Strike Packages versus Today's Air Defence- A simulated look

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

What kind of simulator or software is this ? Quite a fancy little thing

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar it seems in a head-to-head the CAP's survivability isn't too good. What happens if:

1. Immediately after the first BVR shots the CAP ascends to 30000-50000 ft.
2. Starts off at 30000-50000 ft.

Easiest one to manipulate is first in, I have difficulty making sense of it all as such since It seems not too much changed besides getting the MKI escorts distracted as such. Based upon the players in the action you know, maybe you can interpret.

 

[Hell hound]

Easiest one to manipulate is first in, I have difficulty making sense of it all as such since It seems not too much changed besides getting the MKI escorts distracted as such. Based upon the players in the action you know, maybe you can interpret.

why does it feels like the real nightmare for rafale in these simulations is anza 2 the most underrated air defense system by PDF.

 

[SQ8]

Interestingly disappointing results from PAF's perspective.

How would the results change if defending air assets are 50% of strike package (8 instead of 6) 4 each of Thunders with dual SD 10 launchers 4 each of F16 (2 block 52, 2 MLU) with six Aim 120 each.

Replace Spada 2000 battery with LY80

Add one LY80 battery in addition to one Spada battery

can you ask him to replace the spada with hq 16 A or B which ever we have (i know its spadas duty to protect the airfields but still just to see how well hq 16 can perform) and the crotale with fm 90.add AWACS in the mix and if he has some spare time ask him to do two different scenarios one with the saab other with ZDK.
and pls do tag me next time
thanks


don't you think that will defeat the purpose of this exercise. to show how unpredictable air combat can be even with the seemingly inferior enemy.

Here is a compromise. The JF-17 on CAP is flying with dual SD-10s and is positioned at 30000ft(@CriticalThought as a point). The MLUs are still going to intercept but try a zoom climb to high altitude, there is an Erieye flying. All PAF assets are linked with simulated Link-17. In addition, the SPADA is replaced with a stand in for the HQ-16 via a Sa-17 battery. To compensate, the MKIs are now at 10000ft which should give them better radar picture albeit leading to earlier detection by the Erieye.
The results are pretty surprising for me at least in the start, as it seems the PAF assets have the initiative.
You folks can interpret that result for yourselves, but the real deal is the mauling the more active assets take on the Strike package; I stopped counting how many went down. As an unexpected treat, there is a dogfight between a Jf-17 and a M2K but its pretty inconclusive. I wish there was some way the guy who does this could get on call camera shots but that is a limitation of the sim engine I think.

why does it feels like the real nightmare for rafale in these simulations is anza 2 the most underrated air defense system by PDF.

Possibly because its ability to be used in an ambush. Lots can be fired in a short time like a Kill box. Not too differrent from how the PA and PAF intend to use them.

 

[Army research]

If only PAF inducts fifth gen by 2023-4 when the iaf is inducting rafale, only then does PAF stand a chance. Any ways Oscar how would this simulation run say with one of the most trained pilots seated in a single FC31 aiding the defence package?

 

[Hell hound]

In addition, the SPADA is replaced with a stand in for the HQ-16 via a Sa-17 battery. To compensate, the MKIs are now at 10000ft which should give them better radar picture albeit leading to earlier detection by the Erieye.

HQ16 performed much better but it seems like there was no SEAD aircraft this time or did PAF took them out that early in the engagement.

You folks can interpret that result for yourselves, but the real deal is the mauling the more active assets take on the Strike package; I stopped counting how many went down. As an unexpected treat, there is a dogfight between a Jf-17 and a M2K but its pretty inconclusive. I wish there was some way the guy who does this could get on call camera shots but that is a limitation of the sim engine I think.

IAF sure did took some heavy beating in this scenario. but how many assets does PAF have in air this time it felt like there were 6 thunders(instead of 4) and 2 f16 this time.
one thing is clear from these simulations rafale and su 30 even though great combat air planes but aren't the gods of air as some Indians make them out to be and neither is our thunder the underdog. it is standing toe to toe with IAF and punching well above it weight.
but one worrying aspect is if IAF is tanking this much beating from our relatively inferior SAMS.then there will be a turkey shoot of PAF strike force in Indian air space .
All of us can see the missile flying but can you shed some light on the role of ECM, ECCM and data link that it played in this fight.
once again thank you and the guy running these simulations. loving your work so pls keep them coming

 

[CriticalThought]

@Oscar. Many thanks. Haven't had time to look at the videos, but just based on logical deliberation:

1. A concentrated strike package is a recipe for disaster. The defenders will hunt them down from the sides and from the top.

2. In a real engagement, the escorting Su-30s and Tejas will be ahead and on the flanks. The approach will be deliberately misleading. As soon as the defenders engage, the escorts will engage them into a furball, and the real strike package along with at least two escorts will 'divert' to the actual target. This will definitely consist of the M2Ks and the Rafales. So, except if the defenders scramble further jets, in a realistic scenario, it will come down to air defence vs. M2K + Rafale, and defenders vs. SU30 + Tejas.

 

[Dazzler]

K-8s are last ditch or focused towards UAV defence.
The Erieye I am adding--- 3-4 hours for all requests.

Apologies, by KE8 i meant Karakram Eagles aka ZDK-03, where 8 slipped instead of 3.

If only PAF inducts fifth gen by 2023-4 when the iaf is inducting rafale, only then does PAF stand a chance. Any ways Oscar how would this simulation run say with one of the most trained pilots seated in a single FC31 aiding the defence package?

Mate, seriously, you missed the whole point of this thread.

 

[CriticalThought]

@Oscar. Further deliberations:

1. Due to its size, the SU-30 should shine like a beacon at BVR range. Here, success will come down to the ECCM package on the SU-30s.

2. At WVR distances, the twin engines should shine like a beacon for heat seekers. Here, success will come down to the counter-measures on the SU-30.

3. In a dog fight, the larger airframe of SU-30 means less bang per unit g force pulled. The smaller F-16 and JF-17 should pull it into very high speed turning maneuvers.

4. Due to smaller airframe and composite usage, I don't know how Tejas will fare against BVRs. Since not much is known here, I would want the comfort of AWACS backing me up for the BVR. Against ECCM on Tejas will play a decisive role.

5. The F414 should show similar heat signatures to FA-18 and Gripen NG. They can be used as suitable references.

6. Because of Tejas' lighter frame, bad weather/high gusts of wind will play a definite factor. Similarly, until proven otherwise, I remain skeptical of its ability to fire missile at high roll angles in high speed turns. The fact that it is only now going through missile tests says a lot about the mindset of the designers. So, again, the defenders should be engaging it in high turn maneuvers.

EDIT: Because of Tejas' delta wings, it will ALWAYS lose altitude in high speed turns. Something to factor.

 

[Thorough Pro]

@Oscar Many Thanks Bro, great work.

Comparing with the earlier simulation results, addition of two Thunders, an AWACS and replacement of Spada by HQ16 makes a huge difference, I didn't count the enemy losses but looks like a major chunk of strike package (60-80%) was destroyed and mission compromised.

Not trying to go off-topic but this is just a simulation played by a machine on pure technical data and capabilities. In real scenario the most important factor (the human component) plays a significant role, assuming both sides have equally trained and proficient pilots, being on the receiving end of a salvo of missiles and warning sounds going off in the cockpit alerting to missiles locks, seeing and hearing your comrades being blown out of the sky, would make your feet cold, or hands tremble making one's nerves jittery, while pulling high G's and making a real effort to force the oxygen in the lungs, errors would be made, making some shoot their own and others to turn back and flee, wonder what impact a few such instances would have on the outcome (@Oscar not asking you to build that in the scenario, but would be awesome if choose to that of your own accord ).

Edit: Watched it again to count the losses
First Chart:
Thunders took out 2 MKI's, 4 Mirages
Ground fire took out 6MKi's, 1 Mirage, 2 Rafaels
Falcons did nothing

Second Chart:
Mirages took out 1 Falcon

Observations:

Rafaels always fall victim to GF, either they are flying too low (for no reason) or there is something wrong in their parameters

6 MKI's by ground fire: why are they flying so low and why are they not firing their BVR salvos at defenders

Why are missiles batteries not engaged from stand off distances?

Shouldn't the rafael's be leading the charge to take on Falcons and Thunders, or
Shouldn't the MKI's be firing their BVR right in the beginning to overwhelm Thunders and Falcons, while Rafael swoop in late to clean up the remaining while Mirages focus on the ground targets?

Note: My questions are based on the assumptions that the strike party has the required armaments and simulation engine will make them use the appropriate weapons from optimum distance for optimum gain.

Here is a compromise. The JF-17 on CAP is flying with dual SD-10s and is positioned at 30000ft(@CriticalThought as a point). The MLUs are still going to intercept but try a zoom climb to high altitude, there is an Erieye flying. All PAF assets are linked with simulated Link-17. In addition, the SPADA is replaced with a stand in for the HQ-16 via a Sa-17 battery. To compensate, the MKIs are now at 10000ft which should give them better radar picture albeit leading to earlier detection by the Erieye.
The results are pretty surprising for me at least in the start, as it seems the PAF assets have the initiative.
You folks can interpret that result for yourselves, but the real deal is the mauling the more active assets take on the Strike package; I stopped counting how many went down. As an unexpected treat, there is a dogfight between a Jf-17 and a M2K but its pretty inconclusive. I wish there was some way the guy who does this could get on call camera shots but that is a limitation of the sim engine I think.

Possibly because its ability to be used in an ambush. Lots can be fired in a short time like a Kill box. Not too differrent from how the PA and PAF intend to use them.

 

[litman]

Small correction other than Rafale all platforms are already available to IAF

rafale is not mig 21.it will have a huge impact on the warfare. secondly tejas is inducted in limited numbers and various weapons are being tested so it wont be a part of any strike package for about next 2 yrs.

 

[SQ8]

HQ16 performed much better but it seems like there was no SEAD aircraft this time or did PAF took them out that early in the engagement.

IAF sure did took some heavy beating in this scenario. but how many assets does PAF have in air this time it felt like there were 6 thunders(instead of 4) and 2 f16 this time.
one thing is clear from these simulations rafale and su 30 even though great combat air planes but aren't the gods of air as some Indians make them out to be and neither is our thunder the underdog. it is standing toe to toe with IAF and punching well above it weight.
but one worrying aspect is if IAF is tanking this much beating from our relatively inferior SAMS.then there will be a turkey shoot of PAF strike force in Indian air space .
All of us can see the missile flying but can you shed some light on the role of ECM, ECCM and data link that it played in this fight.
once again thank you and the guy running these simulations. loving your work so pls keep them coming

Well, all thanks to the guy with the setup.. purportedly spent $1900 on a rig recently to use it for a simulator done in 2009. Still, considering he says he has some 800+ aircraft that the sim has available to a varying degree; including every possible aircraft in the Indo-Pak air theater and more coming. I envy that ability of fun.

I think the scenario did have 6 thunders since I counted 4 down and 2 still flying. I would not discount the Rafale or Su-30 as this is NOT REAL LIFE. However, it does show that when over enemy territory against a coordinated Air Defense, there is likely chances of heavy losses unless some clever combination of stand off and decoy systems.
Take a look at the packages the USAF had to use in Gulf war 1 against what was still not the most modern Air Defense system albeit well coordinated.

Here the issue is the usage of basic algos running on RCS vs Radar Range vs other factors using coefficients. Many more complexities hit in real life(TM). What it does show is that there is no predictability in Air Warfare; this was the idea of the whole thread compared to the many paper ideas and scenarios being run here.

@Oscar Many Thanks Bro, great work.

Comparing with the earlier simulation results, addition of two Thunders, an AWACS and replacement of Spada by HQ16 makes a huge difference, I didn't count the enemy losses but looks like a major chunk of strike package (60-80%) was destroyed and mission compromised.

Not trying to go off-topic but this is just a simulation played by a machine on pure technical data and capabilities. In real scenario the most important factor (the human component) plays a significant role, assuming both sides have equally trained and proficient pilots, being on the receiving end of a salvo of missiles and warning sounds going off in the cockpit alerting to missiles locks, seeing and hearing your comrades being blown out of the sky, would make your feet cold, or hands tremble making one's nerves jittery, while pulling high G's and making a real effort to force the oxygen in the lungs, errors would be made, making some shoot their own and others to turn back and flee, wonder what impact a few such instances would have on the outcome (@Oscar not asking you to build that in the scenario, but would be awesome if choose to that of your own accord ).

The human component is sort of modelled in here via wingmen going stupid for a few seconds(to more depending upon the random pilot skill factor within the sim)in case their leader goes down. A lot of it is also with near perfect A2A engagements that the PAF side here is seemingly able to pull off due to simpler factors involved. But, Home on Jam is simulated and despite all the Jamming, the previously mentioned factors of RCS+Jamming+Radar Range+Altitude+Speed+ Vector etc all come into play.

There are also iterations in cases where the IAF aircraft break through with ease on the air front only to fall to SAMs.

Very very interesting simulation. The best thing is that it takes into consideration the numerical advantage. This is a 16 vs 6 scenario, probably the worst it can get in real time war situation (although i do not think it will get even this bad). I think adding two more JF-17 with dual SD10 will make it a more realistic 16 vs 8, 2:1 game. However the Indians are likely yo throw in a couple of extra MKIs for there main attack anyway so i am not sure.

There is this AWACS aspect however that needs to be considered. Pakistan do have a half decent integrated radar coverage and that will enable us to detect the incoming enemy aircraft. Early detection will be of help in case of defense.

One thing i noticed is that if we can get a better SAM system in future that will make our life much more easier. Ground based air defense is NOT a thing of the past for sure. Need some better SAM systems to make the defense that much more stronger. Turkey and South Africa need to be considered as partners.

P.S. I still have no idea how you or that fiend of your do these simulations. This is using some easily available software or is it a geek thing? Very interesting indeed.

This time the aspects have been changed.

There are 2 extra Su-30MKI's escorting the group- split into 3(as the IAF has been practicing) with 1 layer at 10000 and other at 20000.. forming a wall of MKIs.
The Tejas has been replaced with a MKI SEAD flight.

The JF-17 Block-III is simulated with a AESA and with dual launchers, and a F-16 Block-52 has also joined as a simulated alert 10 aircraft. Finally, to try and even the odds; 4 F-7PGs will be doing an AMBUSH CAP.

The result of it being night has visual visibility reduced to a large degree and radar systems along with size of the aircraft having a greater play in Situational awareness.
Outright, the aforementioned combination of sensors and ranges lets the F-16s take the first shot even with the wall of MKIs(who do fire back quite quickly). The ALQ-211 on board is less sophisticated in the sim than either SPECTRA or the MKI's Jammer but it works fine against Russian missiles.
The "human" factor of panic as mentioned settles in among the flight and soon the Rafale's end up in short work. Although some still manage to hit the EW sites placed by the auto generation system. Later on, there are some interesting dogfights and one MKI who is out to take the Maha Vir Chakra by taking on the HQ-16 SAM system and being quite successful at it. The F-16s score more than a few kills but fall prey to their own greed as will be seen

@Oscar. Many thanks. Haven't had time to look at the videos, but just based on logical deliberation:

1. A concentrated strike package is a recipe for disaster. The defenders will hunt them down from the sides and from the top.

2. In a real engagement, the escorting Su-30s and Tejas will be ahead and on the flanks. The approach will be deliberately misleading. As soon as the defenders engage, the escorts will engage them into a furball, and the real strike package along with at least two escorts will 'divert' to the actual target. This will definitely consist of the M2Ks and the Rafales. So, except if the defenders scramble further jets, in a realistic scenario, it will come down to air defence vs. M2K + Rafale, and defenders vs. SU30 + Tejas.

1. Exactly, hence the ideas of COPE India may no longer be valid against a BVR equipped PAF force no matter how outnumbered.

2. That is exactly what they were, their approach was easterly....and in the first scenarios they made the difference to total victory sometimes. Add the ERIEYE though, it becomes less easy.

@Oscar Many Thanks Bro, great work.

Comparing with the earlier simulation results, addition of two Thunders, an AWACS and replacement of Spada by HQ16 makes a huge difference, I didn't count the enemy losses but looks like a major chunk of strike package (60-80%) was destroyed and mission compromised.

Not trying to go off-topic but this is just a simulation played by a machine on pure technical data and capabilities. In real scenario the most important factor (the human component) plays a significant role, assuming both sides have equally trained and proficient pilots, being on the receiving end of a salvo of missiles and warning sounds going off in the cockpit alerting to missiles locks, seeing and hearing your comrades being blown out of the sky, would make your feet cold, or hands tremble making one's nerves jittery, while pulling high G's and making a real effort to force the oxygen in the lungs, errors would be made, making some shoot their own and others to turn back and flee, wonder what impact a few such instances would have on the outcome (@Oscar not asking you to build that in the scenario, but would be awesome if choose to that of your own accord ).

Edit: Watched it again to count the losses
First Chart:
Thunders took out 2 MKI's, 4 Mirages
Ground fire took out 6MKi's, 1 Mirage, 2 Rafaels
Falcons did nothing

Second Chart:
Mirages took out 1 Falcon

Observations:

Rafaels always fall victim to GF, either they are flying too low (for no reason) or there is something wrong in their parameters

6 MKI's by ground fire: why are they flying so low and why are they not firing their BVR salvos at defenders

Why are missiles batteries not engaged from stand off distances?

Shouldn't the rafael's be leading the charge to take on Falcons and Thunders, or
Shouldn't the MKI's be firing their BVR right in the beginning to overwhelm Thunders and Falcons, while Rafael swoop in late to clean up the remaining while Mirages focus on the ground targets?

Note: My questions are based on the assumptions that the strike party has the required armaments and simulation engine will make them use the appropriate weapons from optimum distance for optimum gain.

Have forwarded concerns to the creator. Initial response is Rafale's following their flight path waypoints. 1500-3000ft approach for SEAD and SEAD escort.
MKI Radars may not be able to acquire a lock just yet on Jamming Falcons. However, the last scenario will be redone with a bit of change. 6 MKIs by ground fire is the result of trying to engage the interceptors and going low. That is just programmed in the Sim that they tend to head low to avoid missiles in an attempt to gain energy and turn around.

Look at the last scenario and suggest from there.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Can fighters and air defence systems operate simultaneously in one sector?I thought that would result in friendly kills,so is not done as such.Also Does this simulation account for SPECTRA or Meteor in rafale's case?
Very interesting work though.

 

[Hell hound]

Well, all thanks to the guy with the setup.. purportedly spent $1900 on a rig recently to use it for a simulator done in 2009. Still, considering he says he has some 800+ aircraft that the sim has available to a varying degree; including every possible aircraft in the Indo-Pak air theater and more coming. I envy that ability of fun.

god damn he must be some crazy level enthusiast to shell out this much cash just for a simulator .

I think the scenario did have 6 thunders since I counted 4 down and 2 still flying. I would not discount the Rafale or Su-30 as this is NOT REAL LIFE. However, it does show that when over enemy territory against a coordinated Air Defense, there is likely chances of heavy losses unless some clever combination of stand off and decoy systems.

not discounting those beasts they can surely give any 4.5 gen jet run for their money.i was just pointing out that these jets in the end are still jets which can be shoot down. not some invincible bhagwan that Indians try to make them here.

Here the issue is the usage of basic algos running on RCS vs Radar Range vs other factors using coefficients. Many more complexities hit in real life(TM). What it does show is that there is no predictability in Air Warfare; this was the idea of the whole thread compared to the many paper ideas and scenarios being run here.

oh and one more question bro how close will rate this simulator to command air and naval operations(calculation wise)

once again thanks for the share bro keep them coming if you and the other guy have some spare time to kill.if possible pls do a total war Pakistan vs India scenario in command air and naval operations it will be very informative and fun to watch with your trademark notes

 

[SQ8]

Can fighters and air defence systems operate simultaneously in one sector?I thought that would result in friendly kills,so is not done as such.Also Does this simulation account for SPECTRA or Meteor in rafale's case?
Very interesting work though.

They do and it does.. notice how the CAPs stay away from the air def zones.
spectra is simulated as a Dual mode jammer at 85% ability(100 percent is max) - the F-35 is at 90%
Alq-211 80 and so on.

You will see a meteor launched.
The biggest issue is trying to make all targets have a TOt that is the same
And that one guy does it for fun so Im at hus mercy.
That being said, inputs- changes and ideas to improve realism via approaches and altitude or weapons are all welcome.

god damn he must be some crazy level enthusiast to shell out this much cash just for a simulator .

not discounting those beasts they can surely give any 4.5 gen jet run for their money.i was just pointing out that these jets in the end are still jets which can be shoot down. not some invincible bhagwan that Indians try to make them here.


oh and one more question bro how close will rate this simulator to command air and naval operations(calculation wise)

once again thanks for the share bro keep them coming if you and the other guy have some spare time to kill.if possible pls do a total war Pakistan vs India scenario in command air and naval operations it will be very informative and fun to watch with your trademark notes

Command is a tactical level sim so not comparable as such. It does a suberb job if war gaming but isnt a flight sim.
The benchmark is digital combat simulator or Falcom 4 both at 94 and 90% respectively.
This is at best 75