Maybe MANPADS are op?!

[Tank50us]

8 minutes ago, Raviar said:

 

you are explaining the SAM systems setup and tactics! thats not the issue here and out of topic! in any CAS mission the manpads can be anywhere ! 
I believe the mission designer know how to setup the SAM and IADS ! (or at least they have to know it)

 

 

Actually, if you read the entire statement, you'd be aware that I pointed out that if brute forcing your way through the problem isn't working, then maybe you need to get around the problem. You're in a freaking airplane for cripes-sake, you can move in three dimensions, start thinking in three dimensions!

2 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Any low level (below 5000-6000m) air operator seeking direct encounter with ground troops armed with manpads should rethink his approach.

That's what Snipers are for after all.

[Raviar]

50 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Sadly, the video does not show the moment of the impact.

 

First scene shows Strela-2M operators, possibly not even taken at the time. If you pay a close attention what follows in next scene (you hear the cheers from the civilian observers, which means they knew it was hit already), Mirage was already a non-maneuverable fireball (onboard fuel burning), then the aircraft disintegrates and falls down. As for flares, I always had a great respect for french pilots, I very much doubt they did not throw flares. Their mission was to hit targets on the ground, the itself weather was cloudy which forced them low, it's a mountains region and they easily found themselves within the missile envelope.

 

Economics and effectiveness is clear: Mirage $23M, Strela-2M , obsolete back in 90s, but costingpossibly well below $5K, since it was domestically produced.

 

Regarding those other flares being thrown: their effectiveness against any version of Igla is rather dubious. IMHO: they are used more for psychological self-assurance.

 

Already today we will see the range of these missiles being extended, with additional tubes, SA and advanced sensors enabling them to acquire the target well ahead of the range of the human eye, day or night. Not a great news for A-10 or Su-25 future.

 

Any low level (below 5000-6000m) air operator seeking direct encounter with ground troops armed with manpads should rethink his approach.

 

 

thanks for explanation, as you can see in the video the missile fired from MANPAD do not fly in ballistic or straight line neither intercepting! in DCS the Manpads intercept! while the missile launch you can see it from the missile trail the missile constantly try to obtain the target, seeking and tracking hence you can see the zigzag missile trail, while in DCS its straight line and intercepting sometimes (flying in lead pursuit)! although after launch I dont see any flare from Mirage!

[okopanja]

1 hour ago, Raviar said:

thanks for explanation, as you can see in the video the missile fired from MANPAD do not fly in ballistic or straight line neither intercepting! in DCS the Manpads intercept! while the missile launch you can see it from the missile trail the missile constantly try to obtain the target, seeking and tracking hence you can see the zigzag missile trail, while in DCS its straight line and intercepting sometimes (flying in lead pursuit)! although after launch I don't see any flare from Mirage!

I assume you meant this "irregular" flight pattern: this is the consequence of the way control surfaces work. It is mostly related to cost/weight reduction. Igla will fly more straight, but it also has 2 engines: one to launch, and one that is actually used to accelerate toward the target (hence sort of irregular)

 

Strela-2M is rear aspect. Igla is all aspect. Furthermore unlike Strela-2M which will head for the engine of aircraft(were it may cause a damage, but also perhaps give you chance at crippled flying or gliding long enough to friendlies,  ejecting or even landing), Igla will head for the fuselage, puncture it and fuel tanks/lines or weapons. Lets face it: the goal is not only to destroy the aircraft, but also kill the pilot as well. The guys from video were very lucky: they got unscratched and ended up with enemy troops that do not sport physical revenge (well there are some insults, but since you do not understand language, in the interrogation the officers are mostly focused on information about other still flying aircrafts).

 

Again Strela-2M is not what you used for the mission, but I linked those videos from the training, since it is very educational and clearly shows the acceleration and the speed at which these tiny rockets fly. The point is many people consider these thingies an almost harmless toys, but they are far from that.

Edited September 14, 2021 by okopanja

[Cmptohocah]

1 hour ago, Raviar said:

....although after launch I dont see any flare from Mirage!

Here you go: Igla hitting a flaring target [03:22]

 

[Raviar]

18 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Here you go: Igla hitting a flaring target [03:22]

 

thats right an expected! not many flares and straight and level flight! my concerns is when I am in hornet/viper dropping 10 flares per seconds with wild 5/6 G maneuver to the left and right as I provided the tacviews 

[Cmptohocah]

10 minutes ago, Raviar said:

thats right an expected! not many flares and straight and level flight! my concerns is when I am in hornet/viper dropping 10 flares per seconds with wild 5/6 G maneuver to the left and right as I provided the tacviews 

The video says that "Igla" can track up to 0.1s flare dispense times. 10 flares per second seems about right.
Can your AIM-9X track a 5/6G target? If yes, why shouldn't the MANPAD?

[okopanja]

11 minutes ago, Raviar said:

thats right an expected! not many flares and straight and level flight! my concerns is when I am in hornet/viper dropping 10 flares per seconds with wild 5/6 G maneuver to the left and right as I provided the tacviews 

Where is the concern?

 

You will not pull that 5/6 G maneuver, if you intend to use anything useful ( ). Since you do not get the any warning for Igla (other that it may be around), you will have to start firing preemptively which means you will spend them in 3 seconds after which the trained operator on the ground will find you easier, fire the missile and kill you.

 

Splash, one dead Hornet!

[Raviar]

35 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

The video says that "Igla" can track up to 0.1s flare dispense times. 10 flares per second seems about right.
Can your AIM-9X track a 5/6G target? If yes, why shouldn't the MANPAD?

Very good point, the issue is the Fox2 launch from A/C which give initial speed to the missile, while MANPAD launch from ground and doesnt have that kinetic energy, base on wikipedia(which is not proper resource) the max range is 1nmi for Igla-S(SA-24) while in dcs is more than that base on Tacview (1.5nmi and above!), the maximum range as you can compare on other missiles can have very huge differentiation/deviation base on target and/or environment and many other factors !

base on same page there are values regarding maximum target speed, which has deviation ins DCS! 

Edit: 
"base on wikipedia(which is not proper resource) the max range is 1nmi for Igla-S(SA-24) while in dcs is more than that base on Tacview (1.5nmi and above!), the maximum range as you can compare on other missiles can have very huge differentiation/deviation base on target and/or environment and many other factors !"
 

my mistake it stated 2000ft!

Edited September 14, 2021 by Raviar

[Raviar]

14 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Where is the concern?

 

You will not pull that 5/6 G maneuver, if you intend to use anything useful ( ). Since you do not get the any warning for Igla (other that it may be around), you will have to start firing preemptively which means you will spend them in 3 seconds after which the trained operator on the ground will find you easier, fire the missile and kill you.

 

Splash, one dead Hornet!

as I mentioned earlier, I have a single scenario to make it simplified, the fighter is flying over the manpad area 400 to 450 knots (or even faster 500 to 550) without pre-flaring, the pilot see the launch and start to drop flare and use 5/6G opposite turn maneuver, as I provided more than 10 tacviews 90% is the hit! I am not really sure if it can be a realistic MANPAD's missile performance regarding the tracking and hitting the target!

[GGTharos]

Simple turns that have become established are not and should not be effective. 

[Raviar]

1 minute ago, GGTharos said:

Simple turns that have become established are not and should not be effective. 

is 5/6G (7 is the Max G which hornet can pull) at 500 knots with flares consider as Simple Turn ?

[GGTharos]

I don't know, it depends on what/how you did it.  If you're just pulling into/away from the missile and it has become an established turn, that's easy for PN to deal with.

You want to introduce seeker settling problems which aren't really modeled in DCS (but there's a good chance that they will be down the road) ... but that still won't help you as much with modern MANPADS which would have shorter seeker-settling periods.

 

The best way to evade a missile very generally is to have it on the 3-9 and apply orthogonal max-g when it's fairly close (1-2 seconds)

[Raviar]

13 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

I don't know, it depends on what/how you did it.  If you're just pulling into/away from the missile and it has become an established turn, that's easy for PN to deal with.

You want to introduce seeker settling problems which aren't really modeled in DCS (but there's a good chance that they will be down the road) ... but that still won't help you as much with modern MANPADS which would have shorter seeker-settling periods.

 

The best way to evade a missile very generally is to have it on the 3-9 and apply orthogonal max-g when it's fairly close (1-2 seconds)

you may check the tacviews here:

 

[GGTharos]

Ok so keeping in mind that Tacview 'lags' a bit behind when looking at G-onset, in this:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=231638&key=7580d37b44f10994b14f8ab99d2b037a

 

You evade 2 MANPADS head-on with just a 3.x-4.0 g jink head-on.   Later on, you're hit while pulling 6g because you are in an established turn.

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by GGTharos

[okopanja]

I just watched the tacviews and I hope you will not get offended with what I have to say: you would not survive even a single Strela-2M in real life flying like that, not 5 or 6 Iglas being fired on you during the same ingress! You basically overflew them and turned within the effective range!

 

Your tacviews are great proof that the Igla is actually heavily under-performing in DCS (and sadly they are not only SAMs like that).

 

Now I understand the sentiment: to be absolutely honest in RL nobody likes the manpads. Nasty little thingies.

 

USA, SSSR, France and many others would really like the others did not have them.

 

The only thing ED has to do here, is to ensure that the missile hits while traveling toward it, since the real one would.

 

 

 

[Tippis]

46 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Your tacviews are great proof that the Igla is actually heavily under-performing in DCS (and sadly they are not only SAMs like that).

…and it should be mention that this is with a few performance perks that have been given to them, such as adding various levels of countermeasure immunity to (in particular) IR missiles. Even then, just about all of them can be spoofed in DCS by just adding more spam since that simply triggers more die rolls for confusing the missiles. Barring absolute immunity, one of them will cause a miss sooner or later. As such, the only thing that really causes a hit is if the target doesn't have time to react, usually by not seeing or being warned of the launch.

 

51 minutes ago, okopanja said:

The only thing ED has to do here, is to ensure that the missile hits while traveling toward it, since the real one would.

Even that part has proven to be under-modelled and underperforming for a number of SAMs for the longest time (looking at you SA-2), so… yeah. Anit-air in DCS is often not treated with the respect it deserves from pilots because they don't need to. So on the few occasions when that need actually comes up, a DCS regular is quite likely not to be fully prepared.

[Ironhand]

Not that it matters but I just made a quick a few quick bombing runs against Iglas and they look to be as relatively ineffective as they've always been. Straight line, diving attacks each time, flares when under 1500m, no special maneuvering. Six missiles launched, none hit.

[okopanja]

So do we all agree now that Iglas need to be way way more effective in this situation?

[Ironhand]

Oh, I’m perfectly happy with the status quo. Why worry, when I don’t have to….
 

SAMs have been modeled superficially since the first incarnation of the sim 20+ years ago. That being said, they are much better than they used to be.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Ironhand

[okopanja]

3 hours ago, Ironhand said:

SAMs have been modeled superficially since the first incarnation of the sim 20+ years ago. That being said, they are much better than they used to be.

Well if you refer Su-27 Flanker for DOS and Windows, you are wrong: SAMs were great back then. You really had to work hard to defeat them, unless you had nice terrain + Kh-31p.

 

I made a pause of almost 20 years and I have to tell you DCS feels like an arcade game, despite graphics improvement. R-27 flies like it has a parachute attached behind it and loves to calculate interception point 12 km below the see level on the first dive of the target. R-77 looses look after 2 seconds, adores hiking in the hills for no reason even if target flies well above. The only thing that remains good is R-73, provided that the guy does not know you are there. And yeah we lost the smart weapons.

Edited September 14, 2021 by okopanja

[Ironhand]

30 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Well if you refer Su-27 Flanker for DOS and Windows, you are wrong: SAMs were great back then.

No they weren’t. At the start, they were one size fits all. They all launched same and flew the same. The only difference was the distance they flew and the size of the warhead. I know because I was one of the people badgering them to make them better. And later, they weren’t more difficult to evade than they are now. You just had to know their and your capabilities and fly smart. True then. True now.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Ironhand

[okopanja]

Well SAMs are pretty mich useless in their present state. You can fly well within their engagement zone as seen by tacviews here and they are no more than fireworks.

[Cmptohocah]

22 hours ago, okopanja said:

 

...

I made a pause of almost 20 years and I have to tell you DCS feels like an arcade game, despite graphics improvement. R-27 flies like it has a parachute attached behind it and loves to calculate interception point 12 km below the see level on the first dive of the target. ...

Ah, you missed the Alamo before the CFD update. Now that was a rocket powered brick. New one feels like a laser, compared to it.

[Ironhand]

On 9/15/2021 at 3:32 AM, okopanja said:

Well SAMs are pretty mich useless in their present state. You can fly well within their engagement zone as seen by tacviews here and they are no more than fireworks.

The short range stuff--both SAMs and AAA--has never been overly threatening, so that's not news. You've always been able to fly circles around most of them.

[Tippis]

2 hours ago, Ironhand said:

The short range stuff--both SAMs and AAA--has never been overly threatening, so that's not news. You've always been able to fly circles around most of them.

Quite. The new weather system makes for more reasons to actually venture into those engagement zones, but even then, that presumes that the weather system is used at all (clear skies is still a far too common default) and that threats — and possibly even targets — are not precisely known beforehand (the amount of information displayed by default unless you go out of your way to hide it is… excessive).

 

It really is more of an ecosystem of issues, where if you use every tool in the toolbox and put a ton of effort in, you can eke out some kind of threatening(ish) environment(esque), but you are constantly fighting against the basic design of the game to make that happen. If that were reversed, or at least skewed more towards some half-way option between the two, they'd probably be more useful and more used.