UV-26 programs -- any suggestions?

I usually fly with the program "121" but it's sort of arbitrary. I'm wondering if anyone has verified that different flare programs are more or less effective against different threats? I know from my F-16 studies that some advanced threats require specially timed use of ECM and chaff/flare in order to overcome them ... to what degree is this modeled in BS?

TLDR:

- Are there different programs I should be using for different threats?

- Or failing that, is there anything that makes one program more effective than another overall?

I´m generally using 323 works pretty good.

I´m generally using 323 works pretty good.

+1 :)

In my X52 profile I mapped start and stop button handy plus switching sides. In the third (emergency) mode one press will first deploy a lot of flares very fast, then slower and slower and less flares until the dispensers are empty. It's a macro.

333 :P

529 with a single dispenser selected is my personal choice. It does mean you chew through the comsumables pretty fast, but flare carts in the dispensers when you're a smouldering crater in the ground after being hit by a SAM really are useless.

And if you find youself running out, chances are you're somewhere you probably shouldn't be in a KA-50.

I used to use things like 719 for the longest time but lately the burst-delay-burst-delay style such at 4-3-2 or 3-3-3 is really catching on with me. First thing you have to realize is that pre-emptive flares don't work in DCS. They just don't. Flares only serve to make you visible to the enemy and let them target you. In real life you could spoil a launch by having flares out already. However, on the flip side, flares post-launch have a much, much better chance to distract tracking than is the case in real life. So you tailor the program to have bursts of enough to do some good when released. Gut feeling is 3-10. The next two figures, sequence number and sequence delay should span the duration between danger and safety. The original missile is probably only in the air for 2-3 seconds so sequence delays longer than that mean that only the initial burst is even going to matter. 3-3-3 gives you 6-9 seconds of weak coverage which should be enough to get out of Dodge enough that further missiles won't be a threat. If it's the kind of terrain that requires more time to get safe, very flat, very high, or canyons then be a longer total duration. Be aggressive with your settings. Try to put out at least 25% of a wingtip at a time if not 33% or 50%. Let the programs be very long as you can always stop the program manually when safe. It's much better that then to have the dispenser stop while you're too busy still yanking and banking. Also, keep the wingtip selected that has the most flares ready if they are unequal.

Frederf, are you shure pre-emptive use of flares does not work?! IIRC GGTharos advised such use more than on one occasion.

You are also right about the stop button which allows you to be aggressive and save flares at the same time.

Pre-emptive method does work in DCS as far I noticed. Sometimes it happens it won't be so effective, example I flew and aimed Strela... pushed many pre-emptive flares and it didn't help at all. Another day it worked lol.

I'm absolutely sure it doesn't work. I just made the world's simplest test mission of my Ka-50 flying 180km/h 300m off the deck cutting through a Strela's threat circle at about 50% range. I turns on all my lights just to be sure he saw me.

Several seconds before he fired his first missile I started a 019 (continuous, 1/2 second interval very dense) program from both wingtips and the sucker happily shot anyway despite the horrendously low Pk and (in real life) a dubious lock. Flares, even a very dense pattern against the lowest quality IR SAM, don't suppress operator launch decision.

The missiles missed of course but that's because the flares work post-launch rather well.

I usually prefer a continuous program with only a single flare per burst, like X-1-1. Length is adjusted by the number of sequences. I always want to conserve flares, I just cannot help it :music_whistling:

How big is the impact of dispensing multiple flares per burst, like X-2-Y, opposed to single flares? Especially with both sides selected, they will run out rather quickly.

I run at 6-1-2 with both sides selected.

I usually use 321 or 231.... 321 is usually my standard prog, i find it's a good compromise between a effective amount of flares vs unloading too many.

Edit: Oh.. both sides selected also :)

With both sides selected, you'll always be in the middle of the pattern because of the symmetry. I suspect that an IR missile will likely be programmed to aim for the centre of a hotspot. Therefore I always have a single wingtip selected.

0-1-6 for pre-emptive, just let it run as long as you're in the threat area and stop manually.

3-2-1 when I know where the threat is and I have eyes on him. I programmed the cougar to switch between the two modes with the press of a button :thumbup:

With regard to preemptive flares: If I remember correctly, launching flares before a missile is fired at you is effective. As already mentioned, it does not prevent the threat from making the decision to fire, but it does reduce the chance that the threat is locked on to you.

In other words, if you are firing off flares ahead of time, it is more likely that the threat will lock onto one of your flares (instead of your aircraft) and fire away. In this case, the missile never even starts with a lock on your aircraft and is guaranteed to miss. Of course, you have no way of knowing if the missile locked on to you or a flare, so it would be prudent to assume the worst and keep dumping flares.

On the other hand, if you don't fire off any flares until a missile is launched, then the threat is absolutely locked on to you, and any flares you fire after that are in hopes of fooling the missile into seeking a new target (one of the flares) instead of continuing to stick with the new target. Because of the way the Ka-50's flare dispensers are mounted, they are NOT very likely to fool a current generation missile*. I do not know if this is modeled in the game however. But even if it's not, you are now in the position of trying to fool a missile that was locked on to you to begin with. Sure, dumping flares has a good chance of working (in the game) but the idea is that it's better to never have a missile locked on to your aircraft at all rather than try to spoof one that is already tracking you, especially when you may not have seen the launch (which is really the purpose behind preemptive flares anyway, if you don't see the launch, how do you know you need to defend against it?).

*Newer missiles are programmed to know generally what the flight parameters of aircraft are. If the missile is tracking an object that is flying in a straight line, or even making violent maneuvers, there is still some predictability to it. If there is one heat source moving around, and suddenly two additional heat sources appear, the missile will know immediately to ignore these two new heat sources, since they came out of the initial heat source at a 90-degree angle and can be discarded as decoys, since no real aircraft is capable of doing that. Of course, if you need to mention that a helicopter can hover and make 90-degree moves...by the time you even thought about that the missile would have already hit you. This is why flare dispensers on many American aircraft launch flares in the direction of flight, so it's harder to determine which is the flare and which is the decoy.

Interesting bit of information. Thanks

I turns on all my lights just to be sure he saw me.

Nav lights don't affect detection by ground units :) Only AG aircrafts, IIRC. There is an official topic about it.

Several seconds before he fired his first missile I started a 019 (continuous, 1/2 second interval very dense) program from both wingtips and the sucker happily shot anyway despite the horrendously low Pk and (in real life) a dubious lock. Flares, even a very dense pattern against the lowest quality IR SAM, don't suppress operator launch decision.

 

The missiles missed of course but that's because the flares work post-launch rather well.

This is why I trust your opinion before Boberro's, despite his pretty face :smilewink:

With regard to preemptive flares: If I remember correctly, launching flares before a missile is fired at you is effective. As already mentioned, it does not prevent the threat from making the decision to fire, but it does reduce the chance that the threat is locked on to you.

 

In other words, if you are firing off flares ahead of time, it is more likely that the threat will lock onto one of your flares (instead of your aircraft) and fire away.

That would mean pre-emptive ... in DCS is even more effective as IRL an operator wouldn't be so dumb / triggerhappy.

Makes sense.

The missiles would miss by a rather wide margin the whole time. It's a shame that you get shot at anyway but maybe that's an improvement down the road. I miss Falcon's IADS that would try to be clever about shooting you.

I'll run some more tests to see what flare density is required for a pre-launch spoof, post-launch spoof, etc.

I wonder if different IR SAMs have different lock strengths in DCS.

I guess the whole point of the discussion is to determine what can and should be done in terms of pilot input in various situations. If pre-emptive flares work in the sense that they spoof despite an ill-advised launch better than a reactionary flare sequence... then that's what DCS pilots should be aware of.

I'll run some more tests to see what flare density is required for a pre-launch spoof, post-launch spoof, etc.

IMO it should be ED testers posting such vital information publicly.

That wouldn't allow us to have the fun ourselves.

Tested SA-18 StrelaS. Aircraft is 500m 200kmph, large 70-80° cut through threat circle to about 50% range. 3 shots for this system. Format is XXX (Program): H (Hit), N (Near miss), F (Far miss)

017: F,F,H*

017: F,F,H*

017: F,F,F**

019: F,F,N

011: F,F,N

012: N,N,N

013: H,N,F

014: H,H,F

*Due to high flare usage last missile used dispenser on the left (far) side from the threat

**Repeat of the test above it but using the left (far) side for the first two missiles and the right (near) side for the last

023: F,F,F

024: H,N,N

034: H,N,?

SA-9 Gecko, 45° offset

012: F,H,H,N

023: H,F,H,H

053: H,H,F,N

Post-launch deployment (about 1/2 way)

181: N,N,N,N

Chapparal - 45° offset

012: H,F,F,N

Avenger

023: Fx3, Nx2,F,N

Avenger 100kmph

013: N,Hx5, Nx2

024: 50% H

Overall I found that timing is very important. For high speed and angles it usually only takes one flare in the beginning 10-30% of the missile's flight to have it miss. Long sequence delays had the problem of being very hit and miss with such short flight time. 011 proved to be slightly more reliable than 022 for this reason (and much more than 033) despite the same usage of flares over a given time.

Probability of hit improved noticeably with later shots as the first one was the most likely to miss and later missiles tracking better.

Using more flares during a missile flight greatly increased the odds of deflecting the missile, even at small angles. 2 and up to 6 showed noticeable improvements over a single flare, especially for a delayed launch.

The newer and heavier missiles seemed slightly harder to spoof (AIM-9, SA-13) but not by much. SA-9 was the weakest tracker by far.

Dispenser side seemed to make some difference in certain situations but not in others.

Great data!! Thanks man. That's science, you should publish a paper on that :)

True. Rep him hard for that! :D

Again you take on the tedius tasks and perform them admirably Frederf! I wish I could rep you more

If you'd like to address your work also to... ekhem... average people, I have something for you :D

If you'd like to address your work also to... ekhem... average people, I have something for you

Maybe retract your "average people" comment... then i'd respect your post..

No offense but your as average as the rest of us... ;)

Maybe retract your "average people" comment... then i'd respect your post..

No offense but your as average as the rest of us... ;)

It was "average" people and a big smile wink :smilewink:

Besides, this figure contains most of the information from two pages of manual. What's not on the figure is there on the UV-26 buttons. If I had a choice few months ago - the figure or the two pages of manual, I would definitely choose the figure. I'll be probably linking that in the future so I'll remove the "for dummies", as it was only a joke :)