Hi guys..

Here some basic explanations about some of the jamming technics:

INVERSE GAIN JAMMING:
http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A637634

Range Gate Pull-Off
http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A637535

OTHERS
http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A666533

How about this...

A more advanced HARM update program is known as AGM-88E AARGM (Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile). The AARGM is a further improved Block VI missile, which uses not only the AGM-88D's GPS but also an MMV (Millimeter Wave) active radar seeker for terminal homing in its new WGU-48/B guidance section.

Actually the attack against Tripoli was not set up so successful, for the Weasels...

INVERSE GAIN JAMMING: is used against the ZSU-23-4 Shilka, that has a Conical Scanning Radar.
This technique has no effect on other systems.

Range Gate Pull-Off, and Cross Eye can be used against the KRUG.
This technique has no effect on other systems.
Anybody can find the switch that could be used against this jamming?

Velocity Gate Pull-Off is missing from this list. It can be used against the Vega.
This technique has no effect on other systems.
Anybody can find the switch that could be used against this jamming?

OTHERS
Towed decoys are good against KUB, Vega, S-300P, and Patriot systems.
This technique has no effect on other systems.

Noise Jamming
This technique can be used against most systems, with limitations.

Nice book about this topic:
http://louvre.free.fr/falcon/Electronic-Warfare-Fundamentals.pdf

Velocity Gate Pull-Off

VEGA - "POMEHA" + "POLOSA SHIROKAIA" + "RAZRESHENIE POISK PO V V POLETE" ?

Towed decoys are used against SA-3 and SA-2 also, right? RANGE GATE too, I believe...

While I haven't try the latest Beta version which includes the Libya scenario I also have the same impression that this scenario (Libya) is or will be "boring" (gameplay that is "too hard" is also boring, IMO) if these scenarios (Libya bombing raids in 1986) are made in a realistic manner which is the case.
I think that I already said this in the past but IMO there are scenarios which would envolve modern combat which IMO would be more "thrilling", like for example:
- Desert Storm (1991) playing for the Iraqi side -> A realistic scenario with lots of advanced opposing aircraft including the same aircraft/threats that we have in Libya but in the real Desert Storm, many coalition aircraft were shot down (something like 50 or more aircraft), many of them by SAMs. SA-2E and SA-3B systems were part of the Iraqi SAM inventory in 1992.
- Korea (modern day) playing for the North Korea side -> A "what-if" scenario with lots of advanced/current day opposing aircraft which could make this scenario the hardest one, but North Korea has IADS (Integrated Air Defence Systems) which is considered one of the world's best and hardened IADS. Besides North Korea is the only country that currently employs all the SAM systems modeled in SAM Simulator (SA-2, SA-3, SA-4 and SA-5). This scenario would allow the player to engage enemy air forces using IADS and SA-4 SAM systems, a thing that's not (realistically) possible in any other scenario.

Resuming these 2 scenario/sugestions would give the player "lots" of chances of shooting down enemy aircraft but at the same time they would be very challeging.

This would make Samsim "epic" type of game. Like those hundreds of mass produced "easyclick-boom" games in market today.

Harsh setting we have in Samsim shows moral value that war is hell and every decision you make can be deadly for you or your foe.
I like accurate simulation purity Hpasp has kept while developing Samsim. Hope it will stay for long.

I agree with montieris. I want all the scenarios to be exactly what SAM operators actually faced, not at a reduced difficulty for us!

If it is too hard for you just keep practicing. If you are getting hit my HARMS just use less radar

I'm not saying or sugesting to reduce the dificulty for the existing scenarios! What I'm sugesting is to add NEW SCENARIOS like for example Desert Storm 1991 which are just as dificult (if not more) than the Libya 1986 raids but at the same gives the player (SAM operator) more possibilities to shot down enemy aircraft which is realitic since during Desert Storm a considerable number of coalition was shot down during Desert Storm as opposed to Libya where only 1 F-111 was shot down in real life.

Korea What-if scenarios would have the advantage that several and diferent combat situations could be simulated in a similar way like happens in training but with much more targets and in a combat situation (like for example by having someone shooting at us).

I would support that if and only if the systems simulated were actually used in such a scenario.

Also, my best U2 kill:

Here's a question: When using S-200s, can I override the Plamya's decision on which flight profile (proportional or combined) to use? I can then fire one missile using Profile 1 and the 2nd missile using Profile 2?

Perhaps I can trick it by manually setting an incorrect range?

And which one is "POLOSA SHIROKAIA"?

Thanks.

I'd love to see Desert Storm in SAM Sim too! Not sure whether Hpasp has detailed documentation of these encounters.

"Thirteen USAF aircraft were shot down by Iraqi SAMs. Four by SA-6, three by SA-3, two by SA-6, two by SA-13, one by SA-2E and one by SA-9."

For a SAM battery to shoot more than one plane during a real WAR (not in one day, or in one battle) is pretty scarce in reality.

In Vietnam, there were few Dvina batteries, that shot 3~4 B-52's during 11 nights of Linebacker. (there were several battles per night)
During OAF, only one Serbian Neva battery was able to shot down two pilot driven planes, during 7 engagements of the 78 day WAR.

Shooting more than one plane during one battle is simply unrealistic historically.

(It is also true for real world fighter pilots.)

But...
... in the far future I plan to add the famous and feared WarPact Strelba exercises.
There several targets had to be shot down in real life.

From what I read, at least 2 (two) US aircraft were shot down by SA-2E during Desert Storm -> 1 (one) F-15E and 1 (one) F-14.
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15E_Strike_Eagle
You can read: "a second and final F-15E was downed by an Iraqi SA-2"
And here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat
You can read: "an F-14A upgraded to an F-14A+, from VF-103 was shot down by an SA-2 surface-to-air missile while on an escort mission"

Also notice that there were aircraft from other nationalities (British for example) that were shot down by Iraqi air defences.

Yes, you're right. The quote I rewrote from a book should say "Thirteen USAF aircraft were shot down by Iraqi SAMs. Four by SA-6, three by SA-3, two by SA-6, two by SA-13, one by SA-2E and one by SA-9."

Guess I'm getting old.

Ah ok, now I get it - That quote only refers to USAF.

I initially thought that 13 was quite a low number for US (American) aircraft shot down during Desert Storm but I see that the US Navy aircraft were left out from that statistic. Thanks for the clarification!

No luck yet. Anybody?

Plamya is making the flight profile decision depending on target distance.
I do not see any reason (also the constructors not foreseen any) to override Plamya.
The V-880 missile has plastic nose, that would fail (melt) over Mach3 at low altitudes.

(The Patriot and S-300 family use fused silica nose, to withstand the heat of hypersonic speeds at low altitude)

Just always beware if cleaning women are around...

Pretty soon, you will be able to arm your "flying poles of Vietnam" with the Ultimate Warhead.