shrike as a marker most of the time.”

-Kim Pepperell, from the book “Iron Hand” by Anthony Thornbourough & Frank Mormillo.

Further, USAF Wild Weasels typically escorted a strike package of other aircraft , so they’d fly interference by operating between IADS sites and the strike force. If one of the IADS locked on with a SAM, the Weasels would fire a Shrike to mark the general location and the hunter-killer flight would do the rest with CBU / bombs. 
 

What does that mean for DCS? Well, employing the Shrike as a one-shot single ship kill weapon against an IADS radar sadly isn’t realistic no matter how well the player flies, especially in MP. Using it that way is , as many of us have discovered the hard way, a recipe for enduring frustration. It’s a supporting weapon used to find camouflaged sites so Someone Else could bomb them. Worse, the psychological “kill” of a SAM site battalion commander turning off his radar to avoid a Shrike visit isn’t part of DCS as a default yet, so the suppression benefit is lost also. 
 

Bottom line- if you’re flying with a team or as a flight , the Shrike makes sense as a SEAD target locating tool. Otherwise , skip it. 

However, this does not contradict the fact that Shrike-45 could see Sidelobe.

It is and has always required precise planning, but in DCS, even if your planning and firing is close to 100% perfect, the Shrike-45 misses because no SL is simulated when it comes to this aspect.