SELECTIVE targets for HARMs used by SEAD units

[DWReese]

I don't know if this is real or not, so if it doesn't really happen, then please let me know:

In the game, SEAD a/c are given the task of looking for SAMs, we all know that. The game doesn't give you any SPECIFIC radar options to look for. It just allows to to designate how many HARMs that you would like to fire and that's it. There is no specific designation of WHICH ONES you are going to be shooting at.

So, the question, do real life SEAD jockeys know WHAT TYPE of SAMs they are shooting at? If so, are they ever told to shoot at this one (like a SA-10) and not at that one (like a SA-2)? It would seem as though they should be able to do that. If so, could the WRA be expanded to designate WHICH TYPE of SAM the HARMs should shoot out, and which ones they should leave alone?

In a scenario where HARMs re limited, and only a handful of legitimate threat SAMs exist, it would be quite easy for the SEAD a/c to fire off all of its HARMs at an old SAM (like a SA-2), then run out of HARMs, while a real threat (such as a SA-10) is still operating.

So, can they designate which types they can shoot at in real life, and can that be modeled in the game if it is possible?

[Technopiper]

I'll leave someone more qualified to answer your questions. For me, the greatest strength of Command is the integration of all modern weapon systems. No other game does that. But if we were to scrutinize each elements of Command, none of them are super realistic, not even close. Aircraft in real life don't fly like they do in Command. Real tanks don't have health bars. I still think it is a fair compromise between simulation and realism. We keep forgetting that "simulation" is not "realism". In fact they are exact opposites.

[DWReese]

You make excellent points, and I do agree (generally) with your response.

That being said, we are playing a game/simulation here, and in game/simulation terms, your response doesn't answer on the question: Can SEAD a/c target ANY radars that pop up, or are they stuck with what was pre-programmed before launch. If they can pick anything available during flight, then they should be able to select which SAM represents the most danger, and ignore others where multiple ones are present.

As you suggest, I'm not saying that WE are fighting anything that comes close to a real war while sitting in front of our monitors. But, the game is based on a certain amount of facts, which are based on a certain amount of speculation, as to what a hypothetical outcome might be. It shouldn't be that difficult to find the real life answer as to how SEAD a/c operate, and if they can target an array of different radars, or if they are restricted to just what they are looking for. If they can, then IN GAME/SIMULATION TERMS, it would seem that an extra line could be added to WRA which is a little more defined than merely "radar."

Finally, and this kind of refutes your point even further, Matrix sells this game (albeit more detailed) to defense contractors and military people all over the world. Certainly, this issue has been brought up by them, or someone in the know. If it hasn't, then the game company doesn't really have many real defense customers (I think that they do), or this issue is addressed in their version not ours. Certainly, though, they would have posed this same question before.

CMANO/CMO may be a game, but to the military folks that I just mentioned, it's not a game, it's a simulation. Therefore, I believe that my original questions about SEAD capabilities validates the post.

[AKar]

In reality, HARM does allow for targeting specific emitters. Identified emitters are classified accordingly, and can be targeted individually.

[DWReese]

If that is the case, then when creating a SEAD mission, you should be able to direct your HARMs to target the SA-10 battery and disregard the SA-2, since the SA-2 battery probably wouldn't hit anything anyway. That's good to know.

So, I believe that it would be nice to expand that drop down menu to include specific SAM radar units, instead of the generic "RADAR" heading that exists now. It could help SEAD missions be more productive.

[Rory Noonan]

This can be done with strike missions.

HARMs are just one variety of ARM, but they are the example we're using so I'll base my answer on them. HARMs have three broad modes of employment: Pre programmed, self defense and target of opportunity. Pre-programmed means that the higher ups have designated a specific target for each aircraft based on available intel and the weapons are programmed for use accordingly. Self defense is basically a snapshot against an RWR contact, primarily in the hope of breaking radar lock--not necessarily by destroying the emitter. Target of opportunity is similar to pre-programmed but the missile is programmed by the pilot while the aircraft is airborne, using information avaIlable to them at the time (be it through their own sensors or via link).

Thesse behaviours are represented in Command by strike missions, escorts on strike missions, and SEAD patrols respectively. The tools to represent real life employment of these weapons are present and well documented, however it is easy to see how this can be overlooked given the complexity of the sim overall. With that point in mind, I don't think the solution is to add additional layers of complexity with additional doctrine and WRA settings.

[Gunner98]

Can be done manually as well.

Set the doctrine up so that the HARM shooters don't pickle their missiles at the first radar they see, then use the Shift+F1 selective attack, drag select your targets and chose which ones get the missiles.

Using a general SEAD patrol or strike mission removes the micro aspect but simplifies the players job.

B

[DWReese]

Apache,

So, how would you handle this situation?

The SEAD unit is assigned as an ESCORT to strikers. The scenario (just as a point of reference) is variation of Operation Opera with lots of SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6 SAMs. In my opinion, the SA-2 and SA-3 have little chance to score any hits, but the SA-6 is a real threat. So, I would like my SEAD ESCORTS to only use their HARMs (BTW....I know that there no HARMs in the actual scenario, I am just using it as an example of a situation where there are lots of SAMs) against the SA-6s ONLY, withholding fire against the SA-2 and SA-3 SAMs.

What seems to happen to me is the SEAD a/c start firing at the first SAMs that they see, and have essentially depleted their HARMs before they ever even see the SA-6s. Is there a way to program this without being able to add another element to the WRA?

[DWReese]

Gunner,

Thanks for your response.

I am aware that I am able to perform these attacks manually, but I was hoping to use the the Mission Editor to perform these functions so that the opposition can perform these tasks in the actual scenario.

Thanks again.

[Rory Noonan]

ORIGINAL: DWReese

Apache,

So, how would you handle this situation?

The SEAD unit is assigned as an ESCORT to strikers. The scenario (just as a point of reference) is variation of Operation Opera with lots of SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6 SAMs. In my opinion, the SA-2 and SA-3 have little chance to score any hits, but the SA-6 is a real threat. So, I would like my SEAD ESCORTS to only use their HARMs (BTW....I know that there no HARMs in the actual scenario, I am just using it as an example of a situation where there are lots of SAMs) against the SA-6s ONLY, withholding fire against the SA-2 and SA-3 SAMs.

What seems to happen to me is the SEAD a/c start firing at the first SAMs that they see, and have essentially depleted their HARMs before they ever even see the SA-6s. Is there a way to program this without being able to add another element to the WRA?

Being that you are the commander and you assess the SA-2s and SA-3s as low risk, and want your limited munitions used against the SA-6, a strike mission is the way to go. I'd set up a strike mission that launched just ahead of the aircraft they're 'escorting' (quotes since in game terms they aren't escorts).

[DWReese]

Obviously, I forgot to mention that the SA-6s were MOBILE UNITS, and their location isn't known until they light up their radars. So, as my strikers target the reactors, a STRIKE mission against the SA-6 MOBILE unit isn't necessarily something that could be pre-planned ahead of time. Any suggestions?

[Rory Noonan]

Pop up threats shooting at you are a threat no matter what generation they are. Given that they already have you locked, or evan a missle in flight, it's not the time to be cavalier about not taking action to dodge or counter that threat.

It's a common video game fallacy that old weapons aren't dangerous, in much the same way that low calibre weapons don't have 'stopping power'. An SA-2 is less of a threat than a SA-10 or whatever else, in much the same way as a .22 pistol is less of a threat than a .223 rifle. In realistic terms getting hit with either is a potentially life ending event and if someone is shooting at you with a .22 or an SA-2, you would be well advised to take it just as seriously as the SA-10 or .223.

In game terms this is covered by the escort behaviour. If something is shooting at you or threatening to, eliminate the threat.

[honanhal]

I'm probably doing something wrong, but I've had no success with strike missions targeting specific SAM sites -- this is running the Russian Civil War phase I scenario based on the Janes' F/A-18 Kola campaign. The mission flights take off, form up, then declare "mission over" and get into the carrier landing pattern, even though I've checked that the pre-assigned targets are still marked on the map as current. If I assign the same planes, with the same loadout, to a SEAD patrol they have no problem dropping their bombs on those same SAMs, so it doesn't seem like it's an inappropriate loadout issue...

Using SEAD patrol instead does make going after the IADS much more arbitrary and less systematic than I'd like. Instead of strategically hitting the high-altitude, long-range stuff first and then working my way down, it just ends up being the closest stuff to the least far away, which is much less efficient.

James

[Rory Noonan]

ORIGINAL: honanhal

I'm probably doing something wrong, but I've had no success with strike missions targeting specific SAM sites -- this is running the Russian Civil War phase I scenario based on the Janes' F/A-18 Kola campaign. The mission flights take off, form up, then declare "mission over" and get into the carrier landing pattern, even though I've checked that the pre-assigned targets are still marked on the map as current. If I assign the same planes, with the same loadout, to a SEAD patrol they have no problem dropping their bombs on those same SAMs, so it doesn't seem like it's an inappropriate loadout issue...

Can you post this along with a save file in the tech support forum?

ORIGINAL: honanhal
Using SEAD patrol instead does make going after the IADS much more arbitrary and less systematic than I'd like. Instead of strategically hitting the high-altitude, long-range stuff first and then working my way down, it just ends up being the closest stuff to the least far away, which is much less efficient.

James

This is WAD, see my posts above.

[DWReese]

For "pop up threats" (as you call them), I believe that it is nice to have a dedicated SEAD unit (using their stand-off ability) trailing the strikers and assigned to "OVERWATCH" duties. These units can literally attack the SAM unit when the SAM initially fires at the strikers, without being placed in danger themselves.

In any case, thank you so much for your responses to my observations. Perhaps at some later time you (as a dev) might be able to look further into this, if the time and interest is ever available.

Happy New Year!

[KungPao]

I remember IRL, some Soviets ARM require a specific frequency dial before loaded on the A/C, and they would only be able to look for those specific frequency.

[DWReese]

some Soviets ARM require a specific frequency dial before loaded on the A/C, and they would only be able to look for those specific frequency.

That's exactly what I remember reading, as well. But, that was a ways back, and my memory may have faded as it wasn't important to me at that time. I can't cite any sources, I just seem to remember that being the case. I'm not sure that it is even the truth, but that is what I always believed.

[honanhal]

ORIGINAL: apache85
Can you post this along with a save file in the tech support forum?

Done, thanks.

[AndrewJ]

ORIGINAL: KungPao

I remember IRL, some Soviets ARM require a specific frequency dial before loaded on the A/C, and they would only be able to look for those specific frequency.

This is also true of the original American Shrike, which had different variants tuned to different radar bands.

There were eight different marks and several mods of guidance sections:

Mk 22 Mod 0/1/2
Mk 23
Mk 24 Mod 0/1/2/3/4/5
Mk 25 Mod 0/1
Mk 36
Mk 37
Mk 49 Mod 0/1
Mk 50

If you happened to launch with missiles intended for an SA-2's Fan Song radar, then you couldn't shoot at an SA-3s Flat Face, and so on.

Wikipedia has a nice chart of this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-45_Shrike

[DWReese]

That's a great, and very informative, article. Thanks for sharing it.