Patriot downing KH58U

[Rangi]

I don't know but do you think it is realistic that a patriot battery could shoot down a KH58U 100% of the time? Out of about 10 I have shot in game everyone has been shot down.

[EtherealN]

Very realistic.

 

S-300's do the same in-game, btw.

To take out an active site of this caliber, you need to saturate them.

 

The tactic I use on the 25T is to get myself close enough to fire my shorter-range ARMs first, and their job is to keep the site busy while I then follow with two of the larger, higher-energy, weapons. Works 100%. ;)

[maturin]

S-300s no longer launch on ARMs. And their pk was never that high.

Edited March 18, 2013 by maturin

[EtherealN]

Really? That is weird. They always attacked mine, but it was a few versions ago that I flew 25T in SEAD/DEAD role.

 

I'll have to load up FC and see what changed there.

[maturin]

Now they assume the presence of Tunguskas, and leave the engagement to them. There's a now quite ignored AI forum thread about how Tor units should be doing this instead, but do not.

[159th_Falcon]

Correct, some made by moi. And was actually quite surprised to read the Patriot does engage these missiles now.

Slowly moving in the right direction.

 

For those that think the Patriot is not capable of this, currently some Dutch and units are moved to Turkey to protect it from potentially incoming missiles from .......<insert correct country here please, i forgot

 

 

For reference;

Tor M1 http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=95713

Buk S11 http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=94576

 

Have stopped updating the threads since updates happened quite quickly after each other. Making it hard to say if it was in current version or not.

 

Guess ill wait till 1.2.4, which shouldn't be very long either and test some more.

 

As for the S-300, its supposed to engage incoming ARM's by itself, those that manage to get into the S-300's minimum engagement zone should be taken out by the sites TOR's i believe.

Could have been an other system to though, been a while i looked it up.

[GGTharos]

Here's the history on what we know of this capability:

 

PATRIOT's ability to engage ARMs was verified by me. I hunted through FOIA documents until I found a relevant snippet. No, I'm not giving you the documents (because I don't know where I hid them any more, and I don't have time to look through reams of documentation :P ), and I'm not looking through them again. It look a very long time, it was a very obscure little fact buried in piles of investigative documentation (the Tornado downing incident, specifically, IIRC).

 

The original assumption was that S300 would do this as well, but the devs found evidence that this was not the case ( ... which version of S300?)

 

Further to this, there were details as to the types of ARMs that PATRIOT could engage, but unfortunately ... those were 'black markered out' ... censored :P

[pepin1234]

I dont believe too that the patriot have the capability to hit a missile that fly at 2500 km/h. the missile is smaller than a aircraft and faster.

 

The patriots must turn the launcher aiming the target, the S-300 launch to 360° only having a valid target. The S-300 have more capability to hit the missiles but the patriot have not such capability.

 

All right, something must exist against the Su-25T in game, but is not Real at all.

 

my question is, all that false capability will remain in our game also when the DCS F-18 become ready????

 

We cant forget that the F-18 have SEAD capability and the only flyable aircraft that have SEAD is the Su-25T.

 

Why we have not the S-300V with high movility features like the Buks???

 

If one side have a powerfull tool they must have it!!

[GGTharos]

I dont believe too that the patriot have the capability to hit a missile that fly at 2500 km/h. the missile is smaller than a aircraft and faster.

 

I prefer to believe PATRIOT crews. The Kh-58 is a fairly large missile, and flying faster makes it easier to discriminate.

 

The patriots must turn the launcher aiming the target,

 

No, they do not.

 

the S-300 launch to 360° only having a valid target. The S-300 have more capability to hit the missiles but the patriot have not such capability.

 

Your assumption (not information, because you have no information) is incorrect. The firing sector isn't everything there is to intercepting missiles.

 

All right, something must exist against the Su-25T in game, but is not Real at all.

 

It is very real. However, the misrepresentation of SEAD needs better SAM intelligence to be fixed. If that is programmed in, then SAMs can survive ARMs without having to shoot them down.

 

my question is, all that false capability will remain in our game also when the DCS F-18 become ready????

 

We cant forget that the F-18 have SEAD capability and the only flyable aircraft that have SEAD is the Su-25T.

 

Why we have not the S-300V with high movility features like the Buks???

 

If one side have a powerfull tool they must have it!!

 

I don't know which exact S-300 version the developers are modeling, but eventually it will be updated as well.

 

Once SAMs become smarter, they may choose not to engage ARMs at all, but they will shut off their radars instead. This is why the 'S' in SEAD means suppression, instead of 'D' for destruction.

[Hubris]

100% of the time? I guess that depends on how many anti-radiation missiles are launched at it at the same time.

 

I think the success rate of shooting down missiles from ships is much higher with their CIWS. It is a spectacular show, even better with the old tracers that were thicker.

[EtherealN]

100% of the time? I guess that depends on how many anti-radiation missiles are launched at it at the same time.

 

Well, if there is only one missile launched, we're talking about asking a SAM site to engage a single non-maneuvering target...

 

...EASY!

 

People seem to have this idea that speed alone is something magical as far as intercepting a target. No it's not. Patriot easily intercepts ballistic missiles flying several times faster - coming in from SPACE - than ARMs do. So no, speed is not a problem. We're simply talking about target detection, discrimination and lockon. And Patriot (and I thought S-300) was built to do this against missiles as well. After all, a missile is just another flying object. Being a "missile" as opposed to an "aircraft" does not mean you are magically undetectable. :)

Edited March 18, 2013 by EtherealN

[Hubris]

Well, if there is only one missile launched, we're talking about asking a SAM site to engage a single non-maneuvering target...

 

...EASY!

 

:) at least iron dome isn't in DCS world...yet...:cry:

[pepin1234]

I prefer to believe PATRIOT crews. The Kh-58 is a fairly large missile, and flying faster makes it easier to discriminate..

 

is not so easy and the % of succes is low. Specialy with the patriot

 

 

No, they do not.

 

..

 

 

 

The Patriot must turn the launcher if I come from their 3 a clock, of course because I have seem an a militar talking about that

 

 

 

 

 

Your assumption (not information, because you have no information) is incorrect. The firing sector isn't everything there is to intercepting missiles.

..

 

100 % true. The S-300 just need a efective track to launch. the launcher keep in the same possition.

 

The patriot launcher must turn and aim the target, that mean time.

 

One of the features in all the Russians SAMs is the movility. I think this is very important when the F-18 become ready. Also the S-300V is off-road and is not in our game

[GGTharos]

Missile defense is better than CIWS. That's why you see everything moving to missile defense as a preference to guided gunnery.

 

100% of the time? I guess that depends on how many anti-radiation missiles are launched at it at the same time.

 

I think the success rate of shooting down missiles from ships is much higher with their CIWS. It is a spectacular show, even better with the old tracers that were thicker.

[GGTharos]

is not so easy and the % of succes is low. Specialy with the patriot

 

Please show me some real data. And don't point me to the SCUD analysis, which itself is only concerned with warhead destruction and not actual hits on missiles :)

 

 

The Patriot must turn the launcher if I come from their 3 a clock, of course because I have seem an a militar talking about that

 

It does not. You can attack it from its 6 o'clock if you want, it'll turn around and bite you. it will have somewhat shorter range since it's spending some time reversing course.

 

In any case, discussing this is a moot point; PATRIOT batteries deploy in a way that is designed to defend a particular corridor, which means attacking them from their 3 o'clock will probably not be an option for you.

 

100 % true. The S-300 just need a efective track to launch. the launcher keep in the same possition.

 

You don't know what you're talking about. Shooting at missiles has NOTHING to do with turning launchers.

 

One of the features in all the Russians SAMs is the movility. I think this is very important when the F-18 become ready. Also the S-300V is off-road and is not in our game

 

What's this mobility you're talking about going to do? Do you think those SAM vehicles will just drive away from an ARM?

 

Don't worry, PATRIOTs, HAWKs, ROLANDs, Crotale's and Avengers are pretty mobile too :)

[pepin1234]

only one example. If the patriot launch me with non turn the launcher. We are talking about an amount of rocket fuel spent, so if I come from the 12 a clock of the launcher aiming and the missile hit me at 50 km, is not possible the missile have the same succes when I come from the 3 a clock. This is something important.

 

And we are talking about 5 min. I am not worry

 

[GGTharos]

You're still having trouble figuring out the fact that pointing missile launchers at things has nothing to do with shooting down missiles.

 

Posting videos isn't going to help your argument. FYI, PATRIOT missile targets for testing are usually other PATRIOT missiles. ;)

[pepin1234]

I have any trouble. Me and a lot of people would like the things like they are...

[lunaticfringe]

only one example. If the patriot launch me with non turn the launcher. We are talking about an amount of rocket fuel spent, so if I come from the 12 a clock of the launcher aiming and the missile hit me at 50 km, is not possible the missile have the same succes when I come from the 3 a clock. This is something important.

 

"Rocket fuel spent"? Good gravy- you literally have *no* clue as to what you're talking about.

 

You're not talking about "rocket fuel spent"; you're talking about speed, which translates to a shorter Rmax for interception, as GG stated. That fuel is being spent one way or another upon startup- turning the interceptor is a function of the *guidance fins*, not the impulse. Fins induce drag, drag slows net acceleration, generating a lower maximum run down range.

 

And as GG already stated, Patriot battery LMs are staged with their launchers deployed in overlap to cover all potential threat vectors, and the fire control system determines which LMs have the shot, and takes them accordingly based on where the target is coming from. No need for the launcher to turn around.

 

Me and a lot of people would like the things like they are...

 

Where? Candyland? An episode of Doctor Who?

 

Oh, BTW- if you want to post videos, from 0:28, this is you coming from the battery's 3 o'clock. Have fun.

 

[pepin1234]

What!! Do you say me if the missile make such maneuver only affect the speed??!!

 

affect negatively in all, specialy when the missile start with the inertia he must change the direction having decreased performance. Like you say is the speed affected but also the fuel, because is a curve with a longer trajectory and a decreased effective range. In case the missile lose speed but have enough fuel he could hit me when I lose speed in my maneuver. All have relation in this case.

 

Videos?? yes I like the videos. Take other one here, and hear what make you happy.

 

[Rangi]

Ok thanks guys, question asked and answered. Thanks GGTharos and EtherealN for your knowledgeable and detailed answers.

[Angel101]

I have any trouble. Me and a lot of people would like the things like they are...

 

Why i think that your reality differs from our reality? I'm a little tired of reading your post about your feelings must be truth in RL. And if you believe all about youtube videos...

 

And back on topic. Ussually I don't have any problem disabling a patriot site with a volley of two shoots, the first missile always get shootdown but the second one hit the site. Think that if you need to supress a target like a patriot or S-300 you need more aircrafts and more missiles, is not a job for a lone wolf.

[159th_Viper]

Best plane to clean a Patriot's clock is a P-51....nimble, agile and lethal. No need to bother with 58's or the like.

[Pyroflash]

Best plane to clean a Patriot's clock is a P-51....nimble, agile and lethal. No need to bother with 58's or the like.

 

I'll take my chances with the Sopwith Camel. :D

[159th_Viper]

I'll take my chances with the Sopwith Camel. :D

 

That'll work too but then you'll never make it back for tea. Hell, the Patriot ground-crew will be able to outrun you and pepper you with small-arms fire while you attempt to RTB :P