@@Spudknocker I got chased down by a Grumble on the highway just last week. I put your 45 to 45 degree methodology to use and utilized obstructions to break contact behind an SUV with a family in it. Thanks Spudknocker!
Man, you make it look so easy haha. But this was definitely a very useful video. Now I realized my mistake, I'm always using the old-school way of turning into the missile even at longer distances. I'll try the 4/8 o'clock technique. Thanks!
I fly the Hornet and I came up with these concepts on my own several years ago. Precisely what you have just demonstrated. However, my targets are the actual SAM sites, themselves. I cannot just turn away at a long distance and try again. My technique is to fly NOE with masking and slightly offset as you explained as much as I can until I'm within 10 to 12 nmi from the site, pop up and toss a JDAM at it. Often, with an IADS system in place, there will be a layered defense in play which makes a run in on 4 targets max. And, of course, with today's accurate ELINT missions/systems, knowledge of exactly where these semi-mobile sites will give JDAMs lots to intell to get to within a couple feet. In addition to the "danger close" position of the attack, NOE in burner going in as well as leaving takes a lot of fuel.
Hey Spud, absolutely great work. I'm actually interested extremely in the wild weasel thematic and this video seems to teach me from old school to new school. Thanks for the input and fly safe! Cheers Milan
If you have sky behind you, trying to fool the doppler clutter rejection won't work. You only become "invisible" when there's ground behind you and your returns get filtered out.
im not experienced with notching, but that's another technique. 45 degrees attacks the kinetic energy by a) forcing a change in intercept path b) afterburning away after it loses propulsion.
@@Spudknocker there is a game on playtest called "Nuclear Option" I have a hard time evading missiles but I will apply tactics from this video there. Thank you for this vid btw 🔥
Hey friend! You can see example videos on my Channel of lessons. They typically last about 1-2ish hours depending and I will typically do a schedule of a lesson every couple weeks or so. I try to give you as much homework as possible and set you up for success with that homework
Sory to say but the assumption that constant course change will drain down missile energy is true in real life bit not in DCS. You can verify this by measuring missile speed and energy in straight and manoeuvre scenario by help of Tacview. DCS engine does not model drag coefficient change in a turn. Simple as that. It does model the coefficients based on air density though so draging a missile low is a good idea. But turning... Not much if a difference in range if you make prolonged turn after its engine burn off time or you mske a rapid vector change. Blame ED. Also you cannot notch the SAM radar as you are not on cluttered radar background. From perspective of a SAM radar you are on clear blue sky. Alsi you suggest to viewers the should crank imidiately to see a curve in missiles smoke. A curve in missile smoke does not change the situation dramatically if you are not going cold. This is due at this case missile is still gaining energy from it's burning engine. You di not mark the important aspect that any manoeuvres while missile is still burning is a waste of your energy only. Sure if this mske you going cold or low but otherwise will not make a difference.
Every single thing you said is wrong. Inertia is modeled, you can notch SAM radar IRL & in DCS, and it is NOT a waste of your energy to crank the missile while the rocket is burning. It has finite inertia, this is simple kinematics that is easy to understand.
Hey spud. I've always wondered if head on is better or worse than an off set approach. Wouldn't a head on approach mean that the missile would launch at a longer range do to faster closure? Wouldn't beaming at missile launch and the added range make the missile easier to defeat? Could this maybe be a viable wild weasel strategy to deplete missiles?
I think that by starting at an offset the sam missile, starting from the site, already has to turn to intercept you, and turning consumes energy. While going head on doesn't require as much energy for the missile. So by having an offset and then doing the turn the overall energy of missile could be lower compared to what you were suggesting. Obviously i haven't tried it nor measured its energy, i am supposing the reason why it's done like that. Should be investigated though.
I am with here. To the energy of the missile it should not be much of a difference when the turn takes place, as long is it does take place. However, the earlier the missile is started, the more wiggle room you have, and the closer it is to its maximum range. So yes, I agree with you. Would be interesting to see what others think about it.
Note: Sometimes the AI sam is a bit silly. It fires at maximum range which is very easy to evade. If the SAM let you to go closer, the real game begins.
Thanks Spud! One question, the 45° behind the beam technique has you flying away from the SAM site. If your mission is to destroy said site/a target nearby, what's stopping the SAM site from continuously launching on you, driving you further and further away? How do you get close?
You fly in a SEAD-package and you and your wingman play with the missiles while your second package engaged/overwhelmed the SAM site with stand-off weapons... Or you repeat evasion until the site needs to reload and needs to rely on their SHORAD/AAA.
Not an experienced DCS pilot but I know some other sims and history You don't. Unless there's a convenient valley or mountain range for you to fly through all the way to your target, some SEAD needs to be done
Ok now I really want to come back home from work, open DCS, build a mission, and have a try. Oh, and probably die. But this is a different story. 😂 thanks a lot Spud.
Mannn i dont even know how to do flares so im here turning like crazy and 90% get away by going up then down. Sometimes they seem to get lost in the clouds. maybe its just luck
That's very interesting, and makes a lot of sense! Trying to run the missile out of energy instead of dodging it. The thing is, though, you still end up running away. How do you go about trying to actually Wild Weasel these things, other than simply flinging HARMs or standoff weapons at them? (which isn't an option for the Grumble). Do you maybe have to poke at the site from multiple angles with multiple aircraft at once, evading like this when any one of them is fired on, and coming back in again and again until someone gets close enough to land hits?
I have a question, when SAM fires at me, and I dont know the type of the SAM, should I perform evasive manouvers like you did for s300 just to be sure I dont get hit? Or should I perform manouvers showed earlier in the video ( hoping it wasnt indeed s300)
Thanks for the video. The earth has no effect on curvature at this distance. The only thing that happens with a Split S. That the rocket can't distinguish between air and ground. As long as you fly down, it tries to estimate your position where you could be and intercept you into the ground. This works with all SAM positions that are radar-guided. Also with A2A
SA-2.... dispense a bit of chaff, manuever, you dodged it. SA-11, Dive, dispense chaff, go cold, you dodged it. SA-5, Dive, Dispense chaff, go cold, you dodged it. SA-5 short range, Dive, notch, dispense chaff, you dodged it. SA-10, Just turn, stay cold, you dodged it. BOOM, 40 minutes of content. Done. No need to explain further, not hard, just have your RWR on. Now explain how to dodge an sa13... Which is... stay high, dispense flares if noticed.
Meteor, the author of the Album explicitly grants the right to use it for DCS video production... no matter the module. And as the artist he knows best!😂
