Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side

 
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 >> After Action Report >> Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/30/2018 9:45:50 AM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
Arctic Tsunami 2019, Version 4.1, NATO side

This is a bit longer AAR, because I took notes along the way.
Times are given in “Time to go” scale, starting from 3 days, counting backward, and ending with Time To Go of 0 at the end of the scenario.

Initial setup.

Delete all preconfigured missions and their reference points for a blank slate
Move SAMs closer to their respective airbases. Everything further out than Bardufoss is to be sacrificed (does not look like I have enough anti-air capability at the initial clash to protect that stuff). Also move RAT-31SL radar near Bardufoss following SAMs to keep it under SAM protection.
Send Storm MTB group along the coast in general south-west direction at full speed.

Loadout changes

1. At Andoya, configure all Tornados to ALARM II, short range. With 6 hours reload they should be ready about when air-to-air situation becomes better.
2. On Queen Elizabeth, configure all F-35s to Standard CAP, internal only.
3. At RAF Lossiemouth, configure 3x Poseidons to SLAM-ER.

Global doctrine changes

Weapon control, air, Free
Ignore plotted course, Yes
Kinematic range for torpedoes, Manual only
Refuel/UNREP, Not allowed
Fuel state RTB, units leave flight
Weapon state RTB, aircraft do not RTB


Missions and opening movements,

AEW point 100 NM due west of Andoya, assign 3x E-3s, and adjust doctrine to allow refuel

Tanker track north-south 120 NM due west of Andoya, assign all available tankers and adjust mission doctrine to allow refuel, but not tankers refueling tankers. Tankers are intended to support F-35s from QE, AEW mission, and Poseidon strikes out of Lossiemouth.

CAP, above Bardufoss, adjust doctrine
Weapon state, pre-planned – Shotgun: All BVR weapons expended, allow opportunities with WVR, no guns
Weapon state RTB – aircraft leave flight and RTB

Additionally, launch two flights 4x F-35 each from Queen Elizabeth and move them towards Andoya

Long-range ASW patrols, three sectors with Orions.
Short-range ASW missions around Anzio and QE groups.
Forward deployment ferry mission, ferry all fighters from Bodo and Orland to Andoya.

Detach oiler from Anzio group because the oiler is too slow, send it towards Keflavik full speed. Send Anzio group flank speed towards Andoya.
Send QE group full speed towards Andoya
Submarines… there does not seem to be any work for them, so after firing TLAMs send them back in general direction towards Iceland.

TLAM/TACTOM

Mahan has 56 TACTOMs
Anzio group has 120x TACTOM + 8x TLAM
Submarines - San Juan and Newport News have 20x TACTOM each, Trenchant has 4x, Ambush has 16x.
This makes a total of 244 missiles (arriving piecemeal).
Fire everything at Olenegorsk and Severomorsk and any detected SAM sites. Not that I think it will have any effect, but mostly to force enemy to spend SAMs and AAMs. If missiles are fast enough (although I don’t believe they are), the strike group escorts may have to spend their AAMs against TACTOMs, leaving strike group more vulnerable. The fact that missiles are likely to arrive piecemeal is probably good.

This completes initial plan at time to go of 2 days 23 hours.

Events

Inbound Fencers and Foxhounds. CAP not fully up at the moment. However, TLAMs are starting to arrive, hopefully to suck up some escort AAMs allowing me a clear shot on bombers.
Nope, that did not work, escort aircraft ignoring TLAMs, TLAMs are going straight ahead to targets while my coastal radars are being butchered. Unfortunately no tankers inbound.

Since Russians got their rules of engagement messed up, see http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4513652
my F-35s now have a field day with Fencers.


Second strike coming in at 2d 22h to go, and this time Russian escorts are engaging TLAMs

At 2d21h to go, Backfires inbound, repelled successfully by CAP.

At 2d 19h to go, Blackjacks inbound, and they start firing subsonic cruise missiles before CAP gets to them.

Meanwhile, Poseidons arrived to Lossiemouth, reload all with SLAMERs.

Blackjacks got one of the radars, move AEW point and tanker track 70 NM east to compensate for the loss of coverage somewhat.

At 2d 19 hrs to go, SAMs at Bradufoss are engaging vampires. At the same time, Orion is chasing someone somewhere but I did not bother looking.

At 2d 18 hrs to go, ran out of AMRAAM-C-7s in Andoya, ferrying F-35s out now. Still no air superiority, most of the CAP is reloading. Russian SAG firing ASM (Shipwrecks) without good intel, so there are missiles flying all over, not hitting anything.

At 2d 17 hrs to go,

F-35s from QE are engaging Kuznetsov CAP.
At the same time, launching SEAD strike from Andoya, 9x Tornadoes 5x ALARM IIs each.
About at the same time, Nanuchkas firing their missiles (subsonic anti-ship I guess) with no target in range that I know of. Must be firing on an ambiguous contact. Nakhimov is also firing a salvo of something at 30ft and 1450kts, also apparently with no target.
Tornadoes have difficulty approaching the Russian CVBG, SAMs firing at 80 NM and ALARM II range is 40 NM, but Russians run out of missiles pretty soon (sending 9 to 11 SAMs per salvo) and at 2d 16 hrs to go Tornadoes engage with ALARMs. Also rearm 2x F-16 with Penguins, just in case. Got some good hits with ALARMs, but not much and CVBG still firing long-range SAMs.

At 2d 16 hrs to go, order 9x F-16 from Andoya to reload with Penguin missiles to be ready for ASuW strike.

At 2d 15 hrs to go, Russian CVBG is getting too close for comfort, about 175NM NE of Andoya. On the bright side, they do not have any more aircraft. Tornadoes with ALARM will be ready in 5 hours, F-16 with Penguins same, Poseidons with SLAMERs in about 1:30. Plan is to launch tankers in about an hour, launch Poseidons when ready, have them on station and refueled by the time Tornadoes and F-16s are ready. Also moving Storm MTBs closer now.

At 2d 10 hrs to go, launching strike groups. At the same time, Russian SAG fires anti-ship missiles at Storm MTB group. CAP holds the ASMs at bay so far.

Let’s try two birds with two stones. Fire Penguins and more ALARMs at CVBG, save SLAMERs and NSMs for later, maybe that will work. Keep in mind ALARM speed is 1800 kts, and Penguin is 500 kts. So fire Penguins and while they are two thirds of the way to the target or when first SAMs fly, fire ALARMs. However, killing Ustinov, Petr Veliky, and Kuznetsov with a total of 18x Penguin does not look realistic. And…. Yes, while there were some hits on targets, no good effect overall. Firing NSMs (all of them) and SLAMERs (4x per target ship). Once NSMs are away, turn the Storm MTB group to retreat at flank speed.
Multiple hits, follow up with more SLAMERs, overall outlook good. Kuznetsov carrier is still afloat with light damage, and Marshal Ustinov with heavy damage, severe fire and severe flood. Strike complete by 2d 9 hours to go. I can probably finish Kuznetsov by Harpoons from Anzio SAG ships, and I expect Ustinov to sink on its own.
Ustinov sinks by 2d 7 hrs to go.

As Anzio SAG is now close enough to provide antiair cover for Andoya, rearm 18x F-35s on Queen Elizabeth with Paveway internal. Paveway is listed as INS/GPS, not requiring target illumination, so cloud cover will not be a problem.

At about 2d 4hrs to go, Anzio fires 8x Harpoon ICRs at Kuznetsov with zero hits. Disappointed by that I am. However, I have Penguins at the ready, 18 of them. Fired all 18 at once, and Kuznetsov is now heavily damaged but no fire and no flooding apparent.

At about 2d 2hr to go, Bradufoss runs out of AMRAAM-C-7, preparing to ferry F-35s somewhere away (to Evenes most likely). Meanwhile, ALARM-equipped Tornadoes taking off for Nakhimov’s SAG, and Anzio SAG is engaging what’s left of Kuznetsov with guns.

At about 2d 1hr to go, Anzio SAG fired about 1000 127mm shells at Kuznetsov with no visible effect and left for Andoya.

Tornadoes firing 45x ALARMs at Nakhimov SAG, multiple hits.

At 2d to go, HMS Kent of QE CVBG fires 8x Harpoon at Kuznetsov carrier, finally sinking it.

Let’s try dropping Paveways from F-35s at Nakhimov SAG, see if this can be done. Theoretically, there should not be much opposition against stealth aircraft after I used 45 ALARMs on them. In practice, they still have enough SAMs and CIWS between them to go after the bombs, not aircraft. Of 12 Paveways, not a single hit. Sent another wave of 9x F-35s with Paveways, which sank Admiral Ushakov. Conclusion is that Paveways are not very good against capital ships.

Meanwhile at 1d 22 hours to go, Evenes ran out of AMRAAM-C-5s, so the only base for F-35s which has AAMs is Queen Elizabeth.

At 1d 21hr to go, launching Poseidons with SLAMERs out of Lossiemouth. F-16 with Penguins and probably even Tornados with ALARMs should also be ready by the time Poseidons arrive, so this should be the end of Nakhimov.

At 1d 17 hrs to go, everything is done,

Score 9055 Triumph and I’d say it was fairly easy with Foxgloves deleted from the scenario.

Final death toll as follows:

SIDE: Russia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
6x Su-24M2 Fencer D
6x Su-24MR Fencer E
10x MiG-31BM Foxhound
8x MiG-27M Flogger J
2x PL-877M Kilo
13x Tu-22M-3M Backfire C
11x Tu-142MZ Bear F Mod 4
12x Il-38N May
20x SA-21a Growler TEL
6x SA-16 Gimlet [9K310 Igla-1] MANPADS
2x Vehicle (Cheese Board [96L6])
2x Vehicle (Grave Stone [92N2])
4x Tu-160 Blackjack
1x PLA-671RTMK Victor III [Shchuka]
12x Su-33 Flanker D
6x Ka-27PL Helix A
4x Su-25UTG Frogfoot B
20x MiG-29K Fulcrum D
2x Ka-27PS Helix D
9x Ka-27M Helix A
2x MRK Nanuchka III [Pr.1234.1 Ovod]
2x Ka-25Ts Hormone B
1x RKR Petr Velikiy [Pr.1144.2 Orlan, Ex-Yuri Androvo]
1x SSV Yury Ivanov [Pr.18280]
1x EM Sovremenny I [Pr.956A Sarych]
2x BPK Udaloy I [Pr.1155 Fregat]
1x RKR Marshal Ustinov [Pr.1164 Atlant]
2x Tu-142MR Bear J
1x TAKR Admiral Kuznetsov [Pr.1143.5]
1x PLA-945A Sierra II [Kondor]
1x EM Sovremenny I [Pr.956 Sarych]
1x SSV Vishnya [Pr.864 Meridian]
1x Commercial Container Vessel - Feedermax [3,000 TEU, 30,000t DWT]
1x RKR Admiral Nakhimov [Pr.1144.2M Orlan, Ex-Kalinin]
1x Commercial Tugboat
1x VTR Academician Pashin [Pr.23130]
1x Commercial Tanker - Large Range 2 [150,000t DWT]
1x Commercial Dry-Bulk Carrier - Capesize Size [150,000t DWT]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
98x RGB-16MK [Search, Passive Omni]
49x RGB-48 [Search, Passive Directional]
48x RGB-41 [Search, Passive Omni]
33x RGB-58 [Track, Active/Passive]
57x RGB-NM-1 [Passive Omni]
80x SS-N-26 Strobile [P-800 Onyx]
240x SA-21b Growler [40N6]
5x AS-14 Kedge [Kh-29L]
74x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
75x SA-21a Growler [48N6DM]
18x AA-9 Amos [R-33S, SARH]
15x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
2x 800 liter Drop Tank
4x AA-11 Archer [R-73]
14x Generic Acoustic Decoy
16x SS-N-12 Sandbox Mod 2 [P-1000]
22x AA-10 Alamo A [R-27R, MR SARH]
10x AA-10 Alamo C [R-27RE, LR SARH]
127x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
4x AS-4 Kitchen D [Kh-32]
62x AS-15 Kent C [Kh-555]
192x SA-N-20b Gargoyle [48N6M]
32x SS-N-19 Shipwreck [P-700 Granit]
2x SS-N-22M Sunburn [P-270 Moskit]
7x SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit]
64x SA-N-6a Grumble [5R55RM]
52x SA-N-11b Grisom [9M311K-1]
36x SA-N-4b Gecko [9M33M3]
184x SA-N-9 Gauntlet [9M330-2 Kinzhal]
105x SA-N-11a Grisom [9M311K]
84x AK-100 100mm/70 Frag
98x AK-630M 30mm/65 Gatling Burst [400 rnds]
34x 30mm Twin Gatling Gsh-6-30KD [375 rnds]
4x SA-N-4a Gecko [9M33]
84x SA-N-7 Gadfly [9M38]
2x PK-16 Flare [TST-60U]
68x AK-130 130mm/54 Twin Frag Burst [2 rnds]
74x 30mm Twin Gatling Gsh-6-30K Burst [375 rnds]
125x PK-10 Flare [SO-50]



SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Radar (RAT-31SL/N)
4x F-16BM Falcon MLU <-- to ship-based SAMs
2x F-16AM Falcon MLU <-- to ship-based SAMs
1x Radar (AN/FPS-110)
1x Radar (AN/FPS-6A HF)
1x Radar (Coastal ACSR)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
465x AN/SSQ-62E DICASS
386x AN/SSQ-77B VLAD
466x AN/SSQ-53F DIFAR
34x Naval Strike Missile (NSM)
176x RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
24x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM <-- I wonder why it has two different lines
36x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM <-- for what is apparently the same missile
8x RGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM-C <-- anyway these were mostly used as decoys for SAMs
363x SSQ-926 ALFEA
204x SSQ-963D CAMBS VI
159x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM P3I.3
163x AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM P3I.2
257x AIM-120B AMRAAM
23x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
664x SSQ-955 HIDAR DIFAR
16x AIM-2000A IRIS-T
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
2x Mk48 Mod 7 ADCAP CBASS
8x Stingray Mod 0
12x MIM-120B NASAMS [AMRAAM]
3x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
164x ALARM Blk 2 <-- short range but still useful
1x AN/ALE-70 FOTD
54x RB 12 Penguin Mk3 <-- weak punch but still useful
88x AGM-84K SLAMER-ATA <-- good stuff
11x RIM-174A ERAM SM-6MR Blk I
1x Mk54 LHT Mod 0
407x 127mm/62 Mk187 HE-MFF [Mk64 HiCap Body, Mk419 Fuse]
108x 127mm/62 Mk186 HE-MOFN [Mk64 HiCap Body, Mk437 Fuse]
220x 127mm/54 HE-CVT [HiFrag]
17x AIM-132A ASRAAM
1x 27mm Mauser BK-27 Burst [30 rnds]
16x RGM-84G Harpoon ICR
7x AGM-84G Harpoon ICR
8x RGM-84D Harpoon IC
36x Paveway IV [Mk82] <-- not very effective against ships


SIDE: Biologics
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x False Contact (Large) < - I did it

SIDE: Civilian
===========================================================
LOSSES (Russians did it):
-------------------------------
1x Commercial Trawler [800t DWT]
1x Commercial Fishing Boat [23m]
1x Civilian Small boat [7m]






Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/30/2018 1:42:00 PM   
ultradave


Posts: 1221
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline
Just LOOK at all those missiles !!

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 2
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/30/2018 5:04:12 PM   
Schr75


Posts: 609
Joined: 7/18/2014
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Hi AlexGGGG

Great AAR.
I think the reason your Paveways performed so badly is that although they are INS/GPS capable, and therefore can be used in cloudy conditions, they need the laser to hit a moving target.
INS/GPS is not of much use if the target moves This is typically only used if the target is obscured or the laser losses the target.

Sřren

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 3
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/30/2018 10:58:32 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1188
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Thanks for your help and great AAR. Interested to see how you do as the Russian player!

I'm surprised one of the teleported Russian subs didn't show up.

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 7/30/2018 11:00:34 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 4
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/30/2018 11:24:34 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1188
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Going to have to think of what I can replace the Foxgloves with...

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 5
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 7/31/2018 1:47:25 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 4235
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Haven't been following the discussion but some MiG-31BMs might work as long as you keep them out of close combat. They carry both the AA-12 and AA-13, they actually exist and make great missile trucks.

B

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 6
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 8/1/2018 3:15:34 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1188
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Gunner, I will add the MiG31s and also thinking about removing the ATA Slammer cruise missiles, The HMS Prince of Wales F-35B Squadron (2nd F-35B squadron on the Queen Elizabeth) and the RAF Tornado Squadron to balance this scenario out a bit. I'd like to see how AlexGGGG does with the Russians first.

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 8/2/2018 2:49:53 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
You will have to wait a couple of days more for it. Aside from real-life events intruding, Russian side seems unexpectedly difficult. Amos missiles from MIG-31s cannot lock on what I think is F-16 (NOT F-35) at ranges longer than about 40 NM (no directors, insufficient reflection). So far, I'm trying to figure out a strategy for Russian side and the worst problem at the moment is appaling sensor performance. A-50 are no good, providing bearing but not range, so I will probably end up having three if them airborne for triangulation just to get me some bogey dope.

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 8
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 8/6/2018 2:12:27 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 329
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline
quote:

Going to have to think of what I can replace the Foxgloves with...


Well, If that change was prompted by my previous commentary, I'm afraid you are gonna hate me for being a nitpicker but: MiG-27 were retired of service with the RuAF in the early nineties; along with the fighter-variant floggers. So if this is not an AU those must also go.

I'll see myself out, please put down the torches.

Ancalagon

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 9
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 10/5/2018 8:03:46 PM   
magi

 

Posts: 1368
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
Hahahaha.............

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 10
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 10/7/2018 11:52:22 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1188
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Just saw this. Oooooops sometimes its hard to keep up with all the changes especially as an old fart!

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 11
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 10/8/2018 10:29:35 AM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 329
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline
I thought that you decided keep it as is. I you're going to tinker with it once you're not in the crosshairs of some hurricane, Mig-29SMTs are the more direct replacement for Mig-27s since they mostly carry tactical strike loadouts.

For the Foxgloves you can direct substitute them with PAK-FAs (Im not calling them Frazors. Who puts such an ugly name to an elegant plane like the Su-57?) in the stealth VLRAAM toting uber fighter role; but since as of the scenario date there will exist perhaps four production aircrafts of dubious capabilities that's not much of an improvement.

A more elegant solution would be putting a few of them (four to six) as a silver bullet for the player (for the IA putting them on an AWACS intercept mission is always a nasty surprise for a NATO plater). And back them with a bunch of R-37 armed Foxhounds.
R-37 only loadout works the best because with it and the "RBT when stand-off weapons have been depleted" SHOTGUN state, the IA executes the hit-and-run tactics that should be ALWAYS executed with a Foxhound (it's an interceptor not an air superiority fighter).

If so much R-37 rubs you wrong (official 2016 IOC notwithstanding, it's still a paper missile and in 2019 that will not change much if at all).
You can employ R-33 armed Foxhounds, if you set their WRA to "all missiles againt this target" and "fire at maximum range" against fighters. Individual pK will be abysmal but employed four in a row, they can do the trick (34.4% of a salvo hit for a 10% per-missile hit probability) and the Foxhounds will still be able to escape unscathed for the most part.

Hope this wall of text helps you somewhat, and good luck with the hurricane season.

Ancalagon

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 12
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 10/28/2018 11:47:16 PM   
Cpt Black

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 10/17/2018
Status: offline
AHHHH! Found it. Disregard my comment below, I found the more up to date version of the scenario. Will restart with that as trying to edit the old scenario to fit the new database was getting a bit tedious. The version I had was part of the community pack downloaded recently so I assumed it was up to date.





I started this scenario and ran into a real head-scratcher. I went to check the load-out and re-arm the F-35 Fighters on the QE. The QE appears to have exactly zero C5 AMRAAMs aboard. I checked the magazine and found Meteors.

Only this version of the F-35 can't use them. Then it gets really strange. One squadron of jets is loaded with Meteors! These are the new, advanced ones then right? Nope, even though they are loaded with an external loadout of 6 Meteor and 2 ASRAAM they can't actually carry that loadout. They can only be reloaded with C5 Amraams (which don't exist).

Perhaps the database was updated since the scenario was published? Maybe the QE magazine and fighter loadout was done then the DB changed disallowing that loadout?

Or perhaps some clever armorers on the QE were given medals for shoehorning those Meteors aboard the fighters while some poor Royal Navy quartermaster was strung up by the thumbs for loading the wrong missiles aboard!

< Message edited by Cpt Black -- 10/29/2018 2:33:26 PM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 13
RE: Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side - 11/28/2018 2:49:51 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1188
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

I thought that you decided keep it as is. I you're going to tinker with it once you're not in the crosshairs of some hurricane, Mig-29SMTs are the more direct replacement for Mig-27s since they mostly carry tactical strike loadouts.

For the Foxgloves you can direct substitute them with PAK-FAs (Im not calling them Frazors. Who puts such an ugly name to an elegant plane like the Su-57?) in the stealth VLRAAM toting uber fighter role; but since as of the scenario date there will exist perhaps four production aircrafts of dubious capabilities that's not much of an improvement.

A more elegant solution would be putting a few of them (four to six) as a silver bullet for the player (for the IA putting them on an AWACS intercept mission is always a nasty surprise for a NATO plater). And back them with a bunch of R-37 armed Foxhounds.
R-37 only loadout works the best because with it and the "RBT when stand-off weapons have been depleted" SHOTGUN state, the IA executes the hit-and-run tactics that should be ALWAYS executed with a Foxhound (it's an interceptor not an air superiority fighter).

If so much R-37 rubs you wrong (official 2016 IOC notwithstanding, it's still a paper missile and in 2019 that will not change much if at all).
You can employ R-33 armed Foxhounds, if you set their WRA to "all missiles againt this target" and "fire at maximum range" against fighters. Individual pK will be abysmal but employed four in a row, they can do the trick (34.4% of a salvo hit for a 10% per-missile hit probability) and the Foxhounds will still be able to escape unscathed for the most part.

Hope this wall of text helps you somewhat, and good luck with the hurricane season.


Most of the changes you made have been implemented.

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to Cpt Black)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> After Action Report >> Arctic Tsunami, version 4.1 NATO side 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

0.125