Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> The War Room



Message

Raptorx7_slith -> Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/22/2016 2:09:53 PM)

This is the hardest thing I am trying to learn right now in command, especially when its in the early 70's to the 80's. I understand the wild weasel tactics where I run an aircraft over SAM's to get them to emit, but after this happens that aircraft gets knocked out of the air and my other aircraft never have enough time to acquire the radar before its off again. So my thinking has turned to this, do I stop relying on ARM/HARM missiles and instead "kamikaze" an single aircraft over the SAMS's to find them and send in precision/CBU munitions to knock them out?

Thanks guys.



wild_Willie2 -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/22/2016 7:00:24 PM)

Either use jammers to spoof the enemy radar, try to goad the SAM site into firing from maximum range so you can take a shot or try to approach from low altitude and take out the SAM search radar with your HARMS. Depending on the programmer they then either go dark, or turn on their search radar for you to take out. Either way, you'll be better of.



poaw -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/24/2016 6:01:13 AM)

If you know (or suspect) there location try a bearing only shot (ctrl+F1), most will light up if they detect a threat in order to defend themselves. At which point they'll both draw the ARM to their location and allow you to target it for follow-up shots.

If your missile don't have the range to do that try using your own aircraft radars to stimulate them into emitting.



falcon2006 -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/25/2016 2:16:53 AM)

This is truly an interesting topic, my solution is to use advanced decoy like the ADM-160C to suppress and attract enemy‘s air defence system. The ADM-160C is both a jammer and a decoy, so the enemy had to choose between wasting their ammo and being jammed by the decoy.



PaulCharl -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/26/2016 5:21:31 PM)

This is exactly why the Alarm missile was developed. Great piece of kit. A pre-strike wave of SEAD Tornadoes launch Alarms over SAM or suspected SAM sites on the ingress route a minute or two before the strike package follows them along the corridor. The Alarms scoot up to 60 or 80k feet and then hang from a parachute, slowly descending over up to 15mins. If a missile detects an active SAM radar it releases the parachute and a second rocket motor fires to drive it to the target. The SAM operators have the choice to stay dark and stay alive, or light up and maybe get off a shot or two before being clobbered. That is the theory in real life, have not tried it in the game yet so cannot say how well the AI handles them.



Tailhook -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/26/2016 8:38:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaulCharl

This is exactly why the Alarm missile was developed. Great piece of kit. A pre-strike wave of SEAD Tornadoes launch Alarms over SAM or suspected SAM sites on the ingress route a minute or two before the strike package follows them along the corridor. The Alarms scoot up to 60 or 80k feet and then hang from a parachute, slowly descending over up to 15mins. If a missile detects an active SAM radar it releases the parachute and a second rocket motor fires to drive it to the target. The SAM operators have the choice to stay dark and stay alive, or light up and maybe get off a shot or two before being clobbered. That is the theory in real life, have not tried it in the game yet so cannot say how well the AI handles them.

I believe at this time the parachute capability is not yet modeled.



SeaQueen -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/27/2016 5:32:53 PM)

It depends on the range of the SAMs. Anti-radiation missiles are great against emitters, but you're right, to really get them, you need to get the launchers. Furthermore, many SAMs out-range HARM/Standard ARM/Shrike by a long shot.

In order to avoid wasting aircraft, I'd recommend standoff weapons which allow aircraft to launch from beyond the range of the SAMs. In many cases, the combat resolves itself to a numbers game (how many can I shoot versus how many can they shoot down?) but it spares you aircraft. In general, weapons are cheap and aircraft/pilots are expensive. Even if the SAM site isn't dead, just out of missiles, that might be good enough. Ballistic missiles are a great way to attack certain types of SAMs because they lack the capability to shoot them down.

I'd only use bombs if it was a long ranged glide bomb or if I knew I'd hit the emitter guiding it first hence it was unlikely to shoot back at me with anything but light AAA and MANPADS.


quote:

ORIGINAL: raptorx7

This is the hardest thing I am trying to learn right now in command, especially when its in the early 70's to the 80's. I understand the wild weasel tactics where I run an aircraft over SAM's to get them to emit, but after this happens that aircraft gets knocked out of the air and my other aircraft never have enough time to acquire the radar before its off again. So my thinking has turned to this, do I stop relying on ARM/HARM missiles and instead "kamikaze" an single aircraft over the SAMS's to find them and send in precision/CBU munitions to knock them out?

Thanks guys.




cns180784 -> RE: Conducting SEAD against non emitting radars/SAM (1/29/2016 10:44:54 PM)

In Canarys Cage i have a strike package heading to take out the ammo supplies at an enemy AB using GBU-10E LGB's, they have a 2 ship SEAD escort with AGM-88s which will need to neutralize a HAWK SAM battery. Its been emitting its radars except for the illuminators which guides the SAMs, and it has 2 of them. Interesting to see what happens.

Can anyone tell me if i need my escorts' doctrine set to engage opportunity targets for them to engage the SAM? i do have max threat response radius set to 50nm in the escort options but not sure if i need to alter that doctrine, thanks.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.984375