Shilkas and SA8b

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Shilkas and SA8b

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Shilkas and SA8b

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Shilkas and SA8b - 8/17/2017 8:20:15 PM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Playing the excellent strike tutorial scenarios I have been surprised by the fact that a mixed defence of 4 SA-8b Gecko TELs and 6 Shilkas will happily engage and shoot down Skippers and Mavericks, but when attacked with Paveway IIIs then they do not defend themselves and are wiped out. It seems like a mistake to me that they can shoot down volleys of missiles but are helpless against guided bombs. A Skipper is just a guided bomb with a rocket engine, right?

Is this WAD?

Post #: 1

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/17/2017 8:29:10 PM

tjhkkr

Posts: 2428
Joined: 6/3/2010
Status: offline

AGM-123
[link=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paveway[/link]
Here you go...
I am not sure why it would not shoot down an AGM-123. It does as you say have a rocket motor.
But the Paveway is a bomb... what is the probability of AA getting a falling bomb?

_____________________________

Remember that the evil which is now in the world will become yet more powerful, and that it is not evil which conquers evil, but only love -- Olga Romanov.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 2

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/17/2017 8:58:12 PM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Thanks. I just find it strange that the SA-8s and Shilkas seem to treat the AGMs and Skippers as legimate targets but not the LGBs. I cant really understand why an unpowered bomb should be more difficult to shoot down or at least divert than the same bomb with an rocket attached. I get that the AGM might be more fragile, but it should be much more difficult to hit in the first place.

(in reply to tjhkkr)

Post #: 3

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/17/2017 9:16:42 PM

Cik

Posts: 671
Joined: 10/5/2016
Status: offline

you sure it isn't an OODA loop limitation? i've seen massed walls of GBUs shot down so it's definitely not some sort of categorical limitation.

depending on the skill level the LGB may arrive before they have time to figure out they are under attack.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 4

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/17/2017 10:46:45 PM

KungPao

Posts: 333
Joined: 4/25/2016
From: Red China
Status: offline

A high-tech SAM system has the capability to shoot down LGB and JDAM

quote:

3:40:11 PM - Weapon: SA-20a Gargoyle [48N6E] #4421 is attacking GBU-32(V)2/B JDAM [Mk83] #4418 with a base PH of 80%. Target signature modifier: -15%. Final PH: 65%. Result: 14 - HIT
3:40:10 PM - New contact! Designated SAM #834 - Detected by Silver Eagle #8 (F-35B Lightning II) [Sensors: Mk1 Eyeball] at 152deg - 20.3nm - Large Contrail Detected.

for Shilkas, it is the visual signature makes the difference, see the difference on visual signature of AGM-65 , AGM-123 and Paveway III
however SA-8 puzzles me, as SA-8 can only be guided by FCR. And these three ammunition have very small radar signatures.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by KungPao -- 8/17/2017 10:47:38 PM >

_____________________________

Sir? Do you want to order a Kung Pao Chicken or a Kung Fu Chicken?

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 5

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 12:59:47 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Doesn't the SA-8 have optical tracking also? The db says it has low light TV tracking up to 40 miles. If radar isn't tracking, than the visual profile might come into play.

If you posted a save, we might be able to look at the radar and ECM environment, besides other things that might be going on.

(in reply to KungPao)

Post #: 6

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 6:46:19 AM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Will do.. does the save need to be before or after the shooting down of the AGMs?

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 7

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 7:31:39 AM

zaytsev

Posts: 99
Joined: 6/16/2014
Status: offline

AGM-123 is nothing else then Mk83 bomb with laser kit (paveway 1?) and a rocket booster for extended range, less then <10nmi .. regarding range and size of the unit.

It doesn't mean that it has a rocket motor which is constantly burning through flight time, which you could use for thermal detection/tracking.

So, good luck detecting and tracking something (mk83) this "large" via LLTV from 10nmi. Like a black grain of rice in a rice bowl. (considering granularity)

From this Jane's article , it is questionable even that OSA/SA-8 could engage anything smaller then Tomahawk , and that's via radar.

So, without some modern IADS/GCI cove, probably is like a sitting duck for any (smart)bomb, especially some 3rd gen and above Jdam.

Jane's - SA8 (2006)
http://www.tetraedr.com/mupload/iblock/588/58800b30e603bcc2b990aa5091daa7a5.pdf

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 8

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 10:08:36 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kch

Will do.. does the save need to be before or after the shooting down of the AGMs?

Well, common sense would say before, but anything helps.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 9

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 10:35:36 AM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Ok.. I will upload something later today/tonight

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 10

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 7:41:42 PM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Here is the game.. if you let it run then you will see the AAA and SA8s engaging the skippers and Mavericks, but ignoring the Paveways.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 11

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 8:28:53 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Did a quick run through...

All the 123s and 65s are being tracked and engaged optically at less than 10 km, which seems to be well within range of the 40km range optics on the SA-8b. If you leave the God's View off, you'll see that the SA-8s don't see the Paveways until about 1000m from impact. I think the SA-8 optics see the 123 and 65 being launched so that helps it track them.
My question isn't the difference between the weapons being spotted, its about why the SA-8 isn't using its radar to engage. I ran it a couple times and the SA-8 never sees the Paveway until too late.

There could be any number of reasons. I did note a lot of damage had happened to that base and it looked like some HARMS might have impacted. I'll take a closer look tonight.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 12

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/18/2017 8:48:02 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Looked a little closer...The SA-8s are being jammed so they can't use their radar FCR. That is exactly why the optical tracking system was installed. Also, by the time the Paveways are detected about 1km away, the remaining SA-8 is reloading and has no missiles.

This is why a save file is important. No way to get that detail from a generic description in a question.

edit: Also noted that when the 123 and 65 launched, they were spotted because of contrails. The message box explicitly stated that the Paveway (Vampire) was spotted with no contrail.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 8/18/2017 10:20:43 PM >

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 13

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/19/2017 8:56:02 PM

marksdoran

Posts: 45
Joined: 7/7/2017
Status: offline

I've experienced the same thing in the same tutorial scenario and I was very surprised that SA-8 and Shilka AAA pieces could bring down mavericks.

The explanation of what the game mechanics are doing above (re: visual tracking and such) is very interesting. The fundamental question in my mind hasn't yet been answered yet though: is it actually reasonable that these anti-air systems can in fact shoot down something like a maverick?? I'm not trying to be argumentative but I've not seen evidence to suggest that such behavior has real world precedent or is otherwise realistic. Spotting a trail from a rocket is one thing but a successful intercept resulting in destruction on a relatively small target like a maverick or a 1000lb bomb casing (even with a big tail kit) seems like a big ask for what is essentially 1960's era weapon system designs.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 14

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/19/2017 9:48:15 PM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

The SA-8 (SA-N-4) is used as a point-defense on several Soviet-era surface combatants, so it presumably has some capability to engage incoming weapons. The SA-8B is also an upgrade, that was fielded in the 80's (SA-8A was fielded in the early 70's). I just ran a couple of tests against both SA-8A and SA-8B and the logs are telling:

quote:

3:06:27 PM - Weapon: SA-8b Gecko Mod-0 [9M33M2] #11 is attacking AGM-65E Maverick Laser #9 with a base PH of 75%. Target speed modifier: -25%. Target signature modifier: -15%. Final PH: 35%. Result: 71 - MISS

As the logs show, the game is accounting for the fact that PGMs are small, fast targets, and legacy systems have difficulty with them. SA-8A fares even worse, with only a 15% PH under identical engagement conditions.

(in reply to marksdoran)

Post #: 15

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/19/2017 10:55:35 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

The shooting down of precision guided ASMs has been debated several times on these boards. If you really want to get into the nitty gritty of some of these systems, go to this site...

https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

They have the manuals on operating the SAM systems. IIRC, the SA-8b is documented and there are some mentions of the optical tracking system. I read somewhere on the interweb that the camera tracking had a high zoom level that allowed tracking a fighter-sized object out to over 30km. It was stated several times that it required skill to track the target until missile impact for a crossing target. But a head-on or retreating target was much easier. Operators were trained specifically on using the optical tracking as part of their full qualification.

The short of it is that in a high-ECM environment, a high zoom optical tracking platform, a target at less than 10km, a rocket launch signature, and a contrail, the SA-8b is capable of tracking and intercepting. I noted a less than 50% hit rate on the 123 and 65, and an inability to even see the Paveway until it was too late.

(in reply to ExNusquam)

Post #: 16

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/20/2017 7:43:23 AM

kch

Posts: 194
Joined: 12/31/2014
Status: offline

Thanks guys for going through the trouble of checking out what was happening. I will take as a note to myself to factor in contrails when I plan attakcs where there might be optically guided defenses.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 17

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/21/2017 10:23:19 PM

marksdoran

Posts: 45
Joined: 7/7/2017
Status: offline

My thanks also -- I definitely feel more educated.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 18

RE: Shilkas and SA8b - 8/22/2017 1:41:28 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kch

Thanks guys for going through the trouble of checking out what was happening. I will take as a note to myself to factor in contrails when I plan attakcs where there might be optically guided defenses.

btw, the lesson isn't to look for contrails. Its to take a hard look the messages when you have a question. I am always going back in time with message logs when I want to figure out something like this one.

(in reply to kch)

Post #: 19