Real world info for use/placement of air threats?

[-Ice]

I'm looking to build a few scenarios and would want to put some decent air threats. I was wondering if there is a certain rule or structure to follow when putting air threats. For instance, I am hoping to make a scenario with an attack against an enemy airbase. What types of AAA and SAMs do I put in, and where? In a convoy search-and-destroy mission, what types of AAA and SAMs do I put in? I am assuming the airbase threats will be very different compared to the convoy threats...

 

I'm tired of flying the safe skies... I want to put in very good motivators to fly low and fast.

[Speed]

Well, I can try to help. Of course, last time I tried to give my own thinking and advice on real world scenarios, I got negative rep (for this post). But if I let the a-holes out there get to me, I'll never be able to do anything :D

 

Anyway hmm... well, you gotta think about who you are fighting against. IRL, Russia has SA-8s, SA-13s, SA-10s, SA-11s, SA-15s, SA-19s (2S6's) in abundance. If you're fighting against Russia, put the more advanced SAMs and fighters in there. Russia keeps the best for themselves.

 

If Georgia is in your scenario, give them SA-11s, and maybe SA-8s. Georgia used the SA-11 with great effectiveness to shoot down like half a dozen Russian aircraft during the August 2008 war. Georgia operates the Su-25 (in fact, they manufacture the Su-25 at the Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing plant).

 

Don't give US forces Hawks, they don't use them anymore. Give the US forces Patriots. Additionally, I think that the Patriot tracking radar is phased-array, and doesn't physically move, having a fixed scan volume of 120 degrees so I believe if you want a full 360 degree coverage you need at least three of them. Personally, I prefer four Patriot radars, each one covering one point of the compass. Someone correct me if I am wrong about this.

 

For airbase defense, the best most realistic SAM systems would probably be a combo of some SHORAD like SA-19s and/or SA-15s, and some longer range SAMs, like the SA-10 or SA-11. There would certainly be an SA-10 site somewhere. The old Soviet doctrine for air defense was to have a lot of interlocking early warning and SAM sites, with fighters (interceptors) under strict control and being vectored in against threats by the radar operators on the ground. I do believe that Russia has began to embrace more free, western fighter tactics where the the fighter pilots are given more initiative, but I'm sure Russia still loves building those huge, integrated SAM traps. So give yourself some interlocking long range, medium range, and short range SAM types. Basically, it should be suicide to attack an airbase with an A-10. You attack airbases with cruise missiles and stealth aircraft, though I suppose you could launch a massive SEAD campaign so that you could attack them with regular aircraft.

 

Now, maybe, you can set up some SEAD flights to take down the air defenses, or set up some SAM sites with everything except the control radar- for example, you could set up an SA-11 site with no Snow Drift search radar, and then place, right where the Snow Drift should have been, a destroyed static object Snow Drift radar. It simulates that the SEAD strikes have already hit the area (of course, it should be a bug that the SA-11 is disabled when it doesn't have a Snow Drift, but that is another topic).

 

Anyway, if you want realistic convoy defense, you could place some 2S6s, SA-8s, SA-13s, and/or SA-15s. Also, the Russians like to slowly advance their medium range SAM systems (such as the SA-11) with the army. So as the Russian army advances, they like to make sure there is always an active medium range SAM or two covering their advance, in addition to the smaller systems such as the SA-8, SA-15 or SA-19 (2S6).

 

I do believe that the Zeus has been phased out of Russian service, but I could be wrong. You can wiki stuff like that and find out in about 5 seconds.

 

Anyway, sorry for providing a broad answer, you asked an extremely broad question. Try to narrow it down.

Edited October 25, 2011 by Speed

[-Ice]

Thanks for the reply Speed! Very useful info, at least it gives me a basis to start from, although this is quite broad as you stated.

 

For my purpose, I will have my team going against Russia. No real story here, just some sort of instant-action scenario with a goal and maybe some backstory for ambiance. I'm also not going for ass-crunchingly real, so I may highly encourage my flight to do SEAD :D

 

Anyway, for my enemy airbase mission, perhaps the enemy has not properly "locked down" the area so some of the air threats you would expect is not present, thus making it possible for a flight of A-10s to "neutralize" the airbase and probably allow a helo to insert some infantry to hold the airbase. To do this, however, I'd need to have an idea of what is a proper air cover for an airbase, then "soften" it a bit from there.

 

You mentioned some SA-19s and -15s, but how many? And where would they be placed on the airbase? Just outside the runway? At the airbase perimeter? Some distance in-front/behind the airbase? The SA-10s or -11s I'm guessing would be well behind the airbase, but about how far back? And how many -10s/-11s?

 

For the convoy mission, I'm thinking at least two 2S6s, maybe 3 or 4 for a longer convoy? I'm talking about a convoy of tanks/trucks here, maybe making an escape or transferring to a different location, not the forward-line of the enemy.

 

 

Again, not hoping to start a war between accuracy and opinion here (but if it's one or the other, please do state which one). I'm just hoping to get an idea of how this concept is done (accurate) or should-be-done (opinion) as I have zero knowledge of this topic. Any information gleaned from here would be used to certain degrees in my mission building, but obviously will be tweaked to give me the "feel" that I want. For instance, any proper "war" would at least have air cover of some sort, either helos or air-superiority fighters. I'm not putting any of that in my missions for now... simply because "if Red has these assets, then Blue should have these assets too" and if I follow that chain of thought, the mission will be too big for me to handle.

 

Any input appreciated!

[Mt5_Roie]

Great info Speed!

[Speed]

Thanks for the reply Speed! Very useful info, at least it gives me a basis to start from, although this is quite broad as you stated.

 

For my purpose, I will have my team going against Russia. No real story here, just some sort of instant-action scenario with a goal and maybe some backstory for ambiance. I'm also not going for ass-crunchingly real, so I may highly encourage my flight to do SEAD :D

 

Anyway, for my enemy airbase mission, perhaps the enemy has not properly "locked down" the area so some of the air threats you would expect is not present, thus making it possible for a flight of A-10s to "neutralize" the airbase and probably allow a helo to insert some infantry to hold the airbase. To do this, however, I'd need to have an idea of what is a proper air cover for an airbase, then "soften" it a bit from there.

 

You mentioned some SA-19s and -15s, but how many? And where would they be placed on the airbase? Just outside the runway? At the airbase perimeter? Some distance in-front/behind the airbase? The SA-10s or -11s I'm guessing would be well behind the airbase, but about how far back? And how many -10s/-11s?

 

For the convoy mission, I'm thinking at least two 2S6s, maybe 3 or 4 for a longer convoy? I'm talking about a convoy of tanks/trucks here, maybe making an escape or transferring to a different location, not the forward-line of the enemy.

 

 

Again, not hoping to start a war between accuracy and opinion here (but if it's one or the other, please do state which one). I'm just hoping to get an idea of how this concept is done (accurate) or should-be-done (opinion) as I have zero knowledge of this topic. Any information gleaned from here would be used to certain degrees in my mission building, but obviously will be tweaked to give me the "feel" that I want. For instance, any proper "war" would at least have air cover of some sort, either helos or air-superiority fighters. I'm not putting any of that in my missions for now... simply because "if Red has these assets, then Blue should have these assets too" and if I follow that chain of thought, the mission will be too big for me to handle.

 

Any input appreciated!

 

One can strive for the most fun mission possible, instead of the most realistic. Back in Beta, I made a mission where an enemy airbase was attacked by a flight of human A-10s. It was not a very realistic mission, but it was a fun mission.

 

I made another mission several months back that included a somewhat more realisitic level of enemy air defenses covering a Russian advance. People did not find it as fun of a mission- why? Well, apparently, most people don't find it as fun as I do to fly high the whole mission, above SAMs, dropping PGMs. A lot of people want to use, and expect to be able to use, their GAU-8s against all enemies, even modern Russian army, and not get turned into flaming wreckage. They want to fly around at angels 10-15 "where it's most realistic for an A-10 to fly" (this is incorrect against modern air defenses- see historical example of Serbia/Kosovo).

 

Anyway, the point is, most folks, despite demanding a super-realistic flight model and avionics model, end up not wanting to fly the most realistic missions. Myself, I like to fly a mix of missions between very realistic, and silly slap-stick fun.

 

So you need to decide where on the totem pole of realistic you want your mission. Sounds like you're striving for the normal- as realistic AND as fun as possible.

 

The SA-11s should be placed around the air base, probably. I like to space those things all around the perimeter, and make them very distributed. Same would go for the SHORAD (short range air defenses) defending the airbase- spread it out.

 

An SA-10 could be operating several miles away from the airbase. It's got a very long range.

 

I personally do not know how they spread these things out in real life. But if they are capable of distributing it around, you can bet they will distribute it around as much as possible. Much harder to destroy that way. Put the SAMs and their radars away from any big buildings, tall towers, etc, that would obscure their radar picture IRL. Keep your units away from trees, as it's no fun in DCS to be shot down by a SAM site that can see and shoot through trees (trees are graphical only in DCS, they obscure nothing but the player's sight).

 

2S6s sound like a reasonable balance between realism and fun for SHORAD. They're not quite as nasty as SA-15s (you can, after all, get above SA-19 max engagement altitude very easily), but still pretty nasty.

 

Another fun compromise between realism and fun is to make SEAD aircraft take out the enemy AD for you. In fact, this is fully realistic, of course- though if you wanted to be even more realistic, you'd have some 2S6s that hide somewhere with their radars off until you fly low and in their range.

[-Ice]

Yes, I guess that is a good way to put it. I want to achieve a certain "feel," and strive to make it as realistic as possible, but have no second thoughts about sacrificing realism for fun. After all, I am playing this game to unwind and pretend; I'm not earning a degree or making a living out of it so I have to draw the line somewhere.

 

Regarding placement --- spread it out sounds too... vague. I understand radar placement and launcher placement for the units away from the airfield, but surely the units in the immediate area of the airfield follow some sort of deployment protocol?? Also for the convoy escorts, surely there's some tactical doctrine that would at least guide them in the actual order of the vehicles in the convoy??

 

Regarding other aircraft -- I know in real life, strike packages consists of different flights of different aircraft, blah blah blah, but with the limited time I have making (and testing!) missions, I'd rather just have my A10 flight, the enemy ground targets and defense units, and maybe, maybe, if I'm feeling really cocky, maybe a flight or two of helos or air-superiority fighters, just for me to keep my head down. Realistic? To an extent. Fun? For me, hell yeah!

 

So just finding out how to "best place enemy air defense according to real-world tactics," and going on from there.

[Geert Hooghe]

Well, I can try to help. Of course, last time I tried to give my own thinking and advice on real world scenarios, I got negative rep (for this post). But if I let the a-holes out there get to me, I'll never be able to do anything :D

 

Anyway hmm... well, you gotta think about who you are fighting against. IRL, Russia has SA-8s, SA-13s, SA-10s, SA-11s, SA-15s, SA-19s (2S6's) in abundance. If you're fighting against Russia, put the more advanced SAMs and fighters in there. Russia keeps the best for themselves.

 

If Georgia is in your scenario, give them SA-11s, and maybe SA-8s. Georgia used the SA-11 with great effectiveness to shoot down like half a dozen Russian aircraft during the August 2008 war. Georgia operates the Su-25 (in fact, they manufacture the Su-25 at the Tbilisi Aircraft Manufacturing plant).

 

Don't give US forces Hawks, they don't use them anymore. Give the US forces Patriots. Additionally, I think that the Patriot tracking radar is phased-array, and doesn't physically move, having a fixed scan volume of 120 degrees so I believe if you want a full 360 degree coverage you need at least three of them. Personally, I prefer four Patriot radars, each one covering one point of the compass. Someone correct me if I am wrong about this.

 

For airbase defense, the best most realistic SAM systems would probably be a combo of some SHORAD like SA-19s and/or SA-15s, and some longer range SAMs, like the SA-10 or SA-11. There would certainly be an SA-10 site somewhere. The old Soviet doctrine for air defense was to have a lot of interlocking early warning and SAM sites, with fighters (interceptors) under strict control and being vectored in against threats by the radar operators on the ground. I do believe that Russia has began to embrace more free, western fighter tactics where the the fighter pilots are given more initiative, but I'm sure Russia still loves building those huge, integrated SAM traps. So give yourself some interlocking long range, medium range, and short range SAM types. Basically, it should be suicide to attack an airbase with an A-10. You attack airbases with cruise missiles and stealth aircraft, though I suppose you could launch a massive SEAD campaign so that you could attack them with regular aircraft.

 

Now, maybe, you can set up some SEAD flights to take down the air defenses, or set up some SAM sites with everything except the control radar- for example, you could set up an SA-11 site with no Snow Drift search radar, and then place, right where the Snow Drift should have been, a destroyed static object Snow Drift radar. It simulates that the SEAD strikes have already hit the area (of course, it should be a bug that the SA-11 is disabled when it doesn't have a Snow Drift, but that is another topic).

 

Anyway, if you want realistic convoy defense, you could place some 2S6s, SA-8s, SA-13s, and/or SA-15s. Also, the Russians like to slowly advance their medium range SAM systems (such as the SA-11) with the army. So as the Russian army advances, they like to make sure there is always an active medium range SAM or two covering their advance, in addition to the smaller systems such as the SA-8, SA-15 or SA-19 (2S6).

 

I do believe that the Zeus has been phased out of Russian service, but I could be wrong. You can wiki stuff like that and find out in about 5 seconds.

 

Anyway, sorry for providing a broad answer, you asked an extremely broad question. Try to narrow it down.

 

"Now, maybe, you can set up some SEAD flights to take down the air defenses, or set up some SAM sites with everything except the control radar- for example, you could set up an SA-11 site with no Snow Drift search radar, and then place, right where the Snow Drift should have been, a destroyed static object Snow Drift radar. It simulates that the SEAD strikes have already hit the area (of course, it should be a bug that the SA-11 is disabled when it doesn't have a Snow Drift, but that is another topic)."...is this meant to be a "wild weasel" operation when you talk about SEAD ??

[Speed]

"is this meant to be a "wild weasel" operation when you talk about SEAD ??

"Wild Weasel" is a popular slang term for aircraft/missions involved with SEAD- more specifically, the destruction of enemy air defenses. SEAD is Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. There's also the less-commonly used term DEAD, for Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses. But if you're destroying them, you're suppressing them too, obviously.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Speed

[Geert Hooghe]

"Wild Weasel" is a popular slang term for aircraft/missions involved with SEAD- more specifically, the destruction of enemy air defenses. SEAD is Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. There's also the less-commonly used term DEAD, for Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses. But if you're destroying them, you're suppressing them too, obviously.

 

:thumbup:

[-Ice]

I just made a mission to test an SA-19, SA-15, and an SA-10. The -19s and -15s were 3 each, one Excellent, one High, and one Good skill for each group. These were placed in Kobuleti. An SA-10 was placed in Kutaisi.

 

We took them out without breaking a sweat. What did I do wrong mission-creation-wise?

 

The -19s and -15s were painting us from 20nm out, but we got to within Mav launch distance, 6.5-7nm without being fired on. And we were anywhere between Angels 2-6. No sweat whatsoever.

 

The SA-10 was a bit of a challenge. It fired on me from about 22-25nm out at Angels 6. Easily evaded, but never saw the launch plume. My wingman (Coolts) located the control vehicle, masked behind some hills, and took the control vehicle out with a well-placed Maverick while I was distracting the radar-control guys. Once the control vehicle was out, that was it. I approached to 6nm from the launchers and nothing.

 

Any tips to get deadlier SAMs?

[Speed]

Any tips to get deadlier SAMs?

 

Fly like an idiot, works every time. :)

 

But that's exactly my point... there's nothing you can to make them deadlier do if you did exactly what was necessary to kill them. You can terrain mask SA-10s. You can out range SA-15s and SA-19s.

 

My suggestion, if you wanted to make your airbases more immune to this approach, deploy a few scattered MANPADs and SA-19s in a large radius around the base.

 

Additionally, you could add enemy fighters that only allow you a short time in the target area.

 

Oh yea, you could make SA-15s that don't turn on their own radars till you are already in their kill zone. Use AI on and off. Hide them around the airbase in a few locations.

Edited October 28, 2011 by Speed

[-Ice]

Lol, I was going for the "it should be suicide for an A-10 to attack an airbase."

[159th_Viper]

Lol, I was going for the "it should be suicide for an A-10 to attack an airbase."

 

With a realistic IAD network in place it is..........sadly we do not see much of that to date in missions.

[Bimbac]

Hello,

 

IMO it would be better to have a tool in Mission Editor like in Jane's F/A-18 - Integrated Air Defense so you could connect various Anti-Air units to share target data - that could make thing interesting because short-range units would be engaging targets only when they were safely within their engagement envelope.

 

When I get familiar with Mission Editor quite enough, so I could really make some interesting and realistic missions, I'd like everyone to evaluate.

 

Best regards!

[-Ice]

Viper, do you have a better or more accurate definition of "a realistic IAD"? I'd sure love to give it a go.

 

What I'm looking for is type and number of SAMs, general guide on placement within the airbase or immediate vicinity (ie, do you put it in the airbase perimeter or do you put it 4 miles in front of/behind the airbase?), and other support vehicles.

 

Please note that I am not looking into protection provided by enemy air-superiority fighters at this time... that would make the mission-creation too complex for me. :D

[Boberro]

You can download NATO\USSR template packs with SAMs, convoys, APC squads. Example SHORAD 1 squad consist of 3 Strelas, 2 Shilkas and BTR or BMP. Other SHORAD 2 consist Tunguska, Strela, OSA ect. Supposedly based on real doctrine.

[xifu]

Take a look this Blog , maybe it can help you to put your SAMs unit in a real enviroment.

 

There is a file for Google earth that shows emplacements all over the world.

 

 

[Anastasiuss]

Here is a nice page for SAM Sites worldwide

http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/06/worldwide-sam-site-overview.html

Update from Sept. 2011:

Current as of: 19 September 2011 (6750 locations, +87)

 

 

ah ... to late ^^

 

ok one update (attachments) + one article http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1011909 -> google translator is your friend.

the pdf article is here http://www.migman.com/org/AirPowerAustralia/081009.php too.

 

Thats enogh for realistic scenaries.

Georgia's Air Defense in the War with South Ossetia.pdf

Edited October 28, 2011 by Anastasiuss

[LazerPotatoe]

Have you seen this thread in the Simulation Research forum?:

 

"The ED Partners team is asking for your help in collecting information on group composition and specific placement descriptions for various types of ground units. Highest priority today are SAM systems, SPA (self-propelled artillery) systems, various types of convoys. The information would be used to create unit templates for the mission editor."

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=29338

[feefifofum]

Set your SAM's ROE to WEAPON HOLD using ADVANCED WAYPOINT ACTIONS until a fighter enters the WEZ...much harder to deal with these guys if they don't paint you from 25 miles out and reveal their location long before they fire. :)

 

Go to the Triggered Actions tab and add set option -》roe-》 WEAPON. FREE

 

Create a trigger zone roughly the size of the SAM's engagement range, called SAM range, and place it on top of your unit.

Create a new trigger, ONCE type, NO EVENT.

PART OF COALITION IN ZONE (SAM range, BLUE)

AI TASK PUSH (SAM site, 1. Weapon free)

 

Now he won't turn his RADAR on until you're inside of firing range.