Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/9/2017 12:25:10 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
The next scenario in the Fury series - Indian Ocean Fury #3 Socotra Scramble:

You’re commanding the USS Nimitz CVBG and have been tasked to steam at maximum possible speed north to join 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean. Things are interesting in the Indian Ocean but positively frantic in the Med.
In this scenario you will need to assemble your Battle Group, neutralize several layers of enemy defences, proceed through restricted, hazard laden waters to enter the Red Sea on your journey to the main theater of operations.


As always your comments and critiques are most welcome.

B

Edit: Ver 1.3 uploaded

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 8/11/2017 12:08:50 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/9/2017 4:55:17 AM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: online
Wow - thats a lot of bad guys to kill! Is this possible without any reloads for the carrier? I have a feeling I'm going to be down to iron bombs and sidewinders at the end! Also, the name of the scenario has a # in it, which puts it above Indian Fury 1. Currently, it looks like this in the scenario listing:

Indian Fury #3
Indian Fury 1


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 2
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/9/2017 9:57:23 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
It is a lot of bad guys

Cimarron has some reloads, the trick is when do you slow down to do a RAS

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 3
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 12:09:04 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
How many launchers make up a battalion of SA-10s? The database shows it as anywhere from 4 to 12 TELs, which is a huge range in capability. What is actual Russian practice?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 4
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 12:22:11 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Andrew

I think it depends on who owns the Bn, and if the Bn is in a SAM Regt or a SAM Bde.

Quite honestly I don't know the proper answer, but I think the general principles are:

Air Force (VVS) more mobile and generally smaller units
Air Defence (PVO) larger units
SAM Regt = smaller units
SAM Bde = larger units

But they also used specific formations for specific jobs. I just checked the scenario and I think I picked the wrong unit for the situation which I'll need to fix (based on my musings above) but lets just say its about medium sized

B

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 5
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 12:45:33 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
A few quick notes at the start:

The trigger for the 366 FW going off task is set for 1:30 on 15 Feb, instead of 0600 on the 16th, so they are deleted almost immediately.

It looks like there aren't any ASW reloads in Masirah. A few extra torpedoes would be helpful to allow planes to keep flying once some are expended.

Are the B-1s supposed to only have one load of retarded bombs? (Although honestly, I think I'd prefer to bomb from out of the MANPADS envelope, so this isn't a big deal from my view.)

A typo: special message 1:30 Z, 'NATO HQ for Southern Europe and he Med'

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 6
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 12:54:05 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Thanks, will fix those.

Only one load for the B-1s. Was scratching my head on this one, the conventional loadouts for these babies are just not that good. You get a lot of bombs but no precision. Went for the 'fast & low' to get the best strike, but could be convinced otherwise. One run is all you get though.

B


(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 7
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 3:06:18 AM   
Primarchx


Posts: 2570
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
I hit the three closest airbases to Thumrait nearly immediately in quick succession. The closer two with Jaguars and Ataq Airbase with the full USAF package of Strike Eagles, Vipers and Bones. The Jags didn't find much to hit but took out ammo facilities and bombed revetments at night on the chance there were a/c there. Ataq was hit first by the Bones coming in low at full speed, first targeting the SA-3 sites, which they wiped out, before turning to the aircraft parking at the base. Some SA-3s were launched but were quickly silenced without effect. Lots of AAA had to be sped through as they rocketed along at near-Mach on the deck. They decimated the aircraft at the base and headed for home. Follow on Vipers and Strike Eagles hit secondary targets such as EWRs and the SA-2 site near the base.

Meanwhile Nimitz is probing Socotra, taking out radars and interceptors while goading any hidden SAMs to come on line. Having a load of fun with this one.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 8
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 4:27:37 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
I took the opposite approach, launching an immediate and massive strike on Socotra which arrived just as dawn broke. Carrier aircraft approached from the south, while shore-based ones came in from the north. A few probing shots at the surveillance radars prompted the SA-10 to light up, and then a HARM sandwich took care of it and several of the other SAMs. TLAMs (about 40% of my total) came over the mountains from the south, the first bunch aimed at weather shelters (and acting as a SAM soak) and then a concentrated salvo on the runway and access point. SLAMs also came over the mountain around this time, engaging short-ranged SAMs after they had emptied their ready magazines. All the while a massive fighter presence kept the enemy down until the runway was shut.

CBU carrying F-18s dealt with the SA-2s from low level (although I had to dodge retributive SA-7s), but when some of the F-18s went hunting radars on the way home they found some modern Shorads, which taught them a nasty lesson. Those got hunted down from high altitude by Mavericks and 500 lb LGBs. With the air-defense environment neutralized the Jaguars came in to pummel the docks and the airfield, reducing Socotra to a smoking ruin. My BLU-109 carrying F-15s turned out to be unnecessary, so they're going back home and taking their bombs with them. I may divert them to some of the closer airfields in Yemen, since they have plenty of gas, but I want to count my bomb inventory first.

I haven't used the B-1s yet. I didn't want to send them into a heavy SAM environment like Socotra, and I don't feel like using them in the day when everyone can see them a mile away. I'm actually thinking about using them to hit Khartoum when it gets dark again. They've got the legs for it, and if ever there was a place that shouted "Please base Badgers here!" it's Khartoum. A big base with facilities for very large aircraft which is safely isolated far behind the front lines would be ideal for bombers. But we've no evidence that anything is there. Hmmm...

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 9
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 11:51:59 AM   
jimmyblond

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/13/2015
Status: offline
Dire Diwa Airbase has no runway access points. Therefore the aircraft are unable to launch.

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 10
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 12:26:58 PM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
quote:

Dire Diwa Airbase has no runway access points


Thanks for that, was wondering but forgot to check. Will fix.

(in reply to jimmyblond)
Post #: 11
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 6:28:31 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 2570
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
BTW, I was surprised that so few radars were on covering Ataq Airbase. The SAMs popped up when they were engaging a/c that had been visually spotted but there was no response until my strikers were right on top of them.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 12
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 6:35:21 PM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Thought that I had put one just off the base - perhaps I didn't turn it on...

B

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 13
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 6:51:34 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 2570
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Thought that I had put one just off the base - perhaps I didn't turn it on...

B


I don't think there was a valid ARM target until some of the 57mm AAA started lighting up their FCRs. Caught all the MiG-21s on the ground, too. I assumed there was an airbase defense intercept mission set for them?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 14
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/11/2017 9:38:27 PM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
OK
Will fix - yes there is an intercept mission, and the SAMs so it needs a radar.

Thanks

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 15
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/12/2017 3:08:15 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
As the Socotra strike heads for home, the four F-14s with the longest range loadouts (which haven't yet used any of their ordnance) are refuelled and directed to head west and tangle with forces in the Aden area. After initial successes against Mig-21s patrolling the area they head NNW towards Sana'a, and start running into more credible opposition in the form of Mig-23s and Mig-29s, and a couple of support planes. Their range advantage keeps them out of immediate danger, and they manage to get a decent score before running away back towards the tanker with their tanks nearly dry. (In retrospect, maybe I should have sent more of the heavy CAP F-14s along, and tried to get a more decisive engagement. But I'm nervous about leaving the carrier so undefended, so I hurried them home instead.)

I had originally intended to have all my naval forces rendezvous NE of Socotra and proceed along the N shore of the Gulf of Aden, but looking at the distances I don't think I have the time. So the CV and the AO will have to proceed nearly due W, meeting up to the SW of Socotra and passing through the straits there. With Socotra in ruins I've sent a French Atlantique to start patrolling the straits for subs before my ships get there. Meanwhile the task group from the Gulf has to make good time along the N shore at 30 knots, praying they don't run over a sub at those speeds. I've got P-3s looking around in front of them, so hopefully that will help.

Now that Socotra's down the French decide to get a bit more agressive, and the Mirages start darting out to pick on the Mig-21s flying out of Al Anad. Their missiles aren't great, but they significantly outclass the Mig-21s, so all is well in that regard. However the Russians up in Sana'a are an entirely different story, and any time the Mig-29s start heading south the French flee the scene. I'm always keeping four Mirages on ready alert, rather than commit them all, since I've got airbases all around me (including Dire Dawa to my rear) and an anti-airfield strike could arrive at any time. However I do send one of my recce planes hurtling north through the Bab al Mandeb, getting a nice look at the docks packed with Boghammers and the nearby arty batteries (and the angry 57mm gunners...). He then heads north up the Red Sea to overfly some of the central islands. Nothing's there, fortunately, so he strafes the central Square Tie radar for good measure, and then heads home again. Meanwhile another Mirage pilot has put a pair of AS-30s into the crowded docks in the Bab. I've only got one plane set up for this at the moment, but I've got plenty of AS-30s. The plane will be back every 6 hours with a different pilot to keep wearing away at the foe before the carrier arrives. I think I'll sneak in a helicopter raid with HOT once it gets dark too.

As this all goes on I'm looking at those fishing boats with some distaste. Low overflights have shown me armed men on deck. Fishing with RPGs? I think not... So far they haven't fired at me despite some low and slow passes overhead, but I wonder what they'll do (or who they'll inform) when my ships get closer. Should I risk international censure and sink them? Probably not a good idea at this point. Maybe I'll have to risk a frigate to see how they'll respond to a warship.


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 16
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/12/2017 10:52:35 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Ha ha ha! We the French are ready for your perfidious sneak attack from behind! Victory is ours!

Er, a second incoming wave, you say?

Zut alors!

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 17
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/13/2017 12:38:59 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
It looks like the Sana Strike and Ataq Strike and Aden Strike missions are set to be ASuW strikes, which means they close in on the lone French frigate hanging out near Djibouti. The frigate probably dies early on, but the remaining strikers keep coming on to clear their IP where the frigate was, and end up getting torn up in the French SAM envelope without accomplishing much. If they had been on a ground strike mission they could have fired their ARMs at my SAMs, or launched their Kazoos from well out of my range, and they could have done severe damage to my French base. Would it be more effective if they had their first strike as an attack on Djibouti, and then reset to an anti-shipping attack later?

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 18
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/13/2017 12:46:23 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Andrew

That sounds like a good plan, when I tested they went for the Carrier and got beat up pretty bad. Had not considered them going at the Frenchie, but will look at that

Thanks

B

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 19
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/13/2017 1:43:06 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
In my case what happened is that the incoming Djibouti land strike spotted the frigate on their way in to attack the French base, and that's when the Anti-ship strikes were triggered.

I re-ran it manually, targeting the docks with half the AS-18s and the HAWKs with a quarter each, and firing in a stream of targeted and BOL ARMs. This worked very (too) well, and I have now lost the entire minesweeper force which was at the dock, and both the HAWKs are out of service. (Unlike and SA-10 they just don't have the power to shoot down enough ARMs and save themselves, and if they turn off the radars they get hit by the AS-18s.) All the ARM/PGM attackers got away unharmed.

Now the AI won't be able to coordinate the attack the same way as a human, but the loss of the minesweepers can be very nasty. I still have the helicopters, but that may not be enough.

One discovery is that for some reason the Roland 3 isn't allowed to attack guided weapons, unlike other SHORADS of its type, so the French defence against this type of attack is only half as effective as you had intended.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 20
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/13/2017 1:46:24 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Nasty

Perhaps I'll switch them out for Crotale.

Thanks for the test, will have to think this one through.

B

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 21
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/15/2017 2:59:18 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Good lord, it's an An-2! It's just like an RPV, only slower...

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 22
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/17/2017 12:58:56 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 1061
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Playthrough

Stepping back a little, here's how the rest of it went.

After the air to air engagements mentioned earlier I got a little lax, while waiting for my planes to re-arm, but finally decided I should send another heavy counter-air sweep of F-14s towards the Bab al Mandeb. This would have been great if I'd done it sooner, but as it was they were only ~ 1/2 way there (the 400 kt cruise of those older F-14s is really painful) when the Pact decided to teach the French a lesson in Djibouti. Strikes arrived from both sides, and I really started to regret going on the offensive with half my Mirages, because the four planes which were available weren't able to stem the tide, and it took almost all my AAMs, many shots from my I-HAWKs, and micro-managed cannon fire to keep them out of my airbase. Even my little frigate took a few shots with its deck gun as the attackers came rushing in - and that was a problem, because the attackers radioed back the position of the little frigate to the anti-carrier strike units!

These started to show up on radar just as I was congratulating myself on my hair-thin victory, and it was clear I wouldn't be able to stop them all before they hit their target (which at this point I assumed was the base). My forlorn little frigate shot as best it could, but it's death was assured. (This is where reality splits, as discussed in the earlier posts. The AI ran the rest of the anti-ship attackers through my SAM barrage and then turned the survivors for home. I re-ran it under human control, destroying the HAWKs, some of the Crotales, and wrecking the docks and sinking all of the minesweepers there, before getting away without casualties. I decided to keep playing from that outcome.)

My F-14s arrived too late to interfere, and only a few of them were able to catch up with the tail of the raid returning to Sana'a and shoot down a few Su-24s. However, they did have tanker support, so they stayed around to engage and destroy fighters coming up to challenge them on intercept missions, using their range advantage as much as possible, and being particularly careful to keep Mig-29s out of Archer range.

The fighting in Djibouti had made it clear that the advance planes in Sana'a were a real problem, so the next main strike was directed there. Three pair of F-14s lead the F-16s with HARMs, while F-18s with SLAMs delivered powerful warheads on the SAM sites, and F-15Es came in with LGBs to shut the runways once the defences were down (all under the watchful eye of EA-6 and EC-130 crews). The attack was a success, although I proved that I still haven't learned that high value fighters probably shouldn't go down to strafe - in this case because the pair of Mig-23s that popped up were able to put a pair of Aphids into a reckless F-14 the moment their wheels left the ground.

This was followed by a dusk strike from the Jaguars, which all concentrated on bombing the runway and facilities at Ataq. One thousand pound bombs aren't ideal anti-runway tools, but when you have twenty attackers inbound you can get the job done. So as darkness fell I knew the main Russian base at Socotra was a wreck, Sana'a was down, and Ataq was shut. This meant most of the more advanced enemy aircraft on my side of the AOO were out of operation, and relieved a considerable amount of pressure on me. The most advanced fighters remaining were probably the Mig-23s on the far side of the Red Sea, plus whatever might be hiding out at Khartoum.

That's why the pair of B-1s settled down to nap-of-the-earth altitude as they crossed the Red Sea in the deepening darkness and entered enemy territory near the border of Eritrea and Sudan. Radar cover was thinnest there, and my hope was that they could remain undetected as they swung to the SW and entered Sudan. As they advanced ESM picked up emissions of a Side Net radar to the north of their flight path, and then a pair old model fighter radars. Had they been detected? The bombers turned further south and accelerated to military power, and the emissions faded behind them. Then it was time to turn north again and make the low level run across the large Khartoum airport. The bombers flashed across the airport, glimpsing dozens of small airframes as they dumped 48 one ton bombs on the runway and facilities. They didn't wait to look around, but as they turned and headed back east they could see the glow of fierce fires lighting the skies over Khartoum. (Satellite intel would later reveal 38 wrecked fighter airframes and a demolished runway. Not the Badgers I'd been fearing, but well worth it nonetheless.) The route out was adjusted further south, to stay away from the radar, and the B-1s returned safely home in time to prep for their trip to America.

Other night-time activity was somewhat less spectacular, but still very useful. A large part of my remaining TLAMs were used to strike known SAM positions around airfields in Yemen and Ethiopia, paving the way for my F-15Es to use their LGBs (with the very useful BLU-109 warhead) to shut the airfields at Aden and Al Anad, and to start working on Hodeida. The last of the TLAMs shut the runways and taxiways of the Ethiopian airfields of Aksum and Mekele. The Cairo-based 366th arrived to do the same thing to Port Sudan, and they had enough LGBs to shut Asmara in Eritrea, and then cross the Red Sea to finish off Hodeida. By dawn all enemy airfields were shut, with the exception of Dire Dawa, and since strike aircraft losses during their Djibouti raid had been 100% I did not expect any trouble from that direction.

SAM opposition had been very weak during the night, presumably because once the search radars were down they had no way to track my aircraft, so many of the HARM shooters went back with their missiles, and re-armed with other ordnance. A large amount of effort was devoted to the Bab al Mandeb, where F-15Es flew along the coast using their FLIR pods to identify a large number of small-boat docks, SSM sites, large caliber AAA, and artillery emplacements. These could be safely engaged with LGBs and Mavericks from beyond AAA range (and less safely with CBUs, trying to stay out of the AAA zones). One surprise was the identification of an SSK by FLIR, with a pilot reporting a moving hot-spot with a wake when the sub was in very shallow waters just south of the Bab. Surrounding AAA pieces had to be bombed before an Atlantique could safely get in to sink it.

Once the coast was clean in the straits my surviving mineclearing helicopters started working on a passage near the Djibouti shore, finding and sweeping numerous mines before dawn, and continuing into the day. By mid-day all known enemy units in the area had been destroyed (including those on the islands in the Red Sea), and there had been no further enemy air activity. Some aircraft (the Jaguars in particular) worked on destroying aircraft which were trapped at wrecked enemy airbases. As dusk fell a second time my southern naval units were well into the Gulf of Aden, and the HMS Lancaster which was making good progress southwards along the E shore of the Red Sea to meet them. There are 26 hours left to go, and the Nimitz has a clear path to get to the objective in 22 hours at 20 knots (to escort the slow moving oiler). If she wants to leave the oiler with an escort she can speed up to 25 knots and get there in 17.

So with 1 day 2 hours to go, and no effective opposition left, I think it's fair to call it over.



Miscellaneous Items


The 'B1s 1 hr warning for departure' event plays the 4 hour message.

The 'Port Sudan Ferry' mission to take the planes from Khartoum to Port Sudan is inactive, and there doesn't seem to be any event to activate it. I'm not sure when the planes were supposed to leave, but if it was before the evening of the first day then my B-1 strike would not have caught them there. I guess they will also need a change mission event to put them on a strike mission once they get to their destination.

The 'Sudan Mar Strike' mission is set for a 100 nm range, but there is very little within that range. The closest part of the Nimitz's objective zone is 175 nm away, and the Nimitz probably won't even get that far. Even the Red Sea is 140 nm wide at Port Sudan, so it can't get to units on the far side.

Similarly, the 'Eritrea Mar Strike' also has a 100 nm range, so it can only get at targets along the nearby shore, and cannot reach into the Nimitz's objective zone.

I sent the Lancaster sneaking down the east side of the Red Sea, to try and stay away from the fishing boats and thus avoid getting ratted out and swarmed before joining the Nimitz. This seemed to work, but the 'Msg - Red Sea Clear' says I was supposed to be clearing the Red Sea, which I didn't really do, and I had no idea I was supposed to pass through the Nimitz objective zone, or remain in the Dahlak-Bab area. Maybe a note to the player in the side briefing would be useful to clarify the ship's mission in this respect?

The enemy SAMs had a poor showing, and often weren't able to engage my aircraft (quite possibly because they didn't know they were there, especially at night and when I'd knocked the surveillance radars down). Actually, this may be quite realistic for portraying poorly trained and integrated air defences. It certainly made them difficult to engage with HARMs. If you want them a bit more active, perhaps a few second-line search radars or one or two of the SAMs could turn on in surveillance mode later throughout the game?

The SSMs and artillery will not engage known hostile ships in their area. However, if you change their doctrine to Engage Opportunities = Yes then they will engage. (I wonder if the same would help the SAMs?)

I found the SSK on the south side of the Bab, instead of in its patrol area to the North. It turns out that it was investigating a contact over 500 miles away out to the NE of Socotra(!), and had set a course there cutting through the port zone. This took it into very shallow water where it had to surface, and was therefore detected and sunk. The 'Kilo Ptl' mission is set to allow the sub to investigate outside the patrol zone, and has no prosecution zone, which allows this behaviour. If you want to keep it in the deeper water N of the Bab then this would probably need to be disabled.

I had no idea the Victor was out there until the scenario was over. My initial plan was to have everybody rendezvous right in his patrol zone, but after looking at the transit times it became apparent I needed to go on the other side of Socotra, so that worked out in my favour. The Victor did see me, however, getting a CZ hit on the passing San Jaun, and he started moving to investigate. I motored past cluelessly, and he lost me when I left the CZ, so I got away with it. A slightly different course could have been very embarrassing! This is the contact which pulled the SSK out of position. It also had the effect of making all the fishing boats start to slowly converge on that position. I actually spotted this behaviour, but couldn't figure out what the heck they were doing, since they were pointed at the obsolete CZ strobe, not the current position of my units. Interesting and puzzling at the same time.

The Cimarron oiler is an interesting problem. It can only make 20 knots, and I had thought I should be able to catch up with it with the CV and then replenish and still make it to the objective in time at that speed. I started replenishing passing between Socotra and the mainland, but then discovered that you can only make 11 knots while replenishing, and it takes a long time to replenish the bigger items. So not enough time after all. The tactical situation had improved, so I gave up the re-arming and pressed on at 20 knots for the time being. Hopefully there will be some time to slow down later. (I wonder if you can unrep in the Suez canal?)



< Message edited by AndrewJ -- 7/17/2017 1:06:34 AM >

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 23
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/17/2017 6:51:34 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Thanks Andrew, great report and lots of useful stuff. I'll get back to this one next week.

Appreciate the help.

B

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 24
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/24/2017 5:37:11 PM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
OK here is the next version, many of the points above are fixed and there are adjustments to the French OOB based on the great info from Jan Masterson.

I suspect that the battle around the BAM and Djibouti will play out quite differently. Very interested in your comments.

Thanks.

B

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 25
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/27/2017 3:10:33 AM   
Badlandz

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/18/2016
Status: offline
Hello Gunner,

I was just starting the 1.2 version of this scenario.
One small question: regarding the TARPS recon loadout for the F-14. The carrier magazine has 4 TARPS in inventory, however, it does not have any "Expanded Chaff Adapter (ECM)" pods in the inventory. Unfortunately, those are not optional. Was this your intent? I wanted to have a recon aircraft.

Another question is the Carrier Air Group; I noticed a lack of one of my favorite airframes, the A-6. I looked at GoNavy and see that VA-65 seems to have been a part of this CAG in RL. Just curious if they are being sent somewhere else or just removed for balance. I recall you had a spreadsheet but, didn't find it yet.

Thanks for the great scenarios!
Regards,
Ed

FYI, I updated the scenario to DB 467 and enabled aircraft damage.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 26
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/27/2017 10:13:32 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
Badlandz

TARPs is a good option, I think that it is limited to 2 AC per Sqn, so 4 total. The missing ECM pods will get fixed. Thanks

Ah - the A-6. They are one of the key anomalies in the Northern Fury series. In the storyline the USN has to create another CVW, as the juggling of retirements, building and refits essentially keeps a 13th CAW active for 15 carriers. 4-6 on deployment, 2-3 ready on each coast and 3 in training. Even though the money from the US Congress keeps flowing, there is a physical limit to the number of pilots and airframes the USN is able to maintain, that with the push for modernization led to a decision to retire the A-6 early. When the war starts the USN is caught flat footed in the middle of transition. Only two Sqns of A-6 remain active in the fleet, one on the Enterprise, one on the Independence. When you play the scenarios in the Atlantic you will also not a rush to refit the F/A-18C's to be AMRAAM capable which is another bit of a storyline. No worries however, there are just enough scenarios without the A-6 to make you appreciate them in the later games when 6 smaller sqns are rushed back into the fleet and you will even see an A-6F or two by the end of the series.

Would be interested in how AC damage will work out in this scenario. My prediction is that with a large number of less capable foes, you will have some difficulty keeping your A2A weapon numbers up if it takes a few extra missiles to do the job. I think that's a good thing and will make you really consider what to do with that AOE.

Enjoy and I look forward to your observations.

B

(in reply to Badlandz)
Post #: 27
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/28/2017 7:50:27 PM   
Badlandz

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/18/2016
Status: offline
Well, after about 6 hrs......

I started the scenario by launching the EC-130 and E-3 from Thumrait. Both were emcon restricted to get an idea of which radars were active. Roughly 20 minutes later a flight of f-15e's was sent to hit the coastal airfields of Al Ghaydah and Riyan. Each aircraft deposited 2 GBU-10 with the BLU-109 warhead on each runway. Concurrently, 2 Jaguars were sent to hit the most eastern radar. After the attack on Al Ghayday, that radar began radiating. Not sure whether it was triggered or the emissions took a long time to be detected. Either way a high speed pass by the Jaguars shut it down permanently. Shortly after passing Riyan emissions several Mig-21's was detected. I decided to use the Eagles to take out a few of the pests. The Aim-120 achieved about a 25% hit rate. Resulting in a damage not a kill. The Aim-9 achieved a 50% hit rate with both aircraft going down. The F-15's even made one pass with Guns before retiring.
One note: seems that 2 Mig-21's ventured 400NM from their airfield towards the AWACS and ELINT aircraft. I'm guessing they were detected by the Socotra radars. Just seems a long way for a pair of ancient fighters to go, especially at night.

I launched a raid at Socotra that included 10 of the VF-211 as escort and fighter sweep. The 2 AIM-54 armed ones were used to hit the Soviet Jammers. VF-211 supported a strike by 44 RGM-109 ( the shorter range variety) along with 8 F-16 and 4 F-18's carrying Harm. I lost count of the hit/kill ratio. Every AIM-7 and most of the AIM-9 were used. I'm estimating the AI launched 8 Mig-23 and 8 Mig-29. Seems I recall that one Mig-29 took as many as 3 hits before succumbing to the inevitable. Side note: my father was a WW2 PBJ pilot. Warned me never to fly over water in a single engined aircraft. This "proved" that to me. To be honest, I think the SEAD fight was successful only because the SAM batteries all ran out of ammunition. Either way, the trio of Maverick armed Hornets finished off the AAA defenses before the base was cluster bombed. It's closed! My losses consisted of a single F-16 that evaded south towards the island. It is suspected that an advanced missile, probably an SA-17, was then able to hit it at about 25NM. I almost forgot to mention the TALD that were fired at the island: what a waste. No response from the defenders at all.

As we approach midday, there seems to be some activity around Dijibouti. One recon aircraft was intercepted over Ethiopia. Looks like a raid is building out of Aden. Standby for the results.

One thing I noticed about the Dijibouti defenses: Wow, that's a lot of missles. Any recommendations for French AAA guns during the period?

With the aircraft damage turned on I can see the missile inventory being a bit of a problem. I'm wishing for VERTREP in the game right now. Those Seaknights would earn their pay.


Regarding A-6f. There may or may not been an attempt to have a flight of four of them deploy on to the Nimitz. Sadly, their loadouts all require the AIM-120. Maybe this needs to be changed to optional. FWIW.

A note on scoring: When a Soviet aircraft is destroyed, there are 2 messages generated. One says Soviet AC destroyed and awards 2 points. In addition a message says enemy AC destroyed and awards one point. When other Red aircraft are destroyed they generate only the Enemy AC destroyed message and point. Intentional?

Thanks again for another fun scenario.

< Message edited by Badlandz -- 7/28/2017 8:30:44 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 28
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 7/29/2017 9:12:18 AM   
Gunner98


Posts: 2965
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: online
quote:

A note on scoring


Yes, intentional. I suppose its lazy event programing: Since I put all forces on one side this time, to distinguish one countries AC from another would require a trigger for each AC type and possibly conditions. So to simplify, everything is worth 1 point and Soviet is worth 2 more. I could turn those messages off so you don't see them.

B

(in reply to Badlandz)
Post #: 29
RE: New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble - 8/1/2017 8:24:25 PM   
Badlandz

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/18/2016
Status: offline
Ok, I finally finished this one. I was able finish with a triumph.

The Nimitz and her escorts made it to the rendezvous with few hours to spare. The Russian air strike on Djibouti cost me most of the MSW craft. The only two that survived were the ones that started outside the port. I sent them along with the French frigate on a run down the coast of Somalia, hoping to avoid detection. The minefield claimed the 2 Sea Stalions. They were destroyed by mines exploding near the aircraft.

Regarding the aircraft damage: with the aircraft damage model enabled I had expect the missile inventory to be a problem. In the end I only used 32 AMRAAM, 74 Sparrow, 35 Sidewinder and 14 Phoenix. The damage model allowed damaged ground attack aircraft to RTB and be repaired. The TARPS equipped F-14 suffered damage on 2 missions. Without the damage model I'm sure my losses would have been significantly higher.

The main aircraft killer was bombs. I suppressed the AAA defenses with tomahawk and then hit the runways with the USAF BLU-109 warheads. The F-18 CBU armed aircraft were able to hit the coastal airfields. However, they usually took damage from all the S-60 batteries. One suggestion I have is to throw in a little more variety on the AAA defense. Maybe 14.5 and 23mm guns.

One scoring oddity. The expenditures shows that I used 50 MK84 2000LB Air (Ballute). As far as I know the only aircraft equipped with that are the BONE. The loadout shows 24 per aircraft. Odd...

The departure of the BONE's. I launched them on the evening of their scheduled departure. They were airborne about 50NM from landing when the removal event fired. Just felt odd to have them disappear.
The Russian Victor successfully avoided destruction. I never spotted it. Like Andrew J I went west of Socotra.

In the end another great scenario. Thanks for sharing it. Now off to Madagascar.
Regards
Ed
Just a note about the lack of A-6. If this is any indication of what really existed, I can see why the Navy wanted to turn the F-14 into the Bombcat. Lack of standoff strike and limited precision attack capabilities of this generation of F-18 presents a significant challenge to striking defended targets.

< Message edited by Badlandz -- 8/1/2017 8:35:34 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for Testing IOFury #3 Socotra Scramble Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.141