Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 142 of 176 1 2 140 141 142 143 144 175 176
#3580942 - 05/27/12 04:38 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: piston79

Could you be more specific?
Thanks!


There was a report at scientific conference held by Russian MoD and Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences recently, that went to the internet.
I tried to post it here, but Russian fonts do not display correctly. I currently trying to find a link.

In short, according to it, Pantsyr has serious problems with engaging targets with course parameters more than 2-3 km, advertized range of 20 km is overly optimistic and can only be achieved against non-maneuvering targets, there are problems with the missile fuze, problems with engaging targets in rainy and foggy conditions due to use of millimeter-wave radar, the wheeled vehicle cannot be transported by aircraft and railroad due to its excessive height without disassembly, and so on. Rumors about problems with Pantsyr have long circulated on Russian military forums, this report was a clear confirmation.

EDIT: There is a link: http://bmpd.livejournal.com/197121.html A first part of report is in above post, the rest is in post from user off_topic_off dated by 2012-04-07.


Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/27/12 04:44 PM.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3580951 - 05/27/12 04:48 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Adding the possibility to launch the V-880N 5V28N (Gammon) Nuclear tipped SAM Missile, for the S-200VE Vega-E (SA-5B Gammon) system.
The 25kt TA-18 warhead has 60% more destructive power than the V-760 15D (Guideline Mod.4) Nuclear tipped SAM Missile, available for the S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) system...



... and a bit larger than the conventional warhead at the left.



Nice reading here:
http://infowsparcie.net/wria/o_autorze/pdf/pzr_s_200_w_880n.pdf
thumbsup



beautifull PDF ...ThnQ mr.hpasp thumbsup

#3580969 - 05/27/12 05:17 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: Hpasp


USAF over self-confidence in Stealth technology, till 1999.



Honestly, I dobn't think there was an "over-confidence" in Stealth technology within the USAF. There is an extract from book Dark Eagles by Curtis Peebles, about first strike on Baghdad by F-117 in 1991:

"As the F-117 pilots turned for home, their mood was somber. They knew
they had won a victory, but they were sure the cost had been high. Captain
Rob Donaldson said later, "I came out of there on that first night and went
'Whew .. . I survived that one!' But on the way back, I really thought that
we had lost some guys due to the heavy volume of bullets and missiles that
were thrown up in the air."

At Tonopah East (how the King Khalid AB was named), the ground crews awaited the planes' return. The first
wave landed at night, while the second and third came back after sunrise.
One by one, the returning planes were counted.
Every one returned."

Maybe after that war there was some over-confidence, but I believe that belonged more to the political circles, rather than military professionals.

Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/27/12 05:19 PM.
#3580978 - 05/27/12 05:25 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
ha ha ha ha... guys I'm dying of laughter rofl

looock at this site ! http://www.f-117a.com

one guys please tell to web sites admin :(col.dani shot down this aircraft like a dirty dog)

woooo look at this site... is very complete and no shame about shot down f-117 !!!

#3581008 - 05/27/12 06:10 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
Lieste Offline
Senior Member
Lieste  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
No need for insulting turns of phrase - Col Dani shot down the F117A (Vega 31 tail number 806) like a professional combat operative performing his mission according to his training. The pilot of the downed aircraft, and all those responsible for his recovery were also professional.


There is a page including loss reports for all operational and testing losses, including Vega 31. This is (understandably) partisan, only 'honoring' the USAAF personnel, and not including a mention of operational conditions or 'enemy' professionalism and capability, nor any indication that NATO/US intel failed to correctly identify enemy capabilities and intentions, or to assess the friendly effectiveness.

#3581019 - 05/27/12 06:30 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Hpasp, it looks like you're not the only Hungarian who is delighted by old Soviet machinery. There is another guy, who is making a high-end MiG-21bis model for DCS combat simulator! http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=87621 I wonder if you're know him
cheers

#3581054 - 05/27/12 07:16 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Vympel]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
Thank you smile

Originally Posted By: Vympel
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
Ok, then do you have book title/ISBN please?


Yes,
ISBN: 978-86-87833-00-5
Title: Smena

It is a war journal written by Lieutenant colonel Đorđe S. Aničić.


--
44th VFW
#3581062 - 05/27/12 07:23 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
They dismantled the Iraqi IADS. They suppressed the Serb IADS. Those were IADS, though their quality may have been poor.
I agree, these were all old and export versions of SAMs. But also keep in mind that F-16's recently purchased by UAE (Or was it Saudi?) were equipped with a pod capable of jamming the S-300... or some version of the S-300 at any rate.

And if you are referring to me calling them speed-bumps, please note that I added other qualifiers for this as well. I am not claiming that you can just ignore SAMs, and, in the case of S-300 being shipped to Iran, that would of course easily deprive Israel and the US of a straight-line attack (and a straight line is badly needed. You don't have the fuel for anything else), and it also makes ambush my S-300 easy. That's why. (By comparison, their indigenous, more short-ranged HAWK, the Tor, etc, can probably be negated by attacking the mission target with stand-off weapons).

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
But you must admit that U. S. NEVER encountered any 3rd generation SAMs in combat. S-300, Tor-M1, Buk-M2. Neither they encountered an integrated air defence network. I wonder if SAMs are so inefficient, why both U. S. and Israelis made such an enormous effort to prevent a shipment of Russian S-300 to Iran?


--
44th VFW
#3581076 - 05/27/12 07:49 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
yep

Last edited by milang; 05/27/12 09:14 PM.
#3581173 - 05/27/12 10:26 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
They dismantled the Iraqi IADS. They suppressed the Serb IADS. Those were IADS, though their quality may have been poor.
I agree, these were all old and export versions of SAMs. But also keep in mind that F-16's recently purchased by UAE (Or was it Saudi?) were equipped with a pod capable of jamming the S-300... or some version of the S-300 at any rate.

And if you are referring to me calling them speed-bumps, please note that I added other qualifiers for this as well. I am not claiming that you can just ignore SAMs, and, in the case of S-300 being shipped to Iran, that would of course easily deprive Israel and the US of a straight-line attack (and a straight line is badly needed. You don't have the fuel for anything else), and it also makes ambush my S-300 easy. That's why. (By comparison, their indigenous, more short-ranged HAWK, the Tor, etc, can probably be negated by attacking the mission target with stand-off weapons).


No. Neither Iraq nor Serbia had an IADS by modern definition of this word - an automated system, that would receive data from all radars in the theatre, process it and distribute target designations to SAMs, allowing them to operate far, far more efficiently, somewhat similar to the AWACS/Link 16 combo that USAF has, only for ground SAMs. Regarding the ability to jam the S-300 - we won't be able to find out, since Russia agreed not to sell them to Iran, and other countries that possess them are not in position of being attacked by U. S. or Israel, fortunately. And, by the way, are you sure that those jamming pods shipped to UAE can REALLY do that? Render these systems useless? Or they only capable to slightly degrade their capabilities? If you're played SAM Simulator that is being discussed here, you would discover that even those antiquated year-1957 Dvinas in Vietnam cannot be jammed "completely" - jamming might only complicate their operation, especially against certain types of targets, but will never render them inoperable. Cheers.

Last edited by Lonewolf357; 05/27/12 10:27 PM.
#3581185 - 05/27/12 10:44 PM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
I was under the impression that Iraq had this, but I could be wrong.

Quote:
No. Neither Iraq nor Serbia had an IADS by modern definition of this word - an automated system, that would receive data from all radars in the theatre, process it and distribute target designations to SAMs, allowing them to operate far, far more efficiently, somewhat similar to the AWACS/Link 16 combo that USAF has, only for ground SAMs


Exact capabilities of jamming equipment against the ... opponent equipment is secret; either way, the exact capabilities will dictate tactics. It doesn't matter if the system is degraded or disabled if 'degraded' means you can stick a HARM or SLAM or some other stand-off weapon in it. It was, however, part of the pod's stated capability (I think it was the 184).

Quote:
Regarding the ability to jam the S-300 - we won't be able to find out, since Russia agreed not to sell them to Iran, and other countries that possess them are not in position of being attacked by U. S. or Israel, fortunately. And, by the way, are you sure that those jamming pods shipped to UAE can REALLY do that? Render these systems useless? Or they only capable to slightly degrade their capabilities?


Depends on the type of jammer and its power; there are of course backup capabilities as well. But most importantly, the Dvina does not use a homing missile. This allows it some backup capabilities that a homing missile would not normally have ... although arguably, one might say that a Patriot/S300 can use the TVM system to function in a similar manner in the case of heavy jamming.

Quote:
If you're played SAM Simulator that is being discussed here, you would discover that even those antiquated year-1957 Dvinas in Vietnam cannot be jammed "completely" - jamming might only complicate their operation, especially against certain types of targets, but will never render them inoperable. Cheers.


--
44th VFW
#3581235 - 05/28/12 12:24 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Wolfhound Offline
Member
Wolfhound  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
A missile typically need about 5x the g's that the aircraft is pulling in order to hit that aircraft. So, if the SAM can only maintain 9g, you can escape it with a 3g maneuver (sort of. You probably need to maneuver harder in a bunch of cases)

I think it depends on the guidance strategy being employed. A pure pursuit missile or similar (three point guidance) may require 5 times the target 'g' level to prosecute an intercept, however a missile flying an intercept geometry and also using a form of proportional navigation, may only require 3 times the targets 'g'.

Also reading Vietnam accounts of missile evasion, pilots would often pull a minimum of 6g to evade an SA-2 and these missiles (only capable of around 7g) would still past pretty close by.

Last edited by Wolfhound; 05/28/12 12:31 AM.

*********I have quite a large collection of Flight, Weapon Systems, Tactical & Supplementary Aircraft Manuals for Jets, Helicopters & some Props, spanning the Vietnam era to present. If you're interested in trading Flight Manuals, mainly for modern military aircraft, send me a PM.*********
#3581242 - 05/28/12 12:41 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Wolfhound]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
I think it depends on the guidance strategy being employed. A pure pursuit missile or similar (three point guidance) may require 5 times the target 'g' level to prosecute an intercept, however a missile flying an intercept geometry and also using a form of proportional navigation, may only require 3 times the targets 'g'.


The rule of thumb is five. It is a rule of thumb; the actual numbers will depend on the given situation. Typical PN constant is 5.

Quote:
Also reading Vietnam accounts of missile evasion, pilots would often pull a minimum of 6g to evade an SA-2 and these missiles (only capable of around 7g) would still past pretty close by.


You maximize the miss distance by pulling the most g you can. It's that simple. This isn't a game where you try to 'nail the optimal pull'.


--
44th VFW
#3581243 - 05/28/12 12:41 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Wolfhound]  
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
Lieste Offline
Senior Member
Lieste  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
Quote:
I think it depends on the guidance strategy being employed. A pure pursuit missile or similar (three point guidance) may require 5 times the target 'g' level to prosecute an intercept, however a missile flying an intercept geometry and also using a form of proportional navigation, may only require 3 times the targets 'g'.

Also reading Vietnam accounts of missile evasion, pilots would often pull a minimum of 6g to evade an SA-2 and these missiles (only capable of around 7g) would still past pretty close by.


The required 'g' is no more than x2 for PN, although an acheived x3 is often selected to make the guidance 'brisker' and lower energy use by earlier manoeuvring. Under many circumstances required 'g' is far lower, x1.5 should be ample to maintain aiming error constant (and thus miss distance reducing monotonically with range).

#3581252 - 05/28/12 01:06 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Wolfhound Offline
Member
Wolfhound  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
I think it depends on the guidance strategy being employed. A pure pursuit missile or similar (three point guidance) may require 5 times the target 'g' level to prosecute an intercept, however a missile flying an intercept geometry and also using a form of proportional navigation, may only require 3 times the targets 'g'.

Originally Posted By: GrayGhost

The rule of thumb is five. It is a rule of thumb; the actual numbers will depend on the given situation. Typical PN constant is 5.

I agree that it depends, particularly on attack geometry. However it does make me wonder about quotes of 20g SAMs being able to hit targets manoeuvring at up to 7g, but I guess this falls into the 'it depends' category, where the 'it depends' criteria are favourable. smile



Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
Also reading Vietnam accounts of missile evasion, pilots would often pull a minimum of 6g to evade an SA-2 and these missiles (only capable of around 7g) would still past pretty close by.

Originally Posted By: GrayGhost

You maximize the miss distance by pulling the most g you can. It's that simple. This isn't a game where you try to 'nail the optimal pull'.

I understand that, but what is confusing is why the missiles often passed very close to the evading jet, despite a well executed manoeuvre?

BTW, where did you get those AIM-9L/M graphs from and do you have any more similar information and performance charts?
Cheers

Last edited by Wolfhound; 05/28/12 01:07 AM.

*********I have quite a large collection of Flight, Weapon Systems, Tactical & Supplementary Aircraft Manuals for Jets, Helicopters & some Props, spanning the Vietnam era to present. If you're interested in trading Flight Manuals, mainly for modern military aircraft, send me a PM.*********
#3581259 - 05/28/12 01:26 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Wolfhound]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
I agree that it depends, particularly on attack geometry. However it does make me wonder about quotes of 20g SAMs being able to hit targets manoeuvring at up to 7g, but I guess this falls into the 'it depends' category, where the 'it depends' criteria are favourable. smile


Yep smile Possibly either the jet or missile were quite slow, or it was an in-plane maneuver. That's all speculation though.



Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
I understand that, but what is confusing is why the missiles often passed very close to the evading jet, despite a well executed manoeuvre?


'Very close' doesn't mean much. Did someone get out and measure with a tape? If not, then the testimony is not very reliable. Additionally, 'well executed maneuver' is again subjective - the type of maneuver and geometry needs to be known, etc.

Quote:
BTW, where did you get those AIM-9L/M graphs from and do you have any more similar information and performance charts?
Cheers


It was a study of missile aerodynamics modification - the second performance line is the same missile with fins more like the 120's and a pointed radar radome instead of the IR radome. The paper is not free though.


--
44th VFW
#3581267 - 05/28/12 01:46 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Wolfhound Offline
Member
Wolfhound  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 129
Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
I understand that, but what is confusing is why the missiles often passed very close to the evading jet, despite a well executed manoeuvre?

Originally Posted By: GrayGhost

'Very close' doesn't mean much. Did someone get out and measure with a tape? If not, then the testimony is not very reliable. Additionally, 'well executed maneuver' is again subjective - the type of maneuver and geometry needs to be known, etc.

hahaha Sometimes the accounts use estimates such as 'within a wingspan' etc. Also I think in one of Randy Cunningham's accounts, he mentioned that the missiles fuse must have failed because it was well within lethal range. I just read these accounts the other day, so I'll post some of them later.



Originally Posted By: Wolfhound
BTW, where did you get those AIM-9L/M graphs from and do you have any more similar information and performance charts?
Cheers

Originally Posted By: GrayGhost

It was a study of missile aerodynamics modification - the second performance line is the same missile with fins more like the 120's and a pointed radar radome instead of the IR radome. The paper is not free though.

Do you have the name of the paper?

Last edited by Wolfhound; 05/28/12 01:46 AM.

*********I have quite a large collection of Flight, Weapon Systems, Tactical & Supplementary Aircraft Manuals for Jets, Helicopters & some Props, spanning the Vietnam era to present. If you're interested in trading Flight Manuals, mainly for modern military aircraft, send me a PM.*********
#3581287 - 05/28/12 02:42 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
Lieste Offline
Senior Member
Lieste  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,340
The value N used in PN tracking is a gain factor for the autopilot, not a multiplier for the 'g' requirement. In fact as the N value increases the peak 'g' required for a centre of mass impact reduces.

The primary effect of a very high N is to eliminate aim-off error at launch (ie off-axis capability of a dogfight missile) - As most of the earlier SAM systems launch the missile along the target LOS (or the 'initial' estimate of required lead) a lower gain will have a similar effect over most of the distance.

A secondary effect of high N is to noticeably increase 'g' and turn requirement in the early phase of flight - the benefit is less tendency to a tail-chase intercept geometry and reduced terminal manoeuvring requirement - noise in the measured LOS rate tends to result in larger course excursions for the same sensor quality, although the correction is more rapid.

N doesn't alter the required lead angle to reach an intercept point at constant velocities, or the turning ability of either target or missile.

With a roughly 100m allowable miss distance, the effect of lower N, or alternative guidance strategies (eg command guidance, beam-riding etc) is a lower probability (and tighter geometry requirements) of a direct hit, but still high probability of passing inside the fusing radius...

This is obviously more likely to be survivable, than a direct hit, but you cannot guarantee forcing a miss unless residual missile 'g' is significantly lower than the target - with optimal geometry you can force a near pass with target 'g' near 0.5 missile 'g', but not only might this be insufficient against a succeeding shot from the same salvo, but any missile passing 'close' has the possibility of fusing.

#3581398 - 05/28/12 08:54 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
guys... loock at this vietnam line brack II !

loock at number of missile launche! date one 65 missile launch but only 3 b52 it shot down!






idont know why lauched a lot of missile like that chart ! i think vietnamian sam crew was very nerves cuss2

Last edited by milang; 05/28/12 09:01 AM.
#3581401 - 05/28/12 08:57 AM Re: SAM Simulator [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
"In a jamming environment the TVM technique is still usable because the system can measure range difference and as it has the angular measurement of the target it can determine the difference in path length without loss of range resolution. It has the same range resolution as a non-jamming target"

In normal words, if you successfully deny all information of your distance from a Patriot/S-300P SAM, it simply triangulate you (Fire Control Radar - SAM Missile TVM head - Jamming Target).
As jamming is not affecting the lead point calculation at all, Patriot/S-300P systems has no TT guidance methods implemented, they fly UPR or lofted UPR depending on target range.



AN/ALQ-184 is a BAD choice against S-300P.
I would rather choose AN/ALE-50 / -55, or Stealth, after all metric target acquisition radars were eliminated by standoff weapons.


I still think that sending in F-117A above Belgrade alone, without any support (CAP/ECM/Weasel) was over optimistic, or suicidal.

Last edited by Hpasp; 05/28/12 12:08 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(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.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
Page 142 of 176 1 2 140 141 142 143 144 175 176

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0