homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation SAM Simulator Future Plan { SAM SIMULATOR }

I really like the idea, but i always wait until Hpasp declares it.

I have no credible information on the operations of the above mentioned systems.

HAWK (in pics) is a Phase 1 (PIP I) configuration ,one step after IHAWk .

I need to cool down the expectations...
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=47105&page=4
... check comment 35/36.

PS: I cannot comment any more on this topic.

They make the contact with you? Or in inversely?

Only thing left is to hope.

Hi Hpasp!

So whats the plans for the future right now? Other than working of course. :-)

Currently working on the S-75M3-OP Volhov*
*Karat camera
Than Neva with Karat.

Soon I will release v0.928.3 where each mission could be selected as night one, and thus can be played with lower memory.

i still wait to see sa-6 on samsim

I am thinking of starting simulating Western SAM systems...
... historically the first could be the MIM-3 Nike Ajax, then MIM-14 Nike Hercules, Improved Nike Hercules, and the Nike Hercules ATBM system.

I have all the required information, except the required quality photos...
... so it could be a kind of 'synthetic' panel.

Any opinion on this?

i choose mim-23 hawk ... because iran is a greate user of this system
this system is the best system iran had
but about the historical scenario
im not sure that i cant help ...
maybe 2 scenario if i find
maybe ....
by the way

mim-23 hawk is the famous system in the world

What about contacting some US veterans or some SAM fans if they are able to take required photos?

I have no knowledge on Nike Ajax panel existing anywhere.
Improved Nike Hercules is in Italy, while Nike Hercules ATBM is in San Francisco.

I still find fascinating the development, where if you learn to operate the Nike Ajax (system with similar capabilities as the Dvina), you would be able to figure out Improved Nike Hercules (a system closer to Vega) without reading the manual.

And how about modeling the CIM-10 Bomarc?
Nuclear tipped missiles, you can go wrong with proximity detonations

Regarding scenarios for SAM simulator, I believe that I gave this suggestion before but why not build fictional scenarios?
And if those fictional scenarios are to have random or randomized events such random number of enemy aircraft and random enemy aircraft flights, this would IMO give the player with following advantages:
- When playing a fictional scenario for the first time the player wouldn't have a clue of what will happen as opposed to a historical scenario which an informed player could have some level of knowledge about what will happen.
- A scenario with randomized events would be much interesting in terms or re-playability since every time a player would play such a scenario things could happen differently.
For the developer (Hpasp) fictional scenarios would IMO have the following advantage:
- I believe it would be easier to develop a fictional scenario since there's no need to research for as much information as needed when compared to historical scenarios. All it would need (for fictional scenarios) is good deal of imagination and to make this easier the developer could ask the community for ideas regarding fictional scenarios.

Finally, I want to say that I actually enjoy historical scenarios very much but IMO a mix of historical and fictional scenarios is always a good thing to have in any simulation.

The CIM-10 BOMARC is an interesting air defense system...
... its similar to the Soviet S-50 Dal (SA-5 Griffon) that was never fielded due technical difficulties.

From FCO point of view, it would be the most boring air defense simulator, I can imagine...
... it would be similar to an IADS sim.

Pff.. are you sure?

Canadians killed their own interceptor project to deploy BOMARC....

It was short lived due to fact thaT the main danger from USSR became ballistic missiles...

LINK

I meant that it was a mid-course updated, self guiding weapon, without any dedicated fire control radar.
Just target acquisition radars were used to guide the weapon in the vicinity of the target, than it would self guide itself onto it, using an on-board active radar.

While the S-50 Dal was abandoned and never fielded, the BOMARC was operational** in 8+2* US bases between 1959..1972.
*in Canada
** testing was ongoing still in 1972, with varying results...

Great reading here...
http://ed-thelen.org/ToDefendAndDeterTheLegacyColdWar.pdf

CONUS SAM coverage


Soviet threat

Thanks for the info Hpasp

Speaking about the Bomarc, one of the Canadian Bomarc sites operated by the 446 SAM Squadron (located at CFB North Bay, Ontario) still exists, albeit of course deactivated - The site can be seen on Google Earth or Google maps at the following coordinates:

46�25'46''N 079�28'16''W


Here's the satellite view of that Bomarc site operated by the RCAF/CAF 446 (SAM) Squadron:


Ground level photos of the (abandoned) site can be seen on the following page:
http://urbexobsession.com/gallery_BOMARC

I can understand the enthusiasm for BOMARC...
... only one site in Hungary could cover most of Eastern Europe, and endanger HABU flights over West Germany.

LoL! And the nuclear warhead means that the missile doesn't need to be that precise - The missile detonated "by proximity" 1Km away from the target?? No problem

Of course if this was to be a common situation in real world, people would start having things like a 3rd eye popping on the forehead or something along those lines...