SAM Evasion Techniques

[Moa]

I do one of four things (some of which are already covered):

 

1) stay out of the Weapon Engagement Zone (WEZ) if the mission doesnt have a requirement to get close. This can either be from being very high, very low, or not overflying the danger zone (or a combination). Note WEZ increases with altitude to a point, and then decreases near the weapon's ceiling. It means being low can also be a defense from larger missiles (where the WEZ are smallest) at the risk of low-level defences (AAA and MANPADS). The low-level approach to staying out of the WEZ was required in the Cold War (where there were a lot of SA-10 and IADs systems floating about).

 

2) if I am low enough and head on (no time to turn) I dive down into whatever cover I can find. They are yet to make a missile that can go through a hill. Plus, there is always the chance that the missile will fly a predictive path into the ground before I do. Here you risk running into AAA or a MANPADS.

 

3) if I am far away I'll put the missile on my beam and climb and descend slowly (keeping speed up). The missile's maneuvering will make it run out of energy before it gets me.

 

4) if I am close then I will put the missile on my beam. When the missile gets close I pull as hard into the vertical as I can. This relies on the fact that you:

* can't outrun a close missile

* can't deplete it's energy fast enough

* can't pull greater G than a thrust-vectoring missile.

* can generate a smaller turn radius than the missile.

 

A fast missile with 30 G turning has a much bigger turn radius than a slower aircraft that can pull 7-9 G. Even though the missile can pull Gs that would crush a human when it is close to launch speed it simply can't pull enough G to match my turn radius.

 

Rather than pulling up you can also pull down if you have enough altitude, and then you'll have enough energy to defeat a second missile heading your way (I prefer pulling up but if depletes your energy a lot).

 

So, what you do depends on your energy, the missile's energy, and the missiles range. Timing and spotting the missile are critical (having a wingman on comms is very handy in this regard - which is why they use them in the real world).

 

Edit: besides using a smaller turn radius to defeat the missile kinematicaly it used to be that beaming would also could cause problems for the seeker head (which has a limited slew rate).

Edited June 13, 2011 by Moa

[BBQ]

GG--notching, hmm--yes, and attitude adjustment. Not you, of course ;)

[GGTharos]

I meant that literally :P You can't notch a SAM. It's always closer to the ground than you are, and thus not terribly susceptible to the doppler notch, at least in-game ... ;)

[Eggcake]

I tried the mission "In the weeds". It's a really good mission where you have to fly low (or behind hills) to evade SAMs. Because of that, there is a higher risk of getting shot down by machine gun fire from BMPs or even AAAs. There are also some Streals lurking around.

[FlyingBrick]

Does anyone know of an Emergency Checklist to help with procedures after getting hit by a SAM?

 

Thanks!

[GGTharos]

1. Fly.

2. Put out fires.

3. If you cannot do #1, eject.

 

That is all :D

[Moa]

I tried the mission "In the weeds". It's a really good mission where you have to fly low (or behind hills) to evade SAMs. Because of that, there is a higher risk of getting shot down by machine gun fire from BMPs or even AAAs. There are also some Streals lurking around.

 

Absolutely true.

 

In the Cold War the SA-10 (S-300) was a much bigger threat than the ZSU-23-4 or SA-7, so aircraft flew low (even the mighty B-52 was adapted to fly low) and the pilots trained hard for low-level operations.

 

In Afghanistan (and Iraq, and Libya, once the big SAMS were down) it is much safer to work at altitude, away from machine guns. This does not mean that the A-10C can survive in all wars by flying high (unless the F-117, F-16G, F-22s and F-35 take out all the SAMs first).

 

So your operating altitude depends on what threats you are currently facing. It also means you have to choose a SAM evasion technique appropriate for your current altitude (there is no 'one size fits all').

Edited June 14, 2011 by Moa

[Ramrod_45]

Try this fellas, its quite old but still relevant today

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Evading-Missiles.html

 

It explains beaming as I already understood it i.e. interfering with the missiles Doppler guidance system.

[Bushmanni]

@GG I probably should have been more clear in my post that turning in to the missile is very dicey maneuver that works only against certain missiles and should not be considered when in doubt or panic. But I checked the book "Warthog: Flying the A-10 in the Gulf War" again and the pilot clearly talked about turning in to the missile and defeating it that way and not about orthogonal roll. Against a missile that flies always a collision course, turning into it makes perfect sense so why it wouldn't work in the real life against missiles that navigate that way? And the example in the book clearly states that it's possible in real life. I included the technique because of it's real life use back in the days regardless it's usefulness against more modern equipment. And I don't personally use it or plan to use it in DCS as it's dicey to time it correctly. In my tests I first measured the time it took for the missile to reach me and then with the next try counted until 4s to impact and turned and it worked perfectly. One second too early or late and you were goner.

 

I have been able to dodge only very slow missiles with short orthogonal roll without doing split-s. Hard pull just before impact does nothing for me unless the missile is barely flying. I assume that this is because the A-10 is slow but things would be different with a fighter. Only a split-s gives me long enough pull to make the missile miss enough to not trigger proximity fuse. Then again it might be possible that I haven't really exactly understood how to make the orthogonal roll. I would appreciate if you made a track showing me how it's done without doing split-s against say SA-15 missiles that I have been using as a practice opponent.

 

And I tried notching SA-15 with improved knowledge and succeeded. But yeah, it doesn't make any sense to try to do it as you have to fly so low that you could more easily use terrain masking or just fly low enough to be invisible to radar.

[GGTharos]

Against a missile that always flies a collision course, the only way to not take it in the lips if you turn into it is a) very old missile or b) out of speed missile.

If you turn into it, you've solved all its problems. 4sec is far more than a modern missile needs to deal with your maneuver. It has the ability to pull 5x the G you can, and your turn into it is an in-plane turn. You're helping the thing, you're not hindering it. Now, if it works in DCS ... eh. I'll concede there are certain guidance types and certain missiles that could be susceptible to such a thing, but an SA-15 ... I doubt it. The amount of actual turning the missile needs to do is very small - realistically speaking - DCS missiles currently have their own interesting issues, but that's beside the point :)

 

In the case of an IRH missile you might make your flares more effective or something but ... highly circumstantial and basically not standard tactics, at least AFAIK. Not doubting what the book said, I've just run into people saying one thing when they meant another :)

 

Regarding the orthogonal roll: You're exactly correct. The missile needs to be slow, you need to pull a lot of G or both. Timing also has to be good. As for SA-15 missiles, I just don't go near them! I'll see if I can make a track happen though.

 

You're right about notching too - if you get low enough, one way or another the clutter /must/ interfere. The problem is that in RL, it might as well interfere with your flying too. You also kill your weapon delivery options.

 

Another issue is that the SAM AI isn't terribly smart ... in RL they're going to wait if they can - until you're smack in the middle of the no-escape zone, and THEN turn on the radar and shoot you (your position will be fed to them via datalink from a surveillance radar or say, another SA-15 positioned elsewhere).

 

All that is just FYI though, and not a real commentary on technique.

[todd022]

dido what GGTharos said....

 

coming from the aviation intel community. I will state this very generally as to what we practice/assume:

 

Most MEZ's (Missile Engagement Zones) for SAMs is that they will fire at 2/3 their max effective range (like GGTharos said, you will hopefully be Sh*t-out-of-luck in the middle of their engagement window).

 

Another problematic concern (not sure if ED models this) is ballistic shots....missile is already in the air before you get any indications, then they kick on their tracking radar, with a missile already too close for you to maneuver against. Sh*tty day for the good guys.

 

Again, FYI.

[GGTharos]

Ballistic shots are not modeled. Maybe some day :)

[Phantom_Mark]

Great tips thanks guys.

[Laud]

Ballistic shots are not modeled. Maybe some day :)

 

For SAM-Sites with separate launch and radar vehicles you can simulate it to a certein degree by placing the launcher closer to the expected approach direction of the incoming aircraft. You will get a launch warning however, but you'll be far closer to the missile than you'd expect, cause the AI does its calculations based on the distances from its radar to the aircraft. We tested this once with a BUK-Site in FC2 and the result was devastating...

[Bushmanni]

First one clarification I forgot to make clear. I practiced orthogonal roll against SA-15 as it's the hardest one to defeat to my knowledge. As it doesn't use the proportional navigation method (flying collision course) I have used SA-9 for experimenting with turning into the missile for which that method works against.

 

If you would turn into the missile a little bit too soon, you would be solving all of it's problems like you said, but if you time it correctly your own movement towards the missile will rob its turning space and time and hence make it miss you by more considerable margin compared to the orthogonal roll. It will also impart a lot bigger change of relative direction of the target than orthogonal roll. That's how it should work in theory and how it works in DCS. SA-9 missiles can keep lock right until going past you while doing orthogonal roll but with turning into the missile it loses lock some distance before passing. If there are some other things involved that make this theory incorrect in real life I would be happy to know about it.

 

Other thing I don't understand is why you need to time orthogonal roll correctly? If you just keep pulling and can keep up your speed and load factor until the missile has gone by you you should be covered and actually improve your chances of dodging it because you can bleed its energy with longer pull. With a long orthogonal roll I can defeat R-73 consistently (ie. always if I have enough speed and altitude for high g split-s) which is impossible to defeat or dodge reliably in any other way that I have tried.

[GGTharos]

It doesn't use PN homing, but you can bet it flies a collision course :D

 

First one clarification I forgot to make clear. I practiced orthogonal roll against SA-15 as it's the hardest one to defeat to my knowledge. As it doesn't use the proportional navigation method (flying collision course) I have used SA-9 for experimenting with turning into the missile for which that method works against.

 

That isn't how it works works in reality, and it isn't how it should work in DCS. A real Tor will eat you up if you attempt such a thing, regardless of timing. This is a missile modeling issue. All you're doing when you're turning into the missile is stopping yourself in the sky. Stop thinking of it in terms of turn radii- it's counter-productive. The only important thing is LOS rate, and any modern missile can easily keep up with a turn into it. Where you actually need to start putting g into the missile, the missile merely needs to stop pulling g's and maybe reverse a little to go from lead to pure.

 

If you would turn into the missile a little bit too soon, you would be solving all of it's problems like you said, but if you time it correctly your own movement towards the missile will rob its turning space and time and hence make it miss you by more considerable margin compared to the orthogonal roll. It will also impart a lot bigger change of relative direction of the target than orthogonal roll. That's how it should work in theory and how it works in DCS. SA-9 missiles can keep lock right until going past you while doing orthogonal roll but with turning into the missile it loses lock some distance before passing. If there are some other things involved that make this theory incorrect in real life I would be happy to know about it.

 

Because you cannot keep pulling or keep up your speed, and because if you do it for longer than required, all the seeker settling issues you were hoping to induce and the sudden AoA change become a non-factor. You also lose more SA.

 

I'll say this again: It's a missile modeling issue. You can keep doing it wrong all you want as long it keeps working. When the missile modeling advances, you'll be back here asking why your old habits no longer apply.

 

Other thing I don't understand is why you need to time orthogonal roll correctly? If you just keep pulling and can keep up your speed and load factor until the missile has gone by you you should be covered and actually improve your chances of dodging it because you can bleed its energy with longer pull. With a long orthogonal roll I can defeat R-73 consistently (ie. always if I have enough speed and altitude for high g split-s) which is impossible to defeat or dodge reliably in any other way that I have tried.

[Bushmanni]

I'll say this again: It's a missile modeling issue. You can keep doing it wrong all you want as long it keeps working. When the missile modeling advances, you'll be back here asking why your old habits no longer apply.

 

OK, I understand your point. I hope to be back sooner rather than later crying for new ideas. :D

[GGTharos]

Hehe, so do I :D

[Gremlin]

Does anyone know of an Emergency Checklist to help with procedures after getting hit by a SAM?

 

Thanks!

 

1. Eject! :)

 

Seriously, I found the river bunker mission very useful for learning to defeat SAMs. For example there is a group of SA-11s at 10oc from where you start. I like playing cat and mouse with these. One trick I learned is to fly around the edge of the engagement envelope of the SAM, trick it into firing then run away. They always fall short, keep doing this till they run out of missiles. I also found that if you get caught out and you can't run intime, vertical changes followed bt a hard turn into the beam works well. Its the one that I don't see or the two coming at me from different directions that always kill me!

[Bushmanni]

Yesterday I learned about a corkscrew maneuver that is intended against missiles using proportional navigation, that is SA-9, SA-13 and SA-8. It's handy when you are flying towards the missile already and don't have time to put it into the beam but have to maneuver right away to get out of the missiles way. It's actually even more effective than orthogonal roll in making the missile miss but the downside is that you are flying towards the launcher and unable to escape the engagement zone. But like I said, if you don't have time to do anything else it buys you time and you might even get inside the SAMs minimum range and kill him with the gun.

[OldGeek]

What does SEAD stand for? Thanks!

 

Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses

[Longbow116]

Hi there,

 

you guys are talking about a "orthogonal roll" and maybe somebody could explain how to perform such a roll. I already googled it but found nothing interesting. I usually turn away from the direction if a missile is coming and sometimes im lucky and sometimes not :) But anyway, i want to become more professional and consider all hints.

Why shall i turn into a missile to defeat it? This sounds to me like a sure suicide.

 

best regards

Longbow

Edited June 18, 2011 by Longbow116

[159th_Viper]

Orthogonal roll is a three-dimensional maneuver that results when you execute a high G pull whilst adding aileron either to the left or right, ie pull and left/right-stick.

 

Problem with the Hog is that you have almost zero energy to begin with relative to the Incoming SAM. Attempting an ortho-roll in the Hog with the purpose of attempting to defeat a SAM is akin to showing your belly to a hungry Leopard......Always going to end in tears.

[sobek]

All you orthogonal rollers, brace yourself for the wrath off GG. :)

[GGTharos]

That maneuver is supposed to work against a couple of particular sort of missile in a very narrow range envelope. Closer is suicide ... again, missile modeling issue.

 

Yesterday I learned about a corkscrew maneuver that is intended against missiles using proportional navigation, that is SA-9, SA-13 and SA-8. It's handy when you are flying towards the missile already and don't have time to put it into the beam but have to maneuver right away to get out of the missiles way. It's actually even more effective than orthogonal roll in making the missile miss but the downside is that you are flying towards the launcher and unable to escape the engagement zone. But like I said, if you don't have time to do anything else it buys you time and you might even get inside the SAMs minimum range and kill him with the gun.