EWS plane can't save AGM-88 from SA-10
-
<p>i put a EA-18G near sam site, SA-10 can’t shoot me, but it CAN shoot AGM-88.<br />is this reasonable?<br />another bug:<br /><img class=“ql-image” src=“https://i.imgur.com/nzRs4S1.jpg” /><br />after shoot out 2 AGM-88, this power can NOT be off.<br /></p>
-
<p><img class=“ql-image” src=“https://i.imgur.com/OxwA942.png” /><br /><br />perfectly reasonable.</p>
-
<p>@CriticalMass so why it does NOT shoot me too?</p>
-
<p>@Gear5 IRL I don’t know. In real-like, I’d say it’s not reasonable. It’s jammed or it’s not. In terms of gameplay, finally, it can be discussed. Is it intentional? I don’t know. I’d say it’s not, rather something forgotten on the way, but there isn’t one answer to all the previous questions, so… And after all, should radars be active when they realize they’re jammed? That’s the real question. </p>
-
<p>@Gear5 <br /><br />I think I recall reading somewhere, jamming can be offset in azimuth, elevation and distance - within limits - from the jamming platform. Let’s pretend the HARM has exceeded those limits whereas your plane hasn’t. Shrug. </p>
-
<blockquote>@Gear5 <br /><br />I think I recall reading somewhere, jamming can be offset in azimuth, elevation and distance - within limits - from the jamming platform. Let’s pretend the HARM has exceeded those limits whereas your plane hasn’t. Shrug. </blockquote><p>What you read is about ECM, not jamming aircrafts. But pretending is always possible, not related to this consideration anyway. </p>
-
<p>Hi, Gear. I have questions about your questions . You say EF-18. Do you mean EA-18G? Because if it’s not a Growler, I surprised the SA-10 is not shooting at you, too. Of course, that depends on your distance from the site. I say that as the EF-18M, which is the only EF I know of in BMS, is modeled after the F/a-18C. Therefore, you only have the point defense jammer, not the Growler’s SOJ. I’d have to dive into the files for absolute confirmation, but that’s what I believe<br /> If you meant the Growler, then I have a theory that might explain this. If you think of the jamming as a globe centered on the jammer, not as a blanket covering the whole area, then the farther you are from that globe, the weaker the jamming. If you are within that “globe”, but the HARM is not (like what you were saying about azimuth, etc), that explains what you’re seeing.<br /> As for your second question…Are you saying you were carrying more then 2 HARM and after firing 2 you found the power was off?<br /></p>
-
<p>@drtbkj oh yes, my mistake, EA-18G, NOT EF-18.<br />i think distance to EA-18 not affect the jamming (i have not test much, but so far, i see no different). and i forgot to mention: i fly over the sam site, it dosn’t shoot me at all, but the AGM-88 was shoot down around 10nm.<br />i carry 2 88s, shoot them out, then that button stop work, until…i change to AA master mode, then back to AG master mode, it works again.<br /><br />i made more test, those fatty GBU won’t be shoot down neither. only AGM-88 is victim.</p>
-
<p>@CriticalMass That’s right, even if - in real life - “anti missile capability” is more referred to cruise missiles, tactical ballistic missiles, and possibly a potential to intercept some types of strategic ballistic missiles. I guess AGM88 hasn’t an RCS wide enough to be catched by SA10’s radar systems.</p>
-
<blockquote>@CriticalMass That’s right, even if - in real life - “anti missile capability” is more referred to cruise missiles, tactical ballistic missiles, and possibly a potential to intercept some types of strategic ballistic missiles. I guess AGM88 hasn’t an RCS wide enough to be catched by SA10’s radar systems.</blockquote><p><br />You think the BMS team added that feature on a counter guess?? </p>
-
<blockquote>@CriticalMass That’s right, even if - in real life - “anti missile capability” is more referred to cruise missiles, tactical ballistic missiles, and possibly a potential to intercept some types of strategic ballistic missiles. I guess AGM88 hasn’t an RCS wide enough to be catched by SA10’s radar systems.</blockquote><p>Nope, you knowledge is inaccurate. Even the S-300PT and PS had anti ARM capability.<br /><br /><br /><a href=“https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzdPKsRJUHVoitxBwxAkh-g” target=“_blank”>Militavia - Military Aviation & Air Defense - YouTube</a><br />Watch here the SAM series sooner or later will arrive to the S-300- It will be quite a long road with lots of physics.<br /><br />Regarding the issue.<br />Because the SOJ is just a “hack” in the game as well as the anti-arm capability of current SAMs.<br />They are simply not coupled generally modeled features I guess.<br />This is not bug, they are unmodeled issues.</p>
-
<p>But, in BMS GBU’s are considered “missiles” , no propulsion and all that jazz , but still “kind of” missile…<br />You can see that in /Sim database. <br />Anyway., some sam’s , especially newer sa15 and on … really can shoot down even a GBU … if they can intercept Harm, so…<br />Yeah, there always room for improvements ;)<br /><br />Your EA-18G is not fired upon as it is “standoff jamming|” aircraft type. So… mmm, it is kinda invulnerable to surface to air threats (within “reasonable” limits I suspect) - you cant come too close… can’t say for sure, haven’t flown too many jamming missions, maybe few, but I never tried to overfly sam’s… (It is an idiot move , right)<br /><br />…- while, AGM88 itself it is NOT a jamming platform , so it gets targeted and is shot down.<br />Like I’ve said abovem there’s …<br />cc</p>
-
<blockquote>@drtbkj oh yes, my mistake, EA-18G, NOT EF-18.<br />i think distance to EA-18 not affect the jamming (i have not test much, but so far, i see no different). and i forgot to mention: i fly over the sam site, it dosn’t shoot me at all, but the AGM-88 was shoot down around 10nm.<br />i carry 2 88s, shoot them out, then that button stop work, until…i change to AA master mode, then back to AG master mode, it works again.<br /><br />i made more test, those fatty GBU won’t be shoot down neither. only AGM-88 is victim.</blockquote><p><br /><br /> Hi, Gear, When I say distance from the jamming, I don’t mean the distance from the Growler to the site. I meant distance of the HARM from the jammer. In other words, is the HARM still in the “globe of jamming” we were discussing. <br /> There are a couple of things I can absolutely confirm in 4.35. First, the SA-10 can and will shoot down HARM. A MP Buddy and I would do what we called " HARM Lottery" missions. We’d go against the -10 with max load of HARM, and salvo them off together at the threat ring. We called it the Lottery since we wondered which jet’s HARM would get the hit. It was usually the fifth or sixth HARM . In Tacview you could see the others getting shot down.<br /> The second thing is that Stand-off jamming IS very effective in BMS. I created a TE against a SA-10 with and without the EA-18, and the missions with jammers went completely differently. <br /> I share what seems to be 'Fang’s view about overflying SAM sites. I’ve never tested that particular theory myself. Could the radar have been destroyed, and the site thus neutralized? If not , then I am curious if burn-through on the jammer is possible in RL. And, if so, is <em>that</em> modeled in BMS.</p>
-
<p>@drtbkj <br />Interesting question that yours, <em>compadre</em>.<br /><br />Answering it <em>may</em> be easy and hard at the same time, though, I guess.<br />Easy: what is set and happens in RL is, and will always be, strictly classified - I just don’t need to explain why, do I?<br />Hard: I am also currently making my tests on my little own. And I don’t have still a definitive response about it, even if I would be tempted to conclude that in BMS that burnthrough could be effective, but at some conditions however.<br /><br />If interested, I would update you at its due time. <br /><br />With a warning: we curently don’t know what the next future can bring to us…<br /><br />With best regards. <br /><br /><br /></p>
-
<p>@drtbkj i m not sure i read u clear. and i dunno how real SA-10 radar works.<br />but here is simple logic: if SAM radar can lock on a thin long iron rod, it should be able to lock on big flat iron triangle too, right? and fatty GBU too.<br />the distance (from anyone to anyone), seem have no effect in the test at all.</p>
-
<blockquote>lock on a thin long iron rod, it should be able to lock on big flat iron triangle too, right?</blockquote><p><br />I think it’s more like “lock on to a cone of tungsten travelling directly toward you at mach 3 (think: doppler shift)” vs lock on to a large chunk of aluminum 50 miles away, travelling perpendicular to your beam (no doppler shift vs background terrain)<br /><br />But I agree with you, it seems like if it could detect and intercept a HARM it could do the same for a Mav or a LGB … or JSOW or SDB etc. I don’t know where the gaps are in BMS modelling vs RL.<br /></p>
-
<p>@Gear5 <a href=“http://mediafire.com/folder/ibpuhagkr7a8w/ENG_-_HT_Osszefoglalo” target=“blank">http://www.mediafire.com/folder/ibpuhagkr7a8w/ENG-_HT_Osszefoglalo</a><br /><br />Here I wrote about the S-300 besides many other things.<br /><br />I will make a far more detailed video within some months.<br />Will be available here.<br /><a href=“https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzdPKsRJUHVoitxBwxAkh-g” target=”_blank">Militavia - Military Aviation & Air Defense - YouTube</a><br /><br />In RL SOJ mostly jams the targ. ac. radars…</p>
-
<p>@molnibalage good.<br />do u still work on missile data files on 4.35?<br />may i get ur copy of \data\sim\misdata ?</p>
-
<blockquote>@molnibalage good.<br />do u still work on missile data files on 4.35?<br />may i get ur copy of \data\sim\misdata ?</blockquote><p>I never worked on them. Since ages I did not work any part of the BMS.<br />The EZ and aero data of the missiles were set by my data supply and recommendation for 4.35. (Or even in 4.34?)<br /><br />Also some dispenser config also were changed.<br />Sadly the HP config of red planes are still not set up.<br />Countless time I sent and showed everybody sincs FF4 (!!!) and while the redfor planes still can have totally inaccurate and not useful loadouts.</p>
-
<p>@molnibalage i remember years ago, u change sa2.dat sa3.dat sa5.dat etc in ur theatre mod, right?<br />i guess u have a different sa2.dat from original 4.35 today?<br /></p>