"Tunguska!!"

[Echo38 1]

Which is what I frantically scream over the mic whenever I see one. I hate these things--am deadly afraid of them, in fact. Um, there are a couple of things I'd like to discuss about the Tunguska. Firstly, evasion techniques.

Well, I'm a highly experienced sim-pilot, with thousands of hours in the most realistic aerial combat simulators I can find, so I'm not being stupid or careless around these Tunguskas. While flying my A-10, I usually keep my altitude below 100 meters and my speed above 500 K.P.H., and I try to "beam" enemies (keeping them to my 9 or 3 o' clock) when I am not shooting at them, circling gently around them in a wide, fast turn. When I have to fly directly away from a threat, I jink back and forth as hard as I can without losing too much energy. Most importantly, perhaps, I try to limit my time over a target area--as I instruct my less-experienced friends, "Don't stay in line of sight of an enemy for more than a few seconds. Make a quick attack run, then get out of there low and fast." My gun-runs almost directly mirror those of real A-10 pilots (with a few modifications because of errors in Arma 2[/i's modelling of certain things); I make a shallow firing pass, then I immediately break turn ~90 degrees, duck down behind a hill or below the treeline, and bug out while keeping the target area approximately to my 4 or 8 o' clock.

Due to these techniques, shoulder-launched and static Strela missiles are not a significant threat to me, nor are AA cannons. I can fly in 500 K.P.H. circles around a Strela launcher (either player-controlled or A.I.) and evade all of the missiles they throw at me. Despite my best efforts, however, I am regularly blown out of the sky from a single missile from a Tunguska--almost always one which wasn't showing up on my radar (which an A-10 shouldn't have, but that's another story) until it was too late to do anything about it.

Now, this is in CTI mode--specifically, "Superpowers." I created a quick, simple mission in the editor to try to practice my evasion techniques, placing a flying A-10 as player and a manned enemy Tunguska in a randomized location. Well, funny thing--I can't get the Tunguska to shoot me down in this mission. It's only hit me once with missile, and that only after I'd been circling it for a few minutes at different speeds, ranges, and altitudes. Haven't been able to reproduce it since, even with minutes of circling from as close as 500 meters and as far as 3000 (all within LoS). In order to get it to hit me with its cannon, I had to drop flaps and slow down to about 200 K.P.H., which is absurd. I've tried this with the Tunguska set to 50% skill level in the editor, and also at 100%. My A.I. difficulty level is only at 34% in the game options, but it's the same when I'm playing CTI--so why the huge disparity in effectiveness between playing CTI and playing my own mission? The Tunguska knows about me at all times when I'm circling it (I can even see it firing its cannon at me and missing every time), so it can't be related to the Command Mode find-an-enemy "cheat."

I'd like to open up "Superpowers" and see what they're doing to the Tunguska--one thing that's occurred to me is that they might be spawning it without a cannon, although I'm fairly sure that I've been hit from a cannon from it while playing "Superpowers." (Might've been a static defense ZSU, though, near the Tunguska.) However, as I've posted in another thread, I can't get any of the PBO programs working.

So, does anyone have any suggestions, either for evading & safely spotting Tunguskas, or for why there is such a discrepancy between the effectiveness of the thing in "Superpowers" and its effectiveness in a quick mission I made with the editor?

Edited July 26, 2012 by Echo38

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Tunguskas in this game are horribly overpowered and do not even roughly mimic their real life counterpart. Also your A10does not have (unless changed in latest patch) a working RWR to detect incoming missiles and allow you to pop flares. This also applies to the SU25 in game as well.

Survival against these machines is low for Blufor units.

[Echo38 1]

Tunguskas in this game are horribly overpowered and do not even roughly mimic their real life counterpart.

I don't at all disagree (I don't know much about the real Tunguska), but in what ways is the game's Tunguska better than the real one?

Also your A10does not have (unless changed in latest patch) a working RWR to detect incoming missiles and allow you to pop flares. This also applies to the SU25 in game as well.

[nod] In "vanilla" Arma 2, there isn't even a countermeasure, let alone the RWR. On the other hand, we do have the arcade radar (which is forced on us), but I suppose it sorta-kinda-notreally makes up for not having a realistic view distance & zoom & FoV, or good friendly intel, or the Maverick's IR thingy, and so on. (Desperately hoping Arma 3 does better, but that's another story.)

Edited July 26, 2012 by Echo38

[BasileyOne 10]

both 9M331 missiles, 2x2A38 canons(twin barrel) are extremely potent/accurate in real-life too.

canon can fire all same rounds variety as 2A42 and 2A72 can, except latest APFSD-T round with HP++ loading[kinda much energy for canon with such high RoF]

also it had decent radar, updated with ICCM caps[ECM station mk2 underway], armored, highly mobile, not know amphibious or not.

it can fire/defend from formations, it cover, which is his main purpose, moving, while many other systems, can't, for example, Pantsyr system, not fit for army AA needs, thus.

latest versions, updated, rated - detection range - up to 40km, missile range - up to 20km.

it had NBC protection, fire suppresion system, radios, NVG[termal vision installation sheduled too].

so basically, real-life prototype - awesome TOO :)

Edited July 26, 2012 by BasileyOne

[Tonci87 163]

The tunguska is not overpowered, the aircrafts are "underpowered". They are to slow, they can't fly high enough, they loose speed to fast while turning, they don't have HARM weapons and the view distance is not large enough compared to flight sims. The tunguska is just fine.

[vasmkd 12]

I disagree that the Tanguska is overpowered in any way in ARMA2. It is a nightmare in real life , very potent and accurate just as BasileyOne says

[Echo38 1]

Tonci is correct, however--the aircraft in Arma are, for the most part, extremely nerfed compared to the real ones. Although the A-10 isn't that terribly far off in terms of speed and turning ability. Biggest differences are, as Tonci pointed out, visibility (zoom, FoV, render distance, etc.) and ceiling, but there are plenty of other issues which make aircraft less effective in Arma than in reality.

But, I'm still curious about the Tunguska.

[hellfire257 3]

The issue is with evasion techniques as well. I found that they do not work most of the time. I think Myke calculated that an average sidewinder hits mach 5 in ARMA. The missile physics are not that realistic in comparison to say LOMAC/FC2/DCS so what you use there will more than likely not work in ARMA.

[NeuroFunker 11]

keep wondering about Russian genius in the technology :) Also All russian tanks are much underpowered in game, T90 would literary smash everything to peaces, if it had all real life technologies implemented in game.

[domokun 515]

The issue is with evasion techniques as well. I found that they do not work most of the time. I think Myke calculated that an average sidewinder hits mach 5 in ARMA. The missile physics are not that realistic in comparison to say LOMAC/FC2/DCS so what you use there will more than likely not work in ARMA.

Sadly you'r right.

Fortunately GLT was so angry he developed his Real Air Weapons mod.

Try it and see....

[andersson 285]

If you played CTI on a server the "AI discrepancy" can be explained. On servers the AI is as per server settings, when you do a local mission your settings take effect. So if that server has harder settings on AI compared to your local installation you will see a difference.

IF you played the CTI locally on your computer it must be something in the mission.

[icebreakr 3157]

You might consider contacting your guys on the ground to take care of it from an ambush position?

[maturin 12]

The Tunguska's missiles have some gunner controlled line of sight component in their guidance, right? Realistically, wouldn't that allow a thinking gunner to outmaneuver a circling aircraft that is trying to fool dumb purely IR/Radar guided missiles?

[BasileyOne 10]

The tunguska is not overpowered, the aircrafts are "underpowered". They are to slow, they can't fly high enough, they loose speed to fast while turning, they don't have HARM weapons and the view distance is not large enough compared to flight sims. The tunguska is just fine.

you can't use HARM against AA or point defense systems, cuz modern variety of them, had quite decent chance[0.7 or even more]to shot them down.

let alone point defense systems especially designed to counter PGM, even salvo-fired, like morpheus or more interesting things.

suggestions about Arma2 flightmodel basically correct, but it made on purpose, i guess, cuz typical size of islands is quite small for full-blown, well-performing aircraft, so you hit map edge, nearly after take-off/dogfight.

[maturin 12]

ArmA aircraft are also really survivable without any component damage.

[BasileyOne 10]

ArmA aircraft are also really survivable without any component damage.

its more about pilot skill.

just like in real-life.

[NoRailgunner 0]

The map/islands are just too small for proper air combat simulation incl. radar/EW features. Think that many people are just too impatient to locate/search & destroy enemy AA(A) vehicles before sending in their own aircrafts. Tunguska's radar detection range is ~18km, tracking range ~16km, the missile range is up to 10km and the gun range is ~4km. Usually a anti-air/support group consist of 4 AA(A) vehicles + commanding vehicle. Now imagine a fully simulated modern war - at least 50% of players would instantly ragequit because they got killed without beeing able to see or detect the enemy.... Let's see if A3 will have UAV vs UAV missions! ;)

[Tonci87 163]

@Basiley Skill is important, the only problem is that evasive manuvers seem useless

[max power 21]

I think the best tactic is communication in a combined arms scenario. If you can locate and then 'surprise' a tunguska with a missile strike from a masking helicopter, usually you can survive... or if you encounter one, mask immediately and call ground or artillery to try to deal with it.

The fact the tunguska is more stupid when it's alone on the map is probably because the AI share information. If you just plunk one down on the map, it's probably not in alert mode. Whereas, when they are in a more dynamic mission, enemy units that spot your aircraft report it to a central command entity which then alerts units and sends patrols where applicable.

[BasileyOne 10]

@Basiley Skill is important, the only problem is that evasive manuvers seem useless

but think positive !

its good input/starting point to write/implement one in [you]custom-made add-on, right ? ;)

also someone can [finally !!]introduce EW elements in gameplay, making corresponding mod for this.

basically you cannot do 10g evolutions in Arma2 ;)

basically its seems intentional. imagine how would b like flyghtmodel with average pings/desyncs, usual for Arma2 global online :)

even above 100ms-150ms make many thing seriously jerky/stuttering :[ even ground vehicles, sometimes.

Edited July 28, 2012 by BasileyOne

[kylania 568]

Send in a ground team with satchels or SMAWs. Or a laser designator and drop a GBU on it from 30,000ft :)

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

As someone pointed out the problem is the speed of the missile in game. See GLT mykes air weapons mod for a more realistic Tunguska. Cureent vanilla tung, especially in the hands of a player are extremely potent.

[gunso 10]

Tonci is correct, however--the aircraft in Arma are, for the most part, extremely nerfed compared to the real ones. Although the A-10 isn't that terribly far off in terms of speed and turning ability. Biggest differences are, as Tonci pointed out, visibility (zoom, FoV, render distance, etc.) and ceiling, but there are plenty of other issues which make aircraft less effective in Arma than in reality.

But, I'm still curious about the Tunguska.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTJaBrU9Ut4

more video here http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL691DE35F00E4AC4F&feature=plcp

Edited July 27, 2012 by gunso

[Muecke 114]

Sadly you'r right.

Fortunately GLT was so angry he developed his Real Air Weapons mod.

Try it and see....

We use this since it is released. Works perfekt in MP and pilots have a bigger chance to survive.

The Tunguska rockets are very powerfull even if they explode near your plane without a real contact your plane will be damaged.

We have added missle warning into su25 and a10 to balance this a bit. Also there is no opposite for the Tunguska on Bluefor.

Stinger rockets doesnt come even close....for coop its ok but for pvp this sucks. Thats why we added Tunguska rockets to the Linebacker.

Not realistic but pretty much better playable for stuff like CTI.

[Tonci87 163]

Don't get me started on the stinger Missiles. In this game their engine burns out after only one km of flight