Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: SA-15 tatics

  1. #1
    Senior Member Coolhand's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    567

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    422
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    488
    Thanked in
    252 Posts

    SA-15 tatics

    For the past couple of days, several of us have been flying at Kutaisi attempting to eliminate the 3 SA-15's that have showed up to our party uninvited. Reaper gave us a good tactics lesson yesterday by destroying the 2 SA-15's that were NE of Kutaisi. I've been having a great time today attempting to destroy the one SW of Kutaisi.
    On my second attempt, I approached within 15nm undetected and got a Maverick off at 13.4nm,
    viewing it through tacview, it appeared to be a perfect shot, nothing was fired at it and we thought for sure it was going to make it to its mark, then all of a sudden, at 1.4nm from impact, my Maverick just blew up, nothing was fired at it and the flight log verifies this.
    Someone please tell me what happened, heres a photo of my flight log and will gladly post my tacview file if needed. Thanks, this has really puzzled me.


  2. #2
    Member Dojo's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,246

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,894
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,671
    Thanked in
    800 Posts
    13.4 is a pretty far off distance for a maverick. I know you can get it off with force correlation, but I think that's still a bit out of range. It's possible it just exploded or otherwise died off, and tacview is reporting the point at which it died.
    Last edited by Dojo; 29Dec14 at 00:07.

  3. #3

    Da FAC?


    476vFG GC
    Founding member
    Stuka's Avatar
    Belgium
       Belgium
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,295

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,257
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,829
    Thanked in
    2,539 Posts
    If you want to attack an SA-15, it's pretty much a matter of flooding it with Mavericks, not fire just one.

    And remember, it's not the air defenses that are the targets, it's the stuff that they are protecting that is.
    If you shoot that SA-15 and leave the ground forces alone, that SA-15 is just going to be replaced by another one.

    Providing CAS when you're all out of HUA!

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Stuka For This Useful Post:

    Coolhand (29Dec14)

  5. #4
    Senior Member Coolhand's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    567

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    422
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    488
    Thanked in
    252 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuka View Post
    If you want to attack an SA-15, it's pretty much a matter of flooding it with Mavericks, not fire just one.

    And remember, it's not the air defenses that are the targets, it's the stuff that they are protecting that is.
    If you shoot that SA-15 and leave the ground forces alone, that SA-15 is just going to be replaced by another one.
    Thank you, I understand, but the SA-15 seems to me, to be a huge threat to any flight attempting to get to those targets you speak of. And like I explained earlier, that is our ultimate goal in our efforts, to eliminate the ground forces, but I have to get to them first.
    My logic may not be correct, but to me, it seems solid.
    My Maverick blew up in mid air, I watched it. The first two SA-15s were destroyed from approx. 12 miles, any closer, and the radar came alive and defeated our Mavericks. We discussed the tactic of flooding the target with several of them, but was shown a method of correlating an H model from that distance before the radar went active.
    This last flight was a fun one for sure, we snuck up on him flying through the southern mountains and using a pop up like we learned in the competition. We thought our plan was sound, and sufficient, we were undetected and the Maverick was right on target. I still would like to know why it blew up.
    I'll continue to work on the tactics you share with me, but at the same time, I have to go with my gut during planning....right or wrong....I always learn from it.....but this one bothers me, I really need to know why that Maverick blew up so I'll understand what went wrong. Knowing about them being re-spawned and stating what should be prioritized is always good information and I thank you for that, but it doesn't help me with my question.

  6. #5
    Member Dojo's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,246

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,894
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,671
    Thanked in
    800 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Coolhand View Post
    but it doesn't help me with my question.
    Then perhaps you didn't see my response ahead of Stuka's? You're too far for a pop up. the range of a 65H is ~12 miles. If you're doing a pop up, as you describe, you're really pushing it... (as I imagine you're at low/medium altitude). That's a really long distance for a Maverick shot, and although DCS isn't perfect, it's likely simulating the missile being at range and dying. If you were coming in high (not popping up) you may have a bit more to play with, but again, a maverick a medium altitude is using more energy, and you're already at the edge of its range with a shot that far.

    I should add: The purpose of force correlation isn't necessarily to extend your shot, it's to allow you to shoot more accurately. (e.g. shoot a window of a building, as oppose to "the building")
    Last edited by Dojo; 29Dec14 at 01:02.

  7. #6

    Da FAC?


    476vFG GC
    Founding member
    Stuka's Avatar
    Belgium
       Belgium
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,295

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,257
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,829
    Thanked in
    2,539 Posts
    You're maverick blew up because it was at the end of his life. 12 miles is long for a Maverick.
    And actually, with FC you wouldn't even be able to lock it up from that distance in RL, the seeker couldn't handle it.

    If I would have to deal with an SA-15 to get to my target, I'd go in Shooter-Shooter and get all the Mavericks from the rails in that attack.

    Providing CAS when you're all out of HUA!

  8. #7

    Da FAC?


    476vFG GC
    Founding member
    Stuka's Avatar
    Belgium
       Belgium
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,295

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,257
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,829
    Thanked in
    2,539 Posts
    Another thing that just comes to my mind: It's night time on the DS; How did you get that H model to lock up in the first place ? Was the target area that lighted up?

    Providing CAS when you're all out of HUA!

  9. #8
    GOMER 2 Noodle's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,572

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    606
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,946
    Thanked in
    682 Posts
    I'll add some detail to what both Dojo and Stuka have said.

    First and foremost I'd like to say that despite what you hear/see on the ED forums, Forced Correlate is not a panacea. It's purpose is not to increase the employment range of the maverick, and in real life it is neither intended nor suitable to be used on "point" targets.

    The Maverick utilizes two methods of target tracking: Centroid Track mode and Correlate Track mode. For a point target such as an armored vehicle, releasing the slew control with the tracking gate over the target causes the guidance software to evaluate the video contrast of the pixels under the tracking gate. If both a horizontal and vertical boundary is detected, Centroid Track is initiated. Centroid Track continuously evaluates the bounding box of the target and once launched, generates missile steering commands to center the bounding box in the seeker FOV.

    If neither boundary is found under the tracking gate, the seeker will space-stabilize while the tracking gate is expanded gradually (relatively speaking) until the target bounding box is found, then Centroid Tracking begins. If neither boundary is found, the seeker will break lock.

    After launch, Centroid Track is used until the target size exceeds a predefined threshold at which Correlate Track takes over. Correlate Track does not attempt to find or track the contrast bounding box of the target. Rather, it tracks the motion of every pixel in the entire scene, and generates missile steering commands that cause the scene to "grow" equally in all directions. For point targets, the proximity of the missile ensures that the target fills the majority of the scene, thus ensuring that the missile continues guiding to the intended target.

    Forced Correlate mode simply forces the seeker into Correlate Track before the missile leaves the rail. As such, the seeker is incapable of tracking a point target that initially represents only a tiny fraction of the entire FOV. Instead, Forced Correlate is useful for attacking large (unbounded) targets that exceed tracking gate size limits such as buildings, bridges, or ships, or for attacking a particular portion of a bounded target that is not near the centroid, such as a particular corner of a building.

    DCS does a terrible job of simulating how the AGM-65 works regardless of type; EO/CCD/IIR. The fact that DCS allows tracking and guidance of point targets in FC at all, let alone from ranges that far exceed the capability of Centroid Track is a glaring error and should not be the basis for developing tactics.

    Second, the reason your Maverick blew up is because of another DCS error that causes "dead" missiles to immediately self-destruct. In the real world, the AGM-65 is limited by battery life and pneumatic/hydraulic supply. When the missile runs out of either, it simply goes ballistic until it strikes the ground and the mechanical backup trigger initiates the warhead.
    Last edited by Noodle; 29Dec14 at 06:24. Reason: Corrected fuzing info.

  10. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Noodle For This Useful Post:

    amanuense (22Apr16), Coolhand (29Dec14), Dojo (29Dec14), El_Roto (02Jan15), Howie (29Dec14), JayPee (29Dec14), PFunk (07Jan15), Ski (02Jan15), sMaat (02Jan15), Stuka (29Dec14), Yassy (04Jan15)

  11. #9
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts
    Very interesting read. Now I understand where the term 'forced' is coming from as I was always wondering what I am forcing the missile's seeker to do exactly.

    Regarding your last paragraph, in the real world, does that mean the missile will fall short and detonate upon impact where it could harm anything or anybody you wouldn't want to see harmed?
    Last edited by JayPee; 29Dec14 at 07:49.

  12. #10
    GOMER 2 Noodle's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,572

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    606
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,946
    Thanked in
    682 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
    Regarding your last paragraph, in the real world, does that mean the missile will fall short and detonate upon impact where it could harm anything or anybody you wouldn't want to see harmed?
    As far as guidance goes, yes. For all variants, the Guidance Control Section (GCS) will cease to function if/when battery voltage drops below a certain threshold. Without the GCS, the missile will become unguided/ballistic. Where the missile actually goes would depend on the phase of flight, steering error, and guidance commands (fin position) that existed at the time of failure.

    Regarding detonation, yes. Although the primary method of warhead detonation is an electrical contact trigger, the A/B/D/H variants use the lightweight shape-charged warhead which also possesses a backup trigger that mechanically detonates the warhead upon sensing the deceleration of impact. Once armed, these variants will detonate high-order upon impact.

    However, the E/G/G2/K variants use the heavyweight kinetic penetrator warhead which possesses only the contact trigger, and should either dud or possibly detonate low-order upon impact.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Like our website?

You can help us by donating to cover our costs.

Many sincere thanks!


Search

Follow us

Twitter Twitter youtube iTunes Subscribe to our Podcast