New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
User avatar
Jorm
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 5:40 am
Location: Melbourne

New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Jorm »

This simple little scenario is based roughly on what was one of my favourite, quick little harpoon scenarios.

Any feedback most welcome.
any one enjoy it enough and wants to make Ecuador playable then that would be good.

have fun
Paul
Attachments
TheNavalBorderWar.zip
(105.96 KiB) Downloaded 44 times
User avatar
Sensei.Tokugawa
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
Location: Wieluñ, Poland

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Sensei.Tokugawa »

I'll play it within a couple of days, I also liked that scenario in Harpoon even though I had not managed to play that before, but I have been keeping that on my radar, so to speak.
"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"

...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"

User avatar
Sensei.Tokugawa
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
Location: Wieluñ, Poland

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Sensei.Tokugawa »

The operation was completed successfuly on Oct 2nd 1992 with 15hrs 36 mins spare.

Lessons learned (some long time ago, but apparently unlearnt anew since then):

1.Never engage higher performance fighters unless on laast ditch defence.

2. Geometry of the battlefield organization is of paramout importance.

3. Never underestimate the necessity of acquiring an up to date reconnaissance data with a clear LOS from a trutworthy platform or overestimate the one obtained through instrument observation.

The losses mainly resulted form refusal to adhere to those above and a few other basic rules, but at the same time it is to be taken into consideration that I use an operational and mission oriented approach with little to no interference with the missions of the forces already deployed in the AO - same was the case with Firey Cross 2016 scenario I reported a few days ago. The Peruvian destroyer was hit by a Gabriel anti-ship missile just minutes before the missile boats were engaged by Dragonflies; despite alternated RoE and edited WRA values - within the mission parameters as per orders given in the mission editor I mean - the full loads of bombs were released in sticks and the aircraft went for egress route immediately whereas I wanted them to make an ad-hoc BDA and if necessary make another bomb run. The vessel was hit, leaks sealed, but it was burning for several hours until the fires were out of control and it sunk shortly afterwards.
Apparently Canberras with agility 1 were a better platform to bomb the enemy airbase at Taura as they released their bomb loads at some 12 k feet and returned without a single loss whereas Dragonflies and Sukhois accounted for same minor hits with friendly aircraft downed, because they were attacking with much lower mission profile from the IP. Anyway, most of the enemy aircraft were destroyed in the air by AAW patrols, intercept missions and pickets so I was against striking the airbase for the fear of SAMs or AAA, but decided to follow orders already issued. Three separate bombing missions didn't change much apart from some Blowpipes and Bofors guns destroyed.

The enemy vessel carrying vital cargo was sunk with two Exocet salvo from a chopper off Aguire SAG - minus the sunken destroyer - with an angle-off mission allowed it was heading right for the fregate screen despite a precise information about the enemy SAG position, course, bearing and speed, finally organization. I had to change the course manually which means there something needs to be done with the way mission planner works or am I still missing something after over three years with the game. Some minor to medium issues with maritime recon mission profiles like planes not keeping the assigned distance from the platforms already recognized and lethal if approached. Unless I misunderstood the mission editor nuances for an umpteenth time.

Generally speaking, a great scenario with low to medium to high tension throughout the entire operation. The result was average throughout the entire mission and no points awarded after the main strike, just the message that the scenario was won. I have always thought that not only platforms damaged and lost, but also munitions expended should count towards the final result. Completed with 1.12 build 936.18 - where do I get build 936.21?

SIDE: Ecuador
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
10x Mirage F.1JA
8x Kfir C.2
10x A-37B Dragonfly [Super Tweet]
3x LM 25 Manta
2x P 203 Fremantle [PCF-420]
4x Blowpipe MANPADS
2x 40mm/70 m/48 Single Bofors
1x A/C Hangar (4x Small Aircraft)
3x LM 21 Quito [FPB-45]
1x Commercial Supply Vessel [6,000t DWT]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
11x 30mm DEFA 553 x 2 Burst [50 rnds]
7x Gabriel II
13x 30mm/75 Twin Oerlikon HE Burst [20 rnds]
2x R.550 Magic 1
42x 40mm/70 Single Bofors Burst [4 rnds]
48x 40mm/70 m/48 Single Bofors Burst [4 rnds]
12x Aspide
2x 40mm/70 Twin Breda Compact Burst [32 rnds]
4x Blowpipe
12x 76mm/62 Compact HE Burst [4 rnds]
2x Sea Cat Mod 1



SIDE: Peru
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x Mirage 5P
2x A-37B Dragonfly [Super Tweet]
1x Su-22M Fitter F
1x Mirage 2000P
1x DM 73 Palacios [Daring Class]
1x F.27-200MAR Maritime


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
10x R.550 Magic 2 Mk1
16x R.550 Magic 1
9x 30mm DEFA 552 x 2 Burst [50 rnds]
33x 30mm DEFA 554 x 2 Burst [50 rnds]
5x SA-3b Goa [5V27, V-601P]
8x Aspide
56x Mk82 500lb LDGP
34x 114mm/45 Mk5 Twin HE Burst [2 rnds]
23x 40mm/70 Twin Breda Compact Burst [32 rnds]
12x 57mm/60 m/50D Twin Bofors HE Burst [2 rnds]
1x MM.38 Exocet Blk I
20x FAB-250M-54 GPB
58x AN/SSQ-41A Jezebel LOFAR
24x AN/SSQ-47 Julie Active Range-Only
24x Mk13 1000lb GPB
5x Otomat Mk2 Mod I
2x AM.39 Exocet Blk I



SIDE: Neutral
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------



SIDE: Colombia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------



"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"

...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"

User avatar
mikkey
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by mikkey »

ORIGINAL: burroughs
... Completed with 1.12 build 936.18 - where do I get build 936.21?
burroughs, this is currently latest B936.21 update: Command LIVE: Pole Positions - Version 1.12.6
User avatar
Jorm
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 5:40 am
Location: Melbourne

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Jorm »

Hey Burroughs

thanks for the excellent feedback,
i normally dont set up 'scoring' so its working as intended.
yes i had the same issue with the Su-22's being pretty vulnerable as well.

cheers

User avatar
Sensei.Tokugawa
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
Location: Wieluñ, Poland

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Sensei.Tokugawa »

I see. Indeed I came to the conclusion that there wasn't detailed evaluation implemented and I didn't need that, but that often prompts me to assume that the men and the equipment are expendable. Not very likely in second to third world states albeit not only Reaganomics made the life there cheap apparently.

Anyway, a great port, I had a look at the original Harpoon scenario yesterday and I think yours was ... better? I mean to me it stroke a perfect balance with everything involved - surface, subsurface and aerial platforms - and everything manageable especially if one still needs to micromanage despite assigning missions just to get the things done without insane stunts.

Aw, by the battlefield I meant battlespace, of course.
"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"

...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"

User avatar
Jorm
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 5:40 am
Location: Melbourne

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Jorm »

ORIGINAL: burroughs

I see. Indeed I came to the conclusion that there wasn't detailed evaluation implemented and I didn't need that, but that often prompts me to assume that the men and the equipment are expendable. Not very likely in second to third world states albeit not only Reaganomics made the life there cheap apparently.

ah, well they are your little digital warriors to command and assign value to.

Did you find the second merchant ?

cheers
User avatar
Sensei.Tokugawa
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
Location: Wieluñ, Poland

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Sensei.Tokugawa »

Don't know for sure, had multiple contacts up north going in various directions, but I didn't prosecute them any further as there was a clear and confirmed indication as to where to turn for the big prize. Angamos was guarding the entry into the AO in there, but I didn't press them into investigating more than it was necessary.
"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"

...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"

User avatar
Sensei.Tokugawa
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
Location: Wieluñ, Poland

RE: New Scenario for test Naval Border War Ecuador v Peru 1992

Post by Sensei.Tokugawa »

By the way, thanks a lot mikkey - somehow I never know where to find them any more, do I need a NILO clearance or something to access them? I forgot I might have checked the members' area though.
"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"

...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"

Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”