China?

Right on the spot...
This is a part of Nixon's greeting decoration in Beijin..

I was wondering, how many vehicles are needed to transfer a "5 van" SA-75?

They should be:

5 for each van; 6 for each launcher; 1 for the spare parts, 6 TZM's maybe... What else?...

...Who can accurately say shot down by a missile or aircraft.
Who's 100% knows.

Actually no one knows exactly shot down a U2 rocket or aircraft, those nobody alive.

Who can accurately say shot down by a missile or aircraft.

Who's 100% knows.

We assume that a missile shot down a U2.

That is true at 100% it was.

Hello
I try to get into the sim with perhaps the most simple of the systems as far as I noticed. I tried to engage a B52 target drone which have both dm and cm jam equipment. I accuire the ep and beta as told in the manual and I assume it's range using the tables in "A" view and I use the bore sight control in order to move the range line into place but I can't "lock on" (press the right mouse button in the R area) and therefore there is not envelope or any sign for firing the missile.

I saw that in the Volhov you can set the height of the target manualy which solves the problem. but how do you do it in the Dvina?

thanks
RF

i cant understand why dvina dont have ground clutter !

The picture you posted of <1 reminds me of terrain bounce jamming. I can't read cyrillic however I feel that the illustrations and your description of a mirror image from the target return may form part of the underlying concept of terrain bounce jamming.

I just managed to kill the simulated F-117 at the Asuluk range. It seems that the best technique is to fire missiles with T/T guidance and the radio fuse switched OFF. I think the target being stealthy makes it very difficult for the radio fuse to detect it.

RTFM!, lol. Thanks, don't know how I missed that....

would u explain to me about this realistic object ?
some where you wrote with launching 3 dvina missiles you have 96% to hunt the target
but with one missile....our 96% have to Division to 3 = 32% !!!!

Just been reading through declassified CIA documents about the A-12 ( CIA version of the SR-71 ).

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/89801/DOC_0001471735.pdf

Read section 3.d

Hit!

Pieces of History: Missile Debris from A-12 OXCART

Pieces of History: Missile Debris from A-12 OXCART

I think it's supposed to represent your crew maintaining a constant rate of rotation, elevation and range change, predicting where the target will be. Though I agree it sometimes seems a little too accurate.

But, I could be wrong.

Nonetheless, it would certainly be interesting to hear what happened to the first „MiG-killer" of the day, namely Lt. Court Dosé- which was punished by escorting A-7s - on the same afternoon. At 3:15 PM Dosé and Hawkins escorted a pair of Iron Hand a-7s north of Hon Gai, when Dosé’s RWR showed signs of a SAM launch from the West. Dosé informed the A-7 pilot, but the later - only 300 meters away - said his equipment showed no such signals. As luck would have it, the late afternoon sun sat low in the sky to the west, and its rays were diffused by a bank of haze. Suddenly, Dosé saw two SAMs, „busting out of the haze in our nine o’clock, doing about Mach 3." He rolled the Phantom on its back and pulled into a dive trying to outmanoeuvre the missiles, but the robot weapons corrected to a new collision course. Dosé rolled out and pulled into a maximum G climb, while missiles readjusted their trajectories and continued after the fighter. Now, the SA-2s were too close for any further evasive manoeuvring and closing fast: „One missile came past the nose, the other went over my canopy. It looked like a killer shot. Those missiles had 280-ound warheads, they had us cold. They were so close I could see the control surfaces moving. I gritted my teeth and waited for the explosion. I was looking at ‘em, tensed up, ready to die. And they just continued on past, they didn’t get off!"

can the enemy jam the Missile Antenna (for SPK), is it omnidirectionnal antenna?
Why on earth would you jam a transmitting only system???

They do this in Vietnam with SA-75 missiles....

But that was jamming of the wide-band antenna missile beacon channel.
Its described in detail in page 6 of the SA-2E Advanced manual by Vintorez.

They attempt jamming of UPLINK and DOWNLINK transmitions...

As far as I know, generally they jammed the missile Beacon signal (Downlink).
I know only that the A-12/SR-71 was trying to inject false missile guidance commands (Uplink), but it was a futile attempt.

True... About SR-71 - it has (since 1972 I think) a possibility to "interrogate" SA-2 missiles and thus find which launch is fake or real.

Just share, what you got...

ANT - EKV, maybe...

By the way, what are those unclickable switches in the SIM labeled P, I, K, L for? They are located left and right of the mysterious clickable ....MB button.

ANT - EKV, maybe...

Meanwhile, there is a clickable switch, right over the missile channel switches, with really bad visible label (something about low altitudes - "MB") - what it suppose to do?

During this period, from Moscow came absolutely absurd recommendation to Fight "Shrike", by launching our missiles. I remember how some of the experienced gunners very accurately said that the order to shoot at the "Shrike" missile is like forcing gunners to shoot the bombs, not the aircraft.
One time, I still tried to track the "Shrike" after the start, but I saw on the screen only the initial time of his separation from the aircraft. A moment later, "Shrike" disappeared because it's reflecting surface is very small and, continuing his search, we have created the ideal conditions for its homing against our SNR. There we, as always, applying the correct, tested method: turn the antenna on azimuth plane and turn off the high voltage. After 10-15 seconds heard a sharp "clap" - overseas "guest" exploded a mile from us, flopping down into the jungle. So we did every time when the aircraft maneuvered in a particular manner, we see splash that marks the launch on the screen or on the report of the commander of the starting battery (who has been equipped with optical device, determined start "Shrike". Twice we were under fire from 2 "Shrike"-s, but they tried in vain - we are not easy prey.
Our experience in defeating the "Shrike" we tried to transfer to the Vietnamese comrades, but unfortunately, after our departure, they do not always strictly follow our, battle-tested recommendations. As a result, in November 1967, our 41st Division received the "Shrike" in the antenna cab "P". Operators (two men) were seriously injured. But our crews, observing elementary but effective measures to combat the anti-radar missiles had virtually no losses from them.
The strange thing is that those absurd recommendation (tracking and shooting the "Shrike" I met at the HQ anti-aircraft missile battalions after returning from Vietnam. You can only imagine what would have led to their execution in a combat situation.
Soon received a new order of command - during the combat readiness our specialist must leave the position. This meant that the Vietnamese payment received full "good" for independent combat work. We also had to come in August in Hanoi for traveling home.

April 25, 1967, Eagle Six is Ltjg Alan R. Crebo in an A-4C Skyhawk, Navy BUNO 151102.

“ We all stare at his Skyhawk in awe and wonder as we all join on him. Crebo’s A4 is a sight to behold. He has no rudder. Fully half of the vertical stabilizer is gone. Football and basketball sized holes allow us to see right through the tail pipe in several places. Someone points out that viewed from dead astern, the horizontal stabilizer is twisted about three degrees out of alignment with the trailing edge of the wing.
Every access panel in the fuselage has been popped open from the force of the concussion. He is flying with the hydraulic boost package disconnected and has very limited maneuverability, so we all fly on him. Someone in the flight has a hand held 35mm camera and takes multiple shots of the incredible battle damage.
Al Crebo was tail end Charlie in the bomb stack.

He reached the top of the pop up and hung at about two hundred twenty knots waiting for sufficient separation from Eagle Five before rolling in. He never saw the SA-2 which delivered a direct hit on his airplane. The force of the hit and explosion rolled Al on his back. He recovered with the nose pointed at the target, so he completed his run.

As he began his pull out, the badly wounded Skyhawk made an uncommanded roll inverted over the target. It was at this point when he made the “Eagle Six hit and losing control” call over the radio. Al reached under the glare shield and yanked the flight control boost disconnect handle, and flew the little A4 upright on manual flight controls. Now, NATOPS states that before disconnecting the hydraulic flight controls, one should be dirty, below two hundred knots, and lined up with the landing runway. The A4-C even had an extendable stick to give the pilot more leverage when flying on cables and pulleys with no power steering. Al was doing about 450 knots when he disconnected and rolled upright. He said he didn’t remember the airplane being hard to fly at all!

Approaching the “Bonnie Dick”, Al decided to see if he could control the airplane well enough to attempt a landing. He extended the landing gear and the nose gear and tail hook came down, but the main mounts remained jammed in the wing due to buckled wing plates. He tried for ten thousand feet to eject, but along side the plane guard D.D. at sixty five hundred feet, the gallant Skyhawk flamed out and gave up the ghost. Al ejected safely and was promptly picked up by the plane guard helo. CDR. The little Skyhawks had got their drivers home.”

The explosion of an SA-2 Surface to Air Missile photographed by a Model 147 drone. The SA-2 had a profound impact on post-war Black aircraft development: it put the U2 overflights at risk, which led to the development of the A-12 Oxcart and D-21 Tagboard. U.S. Air Force

147 Ryan drone just missed by SA-2...

[quote=piston79][quote=piston79][b]The explosion of an SA-2 Surface to Air Missile photographed by a Model 147 drone. The SA-2 had a profound impact on post-war Black aircraft
Nice, do you have some more?

Nice, do you have some more?

@Piston79,

your first video contain a very accurate depiction of a modulated noise jamming effects on SA-2, from 20:30, with a nice zoom-in at 20:50.

This is how it's explained in SAM operators training manuals ('statut boevovo primeneniya'):

A noise jamming creates a jamming strobe. But a periodic amplitude modulation to this noise (a sine wave) that is just slightly miss-matched (within 1-3Hz) from a scan frequency of Fan-Song (16Hz), creates the effect of jamming strobe (or its centre of brighteness, more precisely) moving around sideways, as if rotating around some invisible vertical axis on the scope.

This makes it difficult for an operator to keep a steady track on the centre of a jamming strobe and reduces the effectiveness of a manual tracking.

According to my sources, this form of jamming (noise jamming modulated at a scan frequency), especially used from several aircraft flying in a pod formation, was considered the most effective form of jamming against SA-2 by russian SAM engineers.

Sadly, there is no english or russian sub to the videos... there are some other interesting information!

Guess you have this one...?

Yes, I have that one

@Piston79,

interesting, but pretty much unreadable. Do you have a higher-res scan, and can give a rough translation to it (an explication)?

B-52 pilot tells about his miraculous escape from an encounter with SA-2 over Vietnam:

B-52 pilot tells about his miraculous escape from an encounter with SA-2 over Vietnam: