Re: AA Radar Question
 

Optical systems like AAMG should have a high EW rating then?

Re: AA Radar Question
 

I thought EW rating only affects missiles and AA guns with radar. Logically it should be so. However, if it isn't, I agree that purely optical AAA systems should have a very high EW rating, as should ones which rely on thermals and laser rangefinders (neither can't be effectively fooled by any current methods).

Re: AA Radar Question
 

A generic Anti Aircraft Machine Gun (AAMG) is not an optical system. So, if you mean optical system as an automatic visual tracking and fire control system, then yeah an AAMG may be fitted with such fire solutions; furthermore, an AAMG with such a system may have a higher EW than an AAMG without an "optical system" as discussed here.

From the GG:

"For AA vehicles and units, and planes defending against them, the ratio between firer and target plane EW is very important. If the target electronic defences 'win' then the firer hit chance will be reduced."

Additionally, Vision can have significant consequences as well. An optical system may then refer to Vision as per the GG:

"If fitted, enhanced night vision equipment,with a value of 40 or greater representing a Thermal Imager or a Ground Surveillance Radar (TI or GSR). If game visibility is say 3 hexes, and you have a vision capacity of 12, you can see 9 hexes further than unaided units, which can be vital and devastating. TI and GSR can see through smoke as well, another vital advantage when the opponent lacks this capability..."

Helpful?

Re: AA Radar Question
 

I think I understand more. Thanks for the advice.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

AAMG's usually do not have any kind automation. They have a passive sight that varies from a simple ring sight to a (relatively) sophisticated reflector sight. If we want to do semantical nitpicking, they are all "optical systems" in the sense than they rely on (passive) optical acquisition and tracking of the target by Mk1 Eyeball, but in the case of a reflector sight helped by additional optics in the sight. The "system" has components which are the gun with a sight, and the human eye and brain. Reflector sights can be used with IIR devices for some night vision. There is no reason not to call that a system even if it's not an automated system.

The whole point is that by logic passive optical target acquisition should be immune to EW, so an AAA weapon which has no active radiating components should ignore any EW completely, or if that is not possible from the way the game works, have a higher EW rating than any target. No radio frequency jamming is going to make the aircraft invisible and (visual) cloaking devices have not been invented yet.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

Ghetto edit: I meant I2 (image intensifier) devices with reflector sights. IIR means Imaging InfraRed, which is not the same thing.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

EW only works against SAMs and AAA guns with EW, so optical AAA guns with optical FC aren't affected by a plane or helo's EW value.

Therefore a 12.7 Dushka or a 40mm Bofors firing over optical sights at a "stealth" plane emitting zillions of watts of jamming or flares does not give a hoot, if it is passing by in broad daylight and hence perfectly visible by mk1 eyeball. That is why stealth bombers tend to be painted black and operate when the sun is down (duh:smirk:). A shoulder fired SAM or a radar guided gun (FC 100+) will do, whether its night or day.

EW only works against electronics. (Radar AAFC 100+ or AAGW).

An AA gun with normal FC (sub 100) is an optical (or whatever) on-sight system and so is not in the EW battle. Normal visual rules apply there.

Planes with EW ratings less than AAA systems EW are over-matched and wont fare too well. Conversely, if the AAA system is over-matched by the planes EW then they wont do too well vs the planes.

As with all things SP, its an abstraction, and a broad-brush one at that, dealing with a side show to the main meal of land warfare (cloud punching). Note there is absolutely no split on IRCM, ECM, laser CM etc.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

Okay, that's what I originally thought and it's really the only way it makes sense.

So, to put things together, the only "problem" we have is that Radar AAA has too low FC-100 almost throughout the game compared to non-radar AAA FC. As a general rule should FC(radar)-100 ≥ FC(non-radar) when comparing systems of roughly the same era and technology level. In practice that would mean that minimum FC for radar controlled AA should be somewhere around 110, since most WW2 AA guns with a predictor sight get 10. Of course a modern electro-optically directed AA gun such as modernized ZU-23-2 guns with a LRF and digital computer will still beat a 1950s era radar controlled gun.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

Set up some tests, never have but I would be surprised if radar AA is not far more effective than any none radar AA especially if the flight path lets it track the target & get multiple shots at it.
Trying to determine the difference would be very difficult due to the amount of factors involved though.
As mentioned radar can often "see" better & hence maintain target lock for longer.

Re: AA Radar Question
 

Yes, I agree it's possible that even with the current low FC values radar AAA might be better than non-radar AAA in most cases. However, the whole point is that it should be at least as good if not better in circumstances that are optimal for the latter, that is daylight with good visibility. The reason for that is that AAA radars are always coupled with a fire control computer which has immediate access to the range and azimuth information from the radar. Non-radar systems without a LRF rely on range and speed estimation or much slower range finding by an optical (usually stereoscopic) range finder. Even the latter was usually provided only with heavy AA guns from 75mm upwards.