Are Stealth Aircraft Vulnerable To Stinger MANPADS Missiles? (and other science) | DCS
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 07. 2024
- Today we investigate whether modern 5th generation aircraft are vulnerable to incredibly basic and cheap portable MANPADS. We also run a series of other tests.
PATREON: / grimreapers
0:00 Overview
1:21 Info About MANPADS
7:08 Scenarion Description
9:14 F-35 Various Tests
14:37 Yak-52
16:23 A-10 Thunderbolt
17:46 CEII
18:41 BF-109
19:29 Mig-21 Fishbed
21:41 F-14 Tomcat
23:24 AV-8B Harrier II
24:36 AH-64 Apache
25:41 SA342 Gazelle
27:46 F-22 Raptor
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS (CZcams): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2 (CZcams): / @grimreapers2
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDES: • DCS World Module Quick...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD: / discord
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #GR #MANPAD #Stinger #Igla #Stealth #5thgen #F22 #Raptor #F35 #GRDCSTesting #DCSTesting #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military #DCS #DCSWorld - Hry
One thing that's easy to forget about AAA and especially MANPADS is how landscape altitude will change their threat to aircraft. If you're thinking you're safe flying at 20,000 feet AGL, you could be in for a very bad day if you happen to be flying near mountains. I highly recommend using a few sneaky MANPADS on a mission sometime, without the team expecting them.
Yup this mission was the inspiration for today: czcams.com/video/iGXCm595-W8/video.html entire flight got wiped by 2 x MANPADS. Hate the things.
Insert them by helicopter.
I remember my Stinger training in Germany in the late 80s, they put us in a huge dome. The ceiling, which turned into the "sky", came alive and we basically were in a video game.. Quite fun actually..
That sucks in United States Marine Corps Infantry we train how we fight. Live rounds only no sims during my time 2003 till 2015 as an 0331.
@@websterl.william106 yes we all know how much you lot love blowing 💩 up 🙈
Only thing that sucks is your comment W⚓
@@websterl.william106Y'all fired Stinger warshots every time? I find that hard to believe.
@@Ken_Koonzhe said 0331… that’s a Machine Gunner MOS which means he never fired any Stingers
@@websterl.william106and bro don’t even pretend like the Marine Corps hasn’t done some stupid ass training that had no place in real war fighting…. I was also in the infantry 1st BN/2nd Mar. and sure we had good training but we equally had really bad training that was forced on us by our leadership
So something to keep in mind about the A-10, whilst it has managed to survive multiple missile hits on occasion it isnt expected to actually be hit. Even back in WW2 armor on planes was minimal.
A big part of the A-10’s survivability comes mostly from its seperated 2 engines. It is considerably harder to take out 100% of the planes thrust with a single hit.
And the stupid amount of flares it carries.
Ive been working and instructing on the F-35A for nearly a decade now. Your explanation of high bypass and boundry layer air on the augmentor of the Lightning was spot on, well done.
Wow! I did a thing!
I thought the F-35 was supposed to have an internally integrated towed decoy. Is that not true? Classified? Or is it just not modeled in DCS?
@@justifiablyhumanthe f35 isn't even an official module so probably nothing is really modeled in dcs. Also we will never get a module of a stealth aircraft (no, not even in twenty years. We don't even know what the SR-71 was really capable of)
@michelestefanini5466 I was curious about this specifically because I thought I saw the pod version of the towed decoy was in, so I was curious if it had been adapted to the F-35 model. If not I hope someone will work on it.
Nice work out there
We had a 98% kill on jets and 100% kill on choppers with the redeye. Personally I question the DoD's claims of 98% and 100%. The issue is they had a range of four miles and you had to hold on target for two seconds. If you're in any sort of built up area or in the woods they're nearly useless since you can't keep a two second lock. FIM-43 Redeyes (1967-1995)
Also the Redeye needed elevation to fire, I forgot what the degrees where. Been too many years since I've done the bridge crawl from Juarez.
@@johnsmith-gk4td Nothing like cattle cars from Logan Heights to School.
I still remember it as the Strela - flying late-night evasion missions on the NAS Fallon range in the late 1987s, dodging Strelas and other Soviet era gear - trapped in the back of the SH-60B Seahawk and puking because we had almost no external visual reference or artificial horizon as we stared at the ESM screen
Wow! Rather you than me...
The A-10’s vertical stabilizers and engines are supposedly placed where they are aside from aerodynamics to allow the stabilizers to block direct line of sight to the exhaust. This was supposedly to limit the hot exhaust view to almost directly six o’clock. Hueys in Vietnam were equipped with ‘’Strela kits’’ after the Strela was supplied to the North. Did the same as the Gazelle exhaust you showed Cap, directing the exhaust upward. They were referred to as ‘’toilet bowl’’ exhaust.
thx
For the missiles to jam up control surfaces on the Mig-21, the Mig would need to HAVE control surfaces…
modern stingers also have negative UV guidance, which means they also track the UV shadow left by a passing aaircraft,
they combine that with the IR emitted by the target for added flare resistance
sheesh looks like next gen stealth is going to have to somehow conceal that too.
In addition to chaff and flares Apache has inbuilt IR 'Black Hole' suppressors on it's engine exhausts, it also has the IRCCM (Infra-red counter countermeasures) system behind the rotor hub, basically a ceramic brick heated by the engines that vents burst of heat energy into the sky behind the aircraft to confuse IR seekers.
I think they have the Northrop Grumman Nemisis which directs laser energy into the MANPADS seeker.
"it also has the IRCCM (Infra-red counter countermeasures) system behind the rotor hub, basically a ceramic brick heated by the engines that vents burst of heat energy into the sky behind the aircraft to confuse IR seekers"
From what I've read and talked to one Army helo pilot about that system dates back to the end of the Vietnam era and is not used anymore. With modern seekers instead of causing confusion it actually acts like a bullseye and enhances a missiles chance of success.
@@williamzk9083That's DIRCM not IRCCM. It's an entirely different type of system.
FIM-92 doesn’t use infrared seeking.
@@Watk72 I think you should delete that statement
11:50 You can see 2 explosions so Stinger did the job and the aircraft damage model is to blame. F-35 is not even fast as for a fighter so proximity fuze should have no problems.
Regarding flares remember that real Stinger has dual spectrum (IR + UV) seeker so it should be very resistant to flares, in DCS that feature seems to be missing from DCS World Stinger.
thats because the current model stinger is not in the game. also at low altiude the fastest a plane is going to go is mach 1.6
The Su 25 with it's anti IR thing would have been interesting
As for the f-22, to quote the English-language wiki:
"The F-22 was also designed to have decreased radio frequency emissions, infrared signature and acoustic signature as well as reduced visibility to the naked eye. The aircraft's flat thrust-vectoring nozzles reduce infrared emissions of the exhaust plume to mitigate the threat of infrared homing ("heat seeking") surface-to-air or air-to-air missiles."
It says it does but not how. 2 big engines produce a lot of heat. I'm always sceptical when physics is allegedly stepping out of he door for a moment to have a smoke.
And there is a hell of a lot of physics magically bypassed in these claims.
If it is claims about military capabilities it gets even more fishy. I mean come one "reduced visibility o the naked eye"? That thing is MASSIVE.
@@5Andysalive*invisible plane* lol
MANPADS have relatively primitive seekers eg Stingers Mechanical Rosette Scan is primitive compared to the AIM-9X focal plane array and the IRIS/T linear scan. MANPADS can often be disrupted by DIRCM "Directional Infrared Red Counter Measures" such as Northrop Grumman's Nemesis. These track the missile with radar and infrared cameras and inject laser wavelength into the seeker of the MANPADS modulated to disrupt the mechanical scan of the MANPADS seeker. Russia has been using Vitebsk L370, the Russian New Generation Directional IR Countermeasure (DIRCM) System to jam Stinger. Of course this was all known about 7 years ago but plans to replaced the seekers of Stinger with a similar seeker to Sidewinder in 2015 was rejected on economy grounds so now the Russians are jamming stinger. IRIS/T can't be jammed due to the linear array mirrors defecting the jamming light and its ability to home on jam.
DIRCM is pretty effective when combined with flares. Laser Beam Riding missiles such as Starstreak and RBS-70 are immune. These use assisted tracking to direct a laser that the missile rids. Laser is offset slightly to avoid alerting the target.
I been around some IR EW tech. The US has some stuff that I can't even say the name of. Even on heavy aircraft.
"Missile is offset slightly to avoid alerting the target." Could you elaborate on that? Offset how much? How can the laser be offset (like not lasing the target directly?) yet still achieve a target lock and guide the missile to the actual aircraft? I am very interested to know how this works.
It's worth noting that the Su-25T as modelled in DCS has one of those IR jammers. I haven't found it works particularly well, but that might be me rather than it.
@@christophero55 These missiles are beam riding and have a rearward facing sensor. They don't use semi active homing. You would offset the missile slightly (a few degrees until half way to target so that the missile didn't block the operators view. This then can be used to avoid alerting the target aircraft till the last seconds.
Makes me long for the Chaparral concept with a modern chassis and AIM-9X. I know some of the SHORAD concept vehicles mounted AIM-9’s but none moving forward retained them. Always liked the Chaparral. Could the DCS version be modeled with AIM-9X?
In Clancy's _Red Storm Rising,_ that's how the F-117 was shot down. The pilot was egtessing down a road, and hit from brhind with a MANPAD.
F-19 Frisbee, not F-117
@@Archer89201
True.
I appreciate all the background info, SuperCAP. Lots of stuff I did not know.
the f35 damage model needs significant work.
the is ZERO chance the f35 can take multiple hits and take less damage than the A10 with a single hit.
unfortunately work to be done yet.
All 2020's planes in DCS work a little different to the core game planes. One manpad does kill the plane, but it's just not obvious to see from outside. In cockpit you start losing control etc after one hit.
@@grimreapers A10's have the engines separated by fusalage and control surfaces specifically in order to keep weapons damage to just one engine.
a second manpad would likely be detrimental to the second engine...that's the dangerous expectation of A10 operations.
the A10 could potentially loose both engines with one manpad...but that is not the rule as per real world operations.
the f35 didn't seem to start showing issues until the second hit as per conversation in video...and it's a far less robust fast jet.
the A10 in by no means invulnerable...but in this situation should fare far better than the f35. not sure if the f35 frag damage is realistic...seems slightly off.
The F35 engine is literally a retuned raptor engine. Also the raptor has also taken steps to disperse engine heat. The Xplanes documentaries on both planes lightly touches on the subject, but you know can't tell all the classified stuff. It's a good watch if you like docu series. I know your limited heavily in game for stealth options, etc. Great video keep up the good work!!
Tried training version of russian MANPAD some 20 years ago and the aquisition of lock on small piston aircraft was very easy. The instructor told me the missile sometimes allow lock even to part of cloud.
I am disappointed by Simba - when you set him up in the A-10 and allowed him to do ANYTHING he wants I really expected him to attack the manpad guys with the GAU-8.... 🤣😂🤣😂🙃
lol yes that would have done the trick.
The high bypass fan on the A-10 does more than keep the exhausts cooler... it's more to do with efficiency of the engine, they get most of their thrust from the bypass fan with that configuration and use less fuel than a turbojet does enabling it to loiter for ages over the target area.
Great flying as usual Simba and great content . Love the GR crew
Starstreak: If I can see you I will kill you. Chaff, flares? Pfft.
I think SS was laser tracking?
@@grimreapers Laser Matrix, the operator puts the target in a box, the 3 projectiles aim for the middle of the box. So totally immune to counters, but requires the target to stay in vision.
16:53: Cap: "I'll allow you to do anything you want..."
A-10: BBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT
The best defense is a good offense.
Cap, would you be able to do the same test against laser guided manpads such as the UKs Starstreak High Velocity Missile?
Sadly not. Laser manpads not in game yet.
as a former Stinger crewmember I have to interject with a couple of points. Now, I can only use classified data so keep in mind Stingers are better than even I will describe. in the 1990's the Stinger we used could (and did) differentiate between engine heat, the sun and flares. With Flares deployed the Stinger RMP had a 95+% hit ratio. Also, when it comes to damage manpads actually do more damage the faster the plane goes. The manpads use the wind resistance of the plane against itself. (which I don't think this game can account for) A little piece of metal shredded from the explosives is going to rip wide open with the plan at speed. The wind then has access to the inside of the plane and will then continue to shred the thin skin of high performance jets. Anyway, my 2 cents worth. Very fun video regardless, just not very realistic for the above reasons (and others).
No matter how old it is I'll always love the f 14
Agreed
The whole bypass thing regarding Jet engines is fairly simple, higher bypass with a smaller core gives you more thrust and better fuel economy, but it requires much more room.
This is why you have the GE90 in the civillian world that showcases that taken to the extreme, getting something like that in a jetfighter or stealth fighter is a bit... Ambitious.
If you are restricted on size, and fuel consumption is a 2nd consideration to getting the thrust required, going with a low to no bypass engine is the name of the game.
The reason for this is if you are hunting for economy, it is better to push a lot of air slower towards the back in a wide stream than a tiny but very fast stream of air and gases.
22:19 you mentioned MANPADS are optically sighted. The afterburner signature on a Tomcat is massive, you can see them for miles. I was staff at an air show circa 2000 and they had one fly around with afterburners lit.
Thing is the F-14B can hit mach 0.8-0.9 in mil, and if it's headed towards you, you don't hear it until it's almost on top of you, same thing with it in burner where it will be over mach 1. after it's past you, you then have to get the MANPADS to your shoulder, arm it, find the target, lock it up, shoot. All that before it disappears behind a hill or something
Simba in the F14 buzzing the tower (Pyramids) ! go Simba
The MI-Hind D and MI-34's have heat suppression systems to avoid manpads especially Stingers. Plus they are very heavily armoured.
You guys are my favorite science channel!
‘You Blinded Me With Science” 🎵 😂
I have read about the Soviet Union's time in Afghanistan and it was pretty much a slaughter until the CIA provided the Stinger MANPADS to the Mujahideen. 3 of the first 4 fired took down the dreaded and much feared Mi-24D gunships. That system is credited to reversing the tide and forcing the Soviets out. Not bad for a tube shooting a hand grenade.
Yup one of the world's real Super Weapons.
Pseudo scientific? Well there is a new category... Fun Scientific and that is just as fun.
Remember what Adam Savage said, the difference between a couple of guys screwing around and scientists is that the scientist records their findings :D
Lol, the mighty Cat survived !! 💪🏻
Cap, shame you don't have the Buccanear on DCS, for this 'scientific experiment.' At RAF Abingdon was a 'Battle Damage Repair' flight. Here they trained people to fix battle damage on aircraft. They often used aircraft panels to practice on, and would take them to the shooting range to inflict the damage. This was often achieved with a shotgun, at least until they used some panels from a Buccanear. We were there one day using the SA80 and they asked if we could 'pepper' the panel for them. This was because the venerable shotgun had only scratched the paint from them.
Thanks as always Cap. I have no idea for sure, but I have a gut feeling ED did this properly, where most of the time a bunch of flares will defeat a Stinger/Igla, but on the other hand the much more expensive, powerful, and sopfisticated air-to-air IR missiles are significantly more difficult to defend against.
As for a random video idea/request, would you be able to come up with an emulation of the Star Wars trench run?
Not in a literal sense. I'd love to see what is essentially the boys taking turns in a jet of their choice to fly through a canyon/valley with a hard flight celing of around 1.5km (maybe?) and everyone else uses a gun or missile of their choice, but it MUST be aimed (guns) or manually guided/dumb-fired by the defenders. I was thinking either some of the vehicles created by CH using various cannons/guns, or even an Apache hovering in place acting as a physical obstacle in the air while also firing the autocannon, and whatever options are suitable as rockets/missiles (maybe increase the boom-boom and have M270 rockets manaully launched trying to hit the incoming jets hah).
I'm not great as describing this idea and you're the mission setup expert, but i guess I just feel like seeing a whole lot of ordnance and boom-boom generators being fired at a fast jet trying to dodge it all. Probably more of a open invite type video with a lot of players. If it proved to be too difficult for the jet you could have them go in pairs and one making it through wins. Each gunner would be spaced a few hundred meters (at least) apart down the valley, and it could be a round-based tournament to make it competitive, win and move to the next round.
I think you guys did something like this a few years ago, but it was an increasing level of AI-controlled anti-air core assets? I'm also not sure how the GR mods/assets and CH assets would work with an open invite event and a lot of players.
If you can take that mess of text above and make a cool video out of it, you win a special prize! ♥😁
Later version of manpads like the stinger have dual IR/UV seeker heads which makes flares much less effective.
Awesome channel, love learning from your vids. Bravo!
Question Cap. How did you make that thumbnail? It looks like you, or someone, was trying to run over those MANPAD dudes with stealth jet fighter.
Looks like an old BF4 Top Plays or ChaaBoy&Azzy thumbnail 🤣👍
Funny story: I was trying to get the manpads to fire at me so I could take a screeny of the missile coming towards me. In the end he refused to fire until I was like 3ft away from him. Pretty cool.
@@grimreapersHahaha...you were actually flying for that!? I thought for SURE you comped that together!
Havent seen you do these solider missions in ages! Cap
Before watching this video, I would like to say that this looks Grim for the aircraft.
The F-35A was always intended to assume the CAS mission, which is why the USAF builds them with an internal auto-cannon. The department of the Navy has retrofited the F-35C & B with a multi-function Gun Pod to allow them to handle CAS missions. Thus, _all_ F-35's are just as exposed to MANPADS, especially IR, as any other combat aircraft.
Neat.
Wonder what the 4 engine transport/bombers would do against those manpads.
It's a long way to scream from 40,000 feet... Pray it's one of those instant death explosion scenarios.
Thanks Buddy! This is what I was wondering!!!! Really appreciated!!!
Pleasure.
I thought I read that the US Apaches were getting some new system installed that was meant to help against MANPADS. Something else other than just flares but I can't remember what.
Correct but not modelled in game yet.
@@grimreapers That makes sense, probably hard put in game.
+GrimReapersAtomic *Radar-invisible aircraft still generate heat.* Tested: Raytheon (USA) FIM-92 Echo; Engineering Bureau for Instrments (RUS) 9K33 Modernizatovenn'yj.
DAS - Distributed Aperture System
thx
@13:15 ish
hmm, about the flares... I wonder if older planes are stuck with older types of flares, or if flares is something that is just continually evolving regardless of plane type.
For example, one standard size flare fits all, so that's what they will use, unless they need to use up a warehouse full of older models ... )
Or if one size doesn't fit all, maybe some planes needs to use special flares due to design issues. (like maybe a stealth fighter would need something special for dispensing flares,, that could mean only those types of planes gets the latest evolution of flares. )
As I understand it, flares are one of those things that needs to be updated all the time, to deal with new kinds of seekers, and comes in all kinds of variants.
Real life, flares have been updated as you say, I suspect in game a flare is just a flare, no difference.
Apparently, Russian flares work best against russian seekers and USA flares against USA seekers. Or they did back in the 80s anyway. Which makes sense, as they would be developped against a known technology. In game it likely doesn't make much difference
8:50 also the "Black Hole" heat dissipation system on the Apache
Eow, Great video 🦊 Pity it didn't end with the A-10 strafing them as a Defense against MANPADS , best defense is a good offense .
I'd love to see the Buccaneer have a go at that!
One good way to defeat a Manpad is to shoot the guy holding it. Sometimes just shooting in the vicinity will make them lose lock as they hit the deck.
GR Suggestion: How would modern air defenses perform against.... cardboard drones? A year ago, this would sound ludicrous, but if recent reports are to be believed.... multiple aircraft were damaged on the ground by a barrage of cardboard drones.
Yup, how strange modern times are.
I thought the F-35 was also supposed to have an internally integrated towable decoy. Is that not the case, or is it just not modeled yet?
It has one.
Not in game.
GM from Fairview, TX. Love this channel!
GM from McKinney! Also a huge fan of the channel
Come visit @ Pie314 sometime @@laa98l
The fly in this ointment is that manpads are distributed thinner. You don’t have whole unit all carrying a stingers. One or two. Fire, reload another man pad farther along the path. Not a convention of manpads. Nobody survives that experiment
CH has made the RBS70 MANAPDS as well, not sure if he managed to sort the laser riding aspect of it or it's IR-guided... Could be interesting to compare to the Stinger/Igla
I don't think it's driveable as human which is why I didn't use it. I may be wrong.
Try a late model Tornado or F-111D/F on full afterburner (I.e. supersonic) with their terrain following radar (TFR) engaged at minimum altitude permitted by the TFR.
I best the manpads wouldn't get time to lock her.
I do wonder how the F-22 would fare if it just went full afterburner and climbed like crazy. The Stinger's maximum speed is Mach 2.54, but if you put it in a slow-gain stern chase you might be able to exhaust its rocket motor.
the soldier looks like dude from kentucky ballistics
Almost made it in the a 10 Simba 😊
21:04 "Ha! We got you with our missile!"
"You're wrong, comrade! Stronk Soviet plane made of Stalinium destroy missile!"
I LOVE SCIENCE!!!!
You got similar result that I've seen personally in DCS with regards to low, fast & approaching targets. Strafing manpads units in any fast jet (400+ kts) seems to have about a 50% failure rate to fuze the manpad missile properly, instead looking like a late explosion.
Not sure about the realism of this.
Other than using flares, my best success rate against core game Igla manpands is death-or-glory style full speed strafe attack.
The stinger manpad got only 1 shot because of the might 21's blistering speed.
I went to Walmart and got myself an Игла ManPADS today. Gotta say, I was very disappointed that you can't get tone on four high effiecency engines at 35,000ish feet. Sadge :(
Mig-21 - So hot its kool.
Could have done with a cold war special test.
The Igla vs a Tornado at Nads height 🏐🏐🤔😅
It would 've been cool to see the SU-25T since it has DIIRCM
I miss your love for the AJS Viggen Cap 😢
DCS has made me LOVE Viggen. But sadly Viggen just doesn't get any YT views anymore, can't afford to do it :(
@@grimreapers understandable, you need to put food on the table, but as a Swede it a little sad.
I forgot to say I appreciate your channel a lot! 🙏
Well the first thing I would do is fly above 20000 feet second dont fly in formation spead then out.
Distributed Aperture System
Loved the ending, taking out a swath of Cairo with the guns! Lol. And of course.....
Schwerer Gustav!!
(Should I stop asking for this...? Seems like it may be fun)
Edit*
How about the XM913 and/or NGCV...?😊
Thanks guys
I know you guys have done vids on which gen of aircraft could intercept a WW2 bomber raid the best, but have you considered a vid on which gen could escort a bomber raid the best?
Will investigate.
If you’re in rang of a FIM-92 and the motors are both working your dead before you can react, no chaff no jamming will work.
Well, my experience with MANPADS is that I am always dead when I don't see the launch (that means always).
20:34 I'm glad DCS modeled it so that it registers the Russian jets as intercepting the missiles like in real life
Surprised you didn’t kill them at the end. cool video though.
Has Cap been watching Commando on a loop?
Not a joke: when I was in my 20's we would have Commando parties, where we'd get drunk and watch it on repeat. It made me the man I am today...
@@grimreapers I hope your wife plays the steel drums.
In fact you could designate from your vehicle after launching an extremely small short range 2nd party confirmation drone like 5x🎉
I wonder how jet fighter bombers would have done replicating WWII long range bomber missions in place of B17s. First have them flying at altitude in formation. Second have them flying as designed. Could they carry a 6,000 lbs payload for a 2,000 mile round trip mission?
Or see if you can have some manpads firing out the back of a C17.
Heres a viewer request, in DCS and real life, can dropping tanks fool a fox 3 kind of like flares for a fox 2?
Tried it a few years back and this had no effect.
@@grimreapers bummer!
Does this software have the F-8 crusader? It was the last dogfighter
The AH-64 also has an IR strobe like the Gazelle. Is it not modeled in game?
Sadly not no.
Could the manpads get a lock if an aircraft was just gliding overhead? Do they have to have the engines running? I know its not practical, but i was curious how the game was coded.
Yes they can but at a reduced range. Tried it in a few missions, works for a bit, then you get smacked anyways.
Could you use the F-15E guided cluster bombs to take out a drone swarm??
Believe it or not the air out the back of a jet engine isn't all that hot. It is true it is definitely hotter than the surrounding air though.
Remember those experiments with jet powered railcars back in the day? It kind of illustrates the concept that what comes out the back isn't as hot as you might think.
Seems like pre flaring would aid the MANPADS teams by giving them a visual cue to spot you earlier than they would otherwise. DCS I think is still slewed in the MANPADS favor.
Agreed to this.
Could beam-riding Thales Starstreak HVM systems defend against an onslaught of stealth aircraft? Starstreak hyper-velocity missiles are available as a MANPADS, a lightweight three-shot launcher system, and a self-propelled system on the Alvis Stormer AFV.
The best modern aircraft for defeating IR are probably the B-2, F-117, and B-21.
Yup BUT again, none of those planes would ever fly below 20,000ft anyways...
@@grimreapers generally, I would agree with you, however, I have personally seen the B-2 at high speed and at low level. It was pretty wild/impressive (1990's Mojave Desert). I just happened to be in the right place at the right time when it overflew me in the middle of desert at apx 500 ft. So while it would be unusual, it has happened. Remember, this isn't all about science, it's also about fun.
BTW, according to Wikipedia, the B-2A has terrain following radar, and I would submit the reason for it is to be able to fly low level missions.
B2, B1, B1R, SR-71?
18:34 was that a Pitts S-15?
WW3 is going to be nasty
Its Egypt.... Thats why they only shot the Mig once ....
SIMBA FTW!
Odd they did not test the su 25t with ir jammer
The Su25's ir jammer isn't modeled in dcs.
I've found the A10a, in DCS, is made of paper. Can cough near it and it gets damaged.
Problem with all damage models in game is that they are not calibrated together, so some planes much tougher than they should be and vice versa.
How about air balloon and reliant robin? :)
^^^ this
Interesting that Afghans were able to destroy Mig 21s with first gen stingers while sitting on camels, yet DCS couldn't?
Those claims were probably false?
@92HazelMocha yeah. I was a stinger in the late eighties to early nineties. In AIT we were shown pictures of the Afghans with stingers on camelback, but I don't remember video footage. It very well could've been a propaganda scene staged for support of more stingers being sent during the Russian invasion. And after some looking back to documentaries on the Stingers we gave them, it seems that the primary victim to the stingers were choppers.