Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

[FIXED] BMD Issue

 
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 >> Tech Support >> [FIXED] BMD Issue Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
[FIXED] BMD Issue - 4/7/2019 10:18:11 PM   
FTBSS

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/25/2014
Status: offline 		So using the SM-3 RIM-161E block IIa missile with the 1325 NM range. the firing platform can't detect the incoming ABSM until around 200NM So I paired with a Platform that has Long Range ballistic missile detection the SBX this detects the ballistic missile out at 900+ NM and the ship fires and this results in an off axis intercept 100% of the time the SM-3 is wasted with no chance of intercept.

If this is somehow WAD why would the USN develop a weapon with 1325 nm range that must wait until attack within 200 NM to have and chance of success?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Dimitris -- 4/27/2019 4:27:15 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: BMD Issue - 4/7/2019 10:21:36 PM   
Raptorx7_slith

 

Posts: 380
Joined: 7/27/2013
Status: offline 		Post a save.

(in reply to FTBSS)
Post #: 2
RE: BMD Issue - 4/7/2019 10:43:46 PM   
FTBSS

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/25/2014
Status: offline 		Its attached now. Just a test scenario but I have tried multiple times with different platforms always same result.


< Message edited by FTBSS -- 4/7/2019 10:44:55 PM >

(in reply to Raptorx7_slith)
Post #: 3
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 12:49:52 AM   
Zanthra

 

Posts: 122
Joined: 2/6/2019
Status: offline 		There are 2 things going on here:

1) Initial missile intercepts are not calculated based on the great circle route the missile is taking. When the Ballistic missile is first detected in this scenario, it is traveling at 10,000 knots at a heading of about 250. The intercept is calculated based on the Rhumb Line (maintaining a heading of 250) or similar, which puts the calculated intercept further north than the missile will actually be. By the time it gets into range of the cruiser's radar, it's heading is about 240.

2) The SM-3 will only get updates on the target position if the firing unit has radar contact on the target. This was no the case before the update that prevented blind AAM shots, and these missiles could be guided in with data from any platform. Currently a workaround is instead of pairing the ship with the X-Band radar, instead you can add the X-Band radar's sensor as a sensor on the cruiser, this allows it to use the radar to maneuver the SM-3 missiles to intercept.

As for what is realistic, there are two capabilities for the SM-3 missile called "Launch on Remote" and "Engage on Remote". Launch on Remote is the ability to launch an SM-3 against a target detected by an offboard sensor, and the ability to acquire that target and guide the missile to the terminal engagement after the target has entered the onboard radar range. Engage on Remote is the ability to use an offboard radar to guide the missile to the termial intercept without the target being in range of the onboard radars (whether by relaying the remote radar information to the launching ship, or handing the datalink off to the tracking ship I don't know). Note this is more complex than it sounds, because in order to guide the missiles to intercept, they are not using absolute positions of the missile and the target, but rather the relative positions as detected by the radar. The radar tracks both the SM-3 and it's Target simultaneously, and calculates the relative difference between the two regardless of where the ship is or how rough the seas are.

Launch on Remote is a current capablity, but Engage on Remote is something only very recently publicly operational.

Edit: The workaround in #2 above may not work anymore. It seems that either the 160nm range of the AEGIS Weapon Link on the ships is either now respected, or was changed to a shorter range. The missile's datalink is listed at 1400nm, but I don't believe there are any launch platforms with that range of datalinks.

< Message edited by Zanthra -- 4/8/2019 1:54:18 AM >

(in reply to FTBSS)
Post #: 4
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 1:59:53 AM   
FTBSS

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/25/2014
Status: offline 		Nope put Xband radar on Cruiser same result, I think I tried this before the recent changes to BVR missile launches and it was the same issue.

Yep I think it's the data link problem. To me, this is what needs to be corrected.

From my understanding this weapon is what The US carrier fleet will rely on until there is an effective laser defense versus the DF-21 and DF-26 missiles,

This is also going to be an issue with the SM-6 block IIB that will have range well in excess that datalink. maybe out to 400 NM or more that should be coming on-line 2022-2023 timeline

< Message edited by FTBSS -- 4/8/2019 2:20:14 AM >

(in reply to Zanthra)
Post #: 5
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 2:18:24 AM   
Zanthra

 

Posts: 122
Joined: 2/6/2019
Status: offline 		Yeah, I retested the X-Band radar on the cruiser myself, and saw the same problem, but I think that one is related to the AEGIS Weapon Datalink only having 160nm range. I don't know if it was ignoring the datalink range before, or if they changed the range, but I have a save in this thread: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4592235 which had a destroyer with the X-Band radar onboard, and it worked at the time, and was confirmed by someone else.

As for this problem before the BVR missile changes, I was about half way through the Chains of War expansion when the BVR missile change was released. The Salvo scenario used to be a real tough scenario because of the BMD missiles that the US and Japan had available, but I went back after the BVR change and it's a lot different now. The first volley of missiles you launch gets attacked by the SM-3 Block IIA missiles from the carrier battlegroup based off detection from the Green Pine radars in Korea, since those missiles are allocated, but don't get tracking updates, they prevent any THAADs or patriots from being launched on them. The supposedly beneficial special action to drop the US fleet from the battle network is actually beneficial to the enemy since they can no longer engage ballistic missile outside of that range anyways. You can read the old frustration of cracking the BMD shield here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4288085&mpage=1&key= when the SM-3 could still be guided based on offboard sensors.

A key quote from that thread that does not match current SM-3 observations ingame:


quote:

ORIGINAL: gosnold

Same, I'm getting nowhere with the PLA rocket force. I think it's partly because the SM-3 is overpowered: the Reagan CVBG intercepts my missiles before they reach Okinawa, 800nm away from the carrier. Plus they do 180° in mid-air when retargeting.
I managed to sink the Reagan though, I think it had expended all its SM-3s.



< Message edited by Zanthra -- 4/8/2019 2:25:42 AM >

(in reply to FTBSS)
Post #: 6
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 2:25:02 AM   
FTBSS

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/25/2014
Status: offline 		The problem is it has to have that capability or why make a missile with that range. I believe the hit % is too high but there is no way a nation would develop and pay for the modifications that allow a missile to travel 1300 NM if it can't hit anything at a range greater than 160 miles. That is why I reported this should be fixed. in my opinion it worked closer to reality before the changes.

(in reply to Zanthra)
Post #: 7
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 2:44:07 AM   
Zanthra

 

Posts: 122
Joined: 2/6/2019
Status: offline 		I agree, but understanding what is part of the problem, and when the problem started are both important for potentially finding the cause or creating a reasonable solution. First, the missiles flying off axis from intercept is not new, but before the BVR change missiles like this got constant course corrections that concealed the innacurate intercept calculations. Second, the missiles were able to engage at very long ranges, 800nm+ before the BVR changes. Third, the SM-3 was able to be guided to long range intercepts by placing very powerful radar on the launching vessel until an unknown change in the past couple months, possibly relating to the datalink range on the ships. (Theory here, but perhaps the AEGIS data-link range was reduced to encourage ERAMs to be guided by E-2D hawkeyes for over the horizon shots - if the target were to evade by decending?)

The biggest gamebreaking issue I see regarding this problem is the fact that an SM-3 launched at long range, with no ability to track, takes up a weapon allocation that prevents any other units from allocating weapons to it. If it's out of radar range, it leads to that incoming missile being unopposed which is a problem for many scenarios including the Salvo scenario from Chains of War.

< Message edited by Zanthra -- 4/8/2019 2:46:33 AM >

(in reply to FTBSS)
Post #: 8
RE: BMD Issue - 4/8/2019 10:36:05 PM   
FTBSS

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/25/2014
Status: offline 		Thanks for your input and feedback and I agree locating when the problem reared it's ugly head is important to figuring out the fix to correct the issue.

I also do a great deal of testing with scenario editor with near future scenarios that I develop which this kinda breaks as well.

(in reply to Zanthra)
Post #: 9
RE: BMD Issue - 4/21/2019 1:16:24 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Thanks, logged as major. We'll investigate.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to FTBSS)
Post #: 10
RE: BMD Issue - 4/27/2019 4:25:56 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Okay, this was a real brainbuster. There were multiple issues piled on top of each other:

1) After launch, the shooter was not providing datalink updates to the SM-3s because it could not detect the target on its own. As Zanthra correctly guessed, this was a collateral effect from the "no blind AMRAAM shots" change.

2) The "estimate average speed to intercept" method was optimized for AAW engagements with no special consideration for ABM.

3) The "calculate point of intercept" method (used to determine the seeker activation point) was likewise AAW-centric.

All fixed for next update release. This will definitely need some testing, as there may be edge cases not covered by these changes.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> [FIXED] BMD Issue Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.828