Jump to content

Does blue have any reliable point defense SAM systems?


Recommended Posts

Point Defense, doesn't mean short range. DCS F10/ME circles are not accurate representations, most distinguishable example... the SA-10.


You can see that when you fire the Kh-29Ts the Patriot tries to track them, but they are too close too fast to be engaged. Their max launch rate is 6nm, so by the time Patriot reacts it is too late... Either that or it is bugged. You can see it engaged everything else. HARMs, JSOWs, C-802AKG, AGM-88E, etc. That's US point defense Patriot and C-RAM

Plenty video online of Patriot intercepting projectiles and failing to do so, as well.


Edited by Shadow KT

'Shadow'

 

Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days

Link to post
Share on other sites

The implementation has something to do with reaction time which in the case of PATRIOT, which is a fairly automated system, may be too slow.    Who knows?  By the time a bandit is in range to launch its missile, the Patriot should already be doing bad things to that aircraft.

 

Not sure what videos there are out there of modern PATRIOT failing its intercepts - it's not a surprise but after concerted changes to deal with incoming missiles, the hit score ended up pretty good.  PAC-3 also made a significant difference together with PAC2/GEM+.

 

I don't know what, if any of that, the in-game PATRIOT represents (though obviously no PAC-3).

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2021 at 9:45 PM, GGTharos said:

 

This is incorrect logic.   Patriot is perfectly capable of all of this, it's just in-game.  It has the sensors and capacity to deal with small weapons, as seen in IRL court depositions from certain real life combat scenarios.

It isn't the case that 'it can't do this because it's a long range anti-aircraft SAM'.  

 

Thanks, i'll read up on the real-life Patriot to find out more, as oviously the game doesn't always mimic real life..:)


Edited by PoorOldSpike
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2021 at 10:04 PM, GGTharos said:

I don't know what, if any of that, the in-game PATRIOT represents (though obviously no PAC-3).

 

If the historical mode filter is anything to go on, it seems Patriot is only available from 1990 onwards, which, if I'm not mistaken is PAC-2 with the MIM-104C, though the database file for it doesn't lend any favours.

 

Spoiler

For what it's worth, and yes, this is a nitpick; I wish DCS would use the full name in the unit listing and be consistent about it (like a certain 'lite' sim), some are obviously better than others (such as REDFOR air defences), but it's just a quality of life thing - you can ask the same question about the SA-2 and 3 which I think is a D and B respectively. That and the fact that some weapons are incorrectly designated; such as AGM-84S when it should be RGM-84D, and BGB-109B, when it should be BGM-109C/RGM-109C. 

 


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2020 at 12:09 PM, Cmptohocah said:

Most of the (radar) SAMs in DCS are nothing more than sitting targets waiting to get shot out by the anti-radiation missiles or some low flying planes. What I mean by that is that they don't really use any tactics or "tricks" in order to survive. They are "on" all the time, they don't move and usually engage only at a pre-determined range. 

 

The ground units in DCS are not to be in combat against each others, but to be a training assistance for the cockpit simulation to pilot learn a proper procedure to engage them.

So pilot knows he is going to attack a target X, then procedure for it is this and then learn to do the this procedure.

 

This is as well why ground units like MBT's and infantry can't be put fight against each others as they annihilate each others in seconds, instead in hours or days of combat. Their purpose is to just sit as targets for air units to attack them with proper procedures.

 

 

  • Haha 1

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

The ground units in DCS are not to be in combat against each others, but to be a training assistance for the cockpit simulation to pilot learn a proper procedure to engage them.

So pilot knows he is going to attack a target X, then procedure for it is this and then learn to do the this procedure.

 

This is as well why ground units like MBT's and infantry can't be put fight against each others as they annihilate each others in seconds, instead in hours or days of combat. Their purpose is to just sit as targets for air units to attack them with proper procedures.

 

 

 

Yeah, but this is more about the scenario and the AI surely; ultimately if they weren't made to fight each other they wouldn't have any anti-tank weapon systems.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2021 at 10:39 AM, Fri13 said:

 

The ground units in DCS are not to be in combat against each others, but to be a training assistance for the cockpit simulation to pilot learn a proper procedure to engage them.

So pilot knows he is going to attack a target X, then procedure for it is this and then learn to do the this procedure.

 

This is as well why ground units like MBT's and infantry can't be put fight against each others as they annihilate each others in seconds, instead in hours or days of combat. Their purpose is to just sit as targets for air units to attack them with proper procedures.

 

 

 

yeaaahhh....no lol.  You should see some of the servers in MP lol.  There's some full on dynamic campaigns out there with large ground wars, etc., letting players control the units (shameless plug for Red Storm Rising).  That's why i was wondering about the point defense SAMs on blue.  If there was a counterpart to the red TOR, I was going to put it in the server


Edited by MobiSev
  • Like 1

Modules owned:

 

FC3, M-2000C, Mig-21bis, F-5E, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, KA-50, Mi-8, F-14A&B, JF-17

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MobiSev said:

 

yeaaahhh....no lol.  You should see some of the servers in MP lol.  There's some full on dynamic campaigns out there with large ground wars, etc., letting players control the units (shameless plug for Red Storm Rising).  That's why i was wondering about the point defense SAMs on blue.  If there was a counterpart to the red TOR, I was going to put it in the server

 

 

 

So just to recap, you asked which Blue point-defence units can engage missiles and glide bombs.

I posted tests with every Blue AA gun and every SAM unit (including long range ones) against incoming Russian KH-29T TV-guided missiles, and the only Blue AD units (AI) that engaged them were the Rapier and the Roland, so that answers your question, at least regarding KH-29T's.

It'd take me forever to test all the other Russian missiles and glide bombs and I don't have the time, but if you can narrow it down by telling me what specific ones you want me to test, I'll have a crack at it.

PS- just to clarify, "point-defence" means short range, so don't get them mixed up with longer-ranged "area defence" units

 

WIKI- "Point-defence is the defence of a single object or a limited area, e.g. a ship, building or an airfield, now usually against air attacks and guided missiles.

Point-defence weapons have a smaller range in contrast to area-defence systems and are placed near or on the object to be protected"

 


Edited by PoorOldSpike
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing is stopping an SA-10 or PATRIOT from being employed in a poing defense scenario.  They certainly did this IRL vs TBMs, and if you deploy it to protect say, a specific factory, that's still point defense ... regardless of its ability to shoot 100km away.

 

SAMs aren't 'point defense' or not, they are either employed for point defense or not.


Edited by GGTharos

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best IR SAM in DCS is Stinger and thats cause of high CM resistance - real or not, its so. Avanger is next most dangerous IR SAM, then goes Linebacker or Chapparal - all very lethal. So, Blufor does have quite good IR defences, contrary Redfor's IR SAMs are not good at all. Strela is mostly unefective if not useless. Tunguska is very crippled as I saw it miss full load of missiles against flanking burner in mid range as its missiles loose energy way too fast. Igla cant match Stingers at all.

 

LR Radar SAMs? Not a problem at all. You can allways terrainmask whidweesel it and gunrun its SR/TR unit easily. No fear at all unless you fly some cargo plane hot on SAM.

 

If we talk about AAA guns then Gepard comes in first place as most dangerous AAA gun in DCS. Vulkan is also very lethal but not as close as Gepard. Redfor Shilka's or Tunguska's guns are half effective as Bluefor counterparts are.

 

Bluefor has way better and very lethal SAM arsenal. Trust me. 30%-80% better than Redfor counterparts. Tor is only SAM that is usable on Redfor but it has no remedy against HARMs as it shows its position easily on DL and HARMs slip thru without much problem. Most SAMs in DCS do not have functional Radar OFF/ON memory function - only if manually controlled by user so yes, most of them are sitting ducks waiting to be SEADed. If Redfor, fear most Stinger, Gepard, Aveger, Chaparral or Linebacker, espetially smokeless IR SAMs that are not easy to spot like Chapparal. If Bluefor fear just Tor, and it smokes as chimney. All other redfor SAM missiles are either sluggish, smoked or have no effective tracking logic cause of low CM resistance.

 

Countermissile systems that work are, as said, Roland and Tor. Roland group unit has advantage as it has more launchers and faster firing rate than Tor and used to be very good against missiles but since late year its not that good as it used to be but still very lethal. Rapier is also still quite good SAM - it works fine. Didnt observe much the Rapier but if it has working missile shield that is a plus for Bluefor. So if player wants some real SAM challenge, then fight Bluefor SAMs. 🙂


Edited by jackmckay
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jackmckay said:

The best IR SAM in DCS is Stinger and thats cause of high CM resistance - real or not, its so. Avanger is next most dangerous IR SAM, then goes Linebacker

 

For what it's worth, all 3 of these use Stingers, just in different platforms.

 

3 hours ago, jackmckay said:

Chapparal - all very lethal. So, Blufor does have quite good IR defences, contrary Redfor's IR SAMs are not good at all. Strela is mostly unefective if not useless. Tunguska is very crippled as I saw it miss full load of missiles against flanking burner in mid range as its missiles loose energy way too fast. Igla cant match Stingers at all.

 

Tunguska is optical SACLOS AFAIK; Strela-1 is pretty bad (then again, it's mostly fighting threats way newer than it; Strela-1 is late 60s); Igla-S isn't too bad but the regular Igla is pretty lacklustre. Though I don't think that either of the Iglas or the Stingers have proximity fuses, at least for the 

 

3 hours ago, jackmckay said:

LR Radar SAMs? Not a problem at all. You can allways terrainmask whidweesel it and gunrun its SR/TR unit easily. No fear at all unless you fly some cargo plane hot on SAM.

 

Meh, depends how you set them up; I'd expect a proper IADS would largely remedy this; though plenty of AI functionality and tactics is missing in DCS.

 

3 hours ago, jackmckay said:

Bluefor has way better and very lethal SAM arsenal. Trust me. 30%-80% better than Redfor counterparts. Tor is only SAM that is usable on Redfor but it has no remedy against HARMs as it shows its position easily on DL and HARMs slip thru without much problem. Most SAMs in DCS do not have functional Radar OFF/ON memory function - only if manually controlled by user so yes, most of them are sitting ducks waiting to be SEADed. If Redfor, fear most Stinger, Gepard, Aveger, Chaparral or Linebacker, espetially smokeless IR SAMs that are not easy to spot like Chapparal. If Bluefor fear just Tor, and it smokes as chimney. All other redfor SAM missiles are either sluggish, smoked or have no effective tracking logic cause of low CM resistance.

 

I mean, Roland is somewhere between the SA-8 and the SA-19 with shorter range.

 

The HSD threat rings can be disabled in the mission editor (if we ever get a mission planner like the other sim, we could get user definable threat rings, instead of them being perfectly on the vehicle).

 

I totally agree with the RADARs, this is a matter for improving the tactics employed by AI units, which hopefully is going to be improved.

 

3 hours ago, jackmckay said:

Countermissile systems that work are, as said, Roland and Tor. Roland group unit has advantage as it has more launchers and faster firing rate than Tor and used to be very good against missiles but since late year its not that good as it used to be but still very lethal. Rapier is also still quite good SAM - it works fine. Didnt observe much the Rapier but if it has working missile shield that is a plus for Bluefor. So if player wants some real SAM challenge, then fight Bluefor SAMs. 🙂

 

Rapier (at least the one we have) is optical SACLOS/RADAR ACLOS (if equipped with Blindfire), but I don't think it was really designed to intercept missiles; it has no proximity fuse for a start, and a fairly short range when compared to the Tunguska or the Tor; it was more specific to attack low flying aircraft. 

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a vague recollection that Patriot in DCS being PAC-2 but don't quote me on that.

 

Some years ago I had made a little mission to play with friends that included us in Su-25Ts against a lot of SAMs and Rolands were able to engage and shootdown Kh-25MP and Kh-58 missiles pretty good. And in general, Avengers were often scary against aircraft even if they can't engage incoming ordnance.

 

One thing, not sure but as far as I know, no SAM in DCS can engage bombs, but some can engage missiles. Some glide bombs like JSOW's I think are considered as "missiles" in code and some SAMs can hit them, but as far as I know JDAM and LGBs aren't engaged by any SAM in DCS. Also I recall reading recently on forums that right now in DCS, HARM is mostly undetectable by SAMs even though similar missiles can be detected and engaged by them. May or may not be a bug, who knows. May have even been fixed by now.

 

If you want a blue side SAM that can engage incoming missiles in DCS, that would be the Roland right now.

 

Not sure if I agree with assesment of blue SAMs in DCS being better than their red counterparts. TOR is pretty damn good, and better than its counterpart Roland in my experience. While both are scary, I'd say S-300 is scarier than Patriot in DCS. Strela-10 (SA-13) is worse than Chaparral but it is still a IR SAM with decent range, so a potential silent threat. BUK I'd say is better than Hawk. Tunguska can miss a lot against a defending fast jet, but still has advantage of not giving launch cue to RWRs. In case of MANPADS though, yes, Stinger is better than Igla. Don't have much experience with later additions like Rapier and HQ-7 though.

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2021 at 10:42 AM, WinterH said:

I have a vague recollection that Patriot in DCS being PAC-2 but don't quote me on that.

 

According to historical mode, Patriot is only available 1990 onwards, which AFAIK, coincides with being PAC-2.

 

Quote

One thing, not sure but as far as I know, no SAM in DCS can engage bombs, but some can engage missiles. Some glide bombs like JSOW's I think are considered as "missiles" in code and some SAMs can hit them, but as far as I know JDAM and LGBs aren't engaged by any SAM in DCS. Also I recall reading recently on forums that right now in DCS, HARM is mostly undetectable by SAMs even though similar missiles can be detected and engaged by them. May or may not be a bug, who knows. May have even been fixed by now.

 

True, it seems that SAMs only engage things that are within a certain class, whereas IRL they should be able to engage anything they can track and make a firing solution for; including bombs and rockets (particularly larger ones fired from MLRS units).

 

And yes, JSOWs are considered as being missiles, despite being a gliding bomb, conversely the Walleye II (which is also a glide bomb, though obviously far inferior to JSOW) is classified as a bomb. So they'll shoot down JSOWs but not Walleyes; despite the fact that the Walleye has a much higher RCS than the JSOW and that they're both the same kind of weapon - a glide bomb.

 

I think I remember one post about a SAM shooting down an APKWS rocket, because in DCS, it's classified as a missile; even though that seems pretty mad.


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, PoorOldSpike said:

 

 

So just to recap, you asked which Blue point-defence units can engage missiles and glide bombs.

I posted tests with every Blue AA gun and every SAM unit (including long range ones) against incoming Russian KH-29T TV-guided missiles, and the only Blue AD units (AI) that engaged them were the Rapier and the Roland, so that answers your question, at least regarding KH-29T's.

It'd take me forever to test all the other Russian missiles and glide bombs and I don't have the time, but if you can narrow it down by telling me what specific ones you want me to test, I'll have a crack at it.

PS- just to clarify, "point-defence" means short range, so don't get them mixed up with longer-ranged "area defence" units

 

WIKI- "Point-defence is the defence of a single object or a limited area, e.g. a ship, building or an airfield, now usually against air attacks and guided missiles.

Point-defence weapons have a smaller range in contrast to area-defence systems and are placed near or on the object to be protected"

 

 

 

Thank you for that.  Prob should have clarified that I was referring to the system's ability to intercept missiles.

 

11 hours ago, jackmckay said:

Chapparal - all very lethal. So, Blufor does have quite good IR defences

 

The chapparal's missile guidance is bugged in DCS.  It will not take an intercept course to the target, but go behind it and make a very high G turn, making it useless


Edited by MobiSev

Modules owned:

 

FC3, M-2000C, Mig-21bis, F-5E, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, KA-50, Mi-8, F-14A&B, JF-17

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2021 at 1:11 AM, PoorOldSpike said:

So just to recap, you asked which Blue point-defence units can engage missiles and glide bombs.

I posted tests with every Blue AA gun and every SAM unit (including long range ones) against incoming Russian KH-29T TV-guided missiles, and the only Blue AD units (AI) that engaged them were the Rapier and the Roland, so that answers your question, at least regarding KH-29T's.

It'd take me forever to test all the other Russian missiles and glide bombs and I don't have the time, but if you can narrow it down by telling me what specific ones you want me to test, I'll have a crack at it.

 

For the most part, you don't need to universally test it so much as confirm the supposed values given in the weapon and missile databases.

 

Most of these questions can be answered by sifting through the unit and system definitions in the DCS World\Scripts\Database\vehicles\SAM directory (or, for newer additions, the corresponding unit definitions in the CoreMods directory), and comparing them against the DCS World\Scripts\Database\Weapons\missiles_data.lua file. In particular you want to search for the reflection_limit stat on systems and compare that against the Reflection stat (basically RCS, but not necessarily accurate to that value IRL) of the missile — if the missile “reflection” is larger than the “reflection limit”, the system can potentially engage the incoming missile… well, assuming its detection range and acquisition time are good enough that it can get a fix in time. Curiously enough, this gives some systems missile defence capabilities that they perhaps shouldn't really have, but they do anyway because that's just how the stats end up working.

 

For instance, to do a stats check on the tests you ran, the Roland has defined a target size limit of 0.18m², and the Kh-29's cross-section is defined as 0.18m² as well — the system should be able to detect the missile in time, but should not be able (or at the very best struggle) to deal with smaller missiles like the Kh-25 (0.06m²), Kh-58 (0.12m²) or Kh-65 (0.17m²).

  

On 1/13/2021 at 11:59 AM, Northstar98 said:

True, it seems that SAMs only engage things that are within a certain class, whereas IRL they should be able to engage anything they can track and make a firing solution for; including bombs and rockets (particularly larger ones fired from MLRS units).

 

And yes, JSOWs are considered as being missiles, despite being a gliding bomb, conversely the Walleye II (which is also a glide bomb, though obviously far inferior to JSOW) is classified as a bomb. So they'll shoot down JSOWs but not Walleyes; despite the fact that the Walleye has a much higher RCS than the JSOW and that they're both the same kind of weapon - a glide bomb.

 

I think I remember one post about a SAM shooting down an APKWS rocket, because in DCS, it's classified as a missile; even though that seems pretty mad.

 

One of the game-mechanical reasons why regular bombs can't be engaged by air defences seems to be that they simply don't have that Reflection stat that would let the sensor check determine if they can be detected or not. There are all kinds of curious details like that in the database files (such as exactly how horrible some of the IR missiles are; how similar some of them are; and why some missiles love to fly into the ground while tracking their targets…). For the APKWS, it seems to be pretty much a case of them copying the base definition of Vikhrs and doing some tweaks, which means it comes with all the inherent properties (from sensor type to general flight profile to having that critical reflection definition).

 

We've done a fair amount of data mining and come up with this list of the systems and their various properties, as best as they can be determined by the lua files.


Edited by Tippis
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting stuff @Tippis

 

I've done a little bit of poking around (though mostly discerning whether or not DCS actually does things like fragmentation, the difference between HEAT, HESH, HEF and pure HE - unfortunately it doesn't seem it does, fragmentation warheads just seem to have their explosive mass inflated to compensate). I'll definitely be checking that link out.


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tippis said:

 

For the most part, you don't need to universally test it so much as confirm the supposed values given in the weapon and missile databases.

Most of these questions can be answered by sifting through the unit and system definitions in the DCS World\Scripts\Database\vehicles\SAM directory (or, for newer additions, the corresponding unit definitions in the CoreMods directory), and comparing them against the DCS World\Scripts\Database\Weapons\missiles_data.lua file.....

 

 

Ah, but databases are geeky, dry and boring and won't tell us if anything is bugged, whereas my tests are HANDS ON and FUN, and any bugs and glitches will show up..😜

For example if you're thinking of importing a Thai bride, you can look at her picture and read  her stats, but you won't really know how she performs or if she's bugged or glitchy until you actually get your hands on her to give her a good testing out..🧐


Edited by PoorOldSpike
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

😄

That is all very true. You also need to test which of the apparently overlapping stats in the database actually come into play in a practical scenario. As mentioned, by stats alone, some systems are capable of things that you are not likely to see in-game (such as Hawk having missile-defence capabilities), or some of the ships having sensor ranges that would let them engage Neptune.

 

But for that particular question, reflection vs. reflection limit is a pretty telling first step (even if it can be annoying to dig out without good file search tools).

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Tippis said:

😄

That is all very true. You also need to test which of the apparently overlapping stats in the database actually come into play in a practical scenario. As mentioned, by stats alone, some systems are capable of things that you are not likely to see in-game (such as Hawk having missile-defence capabilities), or some of the ships having sensor ranges that would let them engage Neptune.

 

But for that particular question, reflection vs. reflection limit is a pretty telling first step (even if it can be annoying to dig out without good file search tools).

 

 

Yes there are a zillion variables and other factors that come into play and it'd take me forever to test every permutation, so my tests only give an idea of what happens with specific AD units versus specific aircraft and specific missiles at specific altitudes etc..

 

strangelove2.jpg

 

For example other variables that spring to mind are chaff / flares and jamming, old or new AD systems and aircraft, types of aircraft or helicopter,  crew skill levels, rates of fire, radar aquisition times, day, night, fog etc..🙂


Edited by PoorOldSpike
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...