reported 20MM CIWS passes through RB-04/SM-2 (OHP) does NOT engage.

[Shadow KT]

I've always wondered why OHP CIWS can't kill Viggen missiles.... bullets just pass through it. For some other reason, OHP can't engage them with SM-2 either.

Here is a track and a video. 

 

RB04 TANK.trk

 

 

[Northstar98]

Seeing the same thing with both AI and player launched RB-04E and RB-15F - it looks like they don't have collision models for gun rounds, and it also applies to the AK630 (and presumably the Kortik, Type 730 and 1130 CIWS).

 

All of them can be intercepted by missiles however (tested with a Neutrashimy class frigate, which was able to shoot down both missile types with SA-N-9 and 9M311 from the Kortik CIWS).

 

I don't know what capabilities the Mk92 CAS has, it should be able to pick up these missiles though... That said, it also doesn't shoot down Kh-35s either. It might that it's set up such that it has a minimum altitude limit, because it does shoot down higher flying missiles (such as the Kh-22N, P-270, P-500 and P-700).

 

Spoiler

Though, FWIW, the OHP we have in DCS seems to be, at the earliest, a mid 2000s fit, given that it has the STIR removed. This coincided with the Mk13 Mod. 4 GMLS being deleted too, so it shouldn't be able to fire missiles at all.

 

Also OHPs shouldn't have SM-2MR at all; they only had SM-1MR. If it's supposed to be an early 2000s fit (Mk15 Phalanx Block 1B CIWS), then it should have the STIR (which provides CWI for the SM-1MR (unsure if the Mk92 CAS can provide CWI, if so then the STIR can provide a 2nd firing channel)) and RIM-66E6 SM-1MR Block VIB.

 

I also noticed that AI RB-04E and RB-15F don't have their launchers, being attached directly to the hardpoints.

 

Also the missiles don't seem to actually impact the ship, they detonate before impact, though this might be related to the hitboxes of individual ships.

 

The only other thing I'll say is that the Mk15 Phalanx CIWS is firing the wrong rounds - it should fire 20x102mm Mk149 or Mk244 APDS projectiles (both untraced), which also should have tighter dispersion, see here.

 

[Shadow KT]

6 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Seeing the same thing with both AI and player launched RB-04E and RB-15F - it looks like they don't have collision models for gun rounds, and it also applies to the AK630 (and presumably the Kortik, Type 730 and 1130 CIWS).

 

All of them can be intercepted by missiles however (tested with a Neutrashimy class frigate, which was able to shoot down both missile types with SA-N-9 and 9M311 from the Kortik CIWS).

 

I don't know what capabilities the Mk92 CAS has, it should be able to pick up these missiles though... That said, it also doesn't shoot down Kh-35s either. It might that it's set up such that it has a minimum altitude limit, because it does shoot down higher flying missiles (such as the Kh-22N, P-270, P-500 and P-700).

 

  Hide contents

Though, FWIW, the OHP we have in DCS seems to be, at the earliest, a mid 2000s fit, given that it has the STIR removed. This coincided with the Mk13 Mod. 4 GMLS being deleted too, so it shouldn't be able to fire missiles at all.

 

Also OHPs shouldn't have SM-2MR at all; they only had SM-1MR. If it's supposed to be an early 2000s fit (Mk15 Phalanx Block 1B CIWS), then it should have the STIR (which provides CWI for the SM-1MR (unsure if the Mk92 CAS can provide CWI, if so then the STIR can provide a 2nd firing channel)) and RIM-66E6 SM-1MR Block VIB.

 

I also noticed that AI RB-04E and RB-15F don't have their launchers, being attached directly to the hardpoints.

 

Also the missiles don't seem to actually impact the ship, they detonate before impact, though this might be related to the hitboxes of individual ships.

 

The only other thing I'll say is that the Mk15 Phalanx CIWS is firing the wrong rounds - it should fire 20x102mm Mk149 or Mk244 APDS projectiles (both untraced), which also should have tighter dispersion, see here.

 

If you have tracks to add, from your tests, please do.

[Northstar98]

Here's a load of tracks from testing.

• OHP never fires SM-2MR against any of the missiles (for both player and AI) - unsure why (likely related to the OHP, not the missiles).
• Neutrashimy engages AI RB-04E and RB-15F with missiles (both Kortik (9M311) and SA-N-9 (9M330)) and does so successfully (SA-N-9 seems more accurate though).
• All missiles don't seem to have a collision model for gun rounds, any rounds that appear to hit it just go straight through it. This is easier to test against the Phalanx as opposed to Kortik, as the AO-18K seems to have a large dispersion and it's hard to see in amongst the splashes.
• Against player missiles, the Neutrashimy attempts to launch on the RB-04E, but they go straight up and then self-destruct. It also only engages with the SA-N-9 - it doesn't seem to engage using the 9M311 from the Kortik. Against player RB-15F however, it doesn't attempt to engage with missiles, just guns from the Kortik (which again isn't very accurate).

Spoiler

Notes

• AI RB-04E would actually miss the Neutrashimy, however, for some reason, it seems to have a proximity fuse (though this might be related to the hitbox of the Neutrashimy).
• As said previously, SM-2MR didn't exist on the OHP, they only had SM-1MR. Also if omitting the STIR was intentional, then it shouldn't have its Mk13 Mod. 4 GMLS and thus no RGM-84 or Standard. Again, not sure if STIR was the only source of CWI or whether it was just a secondary firing channel.
• Mk15 Phalanx CIWS is firing the wrong gun rounds, and has the wrong dispersion (should actually be firing untraced APDS projectiles: Mk149 or Mk244.

 

RB-04E_AI_Neutrashimy.trk RB-04E_AI_OHP.trk RB-04E_Player_Neutrashimy.trk RB-04E_Player_OHP.trk RB-15F_AI_Neutrashimy.trk RB-15F_AI_OHP.trk RB-15F_Player_Neutrashimy.trk RB-15F_Player_OHP.trk

Edited June 6, 2021 by Northstar98

[Shadow KT]

10 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

• OHP never fires SM-2MR against any of the missiles - unsure why (likely related to the OHP, not the missiles).

 

Just to clear any confusion... by any of the missiles, you mean the Viggen missiles, both Player and AI ?

OHP does engage currently the JF missiles (except the LD-10), but for whatever reason does not engage the Hapoon.

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, Shadow KT said:

Just to clear any confusion... by any of the missiles, you mean the Viggen missiles, both Player and AI ?

 

Yes, both player and AI fired missiles, I'll edit the post for clarification.

 

Quote

OHP does engage currently the JF missiles (except the LD-10), but for whatever reason does not engage the Hapoon.

 

Do you know what altitude the JF-17s missiles fly at? As I'm pretty sure it's minimum altitude related, it also doesn't engage the Kh-35 (I'll post tracks and make a list of them below).

Edited June 6, 2021 by Northstar98

[Shadow KT]

21 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Yes, both player and AI fired missiles, I'll edit the post for clarification.

 

 

Do you know what altitude the JF-17s missiles fly at? As I have a hunch it's minimum altitude related, it also doesn't engage the Kh-35 (I'll post tracks below).

 

Yeah, seems like it won't engage when they are sea skimming, but when they have a bit of altitude to them.... I don't understand why that would be and why there would be a minimum height limit.... it is definitely not a  missile limit/launcher limit, it must be radar then, but to me that seems unreasonable.

There is also another weird thing.... It stops firing SM-2s below a certain range... even if the missile is flying a couple of thousand feet, it just stops firing below 10 to 5nm. 

 

On the Burke and Ticonderoga, they will use an SM-2, even if the target is in CIWS range (for example a helicopter flying parallel with it)

 

OHP SM2 FAIL CLOSE2.trk

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Shadow KT said:

Yeah, seems like it won't engage when they are sea skimming, but when they have a bit of altitude to them.... I don't understand why that would be and why there would be a minimum height limit.... it is definitely not a  missile limit/launcher limit, it must be radar then, but to me that seems unreasonable.

 

It's a RADAR thing, I'd love to inspect the sensors.lua file - because it will tell you what RADAR it's modelled as using and what the detection limits are.

 

AI RADARs don't take clutter into account, and I wouldn't be surprised if they don't take RCS into account either.

 

If I remember rightly, it was just a maximum distance, and then detection ranges in both upper and lower hemispheres (presumably look up and look down), and hot and cold aspects + a minimum velocity limit.

 

Surface search RADARs typically have a minimum RCS limit defined - presumably because the AI isn't intelligent enough to not waste AShMs on small craft. 

 

Quote

There is also another weird thing.... It stops firing SM-2s below a certain range... even if the missile is flying a couple of thousand feet, it just stops firing below 10 to 5nm.

 

No idea why that is.

 

Quote

On the Burke and Ticonderoga, they will use an SM-2, even if the target is in CIWS range (for example a helicopter flying parallel with it)

 

I definitely remember the Arleigh-Burke and Ticonderoga class being defined as using 'patriot str' for their RADARs, meaning the AN/MPQ-53 (instead of what they actually have which is AN/SPY-1D(V) ABM Mod. and AN/SPY-1A (possibly with NCTR upgrade) respectively). They should be more capable than the Mk92 CAS.

 

Though I don't really know specifics, and I can't really check the .lua files where this stuff is defined (as it was all hidden when 2.7 was updated).

 

EDIT: I'm not sure they should be doing that, I didn't think the SM-2MR had the manoeuvrability to do that, then again the guidance logic and flight model of the SM-2MR is simplified. But for the Arleigh-Burke at least, it should be firing RIM-162A ESSM for engagements that close (if we have an early 2010s Ticonderoga class, it should also have RIM-162 ESSM (we at least have a mid-to-late 2000s Ticonderoga).

Edited June 6, 2021 by Northstar98

[Shadow KT]

3 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

It's a RADAR thing, I'd love to inspect the sensors.lua file - because it will tell you what RADAR it's modelled as using and what the detection limits are.

 

AI RADARs don't take clutter into account, and I wouldn't be surprised if they don't take RCS into account either.

 

If I remember rightly, it was just a maximum distance, and then detection ranges in both upper and lower hemispheres (presumably look up and look down), and hot and cold aspects + a minimum velocity limit.

 

Surface search RADARs typically have a minimum RCS limit defined - presumably because the AI isn't intelligent enough to not waste AShMs on small craft. 

 

 

No idea why that is.

 

 

I definitely remember the Arleigh-Burke and Ticonderoga class being defined as using 'patriot str' for their RADARs, meaning the AN/MPQ-53 (instead of what they actually have which is AN/SPY-1D(V) ABM Mod. and AN/SPY-1A (possibly with NCTR upgrade) respectively). They should be more capable than the Mk92 CAS.

 

Though I don't really know specifics, and I can't really check the .lua files where this stuff is defined (as it was all hidden when 2.7 was updated).

 

Well... I don't know what kind of radar they have defined for ships, but it is definitely more capable than the Patriot one. They can simultaneously track more targets than the Patriot.

The Patriot is actually quite well modeled in that aspects. It can shoot and guide missiles up to 9 target at the same time and it can guide at least 24 missiles at the same time.

I should test the ship's limits. 

 

By the way the S-300 is also well modelled in that aspect. Up 6 targets, with two missiles per target.

[Northstar98]

15 minutes ago, Shadow KT said:

Well... I don't know what kind of radar they have defined for ships, but it is definitely more capable than the Patriot one. They can simultaneously track more targets than the Patriot.

 

That's what it's defined as using last time I checked. They might have some other modifier that I must've glanced over for maximum missile channels (which might even be defined in the launcher).

 

In any case, the maximum number of simultaneous firing channels for terminal guidance (which is SARH for the SM-2) is 3 for the Arleigh-Burke and 4 for the Ticonderoga, as this limit is dependent on how many AN/SPG-62 CWI RADARs are present.

 

These RADARs can rapidly switch between targets, with the SM-2 using its INS/DL mid-course guidance, but at any one time, those are the limits (which also applies to the RIM-162 ESSM Block 1, which uses the same INS/DL mid-course + terminal SARH, with terminal CWI provided by an AN/SPG-62).

 

For the OHP it should have 1-2 firing channels for SM-1MR (but in DCS the STIR is removed and if that was intentional then it shouldn't have any missile capability at all, because STIR was removed at the same time the Mk13 Mod. 4 GMLS was removed, though I'm unsure if STIR is the only source of CWI, or whether its just a 2nd firing channel and the Mk92 CAS has that ability too). 

 

In DCS however all of this is simplified, the whole guidance logic is simplified, the AN/SPG-62s aren't implemented, and I'm pretty sure the flight modelling of the SM-2 is simplified too. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Northstar98

[Flappie]

Reproduced.

I counted at least 14 hits.