so which SA-2 variant will we get?

They are both Volkhov's. The S-75M2 Volkhov introduced the V-759 5Ya23 missile which had better maneuverability than previous versions and also could still use the 20D missiles of previous versions. The S-75M3 Volkhov introduced a Angle Deception Jamming Canceller and the V-760V 5Y29 nuclear tipped missile based on the V-759 5Ya23 missile. They are either the SA-2d or SA-2e Guidelines depending on their missiles. They are very similar to each other.

They are both Volkhov's. The S-75M2 Volkhov introduced the V-759 5Ya23 missile which had better maneuverability than previous versions and also could still use the 20D missiles of previous versions. The S-75M3 Volkhov introduced a Angle Deception Jamming Canceller and the V-760V 5Y29 nuclear tipped missile based on the V-759 5Ya23 missile. They are either the SA-2d or SA-2e Guidelines depending on their missiles. They are very similar to each other.

Thanks! So we're talking about a early 60', SAM system, right?

Thanks! So we're talking about a early 60', SAM system, right?

The base SA-75 Dvina (SA-2A) design is from 1957.

S-75M3 Volhov system is from 1975 but might also be upgraded to '83 spec. to include a TV camera.

From the SAM Simulator SA-2F document:

S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E) with V-760V 5V29 (Guideline mod.4)

In 1975, the next Volhov version, introduced the GShV (Angle Deception Jamming Canceller) circuit, and the improved V-760V 5V29 (Guideline mod.4) nuclear tipped missile, that was based on the V-759 design.

All earlier 20D/15D/5Ya23 missile versions could also be used.

 

S-75M4 Volhov

During November of 1978, testing was finished of the next Volhov version.

It introduced the 9Sh33A “Karat” target tracking TV camera, a new narrow beam antenna system, capable of tracking low altitude small radar cross section targets, and the “Doubler” equipment to confuse Anti Radiation Missiles with a false emitter.

 

S-75M3-OP Volhov (SA-2E)

From 1983 an upgrade package made from the advances of the S-75M4 system become available. It introduced the 9Sh33A “Karat” target tracking TV camera.

 

The S-75M* Volhov (SA-2E) system exports

It is important to note, that during planned 5 year maintenance (overhaul), the older versions received the advances of the newer systems, so in theory all Volhovs were at the S-75M3-OP level after the middle of the 80’s.

The S-75M2 Volkhov was from about 1972. These are post Vietnam missile systems.

please make it so that number of missiles to be fired are singles. I know they shoot in barrages but please ED make it so that the one site launcher can only fire one missile.

please make it so that number of missiles to be fired are singles. I know they shoot in barrages but please ED make it so that the one site launcher can only fire one missile.

Why?

Do we need to animate launcher loading procedure? :)

We see incoming a transport / trans-loader vehicle to a Sa-2 batteries. Not bad if that can be stay on a "maintenance" area, move to launcher positions as require, making the animation to reload, conecting to them, transfer the missile, stow to moving and move otherwise to a "loading" area to receive a new missile. (Dreams) :D

Yeah, make it player controllable too where they have to actually know how to load it. :)

Has similarly to if ED build a S-200VE Vega [sa-5]. That have 5Yu24 rail transloaders, that can require the same system to reload the 5P72VE launcher.

And of course, the 5Yu24M transporter/transloader to recharge the 5Yu24.

Do we need to animate launcher loading procedure? :)

Why?

because I think one SA-2 is enough to contend with for practice purposes. I meant add option for said launcher to expend drop down menu 1 if its a single launcher or 1,2,3,4,5,6 if its a star of David arrangement site.

Why?

Because the real SA-2 sites could only guide one airborne missile at a time. Shoot one missile, guide it to target, and if it misses, shoot second missile. If it misses, shoot third, etc. There shouldn't be more than one missile being actively guided by one Fan Song/Spoon Rest in the air at any one time.

Because the real SA-2 sites could only guide one airborne missile at a time. Shoot one missile, guide it to target, and if it misses, shoot second missile. If it misses, shoot third, etc. There shouldn't be more than one missile being actively guided by one Fan Song/Spoon Rest in the air at any one time.

^^

Because the real SA-2 sites could only guide one airborne missile at a time. Shoot one missile, guide it to target, and if it misses, shoot second missile. If it misses, shoot third, etc. There shouldn't be more than one missile being actively guided by one Fan Song/Spoon Rest in the air at any one time.

The model mentioned here can guide 3 with 6 sec interval.

The model mentioned here can guide 3 with 6 sec interval.

3 missiles in the air for single target, so if launching in series it could launch a new missile after first one is no more.

Didn't each of the three missiles get a own channel for guidance?

So if launching 3 first missiles in 6 second interval and expected impact time is 30 seconds for first, then a fourth missile could be launched 30 seconds after first missile and fifth six seconds from that again as likely second missile expected impact point would be sooner again.

Fri13, I am not sure that I understand you correctly.

You are correct, single target with 3 channels to guide on and once one is not in use you can reuse it with another missile. The 6 second is the minimum interval hard limit. So, yes, you can space them more if needed.

In SAMSim you can actually have 3 in flight and after 1st or 2nd hits you lock second target, so you can actually splash two targets if you they are close.

Anyway, in DCS we will have 75M2 or 3, if you want a big aerial boom... :)

Yo-Yo, how realistic is this going to be ? Simple AI SAM like SA-3/6/11 or something more? Any plans for it in CA?

Have no idea yet. SA_75 deserves to be carefully modelled, if you want to have it flyable. As far as I can see it will be AI first having the same abilities as its real prototype. Will try to use real thing guidance math in the sim.

 

I have the special attitude to this SAM... so I am from the few here who saw it working :) from inside.

Wow, you was SAM operator / technical?

Yo-Yo, What was your role? Tracking operator? Fire control officer or maybe even battery commander? Tell us more! Were you using S-75 but Dvina or Wolchov M2? M3? with P-18?

SA_75 deserves to be carefully modelled, if you want to have it flyable. As far as I can see it will be AI first having the same abilities as its real prototype. Will try to use real thing guidance math in the sim.

- maybe having some shortcuts for RCS (fighter with small RCS, fighter with big RCS , bomber) so there would be launch at different distance and to avoid building RCS simulation and database

- different tracking modes (half lead, half-lead elevated by constant, direct/three point) => different flight path of missiles

- more realistic of noise jamming burn-through (based on ECM % and maybe even on installed ECM pod). So one flying would really feel that having an ECM pod matters

- don't even bother with Fresnel Zone (more like: straight lines for radar simulation should be good enough for gameplay)

- better simulation of ECM others than noise jamming (S75 would need to internally know what kind of plane is that and assume some of it's ECM techniques)

- simulation of transmitter disabled but still computing plane position (so pilot is not 100% sure if he is tracked or not, missile may be even in flight)

- the simulation of radio proximity fuse [100m,300m,off/K3=detonation by RSN] based on target parameters on launch

- simulation of fake launch codes like in Vietnam so that pilot never knows if the missile is in flight or not

- some smarter built-in emulation IADS (Senezh, Vector, Asturk) for multiple S75 batteries. Just a simple logic so not all of them are always attacking or are attacking much more intelligently , see this https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=118175 (more like cat&mouse game)

- (hard) simulation of passive engagement with three point mode when fielded in group with I87 or other PRW

Such list as above would make S75 a thing that needs to be dealt with and this plays nicley with upcoming HARM for Hornet ;)

Later of course if that will ever happen (I hope so!), I think that the bigger problem might be multiple-screens, but certainly one person is capable of managing one battery end-to-end (e.g. like multiple screens similar to RCTRL-F10/ SA15 PIP Radar / like those AWACS LUA pages? Those could be perfectly 2D images - no need for full 3D cockpits , just with good textures). One could switch between multiple S75 batteries (SNRs) in CA and even perhaps enter independent P-12/P-15/P-18 from F-10 map.

From what I can tell there is all data you need on sites such as http://rtv-pvo-gsvg.narod.ru/ (even for SDC/MTI, GshV) - I've tried to translate some via Google Translate. SAMSim quite recently got also simulation of Range Gate Pull Off/Angle Deception Jamming. In http://www.mediafire.com/download/y5s92qmc18jdkms/SAMSim_docs_150803.rar RAR there is Advanced SA-2E that contains a lot of interesting info even not contained in SAMsim that goes into great detail what author simulates and what not. There are a lot of public engineering books in USA too, so even ECM techniques from 60,70,80s are not secret anymore.

At least we know that we (SAM fans) have Comrade in ED that really understands us and the historic balance ! :) Death to those pesky fighters ! ;)

Just a technician. I am not so old to work at Dvina :) so it was M3 with P-18. And It was long, long time ago... And, no I never was there during real firing, only during live transmitting and tracking.

Still...much respect for your knowledge and experience of the systems! :thumbup: