SM-6 versus DF-21

[DWReese]

My post was asking YOU if YOU have tried it with a DF-21 or not. Not me. I already know that it doesn't work. That's why I was asking YOU.

If YOU could post a scenario with a SM-3 consistently hitting a DF-21, I'd love to see it. Do you have it, or not? It's a simple question.

[thewood1]

You ask all these questions and always expect other people to do the work. You asked me to post a scenario with SM-3s working. I did. Now you say thats not the right one. Do some work yourself for once.

[DWReese]

I asked YOU about the SM-3 and the DF-21, since the thread is about the DF-21. I merely asked you if YOU have ever successfully used the SM-e3 against the DF-21.

I have tested it, posted those results, and am working to help fix it. I asked you if YOU have ever done it. If you have, then your work could be valuable. OBVIOUSLY, you haven't been able to have the SM-3 successfully engage and defeat the DF-21, otherwise you would be providing what you did in an effort to help the game developers.

There is no work that I am trying to get anyone else to do. I play around with the game about six hours each day. I test things. I don't really ever play the game. I just test, so I don't need anyone to "do the work for me." Even if they did, I wouldn't trust them. That's why I was asking you for your work. I trust no one. I want to see it work myself. I've already done the testing, and I know that it doesn't work. Now, if you have the game data (scenario) that shows that the SM-3 can engage and defeat the DF-21, then it would be most beneficial to the devs if you posted it. It would help all of us.

But, I sadly don't believe that you have anything other than a deflective response when backed into a corner. So, you've been called out. Do you have the cards, or is it just a bluff? If you have the cards, show them so that EVERYONE can benefit from your knowledge.

Do you have a scenario that shows that the SM-3 can consistently engage and defeat the DF-21, or not? If so, post it for the benefit of everyone. It's that simple.

[blu3s]

[thewood1]

Since you seem to be unbale to post a single scenario showing the issue...here.

A save after the action and a clean start. The results are highly variable, as expected. I have set the Ford as autodetect to force launches. I added in long-range radars just so the player can see what is happening. But SAMs don't fire until a SPY-1 detects the RVs. I have seen results that vary from 15% hits to 50% hits. All seems very plausible to me.

Now, again, where is your save showing the issue? I have now posted two separate scenarios. I assume you will move the goalposts once again. You have to have start almost a dozen threads on SM-3s and I don't remember ever seeing a save.

btw, the main reason I built those scenarios is to see how many DF-21s or DF-26s it takes to kill a CVN. It seems to around 50 to get through the screen and get 1-4 hits. 3 hits typically won't sink it, but will mission-kill it.

[caelunshun]

Please see this new thread with a scenario example: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0&t=401862

[caelunshun]

I would add that the issue is not that we expect some absurdly high hit rate. The problem is that SM-3s often fail to even reach the weapons endgame state, which is unambiguously a bug in the simulation. It's perfectly fine if SM-3s get to the endgame phase and a message is logged with 25% probability of hit or whatever; it's not fine when they decide to just forget about their targets and fly off into oblivion despite there being a reliable track and datalink.

[DWReese]

blu,

Thanks for the scenario. I tried it, and it does work. I'm not sure why it isn't working elsewhere. I did notice that your target ships were headed directly for the area where the DF-21s were being fired from. Have you tried it with the target ships being on a different heading? If so, and it worked, then that will save me some work.

Thanks again.

[thewood1]

Why don't you try it and post it?

[DWReese]

The problem is that SM-3s often fail to even reach the weapons endgame state Exactly. If it never shows that it is engaging, then there is no endgame status, and there is no actual attack.

It's perfectly fine if SM-3s get to the endgame phase and a message is logged with 25% probability of hit or whatever; it's not fine when they decide to just forget about their targets and fly off into oblivion despite there being a reliable track and datalink. Again true. I have no idea what the actual kill rate should be, but if you never see the endgame breakdown, then you know that no attack ever took place.

I need to study why the scenario that blu provided seems to show engagements, when other scenarios don't. Is it because they are flying/sailing directly toward the incoming missiles? That seems to be the only thing that is different.

[thewood1]

There are massive geometry issues in exoatmospheric interceptions. I am pretty sure the devs have detailed this out in the past. Passing shots are almost impossibly difficult. Thats why, in real life, ships are positioned exactly where threats are predicted to come from. Its also why a CVN needs both a very close protection cruiser and a picket ship far out on the line of threat. When I build by scenarios, I try to take that into consideration.

[DWReese]

Thanks for posting the scenario.

I have been testing the scenario that blu posted with different variations. I will get to yours right afterward. I'm actually looking forward to it.

What you said about the "massive geometry issues in exoatmospheric interceptions" is all true in real life. But, I don't see that that is the issue here. For whatever reason, in every case but blu's scenario, I fail to ever get an endgame combat resolution because the SM-3 fails to recognize/lock on to the target. In fact, another poster (Kobu?), in the Tech Support thread, just provided images that depict exactly what often happens to me, that being that the SM-3 flies toward the target, and then passes it by without ever attacking. As I said, I have seen that EVERY time in the last three releases, except for blu's scenario. Hopefully, your scenario will work just like his, and I can try t piece together the reason why yours and blu's work, and all of the rest don't. But first, I have to look more into his, before I can start looking at yours, and anything else.

BTW, I use one simple test scenario for my ABM combat, and I have uploaded it here plenty of times. It does not change. That way there are no new variables. It's easy to see when it works with one version, and then stops working wit the next, that something has changed. This change began with the red crosshairs appeared.

Thanks again for posting the scenario.

[caelunshun]

Here is yet another scenario where the issue occurs consistently. No setup required.

[caelunshun]

And, FWIW, the scenario I provided has perfect geometry for an intercept and a 100% reliable track on the target. Also, the intercept occurs at an altitude of ~450km, which is well within the interception envelope of the SM-3. Please don't dismiss these examples as broken due to "bad geometry" or "ABM is hard" or whatever else.

[thewood1]

No one is dismissing anything. Its just in this thread few people have brought anything but opinions. Bringing a save is a lot more powerful than just coming in and saying something's broken. And geometry does matter and ABM is hard in real life and in-sim.

[thewood1]

The SM-3 thread in the tech forum is a classic case of bringing a potential bug to light. Look how much shorter that thread is in coming to some sort of conclusion than this one or several of the others that focused on ABM. In those threads players could provide almost no detail or counter to scenarios showing SM-3s shooting down BMs.

[DWReese]

thewood1,

I ran your scenario without making any changes whatsoever.

The SM-3 missiles from your scenario did the same thing that the ones in my scenario did, and the same as what the other poster (Kobo?) was talking about: They are fired at the incoming missiles, and when they get close, they fly right on by without hitting anything, and without an engagement. In essence, yours does what ours does. (The SM-6, however, works just fine.)

Perhaps there is a setting? When I use the scenario that blu posted, it does have some crazy movements, but it does have some actual engagements. This one has none from the SM-3.

Missed.JPG (56.05 KiB) Viewed 2300 times

[thewood1]

As I said, and you should expect, not all SM-3s hit. It varies between 15% and 50%. Check that other thread.

[thewood1]

Just ran it again. About 50% hit with SM-3s. I did do one thing. I turned off the SBX. I also made sure the DDG picket had its radar on.

Screenshot 2024-02-24 222033.jpg (764.2 KiB) Viewed 2289 times

[thewood1]

Same scenario. Next smaller wave of BMs. Still around 50% SM-3s.