[Fixed] SAM and SEAD Detection issues

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] SAM and SEAD Detection issues

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] SAM and SEAD Detection issues

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

[Fixed] SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 8/12/2020 11:55:25 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Ok..been playing with F105s in a Vietnamese threat environment. CWDB v478

Noticing some irregularities...so I made a test SA-2/3/4/5 SAMs spread way apart. ACTIVE Radar

I've picked various F-105 models D/F/G and passively flown them over the SAMs at 36k and no emissions.

SA-2 detects but won't fire due to imprecise target.

SA-3 detects at @8nm but fires. 105G(#2824) doesn't detect until 7nm. Spots SAM visually with no launch warning at 5nm. Then defeats SAM with NO help from the ALQ-105 (miss)

SA-4 detects 105G ~54nm away. 105G detects Pat Hand search radar ~108nm. @32nm detects FCR but no audio/visual "popup"..just orange text color radar info change on launch. SIghts SAM visually at 2nm and 4nm. SA-4 hits with no DECM "fired" to defeat it.

SA-5 detects 105G at 206nm. 105G detects two inbound SAMs visually at 49nm from the 105G...NO electronic warning signals.
Two SAMs miss..(no help from jammer pods). F105G detects Tall King @117nm.

So only some emissions are picked up... no electronic warnings about SAM launch...which the weasels specifically had sensors to tell when it was searching vs lock vs launch....

SA-2 doesn't engage...

save included... BAD guys are SAMS.... GOOD guys is the F105 however YOU will need pick and insert the 105 of your choice as I was trying different variants to see what different effects they had on the SAMs etc. F105G #2824 was used in the commentary above.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Steve McClaire -- 9/18/2020 9:23:58 PM >

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

Post #: 1

RE: SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 8/13/2020 12:17:18 AM

thewood1

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

I don't see a save.

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 2

RE: SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 8/13/2020 12:39:56 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I don't see a save.

Sorry..dunno why it didn't stick the first time

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 3

RE: SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 8/13/2020 2:12:44 AM

Rory Noonan

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline

Logged for investigation.

0014087

_____________________________

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 4

RE: [Logged] SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 9/18/2020 9:23:31 PM

SteveMcClaire

Posts: 4472
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

Hi TheOriginalOverload,

The issue of the SA-2 not turning on its targeting radar against an ambiguous contact will be fixed for the next update. The SA-3 is actually having the same issue as the SA-2 but does fire once it picks up the F-105 visually. Once we have this issue fixed the SA-2/3 will turn on their targeting radar, which will be detected by the F-105, resulting in the 'new contact' warning.

The SA-4 air search radar is on a band that the RWR can detect, so you're getting a contact for the SA-4 before it actually turns on its targeting radar to engage. You can set the game to show a message box when a 'contact change' occurs and you'll be notified when the SA-4 is flagged as hostile after the first SAM is detected, but there isn't currently a message for when a new type of sensor is detected from an existing contact.

In the case of the RWR vs. the SA-5 tracking radar, the RWR sensor in the game is modeled with a maximum range of 120nm while the SA-5 targeting radar is locking on and its shooting beyond this range. So missiles are in the air before the F-105 closes to where the RWR shows the threat radar. This case is being reviewed to see how it should be handled.

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 5

RE: [Logged] SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 9/18/2020 11:56:36 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire

Hi TheOriginalOverload,

The issue of the SA-2 not turning on its targeting radar against an ambiguous contact will be fixed for the next update. The SA-3 is actually having the same issue as the SA-2 but does fire once it picks up the F-105 visually. Once we have this issue fixed the SA-2/3 will turn on their targeting radar, which will be detected by the F-105, resulting in the 'new contact' warning.

The SA-4 air search radar is on a band that the RWR can detect, so you're getting a contact for the SA-4 before it actually turns on its targeting radar to engage. You can set the game to show a message box when a 'contact change' occurs and you'll be notified when the SA-4 is flagged as hostile after the first SAM is detected, but there isn't currently a message for when a new type of sensor is detected from an existing contact.

In the case of the RWR vs. the SA-5 tracking radar, the RWR sensor in the game is modeled with a maximum range of 120nm while the SA-5 targeting radar is locking on and its shooting beyond this range. So missiles are in the air before the F-105 closes to where the RWR shows the threat radar. This case is being reviewed to see how it should be handled.

Thanks for the response...

Two questions:

I'm doing some research and I've found that the Weasel "Vector" RWR operated in the C,S and X band. So it shouldn't pick up the "Spoon Rest". However I stumbled onto something else and I'm not sure if it's something that can be integrated. Currently as soon as the SA-2/3 locates a target via the Spoon Rest the Fan Song FCR (which is detectable) illuminates immediately upon launch. So there is only a "launch" warning no "search" warning....so no ability to fire an ARM prior to SAM launch.
In this link..
http://www.allworldwars.com/Finding-Fixing-Finishing-Guideline.html

It states...
"By 1965 the tracking process, from initial EW detection to Fan Song hand off, 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."

I'm going to guess that it isn't easy to make that happen..but it would put some realism to it as I'm sure many SAM systems need the FCR to illuminate prior to launch to get target data and that it's not "instantaneous". Maybe a delay on the launch until after the FCR is active for x amount of time code? Perhaps even auto turn on FCR radar by default?

For a Wild Weasel junkie this would make things a lot more exciting over North VN as you now know the SAMs are trying to lock you up and they double the pulse repetition frequency (PRF) of the Fan Song just prior to launch.

Second... did you find out about the DECM pods not affecting the to hit chance?

Thanks again for the work you guys do...

< Message edited by TheOriginalOverlord -- 9/19/2020 12:00:34 AM >

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to SteveMcClaire)

Post #: 6

RE: [Logged] SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 9/21/2020 5:10:18 PM

SteveMcClaire

Posts: 4472
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

The larger issue of how best to model the early command guided SAMs and RWR in the sim is under discussion.

The QRC-335 appears to be working as intended. The AN/ALQ-105 is not checking for a jam against some SAM seekers due to differences in the operating bands. Some of the SAMs seekers are set to have different operating bands than their targeting radar (I for the seeker, G for the targeting radar) which will be reviewed to see if it's correct or not.

< Message edited by Steve McClaire -- 9/21/2020 5:21:53 PM >

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 7

RE: [Logged] SAM and SEAD Detection issues - 9/22/2020 1:52:20 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire

The larger issue of how best to model the early command guided SAMs and RWR in the sim is under discussion.

The QRC-335 appears to be working as intended. The AN/ALQ-105 is not checking for a jam against some SAM seekers due to differences in the operating bands. Some of the SAMs seekers are set to have different operating bands than their targeting radar (I for the seeker, G for the targeting radar) which will be reviewed to see if it's correct or not.

thanks again..

further question/observation. If you go in CWDB and add a QRC-160 1A ECM (forerunner to the ALQ-71/72s) to a plane it becomes an "offensive" jammer. And turning it "active" it jams like you would expect...until the SAMs can burn thru and lock on to engage. It does NOT offer any protection during the "to hit" calculations.

IMHO that is how these early pods shold be working..not sure maybe even later pods should also "jam" the radar until burn through instead of/and also give a "to hit" chance reduction.

According to my studying (and I'm not a EW specialist lol) is that all these early jammers "should" be behaving like the QRC does. They prevent the lock on and engagement of SAMs at max sensor/weapon range.

Maybe it would be difficult to do it possibly change the complete gameplay of CMO...but I "think" it would be more realistic that way. Perhaps have the big dedicated jammer aircraft run around with the "JAM" icon when active. But individual self jammers not have the "JAM" icon except in the drop down contact emissions window. PLUS have the effect of not allowing lock/engagement until burn thru has been achieved and also give a "to hit" modifier.

Let me know if I can be of further assistance.

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to SteveMcClaire)

Post #: 8