Surface to Air Missile Inconsistencies

[Suhiir]

OK, here's what we have in some of the OOB's I've checked :

Egypt OOB-1
Imp HAWK ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot= 4 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
HAWK IIIP ACC=150 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot= 3 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
Patriot ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 Sabot= 4 Range=255 EW=9 FC=120 RF=0

Israel OOB-4
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot= 4 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot= 4 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
HAWK IIIP ACC=150 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot= 3 Range=255 EW=8 FC=100 RF=0
Patriot ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 Sabot= 4 Range=255 EW=9 FC=120 RF=0

Japan OOB-5
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=0 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=14 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=130 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=12 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0

France OOB-6
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=14 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=130 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=12 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0

Jordan OOB-9
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=14 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=12 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
Patriot ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 Sabot=30 Range=255 EW=9 FC=120 RF=0

US Army OOB-12
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=0 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=14 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=130 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=12 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
Patriot ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 Sabot=30 Range=255 EW=9 FC=120 RF=0

US Marines OOB-13
HAWK ACC=100 Wpn=0 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=14 Range=255 EW=5 FC=100 RF=0
Imp HAWK ACC=130 Wpn=2 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 Sabot=12 Range=255 EW=7 FC=100 RF=0
Patriot ACC=140 Wpn=2 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 Sabot=30 Range=255 EW=9 FC=120 RF=4

Now looking at this site
Raytheon MIM-23 HAWK

We see the origional HAWK had a 54kg warhead and the Improved a 74kg one. Yet the OOB's don't show any improvement.

So - I'm VERY confused here.

[PlasmaKrab]

Funny you should raise that issue, I've been bumping on the same for a couple of days. Wait until you factor in the equivalent Russian SAMs which have wildly varying HE values for similar warheads, or reverse. Not even mentioning the accuracy scaling where the western bias is way larger than for ATGMs... that's another matter.

As regards the differences between OOBs, this is simply because different OOBs have been created and updated at different times by different persons, sometimes with different views on the values to give, and no one has time to check up all the OOBs and review and compare all these figures, and as importantly, no one would agree on a common value.

Thing is, there is no other scale to which we could relate the SAM HEK/WHS values.The class-11 bombs and the artillery won't work because the weight-to-payload ratio is in a different league (around 10% explosive for iron shells against 30-50% for SAMs)

[Suhiir]

Western bias?
I suppose it could just be me but from what I've seen US AA weapons (gun and missile) are at best half as accurate as Soviet ones. I rarely see a hit probability over 15-20% for the US and under 50% for the Soviets.
Add to that the warhead issue it tends to make US anti-aircraft weapons not worth the purchase cost. They can't hit anything and if by chance they do at best they scratch the paint 90% of the time.

[PlasmaKrab]

Which period would that be in, that Soviet AA weapons are far more accurate than US equivalents?
Just to take an example, you mentioned the HAWK here. Note how the baseline HAWK (MIM-23A, IOC 1960) has an accuracy of 100 and EW of 5, while the S-125 Neva aka SA-3 Goa has an accuracy of 40 and EW of 3. As far as I can tell, both systems are broadly comparable, with accordingly a possible advantage to the HAWK in terms of guidance and propulsion. Not enough to give it the accuracy level of a Stinger, and give the improved 70s solid-state models the same accuracy as a Patriot.
As I said, there's the same issue with ATGMs, but I can live with a Konkurs at 80 acc and a TOW-1 at 90.

Now granted, at more recent dates the Russian material takes the lead to some extent, but maybe that's because the US OOB doesn't feature any SAM newer than the late 80s while the Russian developments are better modeled.
And as far as I have seen, SAMs are pretty much useless against modern aircraft in any case (I mean, any). That's probably a side-effect of EW scaling, so I think it could be worked out.

P.S. just running a test scenario with a selection of Russian aircraft against my best CWM French SAMs. It took 6 launches and 3 hits from 2 Aster-15 launchers (accuracy 180, EW 25) to down one MiG-1.42 with 20 EW. The 1990-top-range Crotale-NG with 10 EW and 150 accuracy didn't even get a chance above 5%.

[KraMax]

S-125 Neva SAM (aka SA-3) with missile V-600P - should have in 1961 accuracy 50 and EW=4 HE=60 FC=100 RANGE=120-255

[Suhiir]

OK, here are the modified values I've come up with for my OOB rebuild.

Redeye...............(1/67-1/81).....EW=2 Acc=90 Whd=4 HEP=3 HEK=3 SabotRange=12 WpnRange=66
Stinger B............(2/81-12/89)....EW=3 Acc=100 Whd=5 HEP=4 HEK=4 SabotRange=4 WpnRange=96
Stinger D...........(1/90-12/101)...EW=4 Acc=110 Whd=5 HEP=5 HEK=5 SabotRange=4 WpnRange=96
Stinger E..........(1/102-12/120)..EW=5 Acc=120 Whd=5 HEP=6 HEK=6 SabotRange=2 WpnRange=100
SLAMRAM.......(1/105-12/120)..EW=7 Acc=130 Whd=10 HEP=18 HEK=18 SabotRange=12 WpnRange=240
Nike Hercules.(1/58-12/75)......EW=4 Acc=84 Whd=30 HEP=255 HEK=255 SabotRange=18 WpnRange=255
HAWK..............(1/60-12/72).....EW=5 Acc=100 Whd=17 HEP=54 HEK=54 SabotRange=14 WpnRange=255
HAWK(imp).....(1/73-12/82)......EW=7 Acc=140 Whd=19 HEP=63 HEK=63 SabotRange=12 WpnRange=255
HAWK(pip)......(1/83-12/91)......EW=8 Acc=150 Whd=19 HEP=63 HEK=63 SabotRange=10 WpnRange=255
Patriot..............(1/92-12/120).....EW=9 Acc=160 Whd=22 HEP=73 HEK=73 SabotRange=30 WpnRange=255

Thoughts ?

[MarkSheppard]

Now granted, at more recent dates the Russian material takes the lead to some extent, but maybe that's because the US OOB doesn't feature any SAM newer than the late 80s while the Russian developments are better modeled.

There's been a lot of Patriot improvements like:

MIM-104A : Original Production

MIM-104B: Late 1980s. Also known as the SOJC (Standoff Jammer Countermeasures) missile and uses a modified guidance and navigation hardware. The MIM-104B adds a surface-to-surface capability against ground-based radar jamming sources to the Patriot system. The missile can fly an optimized (lofted) trajectory towards the jammer, and use its seeker to select the strongest emitter for terminal homing. The anti-aircraft/anti-missile capability is the same as for the MIM-104A.

MIM-104C: 1990: The PAC-2 upgrade includes further software changes, and an improved MIM-104C missile. The MIM-104C has a blast-fragmentation warhead with larger fragments (45 g compared to 2 g for the MIM-104A/B warhead) to increase lethality against ballistic missile warheads. It also has a new pulse-doppler proximity fuze with two beams, a narrow one for missiles, and a broader one for slower aircraft targets.

MIM-104D: (PAC-2/GEM) 1994: It has a seeker with better performance against low-RCS targets, and an improved fuze against high-speed ballistic missiles.

MIM-104E: (PAC-2/GEM+) 2002: The upgrade consists of a new low-noise front end to increase seeker sensitivity (improving acquisition and tracking of small RCS targets) and a modernized fuzing system for better performance against ballistic missile targets. Reliability of the GEM+ missile is also improved by replacement of older components with new technology.