|
chitoryu12 posted:What's the cost division on a single Gripen dropping a laser-guided bomb versus a few Sk 60s flying in with rocket pods? A Paveway is $46,000, but a pair of SK60s is $2.4m, and we'll probably lose them both sending them after a defended bridge with dumb rockets. That doesn't even factor in the very low likelihood of the rockets even doing significant damage to the bridge. Hit it with a paveway and be done with it.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:A Paveway is $46,000, but a pair of SK60s is $2.4m, and we'll probably lose them both sending them after a defended bridge with dumb rockets. That doesn't even factor in the very low likelihood of the rockets even doing significant damage to the bridge. Can we be confident that a Gripen won't be shot down? If we send a single fighter and lose it, we lose a valuable plane and potentially our opportunity to recover and use a second plane with what we've deployed. In terms of AAA, I think Soviet 23mm cannons are the most realistic option for Tibetan insurgents.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
It may be worth noting that during the Vietnam War there were several examples of bridges getting pounded for days by iron bombs and rockets, while a single guided munition brought it down. However, Yooper did say that our rockets would be plenty big enough to damage/destroy the bridge. Also can we confirm if the SK60Bs do indeed lack warning receivers and countermeasures? If so then that means they can only fly in the most permissive of airspace, which is troubling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Are the rebels NATO backed, or is it really just in name only? I think we can probably expect to see mostly old Soviet/Chinese stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
We probably can mount the GBU to an SK-60 and have another one lase it. As for what we can expect, I presume we'll just see a lot of chinese equipment with some soviet surplus in the mix (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Are the rebels NATO backed, or is it really just in name only? I think we can probably expect to see mostly old Soviet/Chinese stuff. Yeah, even NATO backing doesn't always imply NATO arms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:How far can each of our planes fly safely without drop tanks? With? Gripens w/ 2 Meteors : 485 nm Gripens w/ 4 meteors : 220 nm Gripens w/ 4 Iris-T : 540 nm Gripens w/ 6 Iris-T : 260 nm Gripens w/ LGB's 280-600 nm SK60B w/ Gun pods ONLY 970 nm SK60B w/ Rockets 375 nm chitoryu12 posted:Will we have any opportunity to refuel at Nyingchi Airport after the northbound escort or do we need to do this all in one run with drop tanks or aerial refueling? Refueling will be unlikely at Nyingchi. The place is packed with refugees, supplies, and is not the sort of place you'd want to drop down without a ground crew. Soup Inspector posted:It may be worth noting that during the Vietnam War there were several examples of bridges getting pounded for days by iron bombs and rockets, while a single guided munition brought it down. However, Yooper did say that our rockets would be plenty big enough to damage/destroy the bridge. The bridge is pretty fragile, you're not going to need a whole lot. .png) Sensors include... the Mk1 Human Eyeball. Crazycryodude posted:Are the rebels NATO backed, or is it really just in name only? I think we can probably expect to see mostly old Soviet/Chinese stuff. In name only. NATO isn't quick enough to respond to the changing internal politics. It felt right to them when the Dalai Lama was shaking hands with Bono about it, but now that it's a bunch of nameless rebels shooting Chinese civilians they're not so sure. Triple A posted:We probably can mount the GBU to an SK-60 and have another one lase it. As for what we can expect, I presume we'll just see a lot of chinese equipment with some soviet surplus in the mix The weapons loadout is pretty static for those. Just what was mentioned above. 30mm ADEN Mk4, and the rockets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:Also can we confirm if the SK60Bs do indeed lack warning receivers and countermeasures? If so then that means they can only fly in the most permissive of airspace, which is troubling. In the database the SK60B's only have eyes for sensors. However I think that striking from a great height with the SK60B's might work if they come in fast and hard. As for the escort, I like JcDent's plan with 2 planes going ahead and 1 plane escort for each of the VIP's. E:fb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Here is a link to the planning scenario. The hostile units are stripped out but the bridge is still in place. https://www.dropbox.com/s/zzbal50tuei84d3/Open%20Tibet%20Op%201%20For%20Planning.scen?dl=0
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Alright, distance-wise it's a 180nm one-way trip to Nyingchi Airport from our base via Dibrugarh for escort, or 360nm round trip. This means our loadouts for escort are limited to 2 meteors, or 4 Iris-T, unless we want to spend more money and runaway time deploying our air tankers. Distance to the bridge from deployment is again about 180nm one-way, or 360nm round trip, so each Griben can only really carry one or two LGBs,although if they are modern enough it should be good enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
I think putting 4 Iris-T's each on the escorts is good enough, we don't need to splurge on the top shelf stuff and double the ammo will be handy if it gets hot. I agree on the bombs, we only need one or two so that's no big deal. Are we sending up the AWACS, too?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
I assume so, but I don't know what it's endurance is like and whether it can make the round trip with the cargo planes fine. Launch order probably goes Escorts - AWACS - Bridge Strike? I'd like to get the bridge strike as near to the end of the contract if possible, since I somehow doubt the Chinese will take kindly to a ground strike on (what they claim) is there territory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:I think putting 4 Iris-T's each on the escorts is good enough, we don't need to splurge on the top shelf stuff and double the ammo will be handy if it gets hot. I agree on the bombs, we only need one or two so that's no big deal. Are we sending up the AWACS, too? $11k an hour for local sensor superiority seems worth it. I'd like to put an escort or two on it as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
After playing with the planning scenario it look like a flight of 2 SK60B's should be able to take out the bridge using their rockets. As for sensor supremacy, the Grippens have good enough that a flight of 2 doing a CAP should be enough of a pair of eyes. The 4 Iris-T's should be fine for the Then we need a light escort for the cargo planes. Two total?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Given the No-fly zone, and that the only Chinese planes in-theatre are J-8I's (1969 planes last upgraded in 1981), I think air-to-air threats are not the main worry in this mission. I'd be more concerned with possible TLA SAMs/units from deep incursions over the no-fly zone. Do we want any of our escorting Gripens to carry ground-attack ordinance instead?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:$11k an hour for local sensor superiority seems worth it. I'd like to put an escort or two on it as well. We aren't made of money, and do you doubt the ability of our pilots? I disagree with this plan and recommend a doctrine of limited force. A single Gripen should be enough to take out the bridge, and two should be enough to cover the cargo planes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
The only thing I can really see going wrong is the civilian traffic either not being where they're supposed to be or some horrible incident happening with the transports. All the AA is old, and the rebels probably can't intercept bombs in flight, so a Paveway escorted with Iris-Ts should be just right for the situation.K&P posted:"Saab is interested in sending an observer team - strictly professional input." This will definitely end well! Though if it means we get discounts on repairs or something I guess it's not that ba - K&P posted:"Do you have any need for a frigate?" do we even have money for a boat???
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
We 100% want a frigate, are you kidding? It'll make the eco-terrorism an order of magnitude cheaper AND more effective.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:We 100% want a frigate, are you kidding? It'll make the eco-terrorism an order of magnitude cheaper AND more effective. well yeah but how are we going to pay for a boat, is it just going to fire little cardboard shells or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
We've got what, like ~$170 million in the bank? That's enough for a (very heavily discounted and out of date) boat and the shells to keep it sinking defenseless fishermen for a while. Plus I'm sure we can talk AngerPEACE into helping out with the costs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:We aren't made of money, and do you doubt the ability of our pilots? I disagree with this plan and recommend a doctrine of limited force. A single Gripen should be enough to take out the bridge, and two should be enough to cover the cargo planes. We are being paid 6 million for this, and have 100 million. Each flight hour is 0.18% of our takings for the mission. Given that, the extra sensor range granted by the CWACS is worth the cost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:We are being paid 6 million for this, and have 100 million. Each flight hour is 0.01% of our takings for the mission. Given that, the extra sensor range granted by the CWACS is worth the cost. I totally agree with this. The only real reason we wouldn't take the CWACS is if for some reason we can't work out the runway time for it and and its escort. Crazycryodude posted:We've got what, like ~$170 million in the bank? That's enough for a (very heavily discounted and out of date) boat and the shells to keep it sinking defenseless fishermen for a while. Plus I'm sure we can talk AngerPEACE into helping out with the costs. I am convinced! I vote bote. Cathode Raymond fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
I vote for the 2 escorts, 1 strike plan using all Gripens. Are weather conditions permissible to use the Paveways from outside MANPADs range? I just am really hesitant to suggest using the 60's outside of stuff like interdiction of truck convoys or CAS for infantry versus rebels for one pass. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Weather's been clear for the past few days and is supposed to stay that way, so I'd assume so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:We've got what, like ~$170 million in the bank? That's enough for a (very heavily discounted and out of date) boat and the shells to keep it sinking defenseless fishermen for a while. Plus I'm sure we can talk AngerPEACE into helping out with the costs. Oh, like a Furious Steve thing! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Only two planes are required for this mission. A two ship ground attack flight will be more then enough to passively cover for the transport planes from the non-existent air threat, with a nineteen minute window to attack the bridge (and whatever assets we can) and come back again. AWACS is superfluous, as again, our forces would be menaced with manpads at best. The escort duty is just a less-than-subtle set up for our real detail of bombing a bridge. I am not going to run the numbers, I'm not your man for that, but you are being overzealous with your would-be assets. Keep it simple. Two planes, bombs and those AA missiles you strap on for safety's sake will go right back to the bank, unused.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
My very basic knowledge of warship capabilities ends at WW2, what can you even do with one semi-modern frigate?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
While I agree the AWACS is probably unnecessary, the low cost of deploying it ($60,000 all told? ) compared to mission income is why I want to bring it along just in case. It also makes our outfit look more secure and professional: a few 20 year old fighters is one thing, but a AWACS is a sign of a better, more prepared outfit, which should go down well with the Indian Army/Air Force.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
While I don't disagree that the AWACS is a very good asset for this mission I'm worried that ussing it this mission might put it out of other missions due to "maintenance".
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
Stago Lego posted:While I don't disagree that the AWACS is a very good asset for this mission I'm worried that ussing it this mission might put it out of other missions due to "maintenance". Yooper, is this something we have to consider?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:We are being paid 6 million for this, and have 100 million. Each flight hour is 0.18% of our takings for the mission. Given that, the extra sensor range granted by the CWACS is worth the cost. Do you even profit margins, fool? Our fighter pilots can attain great synergies through radar strategies and I feel you have a narrow grasp on business sense and entrepreneurial qualities in order to guide our limited liability corporation forward. Plus if we deploy all of our assets we open ourselves to a great deal more risk factors that may lead to our imminent liquidation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Also while we may not need the AWACS due to the main threat being MANPADS there is always the possibility of unknown contacts being made plus possible civilian air contacts. As long as it won't put it out for other missions I would suggest sending the AWACS up just in case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
This looks fun. Can someone walk me through why we want a boat? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Boats can fire cruise missiles. Cruise missiles are the loving best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
My vote would be for two Gripens loaded AA to escort the freight dawgs, and two Gripens loaded with either a single paveway each, or two per, and a light AA load out. The A2G Gripens can provide depth of coverage for the escorts if needed, and can peel off and hit the bridge when able. It would be extremely embarrassing to fail to destroy the bridge because of a weapon failure or miss, and have the followup strike have to fly into now-alert territory to drop the bridge. The trailing Gripens will help with sensor coverage as well, if we choose to not fly our AEW assets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
I'm in favor us using our AWACS, as we are on the defensive and it can look in all directions at once, while our fighters can't. It may let us use less fighters in the air as well. Also, I'm in favor of dropping a Paveway on the bridge from high altitude. The SK 60s don't have any electronic defenses of any kind. The thing that will hurt us is if we lose a plane. A few extra thousand dollars to really reduce that likelihood seems like good insurance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:My vote would be for two Gripens loaded AA to escort the freight dawgs, and two Gripens loaded with either a single paveway each, or two per, and a light AA load out. The A2G Gripens can provide depth of coverage for the escorts if needed, and can peel off and hit the bridge when able. We won't be able to fit both paveways and any AA armament on the Gripens while keeping them in the fuel budget for the strike/return trip, I don't think. Apart from that, I'd back this + AWACS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
So would it be possible to have a mix of ATA and ATG assets on our Gripens for this mission? Having a duo or trio of planes could allow us to fly where we need to while keeping enough overhead to protect the cargo planes and AWACS and keeping us above the range of any MANPADS in the area. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:Only two planes are required for this mission. This profile relies on civilians getting their poo poo together at what sounds like an overstressed airport to meet the mission window and thinks that China and/or the TLA won't respond to us blowing up a bridge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
I don't see how we need more than 1 plane for the bombing run and more than 2 for escort duty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:28
|
|
