SA-19 new capabilities.
-
So, how it’s possible I have been shoot by Sa19 at 26000ft ?
Some Dev can explain any changes about it ??
Where is the detailed report? What was terrain elevation? Repro case please.
-
Where is the detailed report? What was terrain elevation? Repro case please.
There is no detailed report because I’m not reporting a bug. I’m asking if this is expected as per the code or any DB change I can’t see.
I have little hope to reproduce that, but if I find a way, why not. Otherwise, we’ll stay with the possibility that SA-19 can suddenly target Thomas Pesquet
-
Ok, so, nothing to investigate for the moment then.
Thank you.
-
Exactly. I come to the conclusion that is an unrealistic (and unwanted) event, but that we have no material to investigate.
For anyone curious to see it happening in an ACMI, here it is.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KF8oZ7ZtDDYuz6v7IY04F6Xd-oQjTF__/view?usp=sharingTwo interesting times are in the file name.
-
From GlobalSecurity.org - "9M111 / SA-19 GRISON
The SA-19 GRISON (9M111) is a radar command guided, two-stage surface to air missile mounted on the 2S6 Tunguska Integrated Air Defense System. The 2S6 vehicle is fitted with two banks of four missiles in blocks of two, which can be elevated vertically independent of each other. The SA-19 can engage aerial targets moving at a maximum speed of 500 meters/second (1185 MPH\Mach 1.5) at altitudes ranging from 15 to 3,500 meters (11483 feet), and at slant ranges from 2400 to 8000 meters. The missile’s high-explosive fragmentation warhead is actuated by a proximity fuse if the missile passes within 5 meters of the target. The SA-19 is claimed to have a kill probability of 0.65.The SA-19 missile is a two-stage command-guided missile. The missile system is composed of the fire control unit, launcher, missile tracker, and the canistered missile, and is supported by the direct-view optics (DVO) and the HOT SHOT target tracking and acquisition radars onboard the 2S6M. Typical reaction time is 8-12 seconds."
From this I would say you should have been perfectly safe at anything above 12,000’…Nope, in fact the engagement zone is not a solid wall it just shows the 97%+ pk with certain conditions.
If you are flying slower but higher there is still chance to hit.
The question is the manovering reserve of the missile which shall be modeled well.In fact sometimes the EZ of the system is way to strict. According to Greeks the 10.5 km distance of the Osa-AKM is under estimation. At 2-2.5 km. alt from 10 km flying the missile still can pull more than 20G.
While on paper it is the edge of engagement zone…The problem that 26k feet is way, way higher than should be. In that alt. at slower speed the arrow like 2nd stage barely can manover.
-
Unable to repro on my Dev version. Here it works as supposed.
-
Thanks I have no repro case on the same file here so I’m not surprised. Let’s live with it.
-
Thanks I have no repro case on the same file here so I’m not surprised. Let’s live with it.
If it’s just shooting you down i’m ok with it Lorik… :mrgreen:
-
For the pleasure of the eyes (title says all )
Starts at 14:36 zuluhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/15zrg21U_qlyJw4zU1E6ihUUDtbyCIk29/view?usp=sharing
-
For a short range SAM, the kinematic engagement zone (=the places the missile can reach, regardless of guidance) is usually a bubble, slightly depressed. Fighting altitude is not all that big a deal (gravity, yes, but also less drag).
The further the range, the less depressed the bubble.So I’m not surprised the missile can climb up to 20kft at all.
The question becomes :
1/ is there something else in the Pantsir/tunguska which limits engagement altitude. Radar or guidance method could induce altitude limitatioins not well modeled in BMS.
2/ does the missile has enough maneuvrability at 20 kft.
But even there, the AC in the ACMI is at 2G max, no need for a hard missile maneuver ; plus the missile stays at M2+ all the way.Depending on variants, the 9M311 is also reported to be able to reach 6000 m.
https://www.deagel.com/Defensive%20Weapons/9M311/a000996 -
Aahh very interesting. Until now, everything was driving us, me at least, at thinking that this wasn’t supposed to happen at such altitude. If there is reflects of these data in the code and we should consider such a risk, I’m fine with it. I have to say it’s rather new, and I would be surprised there was no modification made somewhere from 4.35.
If, on the opposite, this is not known as possible in BMS, that’s another question of course. If you’re saying you’re in charge or one in charge of that, then we’re not in this situation anyway.
As for distance and low altitude, it is at least clear that the engagement ring as defined in ppt.ini doesn’t reflect what the missile can do, if this last ACMI doesn’t show any inconsistency with the expectations. I would modify it manually for myself to a larger radius. -
Ppt.ini is wrong anyway. It has been modified long time ago using a in-game evaluation methode which do not consider system capabilities but only common AI behavior of 4.32/33 version. No surprise that it is a piece of crap now.
I will try to find the modjo to set it back to system design values (even if most of the time, missile will not be launched at max range, only poor SAM operator would do this excerpt in some very rare cases. Better wait for the target to be deeper in n launch envelope if he wants to achieve a kill. If it is only to force a mission abort or to force target to burn fuel or react then , it is different)… -
For a short range SAM, the kinematic engagement zone (=the places the missile can reach, regardless of guidance) is usually a bubble, slightly depressed. Fighting altitude is not all that big a deal (gravity, yes, but also less drag).
2/ does the missile has enough maneuvrability at 20 kft.In RL likely this is the limit.
.
And the Tung as I know also uses only three point guidance which means against any target the missile has to pull higher G compared to proportional or and other leading method.
So in case of higher alt it looses the speed quickly in and also limits the alt the max. available G.