Visual Que of SAM Launch?

[Dusty Rhodes]

Running a mission where we duke it out with some Tunguska's and an SA8. I noticed that with the Tunguskas, there is no contrail or smoke plume from launch to give you a visual que that there was a launch. Is this realistic? Do the Tunguska's have no plume or trail? What about other SAMs? Thanks in advance.

[july865]

i am no expert on having missles launched at me irl. but i have seen some really kool youtube vids of the actual launches.

its not what you see in the movies thats for sure.

if i know where they are and have a visual, i can see the plume.

imo, dcs models the launch pretty well.

[ralfidude]

It kinda should.

 

[Xxx]

It kinda should.

 

 

Nice video.

 

At 900 M/S, the missile, fired by the Tunguska, is very fast. We don't have much chance against these. Here is a short description;-

 

The system uses the same 9M311 (NATO: SA-19/SA-N-11) missile family as the naval version, which can engage targets at a range of 2.4 to 8 km and to an altitude of 3.5 km, The Tunguska-M1 uses the improved 9M311-M1 missile with an increased range of 10 km. The missile has two stages, a large booster stage with four folding fins, which boosts the missile to a velocity of 900 m/s, before falling away. The second stage has four fixed fins, and four steerable control surfaces. The complete missile is around 2.56 meters long with a weight of 57 kg.

 

Guidance is performed by the gunner who uses the 8× magnification (8 degree field of view) 1A29 stabilized sight of the Tunguska to track the target and the missile (using a flare or pulsed beacon) is automatically tracked by the optics. The deviation of the missile is compared with the tracked target and used to calculate guidance commands, the tracking radar being used to send radio commands to the missile, making Tunguska a semi automatic with command line of sight (SACLOS) system. The gunner is initially cued towards the target by the systems search radar. Once the missile is steered to within 5 m of the target, an active laser or radio fuse (9M311-M1) is triggered. The warhead weighs about 9 kg, and is a continuous rod system, consisting of 600 mm long 6 to 9 mm diameter rods with a flower-like cross section. The cross section ensures the rods break into fragments weighing 2–3 grams. The rods form a complete ring about 5 m from the missile. Outside the rods is a fragmentation layer of steel cubes weighing 2–3 grams. The 9K22 is reported to have a kill probability of 0.6 with missiles (9M311).

 

 

When I look at the A10, after a near miss, no wonder its like a cullinder:)

[sobek]

The smoke trails in the video are very faint. No chance of spotting that unless you know where to look in advance. Nothing like the old SA-2 motors where you would see a thick trail winding towards you.

[Dusty Rhodes]

Those weren't faint at all and could be seen from miles away, espeically from the air with your attention directed into that area with your RWR screaming at you. I would like to see this represented if it is possible with the GFX engine.

 

I was a TOW missile crewman and sqaud leader and remember the small puff of smoke the TOW lets out when you fire it and tank crews, from the ground, could see them from several miles away forcing us to always disperse after 2 shots. The puff of smoke was nothing like the smoke from the Tunguska when it fired in that video.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Dusty Rhodes

[sobek]

Did we watch the same vid?

[Irregular programming]

Did we watch the same vid?

 

We were, apparently, looked very faint to me. No way I'd spot that from a kilometer or more.

[Dusty Rhodes]

Yes sir we were. As my comparison with the TOW signature, that launch could be seen for miles if you are oriented in that direction. I am not asking for contrails all the way to target but a visual indication, just like shown in the video. With your RWR screaming at you of a radar lock, you will look at it and see the orientation the lock and or Missile launch is coming from and would be able to see that signature from a good distance IMHO and from my experience with a smaller signature of the TOW missile which only leaves a signature on launch.

[Nate--IRL--]

You can see a launch IF you are looking at the unit and expect it. There is a faint initial launch trail.

 

Watch the centre of the runway cross in the attached track........

 

Nate

Tunguska.trk

[EtherealN]

Same here, look in TGP in the initial engagement:

 

[Irregular programming]

I am sorry to disagree with you. Here is a good video of the missile in action,

 

In game the 9M311 do give off a bright flash followed by a white contrail for as long as the engine on the missile is burning. Take a look at what we currently have in game, it is visible if you look at the direction that the missile is being fired from.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Irregular programming

[wolfstriked]

Do tunguska's have counter measures?I mean they are either the bravest warriors ever or are told they have advantage in an air to ground attack.

[sobek]

Do tunguska's have counter measures?

 

I don't think so.

 

I mean they are either the bravest warriors ever or are told they have advantage in an air to ground attack.

 

You can say the same for any ground unit. They should be used in conjunction with an IAD.

[wolfstriked]

I can only imagine that the reason there are no counter measures is money wise.I have read here that you can actually shoot down an incoming missile if its fired from enough range so you can get a lock and since Tunguska attacks are usually done from far away.A tracked attack with guns?Heck even walls that hydraulicly lift up and surround tank at least allowing some dissipation of the blast.Force field?:P

 

What I would love to see is amazing modeling of tank AI though.What I mean is no driving out into open fields.Always near tree lines and actually driving around buildings is what I think they do to remove any lock that an incoming missile has in the same way we pilots use terrain.Its even easier for ground units since they can position the armor at areas with quick escapes.This is where IMO the bravery of the AAA crew comes from.

 

Now of course if DCS were to model true to life Tunguskas and allow players to wage true modern air to ground combat....well I would pay a monthly subscription.:)

[sobek]

I can only imagine that the reason there are no counter measures is money wise.I have read here that you can actually shoot down an incoming missile if its fired from enough range so you can get a lock and since Tunguska attacks are usually done from far away.A tracked attack with guns?Heck even walls that hydraulicly lift up and surround tank at least allowing some dissipation of the blast.Force field?:P

 

Why would they need counter measures? It's a SHORAD system, it's there to provide low to low mid level coverage of armed columns against low flying threats (whirly birds and CAS planes that don't have much stand off weaponry). It's supposed to be used as a denial option, not as a sitting duck. Besides, the up to date successor (pantsir) is supposedly able to give you a good run for your money.

 

What I would love to see is amazing modeling of tank AI though.What I mean is no driving out into open fields.Always near tree lines and actually driving around buildings is what I think they do to remove any lock that an incoming missile has in the same way we pilots use terrain.Its even easier for ground units since they can position the armor at areas with quick escapes.This is where IMO the bravery of the AAA crew comes from.

 

Tracked vehicles are meant to be used in the open, that's why they should have SHORAD support in a symmetrical battlefield as well as top cover if need be. Tracked vehicles certainly don't like the CQ environment of cities, that's infantry territory.

[wolfstriked]

I am afraid to ask this because it seems many of you here are actual military and I work for Fedex.:megalol: Are you sure?I see videos :music_whistling: of infantry in urban settings and they work in conjunction with tanks.They are the tanks eyes and move forward scan and then tank follows.The tank's job is to destroy strongholds for them etc.And if I was a SHORAD driver I would plan routes with trees and as much terrain as possible to counter attacks while escorting columns.

 

 

I just checked out the Pantsir and it dawns on me that it could be remotely controlled saving the crew if it gets destroyed compared to climbing into a tracked vehicle.Sorry another question I have is are you for certain killed if you get attacked from above.I seen videos of tank turrets being blown off and wonder if the crew has any chance to survive that.

Edited January 9, 2012 by wolfstriked

[sobek]

Are you sure?I see videos :music_whistling: of infantry in urban settings and they work in conjunction with tanks.They are the tanks eyes and move forward scan and then tank follows.The tank's job is to destroy strongholds for them etc.

 

You have to differentiate between asymmetric and symmetric warfare. Two tank armies going up against each other would be stupid to duke it out in a city, as it prohibits stand off weapon use and mobility. Also military infantry tends to be better equipped. Against an infantry force that has RPGs and IEDs and little modern anti tank weaponry, why not go into the city and support the infantry?

 

I just checked out the Pantsir and it dawns on me that it could be remotely controlled saving the crew if it gets destroyed compared to climbing into a tracked vehicle.Sorry another question I have is are you for certain killed if you get attacked from above.I seen videos of tank turrets being blown off and wonder if the crew has any chance to survive that.

 

That depends. If the hull is breached in a section of the crew compartment, there is relatively little chance of the crew surviving (depending on the weapon). If, e.g. only the engine compartment is compromised, it will be a mission kill but the crew has a good chance of staying unharmed. For an MBT to blow off the turret, there needs to be a serious breach with the ammunition cooking off. One can imagine what that will do to the crew.

Edited January 9, 2012 by sobek

[wolfstriked]

Hey thanks Sobek,you answered alot of my questions I had. :)