Questions from a newbie

[Chibot Mk IX]

Sorry, a lot of questions here. Most of them are related to CM’s coverage on Technology part. I did a quick search on the forum but could not find any discussion

 

1, The first question is an observation of the game from my limit experience.  I noticed that in the game the American's Artillery PGM is relatively inaccurate compare to Russian/Ukraine's. My guess is M982 Excalibur and XM395 are built with GPS guide system (CEP 5m-10m) while the Russian and Ukraine one are Laser Guide (CEP 0.5m-1m), so there is an accuracy difference in the game and it is caused by different guidance system.  Is this correct?

 

2, Then the next question is , in the game is there any Russian or Ukraine UAV has laser designator system that could support their Laser guide Artillery PGM? US side their UAV can definitely support Artillery PGM strike as the guidance is done by GPS.

 

3, Question number three is, does EW warfare strength have an impact on GPS guide PGM? In other word, does EW include GPS jamming?

 

4, Question number four: Does EW strength have an impact on ground radar, like searching/fire control radar on Tunguska? I have a great respect on Tunguska’s radar. In one of my game it picked up the RQ-11B as soon as it arrives, shoot it down with one bust of AA gun fire. Just wondering if my UAV could survive longer in a heavy EW environment.

 

5, Then the last question: Does CM simulate the Thermal Inversion at dawn and dusk (the rapid change of background heat should have a negative impact on the thermal imager/IR optics)?        

[domfluff]

1. Yup. The US system will be GPS guided, so will be less accurate be definition. Those values are for civilian GPS, but (from memory) the maximum theoretical possible resolution is something like 2m. The control surfaces of each projectile should make a difference though.

The other difference is that GPS targets the ground, whereas the laser point will target the vehicle. That will mean that any laser warning receiver on the vehicle will light up, but also that the GPS will have difficulty hitting a target that subsequently moves.

2. I believe the Orlan-10 does, the smallest Russian one definitely doesn't. Not sure about the middle one.

3. Definitely. It's the major reason to do it. Strong EW will prevent any satellite comms, Medium will prevent handheld satellite comms, but vehicle systems will be degraded.

4. Yup. It never stops them entirely, but the strongest EW degrades them the most.

5. Pass, but that might be possible to test, or at least to get a rough idea.

[Michael Emrys]

Here's a question that I will throw out for anybody to take a shot at. Given that US precision rounds are GPS rather than laser guided, what is the point in some US units having laser designators?

Michael

[domfluff]

1 - For when you have US units with Ukranian, laser-guided artillery
2 - For aircraft with laser guided bombs and other munitions - e.g., the Paveways that the F-16 and F-15's carry.

I haven't tested this, but whilst it should be possible for the aircraft to lase these targets themselves, I'd imagine that you'd shave off some minutes by doing it from the ground.

Worth running through some tests with "Point" targets to see.

[domfluff]

The manual only has "Laser designators are used by forward observers and air controllers to mark targets for attack. Laser designators aid in fire mission speed and accuracy. Russian and Ukrainian precision fire support missions require that the spotting team be equipped with a laser designator. ".

I imagine there's some abstraction here - certainly a laser designator would help you determine range, so would make judging the correct  GPS co-ordinates easier?

[MOS:96B2P]

@Chibot Mk IX 

IIRC Excalibur precision was rolled back in patch 1.03 in May 2015 and the precision of laser-guided munitions such as Krasnopol was bumped up.

The Russian Zala UAV is the only UAV in CMBS that can't spot for precision rounds.  So the Russian Pchela and Orlan UAV will spot for precision artillery. 

Based on a previous thread, linked below, I don't think the in-game ECM affects GPS.  So ECM (in the game, don't know about RL) does not affect the US Excalibur round. 

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/125644-precision-artillery-with-excalibur-shells-keeps-missing-target/?do=findComment&comment=1721907

 

[Michael Emrys]

BTW, it's worth noting in this connection that every six man section of the US LRS platoon comes with a laser designator. Might be handy to have one around.

Michael

[domfluff]

Yeah, comparing a platoon level FO (no laser designator) to an attached Fire Support team (with laser designator), the game effect is that the laser designator shaves off one minute on an F-16 strike, with equal soft factors.

[A Canadian Cat]

16 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

5, Then the last question: Does CM simulate the Thermal Inversion at dawn and dusk (the rapid change of background heat should have a negative impact on the thermal imager/IR optics)?        

I see you have most of your questions answered but everyone is afraid of #5

I did a quick search and found this:

 

TLDR - no it is not modelled and that is likely not a big deal (read thread for details)

[cbennett88]

On 11/18/2018 at 7:28 PM, Chibot Mk IX said:

4, Question number four: Does EW strength have an impact on ground radar, like searching/fire control radar on Tunguska? I have a great respect on Tunguska’s radar. In one of my game it picked up the RQ-11B as soon as it arrives, shoot it down with one bust of AA gun fire. Just wondering if my UAV could survive longer in a heavy EW environment.

I have no knowledge of if/how the game setting of EW affects the radar on the Tunguska, but...even if it does, I'm not sure the trade-off in degraded UAV comms and artillery times would be worth it? You are better off "rolling the dice" and hoping to spot it first with your UAVs and using artillery on it. Last time I played a (US)battle with EW at the highest setting, I came to realize that it was almost pointless to even have artillery(beyond 1st turn and maybe TRPs). It reminded me of training in the US Army(infantry) with full MOPP suits on! 

[domfluff]

Worthwhile pointing out that the larger UAV's fly too high for AA to engage them (as long as they don't attack).

Also that EW is single sided - if you buy EW, if only affects your opponent.

[Michael Emrys]

7 hours ago, domfluff said:

Also that EW is single sided - if you buy EW, if only affects your opponent.

Interesting. I hope you're right.

Michael

[LukeFF]

On 11/23/2018 at 10:09 AM, Michael Emrys said:

I hope you're right.

He is.

[MikeyD]

I'm not entirely certain but I don't think ground radar is modeled. I did a test a long time ago. Armor approaching on a large flat fog-shrouded map, it appeared only close-in visual contact brought the weapons to bear. I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong.

[domfluff]

Without testing, I'd assume this if ground-rader was modelled, it's just the same kind of bonus to spotting that other systems get (e.g., how laser designators mostly just make calling in artillery a bit faster). That would be more than close enough really for our purposes, but it might mean that you're spotting faster in visual range, rather than spotting outside of visual range.

The manual specifically mentions ECM interfering with AA acquisition effectiveness, so in that sense it's modelled.