US AIR DEFENCE
Moderators: WildCatNL, cbelva, IronManBeta, CapnDarwin, IronMikeGolf, Mad Russian
US AIR DEFENCE
I have a funny observation after the first turn of the "Battle Tested" scenario. It turns out, that the most effective US air defence assets are... the infantry units. Since I was expecting to encounter the Mi-24s during the first turn resolution, I rushed as many Vulcan sections as possible to the first line, while the Chaparrals were providing overwatch. All in all, 3 Vulcan and 2 Chaparral sections engaged the enemy helicopters. The results after the turn resolution ended, were quite surprising. All in all 6 Mi-24s were shot down: 1 was claimed by the Vulcans, 1 by Chaparrals and 4 by the mech infantry... Also 3 Vulcan subunits were destroyed. This is a little unexpected. With what weapons does the infantry engage the air targets? From what I see, only the company HQs have the Stinger squads attached. I realize that Chaparrals were maybe not effective against the helicopters and Vulcans were not powerful in general, but as dedicated air defence units, shouldn't they more powerful engaging helicopters than the mechanized infantry? There are more infantry units on the map, so they engaged the helicopters more times than the fewer AD units. But the point is, that the Vulcans are utterly ineffective, even from a very close distance. And keep in mind that the Mi-24 is neither very agile nor very well armored helicopter. From the gameplay point of view, there's no point in keeping the AD units, since currently they only serve as a mere cannon fodder.
Lest we forget.
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
How about the Bradley's 25mm chain gun? That weapon is almost as effective as the Vulcan's 20mm gatling gun. It doesn't have the air warning radar, but that can play into its advantage. A key strategy for both sides when using air assets is to locate and neutralize the other's sides air defense units. That becomes one of the top priorities. That means that AD units will die an early death in many cases. A unit with air warning radar can be detected right now in the game at very long ranges if another unit has radar warning equipment. When I have aircraft available, I try and hold them back until I can locate and kill the enemies AD units. In the future we want to give the player to set the profile of the AD units as to when he uses his radar in an effort to make them more survivable. Even the AI will prioritize AD units when it sees them.
That being said, the most effective AD I have found in the face of hostile helos is to bring my units closer (mech infantry and tanks) so that they can support one another. When helos file into an area covered by interlocking fields of fire by multiple units with weapons such as .50 cals and the Bradley's Bushmaster, they don't tend to last very long. When I first started playing this game, I used to fear helos. They would fly in and just take my units apart. They don't do it as much anymore as I have been using this tactic. I smile when I have read post by players complaining about the Soviet Hinds being too powerful and the US AD too weak. It has meant to me that they were not using sound tactics. Sound tactics in this game can defeat Soviet Hinds.
That being said, the most effective AD I have found in the face of hostile helos is to bring my units closer (mech infantry and tanks) so that they can support one another. When helos file into an area covered by interlocking fields of fire by multiple units with weapons such as .50 cals and the Bradley's Bushmaster, they don't tend to last very long. When I first started playing this game, I used to fear helos. They would fly in and just take my units apart. They don't do it as much anymore as I have been using this tactic. I smile when I have read post by players complaining about the Soviet Hinds being too powerful and the US AD too weak. It has meant to me that they were not using sound tactics. Sound tactics in this game can defeat Soviet Hinds.
Charles Belva
On Target Simulations LLC
On Target Simulations LLC
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
The Vulcan system is not that great of a system. Short range, search radar, but not a tracking radar. Even with those issues they do knock down the occasional aircraft. The Chaparral is another sub-par system with limited search and track. Early versions could only shoot at the exhaust of aircraft as they leave. The US placed its AD eggs in the Air Force basket. It was assumed that we would quickly establish air superiority over the battlefield.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
ORIGINAL: cbelva
In the future we want to give the player to set the profile of the AD units as to when he uses his radar in an effort to make them more survivable.
That would be great since this is a primary tactics improving the chances of AD survival on the battlefield ( Serb tactics in 1999 ).
Having said this, it would only make sense against specialized aircraft equipped with anti-radiation missiles. Simple Mi-24 doesn't have any means to detect and destroy AD radars. So the argument that the AD units are easy to detect and destroy by the helicopters is invalid IMO. I'd say it's the other way around - the helicopters are easy to ambush by the simple AD assets that use terrain cover and proper tactics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_attack_on_Karbala
Lest we forget.
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
The MI-24 has the SPO-15 RWR, correct? SPO-15LM info
Seems like there's enough info to tell a pilot/gunner where to scan with his optics to look and find an AD vehicle.
Seems like there's enough info to tell a pilot/gunner where to scan with his optics to look and find an AD vehicle.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
ORIGINAL: Iron Mike Golf
The MI-24 has the SPO-15 RWR, correct? SPO-15LM info
Seems like there's enough info to tell a pilot/gunner where to scan with his optics to look and find an AD vehicle.
Was that system fitted on the Mi-24s in the late 80s'? I've only found an info that it was employed in the post Cold War era. In Afghanistan Mi-24s' were equipped mostly in a passive anti-radar countermeasures.
Lest we forget.
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
SPO-15 was introduced on the Mi24V, earlier versions used the SPO-10
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
SPO-10 is quadrant warning only, right? I guess that tells the pilot when to duck, but not really all that helpful in finding the emitter on the ground.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
Anything that helps situational awareness helps.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
katukov's point, and I agree with this much of it, is that the RWR on earlier models of the Hind aid in the Hind's survivability,but do not aid in spotting an AD radar unit. My reading on the SPO-10 (Sirena3M) lead me to understand there was a very crude range notification, but it was only on the order of "far", "not so far", and "oh no! real close!". I am guessing that translates into a 7 hex (or bigger) footprint, not a single hex.
I am not sure if the SPO-10 can differentiate between air search and tracking radars, either.
I am not sure if the SPO-10 can differentiate between air search and tracking radars, either.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
In game the RWR on units are a defensive adjustment. Radar detections for arty missions are an external function of detection from other ELINT sources. Right now the unit does flash as a RWR warning and in 2.1 that will be a fuzzier occurrence than it is now and we will be better able to separate it out from ELINT detection and fire missions better too. Same type of thing with radio traffic. Through in some SOP for more variable on/off of radars and it should all get a lot more realistic as we move forward.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
OK, so getting "spotted" requires an on-map unit to do so visually?
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
I have my answer messed up above. Air units with RWR get an adjustment against radar directed fire. Units with air search radar can be detected by "off map sources" (when they flash on the map). When detected, a fire mission is entered in the FSCC queue and depending on available assets it may get hit by arty. Hopefully, that is more clear.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
OK, got that. My question is can a unit be spotted for direct fire as a result of a radar emitting?
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
To your question, not currently. It does leave me wondering under what conditions this would work looking ahead to 2.1 and getting things like GSRs going. May need to expand the special a bit more to take into account the various levels of detection RWRs can do and then factor that into spotting. In the 80s there aren't that many ground combat units with RWRs. Definitely some food for thought here.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
Not sure about this, but what about Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) missions. How can it be implemented in the game?
- CapnDarwin
- Posts: 9270
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Newark, OH
- Contact:
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
John, we have arty based SEAD already in the game. It is a priority target for the FSCC if a system is located. As a scenario designer, you can have airstrikes with ARMs that would do a SEAD mission.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
Do aircraft based radar and GSR work on the same or similar wavelengths?
Would a HARM missile tell the difference if both radars work on a similar bandwidth (i.e. within the HARM's searching range specification)
Would a HARM missile tell the difference if both radars work on a similar bandwidth (i.e. within the HARM's searching range specification)
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
When I was stationed in germany in the 83 to 85 time frame I saw only a couple chaperal's, but they were in the process of being phased out.
When at Ft Campbell in 86-88, we had dismounted vulcans, but they only had a 1200m range with a range only radar. The avenger system was then being introduced equipped with 4 or 8 stingers and a .50 cal system.
Back in Germany again in 88-90 and the chaps were gone as far as I know and the Linebacker mounted on a Bradley chassis was being introduced. When flying around on exercises, like reforger 88, there were stinger teams everywhere. We had a pretty good radar warining system on board but nothing to warn you about them pesky stingers until it was too late. The best tactic we had was to fly low and fast so by them time they saw us they had no time to engage.
Having spent much of my time in the air cavalry, we operated well forward of the main force. As the main force moved, we would conduct a zone reconnaissance to their front 20 or more k's depending on terrain. This was also referred to as a Movement to Contact. When operating on the main force flanks we would conduct screening operations 5 to 10 k's out, primary mission there was early warning of any enemy counterattacks. When working with our ground cavalry brothers, we were typically within a few k's of their vehicles, but quite often the air troops were well forward out on their own.
Deep strike type missions are practised all the time, the most dangerous part is penetrating the FEBA. Once through that and into Indian country, the danger while still there, goes down until you reach the target area. In my day we had to get pretty close to the kill zone to be effectice (3k was optimum range then). We had to shoot and scoot moving to alternate firing positions.
Once the apache came out, new tactics came into play allowing the apaches to fire out to 8k's away and not having to see the target at all. Only the scouts needed to have eyes on target allowing the apaches to ripple fire their entire load of 16 hellfires each in 1 second intervals from masked positions. The range eventually got up to 12k's but not in the 88-90 timer frame. Of course this was an optimal situation and old habits are hard to change. All of the initial Apache pilots were former cobra pilots and were too used to the need to have their own eyes on target albeit at a greater range. During Desert Storm they would hover at a couple hundred feet and engage point targets using hellfires 5 to 6 k's away with pretty much impunity. In a high threat environment that is pretty much tantamount to suicide imo but over there at that time in that situation it worked out. I sure as heck wouldn't have done that in Europe had a war broke out there.
When at Ft Campbell in 86-88, we had dismounted vulcans, but they only had a 1200m range with a range only radar. The avenger system was then being introduced equipped with 4 or 8 stingers and a .50 cal system.
Back in Germany again in 88-90 and the chaps were gone as far as I know and the Linebacker mounted on a Bradley chassis was being introduced. When flying around on exercises, like reforger 88, there were stinger teams everywhere. We had a pretty good radar warining system on board but nothing to warn you about them pesky stingers until it was too late. The best tactic we had was to fly low and fast so by them time they saw us they had no time to engage.
Having spent much of my time in the air cavalry, we operated well forward of the main force. As the main force moved, we would conduct a zone reconnaissance to their front 20 or more k's depending on terrain. This was also referred to as a Movement to Contact. When operating on the main force flanks we would conduct screening operations 5 to 10 k's out, primary mission there was early warning of any enemy counterattacks. When working with our ground cavalry brothers, we were typically within a few k's of their vehicles, but quite often the air troops were well forward out on their own.
Deep strike type missions are practised all the time, the most dangerous part is penetrating the FEBA. Once through that and into Indian country, the danger while still there, goes down until you reach the target area. In my day we had to get pretty close to the kill zone to be effectice (3k was optimum range then). We had to shoot and scoot moving to alternate firing positions.
Once the apache came out, new tactics came into play allowing the apaches to fire out to 8k's away and not having to see the target at all. Only the scouts needed to have eyes on target allowing the apaches to ripple fire their entire load of 16 hellfires each in 1 second intervals from masked positions. The range eventually got up to 12k's but not in the 88-90 timer frame. Of course this was an optimal situation and old habits are hard to change. All of the initial Apache pilots were former cobra pilots and were too used to the need to have their own eyes on target albeit at a greater range. During Desert Storm they would hover at a couple hundred feet and engage point targets using hellfires 5 to 6 k's away with pretty much impunity. In a high threat environment that is pretty much tantamount to suicide imo but over there at that time in that situation it worked out. I sure as heck wouldn't have done that in Europe had a war broke out there.
-
- Posts: 1070
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm
RE: US AIR DEFENCE
Minor correction to Sabre's recollections and some amplification, re: Linebacker
In that time frame, ADA units (5-3 ADA, 1AD, stationed at Wackernheim near Mainz, for example) were issued M2 series vehicles. These were stock Brads (M2A2 for 1AD) and modified in the rear compartment by adding Stinger stowage racks. These were not Linebackers. So, they had Bradleys and were also fielding Avengers. They were not trading in Brads for Avengers.
I worked with the 5-3 ADA Bradley Master Gunner (I was the MG for 1AD) regarding crew training for the Bradley crews. The shot the Infantry gunnery tables, including Table XII, Platoon Qualification. There was not enough ammo in the STRAC at that time to make a Hind heavy qual table. We reasoned (rationalized) that training those guys to engage ground targets was good for a. self defense and b. similar to engaging a helo hovering at treetop level. We did give them a preponderance of targets in the 1600-20000 meter range band. We were able to have some scenarios in SIMNET tailored to their needs, though.
We were fortunate that the COFT (Conduct of Fire Trainer) included a number of Hind targets and even some undocumented all-Hind scenarios. The fellows drilled these a lot, of course. It is quite a challenge at first to hit a crossing and maneuvering Hind at 2000 meters, but learnable.
If anything, I think the lethality of the M2/M3 series firing the M242 at a Hind is lower than reality. At least for 1AD crews at the time! Heh.
Seriously, at 2000m, I'd give it 50/50 if the Bradley crew and Hind discovered each other at the same time. At 1600 meters or less, I'd put it at 90% or higher. APDS-T and APDSFS-T are like lasers at that range and less. No violent recoil like a tank main gun, so you get to watch the BBs fly all the way downrange.
A face-on Hind at 1600 meters was an engagement on Table VIII, Crew Qualification at the time. It was an easy engagement. Crews routinely shot it with only half the ammo allocated, rolling those 12 or so rounds over to tougher targets.
In that time frame, ADA units (5-3 ADA, 1AD, stationed at Wackernheim near Mainz, for example) were issued M2 series vehicles. These were stock Brads (M2A2 for 1AD) and modified in the rear compartment by adding Stinger stowage racks. These were not Linebackers. So, they had Bradleys and were also fielding Avengers. They were not trading in Brads for Avengers.
I worked with the 5-3 ADA Bradley Master Gunner (I was the MG for 1AD) regarding crew training for the Bradley crews. The shot the Infantry gunnery tables, including Table XII, Platoon Qualification. There was not enough ammo in the STRAC at that time to make a Hind heavy qual table. We reasoned (rationalized) that training those guys to engage ground targets was good for a. self defense and b. similar to engaging a helo hovering at treetop level. We did give them a preponderance of targets in the 1600-20000 meter range band. We were able to have some scenarios in SIMNET tailored to their needs, though.
We were fortunate that the COFT (Conduct of Fire Trainer) included a number of Hind targets and even some undocumented all-Hind scenarios. The fellows drilled these a lot, of course. It is quite a challenge at first to hit a crossing and maneuvering Hind at 2000 meters, but learnable.
If anything, I think the lethality of the M2/M3 series firing the M242 at a Hind is lower than reality. At least for 1AD crews at the time! Heh.
Seriously, at 2000m, I'd give it 50/50 if the Bradley crew and Hind discovered each other at the same time. At 1600 meters or less, I'd put it at 90% or higher. APDS-T and APDSFS-T are like lasers at that range and less. No violent recoil like a tank main gun, so you get to watch the BBs fly all the way downrange.
A face-on Hind at 1600 meters was an engagement on Table VIII, Crew Qualification at the time. It was an easy engagement. Crews routinely shot it with only half the ammo allocated, rolling those 12 or so rounds over to tougher targets.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Sua Sponte