SAM AI what has been changed?

[OutOnTheOP]

A few things to remember, though:

 

1) in real-life scenarios, you'll have a pretty good idea of where the high-capability systems (here I'm thinking SA-10) are. They're high-value systems that put out an awful lot of RF, and they're bound to be tracked, from the moment they radiate, on systems like JSTARs. They're just too important not to. So, you'll have a decent idea of medium-to-high altitude systems' locations, and your flight plan (should) be routed to avoid them.

 

2) No matter how powerful the radar or how sensitive the IR seeker, it cannot see through terrain. Get down in the terrain (I'm talking 50-200 AGL) and you reduce their engagement window to a couple kilometers or less

 

3) No matter how maneuverable or lethal the missile, it cannot fly through terrain. See point 2).

 

4) Be advised that flying low does expose you to some additional threats such as small arms, medium caliber AAA, and MANPADS. However, by flying low, you greatly reduce their detection window. If you're past the MANPADS/ AAA in the time they're still turning to face you and acquire proper lead, they'll be denied the shot.

 

Believe it or not, A-10s are pretty sneaky. They're quite silent on the approach at low altitudes. A-6s used to pull this same trick; I watched Intruders from Whidbey NAS fly the Columbia river gorge NOE to do practice strikes on the kettle falls bridge- you would not know they were coming until they were 5-10 seconds from the simulated pickle point. Just not enough time to shoulder a MANPADS, acquire, lock, and fire.

 

I have had extremely good luck flying low against short and mid-range systems like SA-3, SA-6, SA-11. The trick is you have to know where your target is ahead of time, because you won't have more than 10-20 seconds to look for it in your pop-up. So you'll either need to be attacking a predetermined point (bridge or building), or have good FAC coordinates from the 9-line.

 

A method that works well against stationary short or mid-range SAMs is to acquire them at long range (again, assuming you know roughly where they are from pre-mission intel) on the TGP, lock them up in inertial mode, then drop into the terrain and NOE in to Maverick range. Pop up at 6 nm, rapidly lock and fire (preferably on the radar system!) and drop back into the terrain. Luckily the Maverick is a Fire and Forget system, so even though it's a slow missile, you have the advantage of being able to disengage and drop back into terrain as soon as it leaves your rail.

 

Considering the acquisition and decision cycle for a SAM site is going to be 10-20 seconds (for the radar or other sensor to spot you, an operator to decide you're hostile and worth engaging, and the launcher to pivot on-target, if neccesary), and the enemy missile will take another 10-15 seconds from launch to impact, you have about 30 seconds to execute your pop-up, make final pipper adjustment, lock your Maverick, and let it fly. It's fast, but imminently acheivable.

[MadTommy]

^^ Thanks for the insight.

 

In the Betas flying high was the safest approach for me, only the SA10 & Tor where threats... I'm thinking flying low might now be safer now.. harder to acquire targets, but a lot safer.

[tyrspawn]

Im surprised they even modeled the SA-10 in A-10 as a threat. In reality an a-10 would immediately die after being locked by an SA-10, the more maneuverable F-16s, F-18s and F-22s barely have a chance of escaping SA-10 generation systems, and their max engagement range is 200 miles, at about 90,000 feet. The A-10, rarely above 20,000, rarely going faster than 250, and unable to make hard G breaks to defeat incoming missiles is a sitting duck to most SAM syhstems, which is why there is so much suspicion that they would never succeed in a high threat environment (i.e. war against Russia/China/India/other super power). Basically whatever can threaten an attack helicopter threatens an A-10.

Edited March 8, 2011 by tyrspawn

[GGTharos]

An SA-10 won't even see the F-22 coming. Saudi F-16E/F's already equip a jammer capable of foiling the SA-10 as well, and I could only guess what the US forces pack against it. It is a dangerous system, but hardly more than what SAMs usually are: Speed bump.

 

And as for SA-10 engagement ranges...agaisnt tactical aircraft, maybe 50nm in extreme cases, more likely 15-20.

 

For an A-10 though, yeah, might as well be a wall unless you have a way of going around it ... or if it has other things to shoot at. The A-10 could come in low in that case and would have to deal with SHORAD threats. In any case, it isn't like faster aircraft can out-perform most modern missiles in maneuverability unless those are at the farther reaches of their range. In that situation, an A-10 with a dilligent pilot may fare well too.

[Eddie]

UAE/Saudi Arabia, one hot and sandy country is the same as the next. :D

[hassata]

Right, UAE F16s, not Saudi. I think the Saudis made some noise about buying Vipers but never did. Also, believe me when I tell you Saudi pilots fly about 20% of the plane. Don't know about UAE pilots, but I do know Jordan regularly sends F-16 pilots to fly there planes for them. Works out great, because the RJAF can only afford about 15 flight hours per month per pilot.

[GGTharos]

My mistake.

[aaron886]

In that situation, an A-10 with a dilligent pilot may fare well too.

 

Yeah... except when your turn radius is smaller than the blast radius, you have problems. :D

[hassata]

These guys have it wrong as well: http://editthis.info/worldatplay/Royal_Saudi_Air_Force

 

The roundels on the F-16 in the picture are Emirati.

[GGTharos]

That isn't exclusive to an A-10 :D

 

Yeah... except when your turn radius is smaller than the blast radius, you have problems. :D