[Answered] SA 6 Question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support



Message

Swant -> [Answered] SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 9:24:17 AM)

Here is an SA 6 engaging a SLAM-ER missile. How can it fire even though the SLAM-ER haven't been picked up by the
SA 6:s Straight Flush radar/TV?

[image]local://upfiles/72913/96A57EAEE9054873972CEF77B62A6EFB.gif[/image]



Dimitris -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 10:41:10 AM)

I have a suspicion. Any save....?



Swant -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 10:58:57 AM)

It is the Peeling the Onion tutorial mission, but I switched side with the mission editor



Dimitris -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 3:49:57 PM)

We need a save before the missiles are launched, please.



Swant -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 4:13:34 PM)

Ok I don't have that. But the SA 6 will launch again. Here is a few seconds later and against another Slam-er

[image]local://upfiles/72913/DADF9D536D2D4CFDA9C80FE09C82D420.gif[/image]



SteveMcClaire -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 4:55:21 PM)

Hi Swant -- did the SA-6 have its radar off before it launched the first missile? Do you have a save from earlier in the engagement, before the SA-6 fired?



Swant -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 5:28:01 PM)

I don't know. No save. But shoudn't the SA-6:s radar show up in the detections column of the SLAM-ER if it had?



SteveMcClaire -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 6:55:47 PM)

When I un-pause the saved game the radar is detected as soon as the time advances one more second. Does this not happen when you advance time?

Sensor detections can take a second to register. Which is why I asked if the SA-6 radar was off prior to engaging the incoming AGMs, as you may have caught that exact one second in your save.



TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/1/2020 7:35:25 PM)

Could the FCR radars get an OODA loop delay? In older systems the FCR radar still needs to sweep and detect the target even though the co-located search radar has it spotted.



Dimitris -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 5:58:01 AM)

Okay, this looks like an example of a "SAM ambush/sniping" behavior. Here's what happening:
* The SAM battery stays silent (as directed by EMCON) for as long as possible. It sees the incoming target from offboard data.
* On each pre-fire check, it does an illumination check (can it track the target at that moment?) without actually activating the radar.
* If the check is successful (and all other pre-fire conditions are met), it launches one or more missiles.
* As soon as the missiles are in the air, the unit understands that it needs to illuminate for them and turns on the Straight Flush radar.
* Once missiles are no longer in the air, the illuminator shuts down again immediately, to avoid/complicate ARM shots.

So this seems to be working as designed. There is a slight divergence from RL procedure (in RL the pre-fire illumination check would be accompanied by actually turning on the radar), but there does not appear to be a bug in the designed behavior.



Swant -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 6:50:51 AM)

Ok now I understad, thanks



c3k -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 10:35:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

Okay, this looks like an example of a "SAM ambush/sniping" behavior. Here's what happening:
* The SAM battery stays silent (as directed by EMCON) for as long as possible. It sees the incoming target from offboard data.
* On each pre-fire check, it does an illumination check (can it track the target at that moment?) without actually activating the radar.
* If the check is successful (and all other pre-fire conditions are met), it launches one or more missiles.
* As soon as the missiles are in the air, the unit understands that it needs to illuminate for them and turns on the Straight Flush radar.
* Once missiles are no longer in the air, the illuminator shuts down again immediately, to avoid/complicate ARM shots.

So this seems to be working as designed. There is a slight divergence from RL procedure (in RL the pre-fire illumination check would be accompanied by actually turning on the radar), but there does not appear to be a bug in the designed behavior.


Thanks for the detailed explanation. Very interesting how complex the under-the-hood behavior is.

It seems that the RL procedure of turning on the radar is a pretty big difference than staying non-emitting for in-game purposes. Is there any consideration being given to have the game reflect the RL behavior?

Getting hit with an illumination radar is a precursor to a launch and most targets would not know whether it's just illumination or illumination AND launch. Upon getting illuminated with a tracking radar, they'd take appropriate defensive measures.

Just a thought...



TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 7:31:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: c3k


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

Okay, this looks like an example of a "SAM ambush/sniping" behavior. Here's what happening:
* The SAM battery stays silent (as directed by EMCON) for as long as possible. It sees the incoming target from offboard data.
* On each pre-fire check, it does an illumination check (can it track the target at that moment?) without actually activating the radar.
* If the check is successful (and all other pre-fire conditions are met), it launches one or more missiles.
* As soon as the missiles are in the air, the unit understands that it needs to illuminate for them and turns on the Straight Flush radar.
* Once missiles are no longer in the air, the illuminator shuts down again immediately, to avoid/complicate ARM shots.

So this seems to be working as designed. There is a slight divergence from RL procedure (in RL the pre-fire illumination check would be accompanied by actually turning on the radar), but there does not appear to be a bug in the designed behavior.


Thanks for the detailed explanation. Very interesting how complex the under-the-hood behavior is.

It seems that the RL procedure of turning on the radar is a pretty big difference than staying non-emitting for in-game purposes. Is there any consideration being given to have the game reflect the RL behavior?

Getting hit with an illumination radar is a precursor to a launch and most targets would not know whether it's just illumination or illumination AND launch. Upon getting illuminated with a tracking radar, they'd take appropriate defensive measures.

Just a thought...


Hear hear!

This would really be a big positive change...I had posted elsewhere but in my VN era playing Wild Weasels...I found (in RL) that the SA-2 system before firing had to illuminate the target with its Fan Song for as long as 75 secs BEFORE firing just get enough target info to launch..

This was AFTER the Spoon Rest was providing basic contact data.

It would be interesting to know how long the FCR must illuminate on more modern SAMs (if they have to at all) prior to launch.



Dimitris -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 8:20:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheOriginalOverlord
This would really be a big positive change...I had posted elsewhere but in my VN era playing Wild Weasels...I found (in RL) that the SA-2 system before firing had to illuminate the target with its Fan Song for as long as 75 secs BEFORE firing just get enough target info to launch..


IIRC the description was that the _total process_ could take up to 75 secs, not just the part of illuminating the target. (You can try this in SAMSIM, and you'll see that most of those 75 seconds are switchology stuff).



Dimitris -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 8:25:51 PM)

On a more general note: Command is a grand-tactical/operational level simulation, not a combat flight simulator. At the theater level, individual tactics matter less. Whether a Fan Song paints your for 25, 50 or 75 seconds matters less. Coordination of (usually large) forces matters. Logistics matter. Intelligence matters. Positioning of assets matters. Route planning and package assembly matter. Getting "there firstest with the mostest" matters. You can play against a pro user and he'll give you all the Fan Song time handicap you want, and he'll still wipe you out with all the other elements that actually matter.

My point:Relax. At this scope and level, it doesn't matter as much as you think. Rommel and Patton never lost sleep about the precise thickness of frontal armor in their respective tanks. They had bigger fish to fry. So do you.

Thanks.



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/2/2020 9:50:42 PM)

Might want to drop that nugget in this thread. At least up to the point of an actual issue being found.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4891752

Maybe even pin it to the top of the forum.



TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 1:25:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheOriginalOverlord
This would really be a big positive change...I had posted elsewhere but in my VN era playing Wild Weasels...I found (in RL) that the SA-2 system before firing had to illuminate the target with its Fan Song for as long as 75 secs BEFORE firing just get enough target info to launch..


IIRC the description was that the _total process_ could take up to 75 secs, not just the part of illuminating the target. (You can try this in SAMSIM, and you'll see that most of those 75 seconds are switchology stuff).


I'm going off what I read here..
http://www.allworldwars.com/Finding-Fixing-Finishing-Guideline.html

quote:

The plotting officer would manually update the plotting board in the control van, while at the same time the battalion commander was attempting to acquire the track using the co-located Spoon Rest radar. Once the track was detected, the battalion could transmit from the Fan Song and attempt to acquire the target and begin the engagement process.[18] When the battalion operated without the aid of acquisition radar, or was cut-off from IADS cueing, it could still self-acquire using the Fan Song, but this was a degraded (autonomous) mode of operation. By 1965 the tracking process, from initial EW detection to Fan Song handoff, was completed in less than 5 minutes.[19]

The SA-2 battalion would transmit using the Fan Song in an attempt to acquire the target. The process of acquisition, target tracking and missile launch took approximately 75 seconds.[20]




I understand what you are saying about the scope of the game... as a "player" I'd personally like to be able to shoot at FCR radars while they are still in "acquisition" mode...instead of having to wait until a missile(s) is in the air. JMHO




thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 2:01:38 AM)

Osprey has 3-4 books on the the SA-2. I own them all, but haven't read them in detail, but even the radar just powering up to 60 seconds on older models and it was cut down to 30 sec. later in the SA-2' life. The fine tuning for launch was very manual and could take minutes. Its one of the reasons the dog house/bird cage was added for manual tracking on closer targets.

But every game has people that read a website and feel they have to bring that reality to the game. No matter how the devs pushback.



TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 3:05:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Osprey has 3-4 books on the the SA-2. I own them all, but haven't read them in detail, but even the radar just powering up to 60 seconds on older models and it was cut down to 30 sec. later in the SA-2' life. The fine tuning for launch was very manual and could take minutes. Its one of the reasons the dog house/bird cage was added for manual tracking on closer targets.

But every game has people that read a website and feel they have to bring that reality to the game. No matter how the devs pushback.

Yes there are some annoying posters here.



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 10:48:09 AM)

I see what you did there and I'm impressed.



PN79 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 1:17:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheOriginalOverlord

...

I'm going off what I read here..
http://www.allworldwars.com/Finding-Fixing-Finishing-Guideline.html

quote:

The plotting officer would manually update the plotting board in the control van, while at the same time the battalion commander was attempting to acquire the track using the co-located Spoon Rest radar. Once the track was detected, the battalion could transmit from the Fan Song and attempt to acquire the target and begin the engagement process.[18] When the battalion operated without the aid of acquisition radar, or was cut-off from IADS cueing, it could still self-acquire using the Fan Song, but this was a degraded (autonomous) mode of operation. By 1965 the tracking process, from initial EW detection to Fan Song handoff, was completed in less than 5 minutes.[19]

The SA-2 battalion would transmit using the Fan Song in an attempt to acquire the target. The process of acquisition, target tracking and missile launch took approximately 75 seconds.[20]




I understand what you are saying about the scope of the game... as a "player" I'd personally like to be able to shoot at FCR radars while they are still in "acquisition" mode...instead of having to wait until a missile(s) is in the air. JMHO




The same web is in later part saying that later it was reduced to 30 seconds.

Technically SA-2 doesn't need to activate radar at all for missile firings as it can use dog house or carat camera (in later versions) for target track. The number of 75 seconds corresponds to at that time procedures based on at that time crew proficiency.




thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/3/2020 1:38:34 PM)

"Its one of the reasons the dog house/bird cage was added for manual tracking on closer targets."

I noted that already. And good point on proficiency. That OODA loop is a huge factor in scenarios like this.



boogabooga -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 12:06:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Might want to drop that nugget in this thread. At least up to the point of an actual issue being found.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4891752

Maybe even pin it to the top of the forum.


Just for the record, I did post a save that shows an actual issue in that thread.



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 12:08:28 PM)

As I said, there was an issue. My point is all the people who jump into threads like that and demand a flight sim level of tactical simulation for an operational game.



BDukes -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 12:57:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

As I said, there was an issue. My point is all the people who jump into threads like that and demand a flight sim level of tactical simulation for an operational game.


You seem to like fan the flames a little too much. Maybe give us all a rest for awhile. World not need this right now.



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 1:04:29 PM)

Feel free not to read it.



BDukes -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 1:10:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Feel free not to read it.


That would be true if you wheren't doing it in about every string.

What is broke with you that you need to roar into the internet? Probably more important, at this stage of the game why don't you think readers know what is when they see it?

Be nice. We have good game and good community. Look on bright side. People respond because they're interested in game. That is good thing. Command was born out of make thing better and open discourse. Not tell people how to post, do scenario or even think. What are you bringing to table other than think the dev might like you more if you smash any user you think they might not like post.

Please consider. Thanks!



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 1:43:44 PM)

I am not being rude, untruthful, or personal. If you think there is something truly wrong here, report it.

I have new posts in 5 threads in the last three days. You have been in at least 7. So exactly what is all over the place.



BDukes -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 2:08:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I am not being rude, untruthful, or personal. If you think there is something truly wrong here, report it.

I have new posts in 5 threads in the last three days. You have been in at least 7. So exactly what is all over the place.


You absolutely are and I'm reporting it to you. Please come in better faith to conversations. All I can do is ask you.


Bill



thewood1 -> RE: SA 6 Question (10/4/2020 3:14:20 PM)

OK, all the more power to ya. btw, maybe you should stop posting all over the place. Someone might report you.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7207031