|
|
#3578708 - 05/24/12 07:28 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
farokh
Member
Registered: 04/22/12
Posts: 628
Loc: IRAN
|
Edited by milang (06/01/12 10:54 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578720 - 05/24/12 07:51 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Member
Registered: 04/27/12
Posts: 245
Loc: Czech Republic
|
Damn, they are GOOD, they evaded 14 missiles :-( Missile 4 almost hit the target.... They are really aware of the missile's flight envelope. 18:40 24th of March, 1986.
Operation Prairie Fire
S-200VE Vega-E
00:04:33, Missile launched from launcher-1
Target distance: 66km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 2°
Target angular speed: 202m/s (0,7 Mach)
Target altitude: 3km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Acquire target before launch
Received signal strength: 39,8dB
00:04:39, Missile launched from launcher-2
Target distance: 65km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 2°
Target angular speed: 202m/s (0,7 Mach)
Target altitude: 3km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Acquire target before launch
Received signal strength: 39,9dB
00:04:44, Missile launched from launcher-3
Target distance: 64km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 2°
Target angular speed: 202m/s (0,7 Mach)
Target altitude: 3km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Acquire target during flight
Received signal strength: 40dB
00:04:49, Missile launched from launcher-4
Target distance: 63km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 2°
Target angular speed: 203m/s (0,7 Mach)
Target altitude: 3km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Acquire target during flight
Received signal strength: 40,2dB
00:06:04, Missile launched from launcher-5
Target distance: 71km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 1°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 39,1dB
00:06:40, Missile launched from launcher-6
Target distance: 78km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 38,3dB
00:07:10, Missile launched from launcher-1
Target distance: 84km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 37,5dB
00:07:20, Missile launched from launcher-2
Target distance: 86km
Target azimuth: 49°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 37,3dB
00:07:37, Missile launched from launcher-3
Target distance: 90km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 36,9dB
00:07:48, Missile launched from launcher-4
Target distance: 92km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -198m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 36,6dB
00:08:25, Missile launched from launcher-5
Target distance: 99km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -199m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 35,7dB
00:08:59, Missile launched from launcher-6
Target distance: 106km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -199m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 34,9dB
00:09:22, Missile launched from launcher-1
Target distance: 110km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -199m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 34,3dB
00:09:34, Missile launched from launcher-2
Target distance: 113km
Target azimuth: 50°
Target elevation: 0°
Target angular speed: -199m/s (-0,8 Mach)
Target altitude: 1,5km
RPC mode: MHI - Narrow Beam
GSN mode: Vcr<0
Received signal strength: 34dB
Total, SNR On Air Time: 7min 20sec
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578756 - 05/24/12 08:31 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: piston79]
|
Member
Registered: 12/31/09
Posts: 1735
Loc: Hungary, Europe
|
I would not consider all of these as TOP ARMIES... Please, add the number of batteries possesed by those countries, and if you dig deep, what is the density of the coverage over the important objects. Even a modern SAM could be overwhelmed if it is not in a neccesary quontities... Of course, any defense can be overwhelmed by sheer number of attackers. Sometimes, there are surprisingly few of them. Usual Operation Allied Force package against Belgrade consisted... 2 pairs of F-15C CAP armed with; 2 AIM-9M Sidewinder's, 2 AIM-7MH Sparrow's, 4 AIM-120 AMRAAM's 2 pairs of F-16CJ Weasel armed with; 2 AIM-9M Sidewinder's, 2 AIM-120 AMRAAM's, 2 AGM-88 HARM's 1 pair of EA-6B Jammer 10 pieces of F-117A armed with; 2 LGB's 2 pieces of B-2A armed with; JDAM's ... against 8 S-125M Neva (SA-3B) SAM, defending the Serbian capital.  (I plan to introduce several situations around Belgrade in the far future...)
Edited by Hpasp (05/24/12 08:58 AM)
_________________________
Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home
While Fighter Pilots made movies, SAM Officers made History.
(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578836 - 05/24/12 10:19 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
farokh
Member
Registered: 04/22/12
Posts: 628
Loc: IRAN
|
excuse me mr.hp... about serbian war with nato .. over and around belgrad city ... serbian army did used or didnt used any amrican sam???
It might be serbian army using amrican sam system like hawk to engage with nato army???
for deffense belgrAD and over the serb country ... serbian army only use ussr sam defense?
Edited by milang (05/24/12 10:23 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578881 - 05/24/12 11:17 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Member
Registered: 01/12/12
Posts: 171
|
The main idea is, that if you engage a 2 plane F-16CJ formation, and both Weasels are launching a HARM (half of their total war load for the mission), you can engage parallel the two plane and two incoming missiles, while you still have 2 firing channels free. Both Patriot and S-300 has capabilities to auto lock on incoming ARM's. The problem is that both Patriot and S-300 can simultaneously engage targets only in relatively narrow sector, not wider than 90 degrees. If the enemy will launch coordinated air attack with demonstration group that will attack from the front, launching ARM's and decoys, and strike group, that will approach the SAM site from behind, at low altitude, and fire their HARM's at radar's backlobes (similar to Israeli tactics modeled in several missions in SAM Sim, minus ARM's, of course), the lone SAM will have no chance. Putting several SAMs at one location, so that they will be able to cover each other's back is also not the best idea, considering their cost - SAM's have to cover some objects, not themselves. This is, I think, a major problem in today's conditions. The Russian "Morfei" SAM, that I mentioned before, is one of possible solutions to this problem, intended to cover the "big brothers" - S-400, S-500 - from such strikes, with its 360 degree firing capability. P. S.: It is intersting if that fabric shroud on your picture is actually made of radar-absorbing material, or it is here just to protect against rain and snow. If the former is true, it looks like Americans have recognized a problem here too...
Edited by Lonewolf357 (05/24/12 11:20 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578885 - 05/24/12 11:20 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Member
Registered: 10/07/08
Posts: 1318
|
I'm not sure if there is (still) an error, but when looking at the elevation profile of SA2 missile engaging the U2 (in an earlier post), the missile speed increases monotonically from ground to max altitude, before dropping off to a lower value which is steady until impact...
This seems an unlikely velocity profile, and there is a considerable difference between the reported 'speed' and the displayed scale.
Other tracks produce similar profiles and discrepancies in scale/value. I wonder if the speed/scale is partially where the scale only reports ground speed, but the flight path also allows for changes in altitude? However, this isn't 'all' the problem as the SU9 also has 1320km/h peak reported on an 1187km/h scale. (Allowing for spherical coordinates (19871m altitude on 6378000m earth radius) only increases the 1187 'ground coordinate velocity') to 1190km/h, so there is/was an error of some kind somewhere).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578897 - 05/24/12 11:49 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Lonewolf357]
|
Member
Registered: 12/31/09
Posts: 1735
Loc: Hungary, Europe
|
The main idea is, that if you engage a 2 plane F-16CJ formation, and both Weasels are launching a HARM (half of their total war load for the mission), you can engage parallel the two plane and two incoming missiles, while you still have 2 firing channels free. Both Patriot and S-300 has capabilities to auto lock on incoming ARM's. The problem is that both Patriot and S-300 can simultaneously engage targets only in relatively narrow sector, not wider than 90 degrees. If the enemy will launch coordinated air attack with demonstration group that will attack from the front, launching ARM's and decoys, and strike group, that will approach the SAM site from behind, at low altitude, and fire their HARM's at radar's backlobes (similar to Israeli tactics modeled in several missions in SAM Sim, minus ARM's, of course), the lone SAM will have no chance. Putting several SAMs at one location, so that they will be able to cover each other's back is also not the best idea, considering their cost - SAM's have to cover some objects, not themselves. This is, I think, a major problem in today's conditions. The Russian "Morfei" SAM, that I mentioned before, is one of possible solutions to this problem, intended to cover the "big brothers" - S-400, S-500 - from such strikes, with its 360 degree firing capability. P. S.: It is intersting if that fabric shroud on your picture is actually made of radar-absorbing material, or it is here just to protect against rain and snow. If the former is true, it looks like Americans have recognized a problem here too... Disagree.  S-300P should not illuminate its target, till it is in range. (55/75/90/150/250/400km whatever) When target is in range, the V-500 missile has Mach6(!!!) speed, while the HARM is achieving Mach2 only. From this point, it is only tactics, that would decide. Its not so easy to surprise an S-300PMU battery from the back, as it was demonstrated during the current Slovakian MACE-XIII exercise. http://www.macexiii.mil.sk/24943/ministe...-hosti.php?pg=1(Clam Shell Low Altitude Acquisition Radar far away...)  Turkish Phantom with Israeli EL/L-8222 Jamming pod   German Learjet-35 with EADS-Cassidian Jammers  Norvegian Dassault standoff jammer.  And the target... 
Edited by Hpasp (05/24/12 11:59 AM)
_________________________
Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home
While Fighter Pilots made movies, SAM Officers made History.
(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578899 - 05/24/12 11:59 AM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Lonewolf357]
|
Member
Registered: 09/02/11
Posts: 890
|
If the enemy will launch coordinated air attack with demonstration group that will attack from the front, launching ARM's and decoys, and strike group, that will approach the SAM site from behind, at low altitude, and fire their HARM's at radar's backlobes (similar to Israeli tactics modeled in several missions in SAM Sim, minus ARM's, of course), the lone SAM will have no chance. Putting several SAMs at one location, so that they will be able to cover each other's back is also not the best idea, considering their cost - SAM's have to cover some objects, not themselves. This is, I think, a major problem in today's conditions. Thus in 1999, eve of the Operation Allied Force, the Yugoslavian Air Defense had:Three radio technical Brigade (20., 31., 58.), with 17 radio technical battalion. One S-125M Neva (SA-3B) brigade (250. around Belgrade) with 8 systems. One S-125M Neva (SA-3B) regiment (450. around Kraljevo) with 4 systems. Five 2K12M KUB (SA-6B) regiments altogether with 20 systems. 60. 2K12M KUB-M regiment around Podgorica 230. 2K12M KUB-M regiment around Nis 240. 2K12M KUB-M regiment around Novi Sad 310. 2K12M KUB-M regiment around Kraguljevac 311. 2K12M KUB-M regiment around Pristina This war was pretty close to turn much nastier, as the plans to field 3pcs S-300PMU1 (SA-20A Gargoyle) and 4pcs 9K330 TOR-M (SA-15 Gauntlet) were ready that time. Pretty different picture...  Usual Operation Allied Force package against Belgrade consisted...
2 pairs of F-15C CAP armed with; 2 AIM-9M Sidewinder's, 2 AIM-7MH Sparrow's, 4 AIM-120 AMRAAM's
2 pairs of F-16CJ Weasel armed with; 2 AIM-9M Sidewinder's, 2 AIM-120 AMRAAM's, 2 AGM-88 HARM's
1 pair of EA-6B Jammer
10 pieces of F-117A armed with; 2 LGB's
2 pieces of B-2A armed with; JDAM's
... against 8 S-125M Neva (SA-3B) SAM, defending the Serbian capital. Does B-2/-117 attacked PVO??? I am not pretty sure about that... Bet this 4 planes (weasels) were attacking only one or maximum two batteries. In fact serbs had total of 32 target chanels (12 "Neva" and 20 "Kub", only 8 of them were around Belgrade), so max 16 planes (attacking from 2 different directions), where enough to make an attack against Belgrade PVO (I am not counting the artilery).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578908 - 05/24/12 12:12 PM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: piston79]
|
Member
Registered: 12/31/09
Posts: 1735
Loc: Hungary, Europe
|
Does B-2/-117 attacked PVO??? I am not pretty sure about that...
Bet this 4 planes (weasels) were attacking only one or maximum two batteries. In fact serbs had total of 32 target chanels (12 "Neva" and 20 "Kub", only 8 of them were around Belgrade), so max 16 planes (attacking from 2 different directions), where enough to make an attack against Belgrade PVO (I am not counting the artilery). Yes during the first night, they attacked most of the known (than already empty) fixed SAM locations, and Tomahawk's were used to knock off the sole P-14 Tall King at Kacarevo.  Here is the fixed site Yakovo, of the 3.rd PVO (Zoltan Dani's unit) after the first night. The battery left the site few days before the war broke out, leaving few guards at the site only. Those guards were pretty  after the bombing. 
In fact serbs had total of 32 target chanels (12 "Neva" and 20 "Kub", only 8 of them were around Belgrade), so max 16 planes (attacking from 2 different directions), where enough to make an attack against Belgrade PVO (I am not counting the artilery).
In fact, those firing channels were defending different targets, so the Capital-Belgrade (most important target) was defended only by 8 Neva. As the Serbians expected a long war to survive, they created a duty rota so never more than 2~4 battery were actually online. The other units were relocating meantime to their next firing position.
Edited by Hpasp (05/24/12 03:43 PM)
_________________________
Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home
While Fighter Pilots made movies, SAM Officers made History.
(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#3578967 - 05/24/12 01:30 PM
Re: SAM Simulator
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Member
Registered: 01/12/12
Posts: 171
|
OK, I see your point, Hpasp, this makes sense. However with HARM's simultaneously approaching from different directions, SAM crew will still have very hard time dealing with them. By the way, is there any information at which distance can S-300 track the Stealth aircraft, such as F-117? If the S-125 can do so at about 17 km, how S-300 would do?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previous Topic
Index