Why do AAAs use tracers ?

Modern Anti Aircraft Artillery use radar or optic devices for sighting and it seems that there is no reason for them to use tracers in their ammo mix.

In fact the only benefit I see is for us flying in their threat zone : the fact that they use tracers is the only thing that allow us pilots to make evasive manouvers, I really think that these tracers are only positive for the AAA's target. (in the purpose of avoiding the bursts or finding the AAA's position)

So is there a reason why AAAs use tracers ??

I'd think the main reason is to see whereabouts the shells are going while through said optic device, same as with any other machine gun.

At the moment in DCS compute-firing solution is kind of an interim cheat system since at the moment we don't have RADAR gun laying or automatic optical based systems. If we turn it on, no problem, but if we go realistic (for all vehicles) and we turn it off, we have to do everything manually - it's much harder to correct fire (like zeroing) if you can't see where rounds are going. It also makes sense for other friendly units in the area.

It's the same thing with flares on MCLOS missile systems/optically guided missile systems.

I pity the fool who doesn't like a tracer every five rounds!

:smartass:

Wrecking Crew ... me too !

If Zsu Shilka or Vulcan wouldn't fire tracers they would kill me on every burst...

I'm wondering why a radar conducted AAA does use tracers ??

I understand that if radar system is down (?) or if another ground target like jeep or infantry is threatening, tracers may (?) be usefull.... but why ruinning efficiency against aircrafts with tracers ?? Even with Ka-50 when I see a burst coming at me I have time to avoid it ^^

Just based on a quick search: The tracers also serve to blow up the rounds at a certain distance, so they don’t fall back to Earth and hit something or someone. Also, the enemy probably has a good idea of where the AAA is at that point anyway.

Someone knowledgeable on this subject that can confirm or deny?

Just based on a quick search: The tracers also serve to blow up the rounds at a certain distance, so they don’t fall back to Earth and hit something or someone. Also, the enemy probably has a good idea of where the AAA is at that point anyway.

 

Someone knowledgeable on this subject that can confirm or deny?

i don't buy it, self-destructing shells have been around for a long time and it's a completely different mechanism from tracer flares.

otherwise whoever is saying that is implying all the nontracer shells fired end up falling back to earth?

The implication was that every round was a tracer shell.

any AAA is most likely to get a kill when firing from ambush on an unsuspecting pilot.

which in this day and age means you turn the radar off and leave it off until the rock and roll starts.

and your first burst, and most likely to hit, will be on tracer only.

AAA that has been found is ineffective as you point out.

whether it uses tracer or not. because i dodge when i see the muzzle flash on known AAA positions. i don't wait for the tracer.

SO you could say RADAR is as useless as Tracer, at this point.

the problem is the way the AI uses AAA.

Unfortunately even if a game is a simulator about only a specific field, you need to simulate the sorroundings as well.

In the end all the enemy units would need some kind of realistic behaviors for the core simulation to receive realistic effects it was meant for.

It's something I kinda had to think to realize in practise even if you kinda know it in back of the mind, which means a lot more work and pressure for simulator games even if they aren't about simulating everything.

Obviously many shortcuts are possible, there's no need to simulate civilian stuff, and you can pick/choose the depth in many places, but unfortunately for some really good gameplay this game would also need all the ground combat units well simulated, which is something that is easily brushed, people look at the pricing of modules, well, the work on all the AI and ground units, weapons, etc, that's almost an equal part of the simulator, can't be brushed aside.

While the gun-type AA units aren't as sophisticated as missile-type, in terms of depth, I hope that's in the plans for an upgrade or is being upgraded through the years already (don't know), these smaller machine-gun type AAs should not be skimped on simulation depth.

Don't know what the plans are for Hormuz ... if the whole Insurgents side is going to have a place in DCS, can't believe I'm asking this but I guess DCS is purely entertainment, I would like to see all those scrap-welded truck-mounted gun AAs, seem to be so many variations of them, that would provide DCS some good diversity to balance out mostly Russian and US stuff, they should be based on some official gun-type so it would take some research but that might just be old soviet or yugoslav stuff sold to Syria back then.

Two things.

Tracer could be optional in ME.

Muzzle flash should be brigther.

So, for radar bases AAA I should put tracers, ok, it's nice, but... If you put a brigther muzzle flash you know you are being shot at.

I'm wondering why a radar conducted AAA does use tracers ??

Show of force....

:smilewink:

A little out of scope for this thread, but yes please, bring on the technicals.

Modern Anti Aircraft Artillery use radar or optic devices for sighting and it seems that there is no reason for them to use tracers in their ammo mix.

In fact the only benefit I see is for us flying in their threat zone : the fact that they use tracers is the only thing that allow us pilots to make evasive manouvers, I really think that these tracers are only positive for the AAA's target. (in the purpose of avoiding the bursts or finding the AAA's position)

So is there a reason why AAAs use tracers ??

Appart from the "aiming" function of the tracers, they have a secondary purpose: psychological effect on the flight crews.

You might not be afraid behind your computer screen, but the tracers can install "fear" in the pilot's mind. It's less true today, but during WW2 where pilot would be frequently under AAA fire, loose team mates missions after missions, tracers sight did weight on their "fighting spirit".

You don't fear what you don't see (or not that much).

So even today, if you have to work inside AAA range, there is a chance that you screw you firing/ bombing pass while avoiding AAA tracers => purpose achieved.

uneducated guess here: maybe it's for the cases when the targeting system isn't working or is inaccurate due to some factor, you'd still be able to shoot back with some accuracy and you also wouldn't need to spend any time switching to an ammo mix that has tracers loaded if you were using a rounds without any tracers.

Oh yep Jojo you're right. AAA Tracers are really dissuasives for the one who is on a bombing pass. So "Show on force" like Emu said is not so trivial.

The aiming function in this way must be more than secondary, as you can count until 5 or 6 seconds before the burst reach the target according to the AAA max range, so I don't imagine one correcting is fire in a Shilka using the tracers.

Tracers in this case appeared to me like an old obsolete function being kept for purpose like tradition or confidence (? lol) but dissuasive aspect is obvious.

Also it seems like cordite said that all rounds are tracers and self destruct in the end to avoid damage in the defending zone.

Edit : Also what CodenameSection said made me think of a case : lately detected Aircraft - low altitude / low distance like passing by over the AAA - can be shoot at with tracers with efficiency without time to radar lock.

Oh yep Jojo you're right. AAA Tracers are really dissuasives for the one who is on a bombing pass. So "Show on force" like Emu said is not so trivial.

I was joking. Tracers are a dumb idea unless you really need them, even when pilots are using the Mk1 eyeball. When they have DAS, it's just asking for trouble. When bombing 'passes' are conducted from 20+kft or include glide bombs and missiles fired from tens of km away, I feel there is very little dissuasion. Oh no, help, that AAA is firing bright lights at me, I better not hit him with a Maverick from 8 miles away in case he gets angry and explodes.

I was joking. Tracers are a dumb idea unless you really need them, even when pilots are using the Mk1 eyeball. When they have DAS, it's just asking for trouble. When bombing 'passes' are conducted from 20+kft or include glide bombs and missiles fired from tens of km away, I feel there is very little dissuasion. Oh no, help, that AAA is firing bright lights at me, I better not hit him with a Maverick from 8 miles away in case he gets angry and explodes.

Well, DAS is a F-35 thing, and most fighters currently in service don't have anything like it. At best missile launch warning system that won't spot AAA.

Also if you're flying at 20000ft no one will target you with tracers, 23mm/ 30mm won't have the punch to reach hat high.

And shells big enough to reach that high won't have tracers, but they might have proximity fuze :music_whistling:

Finally, when using tracers it's always a mix of ammos, not 100% tracers.

Shells big enough to reach that high usually just have an altitude fuse.

Mk1 eyeball will spot AAA, not just the aircraft being fired on but also the rest of his flight. If your AAA is radar guided, the tracers are pointless and counter-productive. Even when planes were a lot slower and flew lower whilst strafing and rocketing, they still flew through plenty of tracer fire without being dissuaded. These days though, it's just like, "hi, I'm here, come kill me."

Modern Anti Aircraft Artillery use radar or optic devices for sighting and it seems that there is no reason for them to use tracers in their ammo mix.

In fact the only benefit I see is for us flying in their threat zone : the fact that they use tracers is the only thing that allow us pilots to make evasive manouvers, I really think that these tracers are only positive for the AAA's target. (in the purpose of avoiding the bursts or finding the AAA's position)

So is there a reason why AAAs use tracers ??

Redundancy, in case of system failure or damage. Or if they just want to make a quick visual adjustment to the fall of the rounds. When I was in the military on our crew served weapons the gunner was usually down the sights while spotters or observers were observing the fall of the rounds. Without tracers that is still possible but much more difficult. Tracers can also be used for ranging information.

I pity the fool who doesn't like a tracer every five rounds!

 

:smartass:

While 4-to-1 is nice, I prefer mine 9-to-1. :smilewink:

Even radar equipped AAA can't use their radar most of the time due to jamming or fear of ARMs as Desert Storm showed. So they have to rely on optical targeting and that's when tracers are pretty helpful.

Optical plus laser rangefinder does the same job as radar.

Optical plus laser rangefinder does the same job as radar.

And how do you lock the target with a laser? I'm asking, because to get a laser range, the laser needs to get on the target which is pretty difficult, if not impossible, with manual guidance.

And how do you lock the target with a laser? I#m asking, because to get a laser range, the laser needs to get on the target which is pretty difficult, if not impossible, with manual guidance.

Same way you get your laser on a moving ground target with targeting pod. Indeed there are some SAMs that rely on this ability for guidance. The Vikhr also relies on this for A2A, as does the Starstreak and Starstreak II SAM. Think Rapier even used optical SACLOS with no laser originally.

Laser designator is slaved to optical line of sight. Most AAA tend to be high rate spam fire weapons and/or airburst too, so there's some margin for error.