Flak in WoV

[+malibu43 142]

Well, last night I tried altering the gun accuracy in the gundata, as well as upping the rangefinder and ballisticscomputer values in the ground objects data, and neither one of these seemed to get the KS-19 any closer to hitting me.

 

Are the values for rangefinder and ballistics computer simply on a scale from 0-10, ten being the best, or is there more to it than that?

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Thanks for all the responses. I raised it because I had the impression - purely an impression - from reading various books by veterans that despite the SAM menace in NVN airspace, the biggest killer was flak, at height as well as down in the weeds. Plenty of food for thought and remedial action in the replies. Thanks again.

Just happened to have the "F-105 Thunderchief In Action" book next to my comp.

 

In it it says that 321 Thuds were lost in action. 111 in 1966. AAA got 280, SAMs-24, MIGs-17.

 

Guess that shows just how bad the flak was!

[+malibu43 142]

Just happened to have the "F-105 Thunderchief In Action" book next to my comp.

 

In it it says that 321 Thuds were lost in action. 111 in 1966. AAA got 280, SAMs-24, MIGs-17.

 

Guess that shows just how bad the flak was!

 

As someone already mentioned increasing the rate of fire and the burst rate might be necessary in this game regardless of the gun accuracy. In real life, targets were protected by tens or hundreds of guns. In the game, most target areas have a few AAA entires, and so you get a couple small caliber guns and maybe two flak guns. Increasing the rate of fire might help to make up for this.

 

What would be really fun would be to double, triple, or quadrouple the number of AAA entries in the targets.ini!

[Lt. James Cater 62]

As someone already mentioned increasing the rate of fire and the burst rate might be necessary in this game regardless of the gun accuracy. In real life, targets were protected by tens or hundreds of guns. In the game, most target areas have a few AAA entires, and so you get a couple small caliber guns and maybe two flak guns. Increasing the rate of fire might help to make up for this.

 

What would be really fun would be to double, triple, or quadrouple the number of AAA entries in the targets.ini!

 

I agree.

 

Going over Hanoi in in perfectly clear weather, flying straight and level should provoke clouds of flak bursts ala Berlin during WW2.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[+Jug 99]

I agree.

 

Going over Hanoi in in perfectly clear weather, flying straight and level should provoke a clouds of flak bursts ala Berlin during WW2.

Not having to fight an air war with both hands tied behind my back like the real missions over Hanoi, I am very particular as to how I ingresss. Mostly in the weeds and, if possible, with some good hard dirt between AAA and SAMs and me. I like to think my lack of fatalities is based on good routing for ingress and egress from the target area. Low, fast, avoid the red-lettered stuff, behind the mountains and everything else you can twist in your favor. If you proceed direct to the white triangle, you are hanging a target on your backside. Flick to and from the map and choose/change your path into the target and out carefully. Let them die for their country and you go to the bar, drink the fear down, chase some broads, and generally feel good about defending the nation successfully one more time.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

As far as flying Thuds, i prefer historical altitudes but not the routes. About the only real one i do is Yen Bai-Thud Ridge-Hanoi-Red River. A true white knuckle experience!

 

All things considered, flying these sims the way most of here do would have gotten us court martialed in real life.

[Fubar512 1,350]

I agree.

 

Going over Hanoi in in perfectly clear weather, flying straight and level should provoke clouds of flak bursts ala Berlin during WW2.

 

The reason you're not getting historical levels of flak, is probably due to the fact that the NVA 37 and 57 mm AA guns in your installs do not have "time fuzed" checked in their gun-data entries.

[+331Killerbee 840]

I talked to a LtCol. about this subject. He was flying for VMAQ-2 in EA-6B's. He had flown as a Pilot in VMCJ-2 in EA-6A's as a Lt. durning the Linebacker Campaigns. He said that the NV would make concentric "Rings" of their Air Defences. He stated that one should think of the Air Defences as like "Layers of a Cake". SA-2's were the long Arm of the Defence. The "Top Layer". All other Air Defence, various AAA, were set to cover different Altitudes. Thus, other "Layers". Small Arm was orginized in the same fashion to take care of Low Level. He stated, that this is why their Mission was important. It was to, as He put it, "Cut a Layer out". Then the USAF/USN Strike would follow in. He stated that it was Soviet Doctrine of the 60's being taught.

But after seeing CNN News Casts from the first Gulf War, Makes one think that the Doctrine may not have changed that much.

[+EricJ 3,994]

Of course with more lethal systems...

[+331Killerbee 840]

Fubar touched on something....

 

It might not be the effective-ness of the Gun. Rather the Ammo being used......

[+suhsjake 11]

What would be nice is organized Flak and SAM sites at Cities and Airfields. I know there is a SA-3 site layout object that you could populate with guns and SAMs that some one did.

 

SA-3 Site

 

Flak Battery Site

Edited April 3, 2009 by suhsjake

[+malibu43 142]

Fubar touched on something....

 

It might not be the effective-ness of the Gun. Rather the Ammo being used......

 

My 57mm and 100mm guns both have timed-fuze checked.

[+331Killerbee 840]

Yep.......

 

But there's no Entry for an Ammo's Explosive Mass. Limitation of the Game, I guess.....

 

Caliber=57.000000

ROF=120.000000

MuzzleVel=1000.000000

AmmoWt=2.850000

WarheadWt=0.154000

Reliability=93.000000

Accuracy=62.000000

[future_tuskegee_airman 13]

I have been flyin WOV patched with the Oct 08 and while I have yet to be hit by flak, or even slightly damaged even while flying in the midst of the really heavy stuff at medium altitude...my wingmen have been damaged and at least one was shot down on a mission last night.

[+suhsjake 11]

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=4856

 

What Canadair did was to up the WarHeadWt. For example, he changed the KS-19 WarHeadWt from 1.4600000 to 460.000031, making a bigger bang for your buck.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Over North Vietnam(1972),the booster rocket of the SA-2 gave off PINK smoke(a big cloud of it). You would watch for it and then follow the track of the "telephone pole" from there. If you could see the SAM more than likely you could get away from it. Usually,the one you didn't see would get you.

 

 

I see this one. Think it's too late to jink?

 

[Canadair 16]

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=4856

 

What Canadair did was to up the WarHeadWt. For example, he changed the KS-19 WarHeadWt from 1.4600000 to 460.000031, making a bigger bang for your buck.

 

Yes that is what I did, and that made for much more itnersting and violent flak. I actually had to "tune it down" a little in my "gundata". same modification has been applied to all ThirWire's install, yet the chances you have to be hit are very widely related to the "density" of the flak. In wow happens often ind efault desert much less.

 

As for the Radar controlled Flak. I have a firecan model, and I do understand the network=AAA in both the radar and the gun object_data, likewise in sams entry.

the system works by populating the terrain according to the targets.ini Sam_launchers will be picked and put in place and so Sam_Radar and so AAA guns.

Is there any specific entry, for AAA control radars, to be put in the their dataini so that the system uses them in the terrain?

If they need to be palced manually in the targets.ini, how much "range" a Networktype= entry has? (this is interstign for sams as well) I.E if a Firecan is in Vihn, how far can the farthest gun sporting the same networktype entry be placed?

[Lt. James Cater 62]

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=4856

 

What Canadair did was to up the WarHeadWt. For example, he changed the KS-19 WarHeadWt from 1.4600000 to 460.000031, making a bigger bang for your buck.

 

My only problem with that solution is that you have to have the Weapons pack. I've seen so many posts concerning hassles that i have never even thought of getting it.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Lt. James Cater

[+suhsjake 11]

Why do you have to get the Weapons Pack? Do you mean Gun Editor? I'm pretty sure it requires no weapons pack.

 

That and its really easy to go and tweak the WarheadWt on your own with the Gun Editor to your liking. As soon as the SF2 Gun editor is released, that is what I'll be doing.

 

On another note, will someone be willing to build an AA Site ground texture to build flak and SAM emplacements (just a generic one)?

Edited April 3, 2009 by suhsjake

[Fubar512 1,350]

I found that networking the AAA is enough, and have no need nor any desire to ramp up warhead potentials to ridiculously unrealistic values. Also, I set the fusing distance for my SA-2s to 100 meters...

[New Guy 1]

Got downed 2-3 times by flak trap, emergency landing in enemy territory. One time blown outta' the sky because I--accidentally--made a pullout directly over a KS-19 @ 100ft/less

[Fubar512 1,350]

About once I year, I post some varient of essentially the same video. This should dispel all doubts as to the intensity and accuracy of radar-directed flak.

 

WoV.wmv

[Canadair 16]

I found that networking the AAA is enough, and have no need nor any desire to ramp up warhead potentials to ridiculously unrealistic values. Also, I set the fusing distance for my SA-2s to 100 meters...

 

Well the ramping up to ridicusly high values was needed to compensate for the lack of "sharpnel" effect, which apparently is a know limitation. Netweorking the AAA could be the best solution indeed, and the most realistic. Yet in order to implement it at its best and understand it, I need an answer to the questions in my previous posts.

Do I have to place manually the firecan radar, (or any other radar networked to the AAA?)

and how "far" can the guns be from the ground radars?

Edited April 3, 2009 by Canadair

[+malibu43 142]

About once I year, I post some varient of essentially the same video. This should dispel all doubts as to the intensity and accuracy of radar-directed flak.

 

WoV.wmv

 

Yes, I think I have seen that video before. We do seem to go in circles on this stuff sometimes.

 

So, to piggyback on Canadair's question, what exactly does one need to do to get flak like that in campaigns and single missions?

 

Just drop the firecan radar into the ground objects folder, then add "AAA" network type to the data ini's for the ZSU-57, KS-19, and Firecan? (I have also adjusted the burst amount for the ZSU-57 from 1 & 2 to 5 & 5).

[Fubar512 1,350]

I've found that the best compromise, is to use realistic altitude and engagement distance values for the various AAA guns (My KS-30s reach up to 33,000 feet!). This results in the "layered" defenses discussed earlier. And yes, all weps from 57MM and up are networked as "AAA", along with the Firecan.

 

The Firecan itself is set up as "Static-AAA", and given an availabilty value of "Very_Rare". This spreads them around, with an average of one per every 30-50 square kilometers.