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 NF 13.5 Anvil

 
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 Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/17/2017 12:50:40 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Next in the Norway series, this one follows on closely from 'Charge of the Lt Bde' and 'Hammer'.

This scenario is playable by NATO:

You are commanding TF 20.2 centered on two CVBG’s: Nimitz and Carl Vinson. You job is to quickly follow a divisionary attack set by the British (TF 20.3) to your south and strike the Bodo/Evenes/Andoya area to neutralize those three airbases. In the overall plan – You are the ‘Anvil’, and have 24 hours to crush your targets. 25th Air Force’s attacks against the Land Lines of Communications (Hammer); which are just completing now should have the defences off balance. Tomorrow TF 20.1 (Enterprise & Roosevelt) will carry out precision strikes to your North as ‘Tongs’ is put into action.


As always, interested in your comments and critiques.

B
Edit V1.2 uploaded

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 8/7/2017 4:00:09 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/17/2017 9:35:42 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3094
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Being told I'm trying to load a database not on the DB folder. Build 902.26.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 2
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/17/2017 9:38:30 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Working on build 936.3, DB 466.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4268010&mpage=2

B

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 3
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/17/2017 10:22:31 PM   
lamboman43

 

Posts: 96
Joined: 4/15/2016
Status: offline
Yeah, you'll probably have to download the newest 1.12 RC to get that.

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 4
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/18/2017 1:18:59 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3094
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Updated. Started it up and noticed some 'Empty' loadouts on the carrier. Any particular reason there are F-14Ds set up with iron bombs when there are still fighter missions to fly?

(in reply to lamboman43)
Post #: 5
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/18/2017 1:34:42 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Primarchx

Shouldn't be empties, thought I got them all. When I looked at it from a capability basis, the F-18s were too valuable with their AMRAAMs to have them all on bombing tasks, there just aren't enough A-6's. So the F-14D has the advantage of being a bomb truck and since there are about 60-70 Tomcats to throw around the Aim-54s and still only about 200 Phoenix in the stock of both CVNs, taking a few and filling in the bomb line wasn't a big cost.

Worth a try anyway.

b

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 6
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 4/18/2017 1:46:42 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3094
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Understood.

One trick I've played is to have AMRAAM-armed Hornets up front and backed by Tomcats miles behind. The Hornets rush in and fire AIM-120s then do a quick turnaround before plugging in AB to escape counterfire. Their missiles are then guided into the basket by the Tomcats' AWG-9/APG-71s that are still miles out of engagement range.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 5/1/2017 12:58:36 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Anything on this one guys?

B

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 8
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 5/1/2017 4:26:23 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
I'm waiting for the official v. 1.12 release to take a look at this one.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 9
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 5/2/2017 8:52:45 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
I'd really like to play it, but other projects prevent at the moment.

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 10
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 5/2/2017 9:50:34 PM   
JPFisher55

 

Posts: 589
Joined: 11/22/2014
Status: offline
Ditto, waiting for COW.

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 11
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 5/16/2017 2:01:47 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
Now that v1.12 is out I'm going to give this scenario a once-over.

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 12
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/10/2017 11:54:54 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Anything on this one yet guys? I'm back able to work on things for a bit, would like to wrap up some that have been hanging around?

Question - should I be converting these to AC damage?

B

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 13
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/11/2017 9:03:29 PM   
Coiler12

 

Posts: 1113
Joined: 10/13/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Question - should I be converting these to AC damage?

B


I'd actually argue against retrofitting AC damage onto existing NF scens (compatibility issues for people who don't have COW and fear that it would break something), but would welcome its implementation on new or in-progress ones.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 14
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/21/2017 4:51:22 AM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
^ agreed. The only scenario I could see you making a version with aircraft damage would be BUFF Stampede (10.4?) just so large bombers like the B-1 and B-52 don't get instakilled at low range by SA-7s.

(sorry for the late reply, better late then never I guess)

(in reply to Coiler12)
Post #: 15
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/25/2017 2:13:33 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK she stays as is without AC Damage - no problem

Anyone manage to play through on this one yet? Would like to clean it up and post it to the community.

Thanks

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 16
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/27/2017 6:49:11 AM   
morphin

 

Posts: 474
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Hi

I'm playing it. So a few things

F-14A on the Nimitz have only Ammo for one round and then it is finished....(some can ammo with TALD, but on many). So i have after first few hours quite a lot of F-14A wihtout any possiblity to use it.

GBU-Bombs (Precision bombs with alltitude above 10000 and laser guided are useless because of the clouds that are between 10 and 16k. At least i didn't manage to release one (Message "VA-165 'Boomers' #2 (A-6E Intruder) cannot engage ground targets because the cloud cover is too low. There will not be enough altitude clearance to deploy weapon."

So maybe best it not to load with this kind of bombs


The difficulties were to detect and precicely locate all the SAM sites. More and better recon possibilites would be nice. I lost lot of F-14 TARCS because they are the only recon possiblities you have.

I have also fighted about 6 houres with the endless stream of Flogger. I killed 100 pieces of them!!

IDE: WP
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
18x Su-27S Flanker B
4x MiG-25RBS Foxbat D
100x MiG-23MLD Flogger K
4x Su-24MR Fencer E
3x A-50 Mainstay A
4x Su-24MP Fencer F
11x MiG-31 Foxhound
3x MiG-25PDS Foxbat E
3x Radar (Snow Drift [9S18M1])
13x SA-12a Gladiator [9A83] TELAR
6x SA-12b Giant [9A82] TELAR
5x SA-12a Gladiator [9A84] LLV
16x SA-11 Gadfly [9A38] TELAR
8x SA-11 Gadfly [9A39] LLV
2x Radar (Long Track [P-40])
16x SA-15b Gauntlet [9A331] TELAR
8x SA-8b Gecko Mod-1 [9A33BM3] TELAR
3x Vehicle (Pat Hand [1S32])
4x 23mm ZU-23-2
3x SA-4a Ganef [2P24] TEL
4x SA-12b Giant [9A85] LLV
1x Radar (Flat Face B [P-19])
4x SA-4b Ganef [2P24] TEL
1x Vehicle (Clam Shell [5N66])
24x SA-10b Grumble [5P85S] TEL
3x Vehicle (Flap Lid B [5N63S])
2x Vehicle (Grill Pan [9S32-1])
6x SA-6a Gainful [2P25] TEL
2x Vehicle (Straight Flush [1S91])
5x Tu-16P Badger J
6x Tu-16P Badger L
9x A/C Hangar (4x Large Aircraft)
2x Building (Control Tower)
1x Radar (Big Bird B [5N64S])
2x Tu-142MZ Bear F Mod 4


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
135x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
10x AA-10 Alamo C [R-27RE, LR SARH]
2x AA-10 Alamo A [R-27R, MR SARH]
98x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
92x SA-12a Gladiator [9M83]
193x SA-10b Grumble [5V55R]
131x SA-11 Gadfly [9M38M1]
19x SA-4a Ganef [3M8M1]
29x SA-4b Ganef [3M8M2]
56x SA-8b Gecko Mod-1 [9M33M3]
114x SA-15b Gauntlet [9M331]
24x AA-9 Amos [R-33, SARH]
58x AA-7 Apex C [R-24R, SARH]
5x AA-6 Acrid F [R-40TD1, IR]
8x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
8x Generic Flare Salvo [2x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
5x AA-6 Acrid C [R-40RD, SARH]
3x AA-6 Acrid D [R-40TD, IR]
30x SA-12b Giant [9M82]
18x SA-6a Gainful [3M9]
103x 23mm ZU-23-2 Burst [20 rnds]
5x AA-8 Aphid [R-60TM]
5x 23mm Gsh-23L Burst [40 rnds]
2x Generic Acoustic Decoy





Andy


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 17
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 6/27/2017 9:50:15 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Great points. I'll fix that up and get an up date posted shortly.

Thanks

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 18
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/3/2017 9:52:32 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK here is version 1.1

Added a couple of ELINT assets and you also have the ES-3 Shadows on board.

Fixed up the ammo issues and increased the cloud base so it should allow easier LGB use, caught a couple loadout issues.

Still needs a bit more testing I think.

Thanks



Attachment (1)

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 19
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/17/2017 1:42:07 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Geez it's cold up here! Much more comfortable playing scenarios in the Gulf!

Any word from intel on Russian subs in the area? Are we expecting surface forces or missile boats in any number?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 20
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/17/2017 6:22:28 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
I'll add something to the brief. Not at the game for a few days but from memory not much of a missile boat threat but there are likely to be subs.

Enjoy the cold

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 21
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/31/2017 3:15:56 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
I finished up the 1.1 version today, so here's how it went.


Pre-game prep

Looking things over at the start of the scenario it seemed there was a mismatch between my tactical situation and goals and the aircraft loadouts, so I went through and made a number of changes in the editor. For example, I'm approaching a hostile shore with multiple enemy airbases that include enemy fighters with long-range missiles (Su-27, Mig-25, and the deadly Mig-31) all sheltering in a dense overlapping SAM belt, but large numbers of the Vinson's F-14s are set up with weaker AA loadouts, or air-to-ground or utility loadouts. I think in this situation establishing immediate air superiority would be the absolute priority. Therefore, with the exception of a couple TARPs birds, these are all switched over to air-to-air loadouts (about 50/50 Phoenix Heavy and Phoenix+ Light).

The loadouts I lost doing this don't seem to be particularly high value. By this point in the campaign TALDs are well known to be ineffective (due to the WP doctrine setting requiring an ID before shooting) so I doubt they'd be loaded. Similarly, the deadliness of the Pact's low-level air defences has been amply demonstrated by this time, so having half the very best interceptors (my F-14Ds) set up with iron bomb loadouts (most of which are too light to do any damage to my assigned targets) seems unproductive, and invites the loss of these valuable aircraft to no effect. The same is true for lightweight LGB loadouts on some attack planes, which would require me to get too close to the air defences, yet be unable to damage the targets if they survive long enough to attack. These are swapped out for 2000 lb BLU-109 warheads instead, for use only after the air defences are down.

I'm not sure if these loadouts were intended to represent a disorganized air wing emerging from a mixed mid-level conflict (in which case sorry for changing them). Looking at the position on the map it seemed that the carriers just came up from the security of English waters, so I figured they probably had time to have optimized their loadouts more for the task at hand, while standing down for rest in a less intense threat environment.


The Plan

I have two separate CVBGs at the moment, and I'm reasonably confident they can handle airborne missile threats, but it's ASW which has me concerned. Therefore the two groups will sail together to tighten formation and merge behind a concentrated ASW screen, and head due East for the coast. The two long-range cruisers will dash ahead to act as a submarine lure and SAM trap in the event of strikes from the Bodo direction. Initial strikes will be carried out against Bodo, and subsequently against the Evenes/Andoya/Bardufoss area. I would really like to take out Bardufoss, with its more advanced aircraft, but I suspect I can't reach it effectively. After heading east for half a day the carriers will turn north and head for their objective area as strikes continue. Although not stated in the briefing, I am aware of the possibility of bomber attack hooking around and possibly coming in from the NW, so I make sure to keep one of my AEW far to the north to keep an eye in that direction. My subs will quietly stick up their ESM masts until enough aircraft are on station to fill the role, and then move to the carrier objective area to make sure it's clear of enemy threats.


The Actual

The merge of the two groups proceeds according to plan, and ESM and AEW planes spread out to their stations. Tankers lift off from England and head north, to support the initial strike, and I hoped for some initial calm while they did so. However, the Soviets are soon pressing outwards significant numbers of aircraft from the northern bases, and some of them are moving at high speed, presumably to tackle my surveillance aircraft. This prompts a reasonably strong response from me, which arrives to find most of the enemy aircraft retiring NW again. Puzzled, we engage in some skirmishing, but there is no decisive result yet, so the aircraft are sent down to Bodo instead. There the Phoenix range advantage is essential for taking down the more advanced enemy fighters, and reaching deep into the enemy SAM envelope to take down the Mainstays. In a few hours there are no further aircraft rising up from Bodo in response to my provocations.

My first strike at Bodo is heavy, taking virtually everything which can fly, leaving only a small air guard for the carriers. Nothing comes up from Bodo to challenge the strike, which proceeds according to plan. TLAMs (abut a quarter of my stock) arrive to target the runways, etc., sneaking up overland through valleys from the south, and then flying down the fjord to attack Bodo from the east. The army gets a few on the way in, and the remainder are mostly shot down by the Bodo defences (essentially acting like TALDs), but while they are being shot at the HARMs manage to take down many of the SAMs, and then I can try to use Mavericks and Skippers to eliminate damaged or reloading air-defence systems. This works reasonably well, although I learn that A-6s just don't have the agility for SAM dodging, and I loose several of them when they get too close to the northern SA-12. Nonetheless I do manage to shut down the local air defences, and then the F-18s with heavy LGBs move in to close the runways.

As the strike retired the fighters, which had been keeping a vigilant eye for any interference from Bardufoss' direction, were sent north with the tankers, and managed to do good work on the Mig-23 fleet up as far north as Andoya and Tromso. A few planes even managed to kill some of the jammers operating out of Banak before retiring in good order. During the reloading period I made several attempts to provoke a response from fighters in Bardufoss, expecting more Mig-31s to intercept me, but nothing happened. With the fighter situation reasonably benign the TARPs birds and ESM tried to localise the SAMs in the Evenes area, getting a good idea of a few of them by sneaking at low level through the fjords and island channels. The Boston contributed by using its TLAMs to 'proof' flight routes, while ESM listened for the radars of any SAMs trying to shoot them down. Eventually the last four of its TLAMs were sent by a torturous route through the islands, and then hooking around a mountain to strike the Archangel HQ from the east before SAMs could respond.

The next strike came shortly after dusk, and concentrated on Andoya. I had wanted to get Evenes/Bardufoss more, but they were too densely guarded, and the Andoya SAMs limited my options in attacking them. Andoya itself was more isolated, so I elected to take it first. The attack pattern was similar to that at Bodo (being more careful to keep A-6s at a safe distance, and to use jammers for better effect), and the airfield was destroyed.

Once again, there had been no significant enemy fighter presence, so my fighters were sent up the coast en-masse. The remaining Tromso fighters were dealt with and the main force approached Banak and dealt with the Mig-23/25/31s there. (They may be older, but those very long-range IR AAMs on the Mig-25s can be a real problem. You can't rely on turning away the enemy fighter or killing it to save you from its missiles once they're launched.) As that was coming to a successful conclusion, and congratulations were being radioed around, a huge wave of Mach 2+ contacts was seen coming in from the Russian bases further east. Up to this point I'd been trying to husband my Phoenixes, but in this case it was shoot-shoot-shoot, to try and deal with these high-value high-speed targets. There was no attempt to wait and use Sparrows here! My wave met their wave, and in this case long range and active AAMs was everything. I could continuously fall back under the pressure, and was able to stay clear of almost all their shots while taking a heavy toll in return. A very profitable engagement! (While all this was going on a few more Mig-23s popped up out of Tromso, which I had mistakenly thought was empty now, right in the middle of the stream of aircraft going to and from the main engagement. Fortunately some F-18s were able to pounce on them with AMRAAMs before they could do any damage.)

As the Andoya raid retired there were still some A-6s with Maverick left, and they were put to risky use. The location of the Evenes SA-12 had been identified by spotting SAM launches from it, and it turns out there is a deep fjord leading almost right to it. Almost within its minimum range, in fact. The A-6s went scooting along the fjord at extreme low altitude, before turning, pulling up the mountain and flashing into view. Mavericks away, then a sudden hard turn (as hard as an A-6 can) and a desperate dive down into the valley again because the SA-10 on the next mountain over had just lit up! The SAMs went roaring overhead while the damaged SA-12s burned cheerfully. It took a couple of Maverick strikes to finish the battery off, but the loss of that SA-12 was well worth it, because by this time I was starting to run low on HARMs.

The next strike, in the hours before dawn, tackled Evenes. With fewer HARMs available I was relying more on Mavericks and SLAMs for SAM suppression (Skippers having proven too difficult to use), along with intense terrain masking in the complicated terrain of the area. The last of the HARMs were able to deal with the SA-10 and one of the SA-11s, while SLAMs eventually got the other one, and Mavericks got the local Ganef. However, when the TLAMs arrived (flying down the fjord from the north) the SA-15s didn't expend all their missiles on them, which meant that my Maverick carrying A-6s, which were expecting defenceless vehicles with empty missile tubes, instead met determined and disciplined missile fire. Two more losses there... An F-18 might have terrain masked in time, but not an A-6. Still, in the end the missile systems and the base were destroyed.

As a footnote, after the heavy Phoenix fight up north, there weren't enough missiles to arm all my F-14s, so half the F-14Ds were armed with 2,000 lb bombs. In the light of dawn they went to Bodo again, and tried their hand at iron bombing now that there were no air defences there. They were able to damage parking spaces, but simply didn't have the accuracy to do anything meaningful to harder targets.


Aftermath

At the end of our assigned time the carrier group was safely inside its area of operations, accompanied by the two submarines. Thankfully, no enemy submarines had been found in the area.

Bodo, Evenes, and Andoya all had their runways and taxiways cratered, and all control towers and hangars destroyed. Some other infrastructure damage was also done (some HAS destroyed at Andoya, some revetments and parking spaces in other locations, some minor damage to other hardened targets). All SAMs in the immediate vicinity of those bases were destroyed, but Army SAMs and airbase SAMs further north were essentially intact.

My munitions inventory is depleted in some important respects. I have 1/3 of my TLAMS left, but I am completely out of HARMs on both carriers, and am down to ~ 12 loads of SLAMs and ~ 6 loads of Mavericks, and 6 of Skippers. I might be able to take down one more airbase if the TLAMs got through (most likely Tromso, which only has one runway), but I would not be able to take out the air defences as well, and would probably lose multiple aircraft if I tried.

The fighter situation is strongly in my favour. Although the Vinson only has 45 Phoenix left (mostly on fighters already) the Nimitz has 83, and there are plenty of AMRAAMs and Sparrows to go around. The enemy has suffered severe casualties and will essentially have to fly in fresh squadrons to replace their losses. My fighter losses were quite minor, and although my A-6s took more of a beating than I would like, my F-18s are essentially unharmed.


Miscellaneous bits

Since revetments cannot be destroyed you would need a revetment damaged trigger, similar to runways, if you want to score points for them.

'AAW Ctr' mission does not have the 1/3 box checked. (This is possibly why I saw that big fighter surge at the start. Not necessarily a bad thing, actually, but probably not what you had intended.)

'AAW North' has a triangular prosecution area which does not include probable NATO areas of operation in the SW. (Missing an RP?)

'Jammer North' is somewhat exposed up off the north coast. Unless he's a lure (for that lurking swarm of Mig-31s in Banak?) he might be safer and just as effective further south inside the SAM umbrella?

I'm not sure if there's any way for the Russians to detect the American carrier. The only realistic possibility would be the Sierra, but it's two convergence zones out, and only has a possibility to detect the very trailing edge of the two carrier groups. At the preset courses and speeds the NATO warships will soon be out of detection range. The Sierra's sonar is not good enough to detect them in the 2nd CZ, even if the carriers are at flank speed, so in practice they will be out of reach in a matter of minutes. However, it could detect and classify them in the first CZ. Maybe move the Sierra closer up behind, or put it in front, to allow a chance at detection? (The Oscar attack probably won't get through, since the Tico's are that powerful, but it's a perilously close thing the couple of times I tried it.)

So another fine scenario to add to the list. I particularly enjoyed the attempts to dodge around in the fjords. Thanks for taking the time to write it up.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 22
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/31/2017 12:49:35 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Thanks Andrew, appreciate the report

The next one in this series should be a fun one, but I need to go back and clean up some of the Iceland wrap up scenarios first.

Will touch this one up and post it to the community thread shortly.

B


(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 23
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/31/2017 9:02:58 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
One thing I meant to ask was whether you track TLAM inventories and stockpiles within the entire Fury series? (Or PGMs like HARM and AAMs like Phoenix.)

I know I've come to rely on TLAMs heavily for engaging well-defended sites, and without them I would be quite restricted in what I can do to challenge the higher tiers of the Pact air defence system. Have I been using more TLAMs than are realistically available over the long term?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 24
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/31/2017 9:29:53 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Also forgot two items:

The 'Nimitz Med ASW' and 'Vinson Med ASW' missions both have the 1/3 rule unchecked.

The 'NATO AWACS' mission has the radars off.

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 25
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 7/31/2017 10:41:10 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Andrew

Although I probably should be counting - I'm not. There were ~2500 in the early 90s and over 4000 by 1996.

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm

On my rough calculations there would probably be about 2000 loaded in the fleet at any one time, that may be underestimating. Anyway I wished the problem away by saying that with increased tension, production would increase to a requirement of 2 TLAMs for every reasonable space or 1 reload. FAS states that there were 6266 launchers but that is counting every VLS cell which is not realistic.

I also reasoned that within 60 days, production facilities would be producing at maximum capacity.

The only real control I place on them is that they can only be reloaded in a substantial port and if possible have the assistance of either a AE or an established ammo facility (like Rota) and that it would take at least 24 hrs - which is probably really fast.

ARMS and PGMs are generally limited to the ratios that the CVNs carried with similar limitations.

Probably a bit of a cop out but when I first started setting things up it seemed reasonable.

I had been thinking of limiting them in later scenarios but had not gotten that far yet.

Will fix those other points.

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 26
RE: New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil - 8/7/2017 3:59:17 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4813
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK

Final version uploaded here, the OP and the community thread.

Thanks for everyone's help.

B

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for testing NF 13.5 Anvil Page: [1]
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

0.195