Project Reality Forums

Is it possible to intergrate a stationary heavy anti air system to PR, like a SA-3/S-300 missiles etc. To be used on large maps like kashan. Right now the stinger/igla missile systems are to weak to actually make a plane fear them, they also have a poor range. Only helicopters aviod the stingers.

Would it be realistic to add a heavy stationary anti air stystem for each side, which are on large maps, US, MEC, Russia?

You don't want any air vehicules in the mod or what ? lol

Don't forget that jets fear other jets too

SA-3/S-300 missiles etc.

ye, integrate system which can fire missiles at 150km range into 4km map, even Tor, Pantsyr or Buk systems is overkill for such range

Howitzer wrote:You don't want any air vehicules in the mod or what ? lol

Don't forget that jets fear other jets too

Well obviously, i DO want air powa in the mod

But for a symetrical battles, i think we should have heavy ant air. When one team has airpower, while the other team eathier has very little or not air power. So they should get heavy aa positions.

(Battles like, Desert Storm, when all of the Iraqi airfoce got pwned, and used their AA against the US planes.
Or battles like the one between Egypt and Israel, when te Israelis had a good air force, that decimated the egyptian forces, but when the egyptians moved forwards they moved thier aa missiles forward. This mean that the Israeli planes started getting shot down.
What do u think?

I think people will say no to this idea because they want to keep in the air as long as they can, and have dogfights. Which is more fun than attacking aa positions o getting shot down.

chuckduck wrote: But for a symetrical battles, i think we should have heavy ant air. When one team has airpower, while the other team eathier has very little or not air power. So they should get heavy aa positions.

Asymmetrie FTW!
And like DankE already said, it would be too overpowerd, even for 4km maps.

Anyone who says there is not enough AA, or that its not good enough, needs to get confined to a training server for a day in which he will learn the correct time to lock on, the correct time fire, how to avoid being killed and have some fun.

The pilots in general suck, but there are some good ones, plenty of tank campers to avoid, plenty of spotters to seek and destroy while avoiding and plenty of jets that make up for the lack in skill.

i think the AA systems you are suggesting are for taking down planes that fly wayy higher than any planes do in PR. for the most part, due to engine limitations, the planes in PR fly at pretty low altitudes which is why most of the AA missile are the short range variety like sa-19 and the manpads. something like an S-300 if im not mistaken is more of a tactical air defense { like defending citys and nuclear missile silos etc} whereas something like an sa-19 is more for defence of other units like tanks and infantry against air attacks. if the planes in pr could fly 20,000 feet up then yeah they would be good. but the planes in PR fly so low even guns can take them out.

USI has a couple of "Heavy Anti-Air" assets that PR could use if this was implemented.

I personally would just be happy to see the return of sizeable AAA, perhaps larger stuff with proximity rounds that air burst.

GLAs are efficient enough to protect a base from aircraft, especially considering they often come in pairs or more. The only issue you will see with these is that they are manned less than 1% of the game duration and that it is possible for them to run out of ammo (I think).
The only improvement would be infinite ammo, coupled with a longer reload time. Perhaps more frequent use of static-sandbag emplacements to reduce their vulnerability.

...mongol...

Dont the MANPADS in PR loose their lock at 1000m when it should be something like 3000m.

What about the jets in PR whats their missiles max range. Maybe we can settle on using a missile system that uses similar missiles to the jets. Maybe something similar to the MIM-72 MIM-72 Chaparral - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (As seen in WiC, yes i know its out of service but maybe something simmilar to it can be made) It fires sindwinder missiles so its bassically the same missiles as a jet in PR.

I also found this site with the AA systems used by the PLA, you can see which a system isnt too overpowered.

PLA Mechanised Infantry Division Air Defence Systems

meh, even current 9K31 Strela-1(NATO reporting name SA-9 Gaskin), which already available in PR can cover WHOLE map, just staying at base, if you implement realistic specifications link, reason its not implemented is very simple- you can't implement realistic specifications of jets and large scale maps

Then all the aircrafts have to get their aproximitely engagments length so the Apache can stay 8km from a tank and kill it, Tanks can stand in the kashan main base and fire heat on the other main base. You cant just say that these need that engagement length and see over all the other assets that gets involved.

Well i think we need a more effective AA system agaist aircraft espacailly on the large maps.
Maybe having AA Artillery which can traverse slowly so its only really efective on targets that are far away. ie. So it cant be used to shoot at helis unless they are far away and high up (like a plane would be).
I was thinking along the lines of a 20-40mm cannons like this (M1939 37mm/Type 55 37mm),these might be obsolete now tho, but if they are implemented, maybe with airbust if ts possible.

Also check out this data sheet, it shows the different calibres and ranges etc. of different AAA.
Anti-Aircraft Artillery

on large map where are already a lot of assets which can be used again air assets, lets take kashan i.e. you get 4 designated AA, AA at FOBs, stationary HMGs on FOBs, MG's on top of tanks, AA weapon on air assets, 2 MANPADs, APC's, tanks, HATs(yes, helis can be easy killed with it)
other question is effectiveness of AAV and MANPAD, but since i'm total noob in air and in AAV i'll leave it to somebody other, it works fine now

Guys we don't have a working radar target object yet. Just heat. If we do get radar then sure adding medium altitude systems and Anti Radiation missiles wouldn't be difficult at all.

Yes but when u target jets its only in a very small window of opportunity to fire at them. Aircraft can also fly high enough to evade some of those, attacks.
Like the guns, thats why we should have a heavy aa artillery for large maps. Or else on maps like kashan, the tanks get raped by a10s if the US gain complete control of the skies.
This is why there should be heavy aa artillery on maps where one team gets planes while the other does not have any planes but has aa defences.

Aircraft are already underpowered. Why make it even easier for Joe Blow, in his long-range AA weapon, to press a button and kill a jet?

es but when u target jets its only in a very small window of opportunity to fire at them

well, it should be hard to kill aircraft, isn't it? if you completely nerf it there will be no point of using it

the tanks get raped by a10s if the US gain complete control of the skies.

keyword if, if MECs failed at AA defences they deserve to die from CAS, same happens irl, if one faction fails at AA defences or air superiority they get raped by aircrafts

chuckduck wrote:Yes but when u target jets its only in a very small window of opportunity to fire at them. Aircraft can also fly high enough to evade some of those, attacks.
Like the guns, thats why we should have a heavy aa artillery for large maps. Or else on maps like kashan, the tanks get raped by a10s if the US gain complete control of the skies.
This is why there should be heavy aa artillery on maps where one team gets planes while the other does not have any planes but has aa defences.

Have you ever flown in PR?

Alex6714 wrote:Have you ever flown in PR?

Yes, but maybe not as much as some people, i dont fly every round. But when there is an oportunity to fly i go flying.