DCS: Su25T Short Film (attacking the USS Oliver Hazard Perry FFG-7)

[@rayjohnson9610]

I served aboard the USS Reid FFG-30. I don’t think you would have ever gotten that close to the ship in real life.

[@icefox1584]

I agree with you, this simulator not represents all the capabilities of a real frigate of that type Merry christmas!!

[@flym0]

Hi Ray, a longshot but when did you serve on the Reid?

[@rayjohnson9610]

flym0 I served aboard the USS Reid from early 87 to 90 as a BM3.

[@lohrtom]

I served on an OHP frigate (FFG-9). Two comments: 1. You plane has an unrealistic amount of flare decoys. 2. Flare decoys would have zero effect on an SM-1 surface to air missile. It is a semi-active radar guided missile. Chaff, MAYBE. In real life you would be dead. If the SM-1 did not get you, the 76mm gun would have.

[@icefox1584]

First of all, thanks for the comment. About the first comment: I'm not really sure if the amount of Chaff / Flare is correct in this particular module, then I can not answer for sure. About the second comment: what you say is totally true, i was watching the video carefully and there was no chaff at any time. regards

[@dalesmith1107]

I also served on several FFG-7 platforms as the Fire Control Chief and scenario is completely unrealistic. Considering the SU-25 has a radar cross section of the broad side of a barn and is slow even a moderately alert Fire Control 'B' team would have successfully defended the ship. The AN/SPS-49 would have pick the SU-25 up, even at minimum altitude, long before the aircraft would be with in optical sight range due to the antenna height above the water. Even at low altitude attack profile of 50 feet the first of two SM1 would have been headed down range at 13 miles with the second 7 seconds later. Open fire with 76mm at 7 miles and CIWS open fire 3 maybe 4 miles. This attack profile was no different than the pre program Daily System Operability Test that we ran EVERY DAY.

[@madlarkin8]

The su-25 can hold up to 192 flare cartridges to counteract sea chapparal (aim-9) common on NATO fleet vessels. And also has robust electronic warfare capability for defeating radar based missiles, although the configuration in this video doesnt look like it has this. This simulation models aircraft very well, but ships very poorly and grossly underestimates their lethality.

[@jyralnadreth4442]

@@madlarkin8 defeating radar guided missiles is easier to do to active radar seeking missiles (Ie Missiles that have their own radar) Semi Active Radar missiles use the launching ships/aircrafts radar which are far more powerful

[@tonkerdog1243]

@@madlarkin8 Sea Chapparal is not widely used in NATO. I don’t know a single ship that uses it.

[@HVKViper6989]

I served on the USS Boone FFG-28 that was recently part of Atlantic Thunder 2022 and I can say there is no way, this plane would have gotten past the CIWS alone. They may be small but they are mighty. They should have been brought back into service at least for Law Enforcement operations and humanitarian and self defense of the main land!!!

[@whm113e5]

LOL , su25 only have Two at the wing tips with flares and dispensers handling husks, 4 UV-26 dispensers each (Total 512 husks / cartridge flares in each pod)

[@bkip20002]

Great graphics but unrealistic scenario

[@coreydavis6427]

Yep you forgot the phalanx Mr. Hit and Run.

[@justgjt]

Inbound target making a direct approach to the stern. CWIS to AAW Auto and target threat is neutralized.

[@mikeb.5039]

Having served on the USS Taylor FFG-50, you would need more aircraft to fight the FFG. The only reason the USS Stark was successfully attacked was due to incompetence of it's officers that allowed a Iraqi F-1 to launch 2 Exocet anti ship missiles at 12 miles. first engagement would be with SM-1, then engage with the 76mm gun, then with CIWS and stingers if carried. Finally .50 cal machine guns.

[@davidhenk3114]

Video is nonsense. The aircraft would have been picked up with distance to spare. The SPS-49 air search has a max detect range of 250 miles. The antenna is computer stabilized to stay pointed on the radar horizon. You can operate it in multiple search modes. We practiced using supersonic drones flying on the deck. The CAS antenna (one in the ball shaped done) scans once per second and would easily have picked it up. The third radar is the dish behind the main mast. It can scan track an illuminate the target. Two missiles would have been salvoed and the 76mm gun would also be assigned and ready to fire when in range. Then you have the CIWS which has it's own radar. Ship would have turned to bring all weapons to bear. I spent 13 years as a Chief Electronics Tech and maintained and operated the Radars, IFF, and Combat Systems.

[@samfischer3897]

That was a loooong video just to watch you take out a CIWS...

[@icefox1584]

yes, i know, it's a very long video, check this out! kzbin.info/www/bejne/pna2pX-eaq6kgNE this is one of my new videos, this one is short, i promise lol, regards

[@buenoobra3443]

...maybe it can be done to a frigate like Oliver Perry but not to a Cruiser Toconderoga nor a Destroyer Arleigh Burke whose radars can reach up to 800km... Su-25 combat range is only 750km.... a 1,000 km range anti-ship missile should be use, which may be too heavy for the aircraft to carry... and SAM is always a tandem, if one missed then the other will proceed...

[@IvanToman]

If airplane flies very low, radar have poor range detecting it because plane is under horizon for the radar until gets very close.

[@djjermagicstick]

It would be shot down before that plane missles got lock. Sorry try again

[@callsignnictmere465]

Possible, but not by the above tactics. A well planned out attack would have the SU25t armed with the longer range anti radiation missile, and detection pod. If the anti radiation missiles scored hits follow up attacks could be carried out with guided munitions.

[@icefox1584]

It's true, when I made this video i was looking for an unconventional attack technique, it is also very interesting what you mentioned, to disable the radars first and then move to a closer attack with more conventional weaponry.

[@telosfd]

Lol...........

[@albertpietrosanu2667]

Hmmmm My opinion it is was too easy... a frigate is more than aduck.

[@icefox1584]

first you have to analyze the video, if you look well in the minute 0.52 (you can pause if you want) you will see that the turret can not fire the missile given its firing angle, since the command center is between our aircraft and the missile , then it would impact in the command room, the search radar continues following you at the same time that it maintains a continuous blockade, but as we approach from the back, the firing system is unable to fire the missile, in conclusion, it can not shoot unless we raise our altitude considerably. Another thing to take into consideration is the trap, we launched a lazer missile that does not impact so that the palanx turret tries to shoot down the missile which gives us the time necessary to fire a second laser guided missile in manual guidance. and the last thing to take into consideration is that it is a single frigate, if they were more the attack would be impossible in those conditions.

[@СергейТр-г4с]

Fuflo

[@edl617]

Bull crap