Guided Weapons

[VFA41_Lion]

Are all guided weapons supposed to be able to be intercepted? I've seen HARMs and GPS-guided bombs be shot down by SAMs within 10 nm. It's remarkably difficult to carry out a SEAD mission unless I launch an alpha strike on every radar site. :/

I know its within the realm of possibility that HARMs can be taken out (although the frequency with which they are is annoying) but bombs seem a little far-fetched.

[Apocal]

ORIGINAL: VFA41_Lion

Are all guided weapons supposed to be able to be intercepted? I've seen HARMs and GPS-guided bombs be shot down by SAMs within 10 nm. It's remarkably difficult to carry out a SEAD mission unless I launch an alpha strike on every radar site. :/

I know its within the realm of possibility that HARMs can be taken out (although the frequency with which they are is annoying) but bombs seem a little far-fetched.

Why does it seem far-fetched? Do you think bombs are stealthy?

[Pukeko]

Are all guided weapons supposed to be able to be intercepted? I've seen HARMs and GPS-guided bombs be shot down by SAMs within 10 nm. It's remarkably difficult to carry out a SEAD mission unless I launch an alpha strike on every radar site. :/

I know its within the realm of possibility that HARMs can be taken out (although the frequency with which they are is annoying) but bombs seem a little far-fetched.

Have you tried to use an electronic attack aircraft at the same time?

[VFA41_Lion]

It seems far-fetched because there is no report or record of a bomb ever being shot down.

And to be perfectly honest, neither Iron Dome nor Iron Beam are in the game. So yes, i'm pretty skeptical that bombs should be shot down.

I can't recall if I had a dedicated OECM aircraft at the time.

[AndrewJ]

Bombs are actually more reasonable to kill than HARMs. Bombs are usually slow and essentially unmaneuverable. Engaging a bomb dropping in on a ballistic trajectory at high subsonic speeds may be a reasonable thing (after all they successfully tested Seawolf on artillery shells back in the '80s), but catching a HARM zipping in at Mach 2 is another question entirely. While later point defence SAMs may be suitable for such targets (SA-N-9/SA-15 TOR, for example, being specifically marketed as capable vs PGMs and, to a lesser extent, ARMs), I suspect the game is somewhat optimistic about the ability of earlier SAMS (Hawks, etc.) to detect and hit these small fast targets.

[VFA41_Lion]

Bombs are also usually dropped from within a mile of the target and falling pretty quick. Not to mention SAM operators are usually trying to hit the platform and not wait around for the weapon.

[CapnDarwin]

In most cases those types of intercepts should be nearly impossible without equipment designed to do that kind of job (like Iron Dome). SAM systems are built to track aircraft and large missiles. Dealing with AAM and ARM missiles and bombs that have much smaller RCS and in the case of missiles fast flight speeds requires interceptors capable of rapid tracking and movement.

[mikmykWS]

Actually certain systems can. Think SA-15 and 19 have it in their sales literature.

[ExMachina]

I'm not as skeptical about being able to "hit" a bomb with and SAM as I am skeptical that most SAM's could routinely disable/destroy iron bombs with their warheads. Bombs are designed to survive both severe impacts as well as the detonations of other, proximate bombs. Most SAM warheads are designed only to kill soft, light targets, via fragmentation damage.

[mikmykWS]

Good point but would definitely impact accuracy.

If you guy can dig up some data we can use to swing this one way or that other we'll implement.

Thanks!

Mike

[dillonkbase]

"would definitely impact accuracy"

I am not terribly familiar with the warheads of SAMs, but in the air it would take one hell of an explosions for a tungsten cube or whatnot to significantly change the course of a 500 or 1000lb mass moving at terminal velocity, I mean that's a ton of inertia.

[guanotwozero]

It may be possible to damage a bomb's fuse so that it doesn't explode on impact, though it'd still make a big dent in the target. Or else disrupting the guidance system so it misses. However I've no idea of the likelihood of success of any such missile.

In some cases laser-guided concrete bombs are used to knock out armour in urban areas, i.e. an explosion isn't necessary to kill the target.

[ComDev]

Have added a ticket on this and assigned to me. More information would be appreciated [8D]

[VFA41_Lion]

If possible i would recommend asking actual military pilots about this as i personally cant find anything on the internets about it D:

[mikmykWS]

Sure[:)]

[Flankerk]

Not at all sure on this one sorry.
Are we saying that dumb bombs can't be shot down as such or guided bombs?
I can see a real case for guided bombs losing sensors, vanes, the whole guidance package and so on.

Not at all sure Command simulates this incorrectly to be truthful.

[jdkbph]

Wow. This is just weird. Just a few random thoughts on the issue...

What's a typical time of flight for an unpowered guided weapon like a GBU?

Can a SAM facility - even a modern one - detect, acquire, track, prep and launch a missile at such a small fast moving object during that short period of time? (unlike an attacking airplane, I'm guessing the bomb wouldn't appear as a discreet target until after it's been dropped)

Is the homing radar in a SAM sensitive enough to track such a small target?

Would the rods or BBs or whatever the warhead uses (keeping in mind that this is what damages the target, not the blast) be effective against such a small object?

IR should be totally ineffective here, yes?

Would a defender be shooting at the bomb at all, as opposed to the plane that dropped it? IE, even if a missile system was capable of doing this with some reasonable possibility of success, would it actually be used that way?

JD

[ExMachina]

ORIGINAL: Are we saying that dumb bombs can't be shot down as such or guided bombs?
I can see a real case for guided bombs losing sensors, vanes, the whole guidance package and so on.

So hypothetically, even if shots against LGBs have a reasonable chance of disabling guidance, does that mean that AAW assets shoot at all bombs under the assumption that they may be LGB? It seems like that would be established doctrine that someone with inside knowledge could speak to.

[VFA41_Lion]

I did some more snooping around on the internetz. There's a grainy IR video of what may be a SA-22 Pantsir shooting down a PGM, and the SA-15 wikipedia page claims it can hit PGMs. It seems like at the moment only very modern Russian short range air defense systems can track and hit PGMs.

There was nothing said about freefall bombs though.

It makes sense that modern SHORAD might be able to hit these things, but imo, systems like the SA-2 or SA-10, which carry very big and very fast missiles, should be trying to shoot down the aircraft carrying them instead. Easier to search, track and hit. And designed to.

[Russian Heel]

ORIGINAL: VFA41_Lion

I did some more snooping around on the internetz. There's a grainy IR video of what may be a SA-22 Pantsir shooting down a PGM, and the SA-15 wikipedia page claims it can hit PGMs. It seems like at the moment only very modern Russian short range air defense systems can track and hit PGMs.

Those modern systems can indeed engage PGMs without a doubt, but I'm not convinced how successful they would be in practice. A controlled environment when you know a) an a/c s going to release a PGM b) when the a/c will release it and c) where the a/c will release it is a lot different than in an unknown environment. I'm not convinced the SA-15 would achieve the 90% pk number that the company claims, not so much based on the platform, but more of the operator's ability. A little different situation, but when I was a tank commander in a real world situation and multiple targets were presenting themselves in a very fluid my brain was overwhelmed at times assessing which was the most dangerous threat that required immediate engagement. The tank was always waiting on us.