Questions on RWR and Sam Heights

[bunraku]

Hi

 

Just did a test mission with several Radar Threats on the ground. I noticed when i prioritise the top 5 on RWR that an unarmed radar(BB) is 1 of the 5. I know it has the biggest range, but like i said it is unarmed on it's own. However it does support other missiles or at least give much earlier warning to the enemy. So is that the reason it's considered a top 5 threat instead of a SAM unit which i had much more than 5 on the RWR?

 

Secondly the only SAM units i put in the mission were TOR's and Tunguska's . According to the PDF i downloaded on RWR threasts the Max alt for both is 19685ft. So why is the TOR shooting me down at 21000ft?

 

Thanx

[159th_Viper]

According to the PDF i downloaded....

 

The PDF is wrong.

[NineLine]

 

Secondly the only SAM units i put in the mission were TOR's and Tunguska's . According to the PDF i downloaded on RWR threasts the Max alt for both is 19685ft. So why is the TOR shooting me down at 21000ft?

 

Thanx

 

What elevation where the TORs at? Its 19685 from sea level I think, not including anything they gain in elevation from terrain... I think :)

[PFunk1606688187]

Real pilots spend lots of time considering which source for their altitude to use at any given moment. Rolling terrain can screw up a radar reference for things like weapons releases (assuming inertial GPS guidance isn't available), while baro can mislead you as to how high you really are from a target beneath you.

 

If you know a target is able to hit a target up to say 20 000 then you should fly at like 25000 or more depending on how much elevation gradient you're facing. A buffer zone of only a couple thousand feet isn't much of a margin of error. Imagine if you had engine problems only that much higher than enemy launch envelope. You'd have a tough job getting out of range without dipping too low and if you did get a launch cause you strayed in you'd be in especially bad shape.

 

You learn the hard way how much respect to give a launch window. Riding up against it isn't generally a good idea unless you're actually trying to get inside and kill something there.

[arteedecco]

First, let me just help you out:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1117116&postcount=1

Find the "A5 version by PlainSight" in that post.

 

The SA-15 TOR system can hit up to 35K feet above it's starting elevation, which explains the results you are seeing. The Tunguska you can get up on top of in the A-10C, though it takes a while if you're heavy.

 

Now... you can win against an SA-15 with Mavericks IF you:

a.) Know where the SA-15 is by an FAC / JTAC, shared SPI via datalink, or get lucky spotting it with your TGP

b.) Are at relatively high altitude and/or have lots of kinetic energy (speed) when you launch the Maverick giving it maximum range potential, since the SA-15 can hit out to 7 nautical miles (+/- depending upon your maneuvering, speed, altitude)

 

That threat guide made a big difference for me. Depending on the briefing for the mission you can determine your safe altitudes. In general I stay above 12K to avoid the nasty IR SAMs. If I think there are Tunguska, I'll try to get up above 20K, but hey... in reality... you would brief on intel and suspected / known threats and you would go defensive and get out if you ran into a serious SAM. In-game we tend to go into missions that are not super realistic in terms of what an A-10C would be dispatched into w/out SEAD support.

[bunraku]

Thanx for replies. What about the question on threat priority?

[159th_Viper]

BB, designating the S-300PS 64N6E, is the Primary Search and Acquisition radar of the S-300 SAM system.

 

It is the biggest and baddest threat you have by a country mile and as such definitely worthy of it's #1 spot.

[bunraku]

BB, designating the S-300PS 64N6E, is the Primary Search and Acquisition radar of the S-300 SAM system.

 

It is the biggest and baddest threat you have by a country mile and as such definitely worthy of it's #1 spot.

 

Thanx Viper

[PFunk1606688187]

You destroy the radar and all those missiles are basically useless. Kind of like gouging out a Cyclops' eye.

[159th_Viper]

You destroy the radar and all those missiles are basically useless. Kind of like gouging out a Cyclops' eye.

 

Incorrect.

 

You have at least three radars to worry about with the S-300.

[Eddie]

You have at least three radars to worry about with the S-300.

 

Incorrect. Suppress or destroy the tracking RADAR(s) and it's game over, the search RADARs are of no consequence. There is a reason that in RL many western RWR systems don't even display search RADARs unless you specifically enable the option to do so.

[159th_Viper]

Incorrect. Suppress or destroy the tracking RADAR(s) and it's game over, the search RADARs are of no consequence. There is a reason that in RL many western RWR systems don't even display search RADARs unless you specifically enable the option to do so.

 

You need to brush up on the S-300 system.

[Ironhand]

Incorrect. Suppress or destroy the tracking RADAR(s) and it's game over, the search RADARs are of no consequence. There is a reason that in RL many western RWR systems don't even display search RADARs unless you specifically enable the option to do so.

As I understand it, there are several countries that use the S-300's Big Bird search radar simply as a search radar, not tied to any tracking radar. So that would make sense. It's the tracking radars that present the real danger.

 

 

Rich

[Spetz]

The S-300 uses the Clam Shell, Big Bird and Cheese Board. It can get target hand-off's from any and all of the different radars that support it, coupled with the 150+km range and 100 to 80,000+ ft engagement height, the ability to launch and guide up to 12 missile at once against one target, makes it a very credidle threat. I'd say it would be #1..

[Ironhand]

A very creditable threat. But that's not what Eddie was saying. He said that, if you kill or suppress the Flap Lid tracking radar, then rest of the radars are pretty useless. His point was that it's not the BB on the RWR that's the real threat. Or at least I think that was his point. :)

 

 

Rich

Edited November 19, 2012 by Ironhand

[Spetz]

My bad..

 

In real life, The S-300 (SA-10 whatever version) uses the Big Bird EW, which feeds the Flap Lid targetting information through the GCP. If the Big Bird is disabled, the Flap Lid takes over, but detection range is reduced because both the Clam Shell and Flap Lid are primarilly low altitude radars.

 

If the Flap Lid is destroyed, the system CANNOT fire on it's own as the missiles do not possess full active guidance, it passes targeting info back to the Flap Lid, which in turn does it's magic, and sends correction cues back to the missile.

 

The BB radar IMHO is just an idication that there is a S-300 Battalion in the area, and should be considered, but the Flap Lid, as it is the engagement / tracking radar that controls the actual missile would be the biggest threat. IF you see that puppy fire up on the RWR, you know they are active. If this is actually modelled in game, I don't know.. Perhaps the game models the BB as the engaement radar, which is wrong if it is.

 

So basically, take out the Flap Lid in game, the battalion is useless.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Spetz

[Ironhand]

My bad..

 

...The BB radar IMHO is just an idication that there is a S-300 Battalion in the area, and should be considered, but the Flap Lid, as it is the engagement / tracking radar that controls the actual missile would be the biggest threat. IF you see that puppy fire up on the RWR, you know they are active. If this is actually modelled in game, I don't know.. Perhaps the game models the BB as the engaement radar, which is wrong if it is.

 

So basically, take out the Flap Lid in game, the battalion is useless.

I haven't paid close attention in FC3 but the BB used to be in V1.x, and I think still is, just a search radar in the sim.