SEAD

[Viper6 3]

Ok lets see your 'work' in SEAD

[Viper6 3]

one more?

[Viper6 3]

last one til next SEAD mission

[WDH 0]

SEAD looks like the tusk thru the floor!Got HAWGS?

[+littlesmoke 64]

AI flight tasked SEAD firing AGM-65 at SAM site.

 

[kct 5]

 

Don't ask what a German colour scheme is doing on an F-4E. And why I loaded the Pave Spike instead of an ECM (accident).

[Vampyre 24]

Did someone say tango? Knifefighting with air defense is my cup'o'joe!

 

Edited October 14, 2008 by Vampyre

[kukulino 1]

No chaffs, no flares, no ECM... But tons of adrenaline

 

Hehe, missed, hehe...

 

But we have ravenclaws SPS-141 for Su-7 ECM, so we can feel much safer now :good:

Edited October 14, 2008 by kukulino

[+FLOGGER23 3,064]

Ok guys, here is what i got from yesterday, hope you enjoy it as i did

[Vampyre 24]

I'm HARMing a Fan Song.

 

[rovert97 1]

well while on route to my target area of a SEAD mission, i jumped upon an airbase with 4 MiG-29's taking off. so i nailed 3 on the ground with the GAU-8 and one in the air right as it took off. then i proceeded to the target area and took care of business.

 

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Ok guys, here is what i got from yesterday, hope you enjoy it as i did

 

Flogger,

 

just a little heads up.

 

You are getting too low and slow in that Thud. In that situation with a SAM site and/or a MIG that close (in this case BOTH) you ideally want to be moving at least 500kts. The areas around SAMs are absolutly infested with triple A and you don't want to go over them with mere 25% throttle setting at low altitude.

[+FLOGGER23 3,064]

Flogger,

 

just a little heads up.

 

You are getting too low and slow in that Thud. In that situation with a SAM site and/or a MIG that close (in this case BOTH) you ideally want to be moving at least 500kts. The areas around SAMs are absolutly infested with triple A and you don't want to go over them with mere 25% throttle setting at low altitude.

 

It will be kept in mind, sir and thanks for the advice

[+FLOGGER23 3,064]

What about this one, Lt. Cater???

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Lots better Flogger,

 

that way you have the altitude and speed to be able deal with an unexpected SAM or MIG.

 

I usually cruise at 400-450kts at about 18,000ft and the closer to the target area, the more i increase throttle. Full military power is the norm from about 10 miles out with 100% burner on the egress.

 

When using ARMs i like to get up to about 20-25000 and make myself a nice target to the SAM operators. You WANT them to fire at your aircraft. It's really the best when you can entice them at the SA-2s near max range. That way you know EXACTLY where their at and the fact that they are active and locked onto you. If you are carrying a Standard... After you avoid the missle, pull out from the SAM's range, climb to altitude, line up and shoot.

[+Nightshade/PR 7,933]

VooDoo Child...with all regards to Jimi...

 

 

I decided to go for the SIMPLE method. Kill em' all and nobody shoots back.

[+EricJ 4,244]

[/img]

 

Don't ask what a German colour scheme is doing on an F-4E. And why I loaded the Pave Spike instead of an ECM (accident).

 

I may have missed it, but why is that beautiful shot not in the screenshot topic...?

[+Brain32 265]

I decided to go for the SIMPLE method. Kill em' all and nobody shoots back.

That's exactly how I do SEAD lol

Edited October 18, 2008 by Brain32

[Lt. James Cater 62]

VooDoo Child...with all regards to Jimi...

 

I decided to go for the SIMPLE method. Kill em' all and nobody shoots back.

 

You can go that route too. But your long term survival is in doubt.

 

The Thanh Hoa SAM and the site SE of Yen Bai are the only two sites which you can get in a one on one situation with. Even then, that is only from a certain direction and at a certain range. Come in wrong and you will have multiple SAMs inbound.

 

"Kill em all" is a great mindset but also a suicidal one. Take Hanoi for example. How are you going to kill all the SAM sites with a max of 4 ARMs? It's not going to happen. Even the least defended approach to the city has multiple threats to deal with. You could order your wingmen to deal with the objective while you go around blasting the enemy but that will only really work south of Vihn. Any attempt to do that up in Pack 6 will lead to unacceptable casualties.

[macelena 1,070]

I rather SEAD at Suez Canal... but depending on the era, you could need CBUs for radarless targets(AAA or launchers)

as much as ARMs for EWR and ownradar air defences.

 

I prefer to do it in the 80s, with all targets radarized (Mirage Factory WepsPack)

[Viper6 3]

Mr.Carter is correct in the WOV SEAD missions. The SAM threats up north are INCREDIBLE!! Im in Linebacker II and it is a mess!

I never go in with less than 8 AC's and i give them all shrike's even then it is really hard to do any real damage. I've lost 4 pilots already

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

I decided to go for the SIMPLE method. Kill em' all and nobody shoots back.

 

You are using a very high yield weapon, fireball climbing high above the clouds and all. Unfortunately, high yields offer extremely poor corresponding increases in physical blast damage. Line of sight thermal flash damage scales better with high yield, but that's easy to protect against outside a given blast damage radius(**) and flash is not dependable at low altitude in wretched weather. To help just one bomber get through, supporting SEAD flights will have to take on many SAM site grouping locations, so using the same high yield weapon as the bomber, but many times over, may kill the National Bujet.

 

I would suggest that SAM deployments would be made in anticipation of nuclear SEAD and in a way to minimize losses from one high yield weapon. Something to think about.

 

Best bet is using very small sub-kiloton yields for small anti-radar missiles to guarantee a kill against critical SAM sites. Otherwise, continue to use conventionally armed missiles against each. Do note that USAF had planned on anti-radar missiles for B-50 and B-47. These were subsonic, straight winged, to be used against ground surveillance radars that controlled manned Soviet interceptors. The missile was cancelled in peacetime. These were to be conventionally armed to my knowledge but 40kt W-31 was proposed.

 

ah...Radioplane's GAM-67 Crossbow ~> http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/gam-67.html

 

 

 

(**) For high yields, varying local atmospheric conditions at different scales can cause either reduced shock damage or vastly greater damage far away. Tsar Bomba caused shock damage near a thousand km distant from the bomb drop when it should not have happened normally. My guess is that shock waves, like electric current, can find paths of easy transmission that are not easily seen beforehand. So it is possible to blast things apart over long ranges with high yields, one cannot depend on it at all. Zip. That's my limited understanding anyways.

[ziker 0]

I fly in WOI.

 

In Campaign, especially the Yom Kippur campaign, I've developed a tactic to reduce air threats over time.

 

Even when not on SEAD missions I carry a couple of Shrikes. I sometimes also arm my wingman who I can order to strike a specific target with Shrikes.

 

I make it my secondary objective to take out one or two SAM radars per mission, no matter what mission, even A2A missions over enemy territory.

 

If I have surplus clusters and the mission objective is complete, I try to drop them on air defense threats.

 

Over time, in the dynamic campaign, air defense threats start to dwindle and eventually I find partially destroyed and radarless SAM sites when I arrive on the battlefield.

 

I don't think it's historical, and I guess there weren't that many Shrikes around to send them out with every mission.

SAM Radar operators where also smarter at defending against ARMs.

It also goes against the principle of concentration of force.

 

But I think the knowledge that every flight may be armed for RADAR could have confused and agitated the RADAR operators into panic and confusion.

and when large scale SEAD operations weren't possible this attrition method may have been effective.