|
Do we have to choose one of the infantry packages or can we pick multiple? Getting both the Americans and the Serbians may give us some flexibility, and it's not like they're much more expensive compared to the plane investments. Also, in what way did the Americans flunk out of Basic?
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
I am voting for Bacarruda's Secondary Mission Plan B: "Round the World" I am voting to Buy American, and Hire American Also, holy poo poo a Phoenix Command LP. Not only is that insane, it's also the groggiest possible cross-over with CMANO.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 09:31
|
|
|
Psawhn posted:Keep in mind that the planes hauling the RB 15Fs can also carry 2 Meteors each, so they make great CAP cover once they've launched their AShMs. At that point, your plan will completely obsolete my plan Bravo-Point-Five. Which is good, because it means less voting confusion. The one dilemma with using the anti-shipping birds as our primary CAP is the fact that they fly a high-low-high attack profile. That means they're going to be down at sea level during the most critical phase of the mission. If we get bounced by Burmese fighters, they may not be able to get into position to take a shot. They also have very little fuel reserves and are pretty sluggish with the RB 15s attached, so they don't have the gas or the maneuvering ability to really be effective fighters. It's nice that we're able to bring Meteors along, but I don't think we should count on the anti-shipping Gripens carrying them as our primary anti-fighter force. Better to use a) a dedicated escort force flying at high altitude or b) the bombers with Paveways at medium altitude. Psawhn posted:Also, I'd try to get the Gripens back to our own airbase if we can. If we can manage to get them turned around in time, they can help blow up more ground forces and give us even more bonus CAS money. The primary flightcrews are going to be beat to hell after flying a mission that long. But if the Gripens aren't broken and we can get rested-up secondary flightcrews, we can try that. I'll also add this idea to my plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
I am not so sure about that idea, we would probably be better served with just having four Gripens up north going again and again, they'd get at least three sorties in before the naval strike birds come home.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
 Plan B: "Round the World" has been updated! https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3815107&pagenumber=19&perpage=40#post471068239 I've given the High CAP birds GBU-12s, moved up the Saab 100 AEW&C bird's deployment schedule and clarified how we will ID and attack the Chinese ships.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 10:22
|
|
|
American Boots we need these guys for recon, not bulk murder. I also vote for plan Maximum CAS Money we don't have any real allegiances here. Let's make our money and get out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3815107&pagenumber=21&perpage=40#post471085791 I've also updated my suggested plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
The main problem with the AShM's (beyond the price tag) is that their main advantage - range - is negated by having to get within 30 nmi or whatever to ID the ships. If we have to get that close no matter what, there's no point in worrying about standoff capability against a frigate/MANPADS on the deck because we won't know what to shoot until in "whoops you're dead" range anyways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
Basically I'm with Plan Bac. It's not *exactly* what I'd do but close enough and I don't want to split the vote, becsuse an alternative is the 0 freighters option and I'm well against that. For everyone else, please consider: Q: Should we have the AEW in the south? A: hell loving yes. Who identified the supply dump last run? Was it the AEW? BZZT! No, it was the Gripens. We're in the mountains, things hiding in valleys need us to get close. It's basic trigonometry. Q: Should we use anti-ship missiles? Absolutely. Not because paveways are weak, but because once we have AEW down there we can benefit from our range advantage, especially regarding freighter escorts. If anyone is thinking of radar as fuzzy green blips on a CRT monitor, we're way beyond that these days. We will easily ID a warship vs a container vessel. Personally I'd go 5 anti-ship and Meteor planes, with 1 of those AntiShip plane giving top cover and to act as a backup if we get a dud or a surprise extra escort I think 3 Grips would be enough to pacify the North, I'd maube put one on anti-radar in case they have radar-assisted AAA which will gently caress us up bigtime But don't misunderstand how quick Gripens should reload. It's something like 5 conscripts, a Lt, and a trucker rest stop gets it rearmed in 25mins. There are youtube videos of just this. So we shouldn't launch the SK-60s until everything is clear, and we have pretty much guaranteed it, even if it takes a couple of runs with a 3-ship strike group. Then we can just run them into the ground til we run out of daylight. WARNING I don't know what the range of our Burmese friends is, but once we shoot at ships, someone should do the sums on if they can interfere up north. Of course, we should do the 'Around The World' flight path to avoid angering them sooner thsn necessary. E: for some reason I thought Mavericks were anti-radar, not TV-guided. In any case we should load up with both versions of Mjolnir at some point because those look like real fucker-uppers simplefish fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
These plans are looking great and the discussion is also pretty awesome. If we keep getting robust discussion I'll let it roll, but once the plans are settled I'll go into tally mode and see how it looks. If we have a close vote count then I'll let the top two duke it out battle-bots style for a sudden death vote round. Without your involvement all of this wouldn't be possible. Thank you everyone! Here is Bacarudda's awesome collation of all of our intel and Plans so far. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3815107&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=21#post471087687 Yooper fucked around with this message at 12:57 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Another thing about the ASMs: they are heavy and expensive. Even if we can use them and sink two ships with two missiles, it's $3 million off our total income of $25 million.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
Yooper posted:These plans are looking great and the discussion is also pretty awesome. If we keep getting robust discussion I'll let it roll, but once the plans are settled I'll go into tally mode and see how it looks. If we have a close vote count then I'll let the top two duke it out battle-bots style for a sudden death vote round. My plan is locked in. Thanks to everyone for the suggestions and ideas. I've tried to integrate your ideas as best as possible. e: I do have on minor request for you and Zaodai, I'd like to ride in the tanker for this mission to see the sights. Also, if goons are interested, I think we should let people act as co-pilots on the Saab 105s -- that will get more people into the air sooner. nothing to seehere posted:Another thing about the ASMs: they are heavy and expensive. Even if we can use them and sink two ships with two missiles, it's $3 million off our total income of $25 million. One, our Gripens cost about $25-30 million a piece. Our new Phantoms and Frogfoots are each $8.5 million. If even one of them eats a SAM and dies, we lose huge amounts of money. If we spend $7-8 million (which is about what this mission will cost) to make sure that never happens, then we come out ahead in the long-run. Two, killing off their SAMs makes it safer for us to use the Saab 105s and the Su-25s more often. That gives us a lower-cost option to complete missions. And it lets us put up more birds for "kill more people, make more money" missions like the one we're doing right now. Three, even if we lose money on this strike, we should think of this mission as an investment in our reputation. A dramatic long-range strike will prove to the Indians that we can get the job done. They'll throw bigger and better missions our way and we'll get richer as time goes on. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
Using paveways means massive extra fuel burn, means getting in closer, and means more threat to our tanker etc. Worth the money imo. We went Swedish to get the job done right, not get it maybe done cheap
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
I hosed up the budget in our previous update. As we didn't have to buy ammo we have a lot more than we thought. So, after our Phantom-Frog purchase, we have :  Seeing as the BAE Hawk's were a good deal I added them in as well to satisfy the two largest voting blocs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
Russian mercs best mercs. Besides, we want people who can interrogate other russian mercs when we inevitably encounter some.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:09
|
|
|
I know that we can tell a container ship from a warship, but again - can we tell two specific container ships from any others in the area without getting to visual range and negating any reason to use the missiles? We can't just pop off at any ship roughly the right size in the area, that's a great way to sink an orphanage or whatever.
Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:09
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The main problem with the AShM's (beyond the price tag) is that their main advantage - range - is negated by having to get within 30 nmi or whatever to ID the ships. If we have to get that close no matter what, there's no point in worrying about standoff capability against a frigate/MANPADS on the deck because we won't know what to shoot until in "whoops you're dead" range anyways. Also, I'm not sure if that's modeled in CMANO, but AShMs have a problem with hitting things other than their intended targets. And we don't want a stray missile blowing up a cruise ship full of tourists, that would be a PR nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Using paveways means massive extra fuel burn, means getting in closer, and means more threat to our tanker etc. Unfortunately the AShM loadout is the shortest legged. This isn't helped by the fact that this is a part of the world filled with so much civilian shipping, so we have to fly close enough to the freighters to visually identify them. It's bad enough that we're shooting at what is supposedly civilian shipping without accidentally sinking some actual civilian shipping. As a result, we end up with our tanker having to stay close to the Gripens, limiting our search range. Yooper, a few questions: 1) When will our new aircraft arrive? 2) Will we have weapons with them or will we have to order them too? 3) Will the Indians allow us to forward base our S100B in Calcutta? Quinntan fucked around with this message at 13:22 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
I think we could hazard a guess that something the right sort size hanging out near a Chinese frigate would be our boy, but as I said, I'm backing Bac and he has covered that in points 6, 7 and 8 of his plan, so that's a bit of a moot point
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The main problem with the AShM's (beyond the price tag) is that their main advantage - range - is negated by having to get within 30 nmi or whatever to ID the ships. If we have to get that close no matter what, there's no point in worrying about standoff capability against a frigate/MANPADS on the deck because we won't know what to shoot until in "whoops you're dead" range anyways. If the frigate is not under an emcon blackout we will be able to identify it much further out than 30 nmi and trying to drop a LGB on a maneuvering Type 53 frigate sounds risky. I'm down with the cuda
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:Yooper, a few questions: 1> After this mission. They are currently being cobbled into a transport before delivery to Mumbai. 2> All planes arrive with a full loadout of weapons. This holds true except for weirdo one time use stuff. (No 3kt tactical nuclear weapons for example.) 3> Maybe. I'm looking into it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
A Chinese frigate is lost in a heroic effort to save two innocent civilian freight ships struck by TLA suicide boats!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:e: I do have on minor request for you and Zaodai, I'd like to ride in the tanker for this mission to see the sights. Also, if goons are interested, I think we should let people act as co-pilots on the Saab 105s -- that will get more people into the air sooner. Request approved. But there is one very important rule for tanker ride-alongs: They're BYOB. I'll totally share my cigars though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
I'll backseat a Saab for this run, might as well get some time in however I can.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
I would also like to go up in one of the SAAB's.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
If we're letting in goon backseaters, hows about putting all the AWACS sign-ups all join as the S 100B's five-man crew? Hell of a turn-over if we get shot down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If we're letting in goon backseaters, hows about putting all the AWACS sign-ups all join as the S 100B's five-man crew? If that AWACS gets shot down and we can't replace it we've got much bigger problems than pilot attrition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
I'm gonna close voting for the ground element tonight around 7-8pm EST, just FYI
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If we're letting in goon backseaters, hows about putting all the AWACS sign-ups all join as the S 100B's five-man crew? I approve this. I'll backseat goons where applicable.  I've made a few contacts in the Indian Air Force and found an agreeable gentleman who needs a donation for an operation or something. So, for a cool $1,000,000 we'll get access to Port Blair Airfield for unarmed aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
Voting A for the ground element, and Baccy for the air plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Yooper posted:I approve this. I'll backseat goons where applicable. Would that include being able to return there once things go hot? Because it doesn't do us a whole lot of good if we get refused entry once the Mallomar Republic starts trying to kill us for terror strikes on their shipping lanes. Once we're safely back on the ground the Indians would be obligated to protect our aircraft since otherwise it's their own base getting blown the gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
On the one hand, those 1000 rupee bills have been demonetized by now. On the other hand, they were replaced by 500 and 2000 rupee denominations specifically because corrupt, under-the-table deals would be done with fat stacks of thousands, so very good and carry on. (sorry, I very recently got back from a trip to India)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:Would that include being able to return there once things go hot? Because it doesn't do us a whole lot of good if we get refused entry once the Mallomar Republic starts trying to kill us for terror strikes on their shipping lanes. Once we're safely back on the ground the Indians would be obligated to protect our aircraft since otherwise it's their own base getting blown the gently caress up. Yup. Full use. If it goes hot they'll definitely get angry, but they won't shoot you on the ground. They [i]will[/] shoot you in the air and let your debris fall onto the beaches though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Goddamn that's even better for us than Calcutta would have been. It's worth the million to have our Erieye operate from there, we're going to get a lot of coverage of the area.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
Yeah, if we're getting full use for our unarmed craft from there, it's totally worth the million.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Being able to hop tankers up from there would be amazing and make this op so much more viable. Also, I think that the Myanmar route is going to stay in play for a while, so it's not just this op given the setup.
xthetenth fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Yep, getting access to such a nicely located airbase for a million is an absolute steal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Yooper posted:I approve this. I'll backseat goons where applicable. Brilliant. We can land the Saab 100 AEW&C there after the mission is over, since it's going to be low on gas. And we can divert fighters there if they run low on gas. If we can get the Indians to stage tankers there, that'd be excellent. Alternatively, if the Indians will give us tanking support over the Bay of Bengal, we can stage our KC-135 at Port Blair and have it fly out to meet the strike package to and from the target.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
We wouldn't be able to land our fighters there. Non-combat craft only.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Zaodai posted:We wouldn't be able to land our fighters there. Non-combat craft only. "Unarmed aircraft." If we have a serious fuel crisis or a battle-damaged Gripen, we can jettison weapons and they can land. It isn't great, but if we dump a million bucks in weapons to save a 30 million fighter, that's worth doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 17:23
|
|