AG radar tracking movers
-
Last I remember GMT track didn’t move with the target in BMS which is a flaw in the code. Even though CCRP doesn’t lead target motion even on the real airplane. Good chance that every attack which started in GMT tracking ended in CCIP and visual.
-
Last I remember GMT track didn’t move with the target in BMS which is a flaw in the code. Even though CCRP doesn’t lead target motion even on the real airplane. Good chance that every attack which started in GMT tracking ended in CCIP and visual.
Low level, CBU and works fine without leading.
Of course with a price… -
Low level, CBU and works fine without leading.
Of course with a price…What cluster bombs can be used low level (efficiently)?
-
…and what does “low level” mean wrt a CBU?
-
Of course with a price…
That, Molni, is the question. How aggressive is too aggressive? Of course, it depends on the defenses.
Lorik and Stevie- I’ve had good luck with Mk20 , even as low as 500 ft., in a quick pop-up attack. A MP Bud likes CBU-87, but for me they seem to have finicky launch parameters. -
Here’s a video sample of my technique for CBU-87s on movers from a safe altitude. Start the video at 25:28 to jump to the action.
I find nothing wrong with GMT mode whatsoever, it works just as it should.
-
That, Molni, is the question. How aggressive is too aggressive? Of course, it depends on the defenses.
Lorik and Stevie- I’ve had good luck with Mk20 , even as low as 500 ft., in a quick pop-up attack. A MP Bud likes CBU-87, but for me they seem to have finicky launch parameters.I mean in reality. That’s what Molni tends to think with, or so I think.
-
That, Molni, is the question. How aggressive is too aggressive? Of course, it depends on the defenses.
Lorik and Stevie- I’ve had good luck with Mk20 , even as low as 500 ft., in a quick pop-up attack. A MP Bud likes CBU-87, but for me they seem to have finicky launch parameters.Having played a bit with RL Mk20s, I think 500 AGL could be on the absolute ragged edge…but it can also depend on what type of fuse is being used. I suppose. But seriously, I think 500 AGL is too low for getting much if any spread on the bomblets - or time of fall required for arm time on some fuses, for that matter. 1 to 2000 AGL is far more realistic for “low altitude”, if I recall. Doing a pop up attack is certainly reasonable, but I would still think you’d want to apex and release higher.
Used to have serious fun predicting the spread patterns for multiple Mk20s!
-
Do the Mk 20 containers have variable spin? The SUU-64s apparently have a 0-2500 in 500 RPM increment. That would change footprint.
Hitting a T-55 with a Rockeye I would figure 500-900’ HOF would be a good sweet spot. 300-500’ HOF is good submunition density but unless you’re room for error in aiming is minimized. You really want a high submunition density for anything tough. CBUs are only area weapons against soft targets. Against armor CBU is a shotgun instead of a unitary bomb rifle. It’s still 1:1 weapon to target (or 2:1, 4:1) but a lot more of a sure thing.
Falcon CBUs are a little special. Yeah at BA 2000 (not a valid CBU-87 HOF but whatever) you can get away with eyeball leading if target is soft. I’ve also noticed that you’ll drop 1 large area and kill very little but a pair gets tons of kills like the first does 51%+ damage and the second finishes them off even with quite heavily armored targets. That doesn’t mesh with the actual weapon performance you’d expect in reality. When it’s hit-to-kill the density requirement goes very high and soon you’re dropping 2-4 cans and less than average HOF just to meet your density target.
-
You guys have got yourselves distracted into( useful info on) CBUs.
Of course dropping a a dumb iron Mk 82 on a mover is not the way to go any more, but in the First Gulf War ( and in others) there isn’t always a choice. But I think Frederf got it right. GMT doesn’t track movers. Set up a TE last night with only two moving tanks and hit one with a Mk 82, but GMT didn’t track so I had to switch to CCIP and lead before pickling. I assume in real life GMT would track a mover.
-
AFAIR the movers need to be above a minimum speed to feature on GMT. Otherwise they appear on GM
-
AFAIR the movers need to be above a minimum speed to feature on GMT. Otherwise they appear on GM
Correct.
Not sure the LO/HI mode is implemented or not? (changing the rejection speed). -
It also has to be radial speed. GMT uses doppler, just like A/A.
-
I don’t think that’s true. GMTI is generated based on the difference between two GM-type radar pictures. The indicator would be based on a threshold of difference data. If the radar is sharper in range or azimuth that would affect the ability to generate a sharp difference bump but it shouldn’t be radial velocity only.
MTR is actually two MTR settings. There is an MTR HI/LO for AA radar modes and an MTR HI/LO for GMT radar mode and they are independent.
-
Do the Mk 20 containers have variable spin? The SUU-64s apparently have a 0-2500 in 500 RPM increment. That would change footprint.
Hitting a T-55 with a Rockeye I would figure 500-900’ HOF would be a good sweet spot. 300-500’ HOF is good submunition density but unless you’re room for error in aiming is minimized. You really want a high submunition density for anything tough. CBUs are only area weapons against soft targets. Against armor CBU is a shotgun instead of a unitary bomb rifle. It’s still 1:1 weapon to target (or 2:1, 4:1) but a lot more of a sure thing.
Falcon CBUs are a little special. Yeah at BA 2000 (not a valid CBU-87 HOF but whatever) you can get away with eyeball leading if target is soft. I’ve also noticed that you’ll drop 1 large area and kill very little but a pair gets tons of kills like the first does 51%+ damage and the second finishes them off even with quite heavily armored targets. That doesn’t mesh with the actual weapon performance you’d expect in reality. When it’s hit-to-kill the density requirement goes very high and soon you’re dropping 2-4 cans and less than average HOF just to meet your density target.
No, no variable spin in RL. However I should think that time of fall would make a diff - the longer the time of fall, the greater the spin? If they spin at all…which suddenly I’m not sure that they do.
True - it’s bomblet density that matters, and there are various types of bomblets…so it’s a combination of fusing, munition, and delivery that sums up the effectiveness of a Mk20. As a rule, Mk20s are generally dropped in pairs in RL…at least that was the way it was when I played with them.
-
I don’t think that’s true. GMTI is generated based on the difference between two GM-type radar pictures. The indicator would be based on a threshold of difference data. If the radar is sharper in range or azimuth that would affect the ability to generate a sharp difference bump but it shouldn’t be radial velocity only.
MTR is actually two MTR settings. There is an MTR HI/LO for AA radar modes and an MTR HI/LO for GMT radar mode and they are independent.
I completely disagree. When you look at RL radar GM maps, they have a very poor resolution (especially angular) and are fairly noisy. Comparing those would yield nothing.
Those slides do a good job of explaining what you can see in various radar modes (GMT or GMTI as its usually known ; SAR as well).
[https://icerm.brown.edu/materials/Slides/sp-f17-offweeks/Discussion_of_Radar_and_Moving_Targets_]_Armin_Doerry,Sandia_National_Laboratories.pdf](https://icerm.brown.edu/materials/Slides/sp-f17-offweeks/Discussion_of_Radar_and_Moving_Targets]_Armin_Doerry,_Sandia_National_Laboratories.pdf)EDIT : reading those all the way, there is a technic that ressemble what you describe (slide 48 ). But 1/ this is in SAR maps; and 2/ there is absolutely no way it is implemented in the old APG-68.