|
Broadstreet Ford, Lincoln, and Military -- we can get qualified F-16 pilots from all over the world. Same story with parts, and weapons. I'd like my callsign to be Bac. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQAmvKMGUko Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Mar 30, 2017 |
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 19:36 |
|
|
Given that we don't know much about the threat environment and given that we want to make a good first impression, I think we should go for maximum effort on this mission. All Gripens, all day. I'm skeptical that aerial rockets will be able to hit or destroy the bridge. We need precision weapons for that job. So, we send in two Gripens at about 10,000-15,000 feet and have them each drop a laser guided bomb on the bridge (with a extra bomb each that they can use). This plan has a very high chance of success. It gives us good situational awareness. It lets us hammer our target with heavy firepower.  1. Launch two fighters and the AEW&C. The fighters fly a racetrack at 20,000-30,000 feet between the two airfields. They orbit at high altitude. The AEW&C flys a smaller racetrack about 200km further south. The AEW&C can vector the fighters onto targets if the transports or our strike aircraft are threatened. 2. Transports take off. 3. Once the C-17s take off and are 30 minutes into their flight, have the strike aircraft take off. 4. Strike aircraft hit bridge and RTB. 5. Transports land. 6. CAP and AEW&C land. My plan involves us sortieing 5 aircraft in three flights. "Strike 1" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: x2 IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles x2 GBU-12D/B laser-guide bombs x1 Litening III targeting pod Mission Primary: Bomb the bridge Secondary: If fired on by ground forces, destroy enemy forces in vicinity of the bridge, prioritizing AAA and SAMs Tertiary: Engage air targets to protect Eyeball and/or the transports "High CAP" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: x4 IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles x2 300-gal drop tanks Mission Primary: Protect the transport aircraft, protecting them from airborne threats Secondary: Protect the strike aricraft Tertiary: Protect the AEW&C aircraft "Eyeball" Aircraft One Saab S100B AEW&C Mission Primary: Locate air targets and vector High CAP onto targets (and the transports away from them). Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 04:14 on Apr 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
CBJamo posted:I like Bacarruda's plan, with just a couple small changes. The AEW&C should orbit over our field. There's no reason to put it in any more risk than necessary, and it's radar easily sees the entire engagement area with a nice buffer. I'd also suggest a slight change in timing, it would be safer if the C-17s were at least on their way back before Strike 1 launches. Those changes work for me. JcDent posted:Can CMANO simulate a rogue Gripen pilot spotting a TLA MANPAD section and going GUNS GUNS GUNS while ranting something about dead corgies and bootleg dog food*? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQAmvKMGUko
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
If there are Su-27s in the area, what do the goons think about upgunning our High CAP Gripens with x2 IRIS-T short-range AAMs and x2 RB107 Meteors mid-range AAMs? We could then set (and enforce) a 50-100km exclusion zone around the transport aircraft. We contact any bogey aircraft and warn them off if they approach the zone. Simultaneously, we vector the High CAP aircraft towards the bogeys. If the bogeys enter the exclusion zone, then we could fire on them with our Meteor missiles. 80km is the range of the R-77 Amraamski medium-range air-to-air missile carried by most Su-27/J-11 variants, so they could pop up, snipe a transport (or one of our fighters) and dash off before we're in visual range to engage with our shorter-range missile.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
Well that went off very well, indeed. In the future, I think we'd do well to pack some longer-range Meteor missiles. We almost didn't make it to IRIS-T range in time to splash those Finbacks. Loved the video and commentary, Yooper. You've been hitting it out of the park with this LP.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
We can see about getting ECM pods for our Gripens if we need some electronic warfare capability. When it comes to procurement, we should be looking to get our hands on more 4th and 4.5th generation fighters. If we can get more Gripens, great. That'd simplify logistics and training greatly. But there are a lot of F-16s and some F/A-18s out there. They can carry many of the the same munitions as the Gripens, there are lots of ex-military pilots who can fly them, and there are lots of parts out there that we can use. Sk 60s, Hawks and other jet trainer/fighters are great little COIN aircraft for plinking trucks, infantry, and boats. But they'll die like flies against serious air defence and their guns and rocket pods really can't kill heavy targets like the bridges and supply dumps we spotted in this battle. Since we want to give as many goons pilot slots as possible, and that means we're probably going to be buying cheap little jets, let's look for some COIN-type missions that'll let us go after soft targets with our SK 60Bs and other ships. Gripens can fly high cover and can drop precision weapons on harder targets. We should also get our hands on some UH-60 or Mi-17 utility helicopters and some ex-SOF guys to act as a combat search-and-rescue force to grab downed pilots. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:True, but we aren't exactly choosers, we are beggars in terms of what is available. Getting what we got from the Swedes was nothing short of miraculous, and we can't count on being that lucky in the future. I'd disagree with the F-16 assessment. There are, what, twenty-six countries flying F-16s? With Jack's connections, I think we can get our hands on some mid-block F-16s. Hell, if we're feeling fancy, we might be able to get some new airframes from GD down the road once we're more established. This will only happen few months down the line, but it's something I think we should strongly consider going for. If that's not an option, then I'm open to exploring the Phantom option. It's good for goon participation (we can have a goon be a backseater/WSO). They're better at A2A than the A-7s would be. And I do like your idea of loading one up with 12 GBU-12s and going to town on ground targets. If we want Phantoms, the Greeks and Germans are good starting points. But let's also consider the Korean and Japanese angle. They're looking to upgrade their air forces and the old Phantoms might be on the chopping block. Might even be able to get some IDF Kurnass F-4Es.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:The Japanese Phantom Kais are very limited in their armament, it's basically Sidewinders, Sparrows and an anti-ship missile, no LGB capability, no Mavericks, no bombs at all. The Korean ones are similar to the Greek ones but don't have AMRAAMs and are reliant on Sparrows for their BVR capability. The Israeli ones don't have BVR capability. The German ones are very limited in their A2G capability, but do have AMRAAMs. The Turkish Phantoms don't have BVR, but do have a 200km range cruise missile. Personally, I'd rather the Greek ones out of all of them just for flexibility's sake more than anything else. Back of the envelope, what do you think it'd cost to grab Japanese, Korean, Israeli*, Turkish and/or German Phantoms and then retrofit them for our purposes? We'd need to integrate the Paveway-series LGBs, AIM-120 AMRAAMs (or Meteors, to simplify our logistical situation) and possibly some Mavericks. That'll require the addition of a few black boxes, some software upgrades, making sure they can carry MERS and TERs, and some small modifications to the hard-points. *fwiw, the Israeli Kurnass Phantoms has BVR capability with the Sparrow.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:It'd depend on the systems on board. A lot of them (Israeli, South Korean, Japanese, German) are still running with the original 1960s vintage AN/APQ-120 radar and would likely require replacing in order to actually work with newer A2A missiles and certainly would have to be replaced in order to maximise the capabilities of Meteor and AMRAAM. The remaining one, the Turkish one, uses an Israeli EL/M-2032. We'd still have to run our own integration tests. Got to wonder though, why not just try to buy the Greek ones off the shelf, they have everything we'd want and the Greeks are hard up for cash. I agree buying the Greek Phantoms is the easiest thing to do. but as you said, we're the beggars in this situation. If we can't get the Gripens or mid-block F-16s I want and we can't get the Greek Phantoms you'd like, I have an idea. This may be a tad ambitious, but I think we have a business opportunity here. There are hundreds of ex-USAF, USN, and USMC F-4s in boneyards. Not to mention the various soon-to-be-retired F-4 fleets around the world. That's a huge number of airframes (and engines) we could get for low prices. We raise capital and buy up the ones with the fewest flight hours and cycles on them. Meanwhile, we send Jack around to electronics manufacturers and see if we can get a good deal on some modern radars, ECM, etc. If we can get some modern AESA radars, great! But we could also settle for something like the AN/APG-65s that the Greek F-4Es carry. Once that's done, we run a weapons integration program for AMRAAMS, Mavericks, Paveways, etc. Give our Phantoms some serious A2A and A2G capability. We could even do some *ahem* "final testing" on the front lines to prove the systems and demo our product for customers. To make it worthwhile, I'd say we'd need to upgrade anywhere from 40-60 Phantoms. We can keep 15-20 and then sell off the rest to other contractors or air forces. We'd get good Phantoms, we boost our profile, and we can make a pretty tidy profit. *to do all this in-game, Yooper could just hand-wave all of this happening and then just use the modernized Greek F-4Es already in game to simulate our new Phantoms.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Congrats on a mission well done! I love this idea. Let's send a couple of planes out to do a tour. One in the US and one in Europe. Yooper posted:
I think we should look into getting the F-4 Phantoms and the F/A-50 Golden Eagles. The Phantoms should obviously be the top priority, since they're probably the most-capable aircraft on the table. But the F/A-50s are nifty little light fighters that can do the jobs too dangerous for the RB 60s and too petty for the Gripens. Also, they're two-seaters, so we can have goons be GIBs/WSOs/back-seaters/whatever we want to call them. People can also sign up to be co-pilots on the RB 60s, for that matter, too. Yooper posted:
Do we want a bulk order of ammun...? YES! Yooper, what do our current ammo and equipment stocks look like? If we already have enough recon and targeting pods to go around, then there's no need to buy the extras. Here's what I'd like us to buy: Air-to-air missiles 30 Meteor medium-range AAMs ($52,500,000) 50 IRIS-T short-range AAMs ($20,000,000) Air-to-ground weapons 100 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs 220,000 16 Mjolnir Mk2 anti-armor stand-off cluster missile ($6,800,000) 24 Mjolrnir Mk1 anti-personnel stand-off cluster missile ($5,400,000) 30 RB 75 Maverick EO Missiles ($6,7500,000) 500 M/70 135mm rockets ($1,400,000) Electronics 2 Lantirn FLIR and Targeting pods ($2,800,000) 1 SPK 39 EO photorecon pod ($2,100,000) Miscellaneous 25 1200-litre drop tanks ($475,000) For a total cost of: $99,225,000. I know it's a lot, but it'll give us the ability to shut down any Chinese efforts to interfre with us from the air. And gives us a bunch of air-to-ground options that will let us kill tanks, trucks, infantry, bunkers, bridges, supply dumps, airfields, boats and pretty much anything else we want dead. e: corrected the numbers. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:You've messed up the costs on the Meteors and IRIS: 30 Meteors cost $52.5 million, not $5.25 million, and 50 IRIS missiles are $20 million, not $2. Strach them, they are good but too expensive to bulk-buy. Also, our starting ammunition is a full loadout, so the numbers on the second graph. So I have. I've fixed the numbers. I'm flexible on how many missiles we buy. We might be able to cut our buy to 10-20. We're going to need deep stockpiles if we're going toe-to-toe with the PLAAF in a sustained air campaign. It might be a small border scarp to them, but it's going to stretch our small outfit to the limits. And waiting for replacement missiles to dribble in by ones and twos isn't a good solution in the middle of a war. Beefing up our air force with new aircraft and having cash on hand to pay for gas and spares should be our top priorities. But we should dump everything else we have into make sure we have enough firepower to take the fight to our adversaries. We need the Meteors -- they are what sets the Gripen apart from any other fighter in the theater. If we're counting on IRIS-T once our Meteors rapidly run out, we going to have to dogfight and sooner or later we're going to lose a bird.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Here's how I'm thinking about it. What missions we're going to get? From what Yooper said, we're going to be getting a lot of air-to-ground missions, probably against troops, vehicles, and buildings. With the Chinese pissed off, we're going to be seeing J-11/Su-27 fighters, plus whatever older fighters the Chinese want to throw at us. What equipment are we going to need? For ordnance, we need dumb and precision air-to ground capabilities, and a lot of ammo so we can profit from targets of opportunity. To deal with the Flankers without risking Gripen losses, we need long-range air-to-air. That means Meteors. The Pk for a BVR missile shot is anywhere from 40-70%, so we're going to need to salvo multiple missiles per target to guarantee kills. For aircraft, we need mud-movers that can kill ground targets without getting shredded. So, something that can carry precision munitions is pretty desirable. Then, what do we need to buy? We've got about $150 million to play with, so our budget for new toys will be a little tight. For aircraft, the F-4s are the best choice for the A2G mission, since they can carry up to 12 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs. They can do the Gripen-style precision strike missions our SK 60s can't, which frees up our Gripens for the MiG CAP role. I think the F-4s will probably cost in the neighborhood of $30-40 million apiece. And we need to factor in the cost of spares, compatible munitions, etc. If we can't snag the F-4s, I'd like to suggest we go with the F/A-50 Golden Eagles. They only cost $25-30 million a pop. They're cheap to fly. They're supersonic. They've got a decent radar. They can carry Mavericks and JDAMs. In real life, they are rumored to carry AMRAAMs, although Yooper would have to mod this in in-game. For ordnance, here's a conservative budget. Air-to-air missiles 20 Meteor medium-range AAMs ($28,000,000) 20 IRIS-T short-range AAMs ($8,000,000) Air-to-ground weapons 100 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs ($220,000). 30 RB 75 Maverick EO Missiles ($6,7500,000) 250 M/70 135mm rockets ($700,000) Miscellaneous 25 1200-litre drop tanks ($475,000) That's a grand total of $44,145,000. This'd give us: 52 IRIS-T SRAAM 44 Meteors MRAAM 120 GBU-12s LGBs 24 GBU-49s LGB/GPSGB 50 Mavericks TV missiles 24 Mjolnir stand-off cluster munitions 394 125mm rockets 43 1200-litre drop tanks That gives us enough money to buy 2-4 Phantoms (depending on cost), plus their air-to-air weapons.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:On another note, what do we think about liveries?  
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
In other news, I continue to be unable to do basic math... These should be the correct numbers.  Basically, we sell off the four of the SK 60Bs and use the other two for training, advertising, joyrides, and the occasional COIN. We use the money from the sale to buy more Phantoms. This package gives us lots of air-to-air ordnance. Since people seem to hate the idea of buying Meteors, I've trimmed down the buy somewhat. I still think we should heavily invest in GBU-12s and Mavericks. They'll be very useful even once we're out of the theater. Aircraft SELL: 4 SK 60Bs BUY: 5 F-4E Phantom IIs ($42,500,000) 2 Sperwer UAV ($3,000,000) Total aircraft bill: $45,500,000 Air-to-air missiles BUY: 18 Meteor medium-range AAMs ($31,500,000) 20 IRIS-T short-range AAMs ($8,000,0000) Air-to-ground weapons BUY: 100 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs ($2,200,000) 30 RB 75 Maverick EO Missiles ($870,000) 250 M/70 135mm rockets ($700,000) Stores BUY: 20 1200-litre drop tanks ($380,000) Total weapons bill: $42,950,000 Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I support buying at least four Phantoms and two drones We already have 12 RB 15F anti-shipping missiles that the Gripens can carry. We bought 'em in our initial arms deal with the Swedes and Germans. As for NATO missiles, we have the venerable Harpoon and we'll be able to use the new LRASM missile (which comes in ship-launched and air-launched flavors)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
Here's a comparison of the two strike fighters people are talking about : I've marked an asterisk behind weapons we already own. Overall, the Phantom brings a lot more to the table. It's the best bomber by far in terms of payload and weapons choices. It's got BVR missiles. But we're going to have to be prepared to pay for what we get. The F/A-50 is a fine aircraft, but it really doesn't have the weapons or the payload for the kind of ground attack missions that'll be coming along. If we can retrofit them to carry laser-guided bombs, TV Mavericks, IRIS-T, and AMRAAMS (or Meteors), then they become a more appealing choice. F-4E Phantom II  Pros: -Excellent air-to-ground capabilities. Can carry 6 Mavericks or 18 GBU-12 laser-guided bombs -Good air-to-air capabilities. Able to engage targets beyond visual range. Can carry a load out of 4 AIM-9L Sidewinders for dogfighting and 4 AIM-120 AMRAAMs for longer-range work -Uses many weapons we already own -Fast (can fly Mach 1.9 with a light load) -Multiple parts suppliers -Large pool of ex-German, Turkish, Greek, Korean, and Japanese pilots and backseaters -Durable airframe Cons: -Unreliable (20% chance of missing a mission) -Maintenance intensive -Fuel hog -Unmaneuverable -High operating costs Stats: Crew: 2 Min Speed: 350 kt Max Speed: 925 kt Max Payload: 8480 kg Sensors: AN/APG-65GY Radar: 148.2 km range AN/ALR-66(VE) Radar Warning Receiver: 222.2 km Stores: Litening Sensor, Night Navigation and Targeting Pod AN/ALQ-119 Jamming Pod 370 USG Drop Tank 600 USG Drop Tank Weapons: Air-to-air M61 Vulcan 20mm cannon AIM-120B AMRAAM: 74.1 km range AIM-9L Sidewinder 18.5 km Air-to-ground Mk82 500lb bomb: 1.9 km Mk84 2000lb bomb: 1.9 km Mk20 Rockeye II cluster bomb: 1.9 km GBU-10E/B Paveway II 2,000lb laser-guided bomb: 7.4 km *GBU-12D/B Paveway II 500lb laser-guided bomb: 7.4 km GBU-24A/B Paveway III 2,000lb laser-guided bomb: 14.8 km range *BK 90 Mjolner standoff cluster-dispensing missile: 14.8 km AGM-65G Maverick IR missile: 14.8 km *AGM-65B Maverick EO TV guided missile: 11.1 km. ********* F/A-50 Golden Eagle  Pros: -Low operating costs -Reliable -More agile Cons: -No BVR capability -Uses zero weapons and stores we already own (unless they can carry the EO Mavericks?) -Slower (Mach 1.5 max) -Can act as an advanced trainer for new pilots and backseaters Stats: Crew: 2 Min Speed: 350 kt Max Speed: 780 kt Max Payload: 3,740 kg Sensors: EL/M-2032 Radar: 148.2 km range Stores 150 USG Drop Tank Weapons Air-to-air A-50 20mm cannon AIM-9S Sidewinder: 18.5 km range Air-to-ground Mk82 500lb bomb: 1.9 km. Land Max: 1.9 km. Mk20 Rockeye II cluster bomb: 1.9 km GBU-38(V)1/B JDAM 500lb GPS guided bomb: 22.2 km AGM-65G2 Maverick IR guided missile: 14.8 km HYDRA 70mm Rocket: 3.7 km Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 11:45
|
|
|
Yooper posted:I need to explore this some more to be honest. Both technically and in game. If a retrofit is a matter of some wiring harnesses and 1/2-13 threads instead of M12, then we're OK. There would be a cost of some sort, but we can work that out. I'd certainly rather see you guys pay a one time retrofit fee than have to juggle missiles from eight different eras and nations. I also need to verify that it's not a royal pain in CMANO to do. That'd be excellent! If we could get Laser-guided bombs, Lantirn pods, and AMRAAMs on the F/A-50s, that'd make them a very tempting purchase. Yooper posted:I'll let the discussion roll until this afternoon then we'll settle on a choice. In the future I'll break it apart into packages to simplify voting. After the fact we can always make adjustments and customize. Also I believe the pilot list is caught up. There's 57 pilots. Maybe we'll rotate on missions? Or just wait till someone dies? We'll see. We can always have people be the WSOs on the Phantoms (or the F/A-50s) if/when we get them. You can give shout-outs to the whole crew in the videos ("Baloogan and DSM score a perfect hit on the bridge!" etc etc) I'd happily give up my pilot spot to be a backseater.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Cool, more planes for us to fly! 5 F-4E Phantom IIs ($42,500,000) 3 FA-50 Golden Eagles ($40,500,000) 2 Sperwer UAVs ($3,000,000) That's a total cost of $86,000,000 While we're thinking about upgrades, it'd be great to get AMRAAMs and laser-guided bombs retrofitted to the Golden Eagles.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
Voting for Option B.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
We're going to have to use nearly every aircraft we've got on this mission. Yooper posted:The primary mission, and the one we'll be paid for is to support the Indian Volunteers as they engage both Tibet-Chinese forces and the TLA. We will receive positional data on the front line units from the Volunteers on the ground. However there are likely more units behind them in the mountain passes. The Chinese Air Force is on stand down right now. There will be no Chinese Air Force over the Tibet operation zone. AAA is likely. MANPADS will be limited. This strike should takeoff second. Primary Mission Plan: "Maximum Profits" The Gripens launch 30 minutes apart fly in two to ship groups at higher altitude (appx. 10,000-15,000 feet AGL) and drop bombs on precision targets. If the Chinese decide to violate the NFZ again, they'll go after the fighters while the Saabs head for safety at low-level and max speed. Have least one flight airborne over the attacking Saabs at all times to provide air-to-air support for the Saabs The Saab 105s fly low in three groups of two aircraft. Launch them in the 30-minute intervals. They engage targets of opportunity or any targets that the Indians ID for us. As soon as a flight goes bingo or Winchester, have them RTB to re-arm, refuel and then get back into the fight. I want a Hindi, Sikh, etc. speaking liaison officer in the right seat of at least one aircraft to communicate with the Indian Volunteer ground forces. Make sure that we have all the radio frequencies of the Indian Volunteers. Make sure the Indian Volunteers are displaying air-ground marker panels so that we can recognize them. "Slugger" Aircraft and Loadout (in two flights launched 30 minutes apart) Four JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: -IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles -GBU-12D/B laser-guide bombs -Litening III targeting pod Mission Primary: Destroy enemy air defenses Scondary: Bomb ground targets Tertiary: Engage air targets to protect the SAABs "Rocketeer" Aircraft and Loadout (in three flights launched 30 minutes apart) Six SK 60 Saab 105 Gripen attack aircraft, each with: -M 70 135mm Rockets* *they'll use up their allocated rockets, then the rockets originally allocated for the Gripens. If they use those and still have targets, have them use their gunpods. Mission Primary: Bomb ground targets Yooper posted:Secondary Mission I have two plans. Plan A is the fastest, but will cause a bigger international incident. Plan B is slower and will cause a smaller international incident. This strike should take off first. My personal vote is for PLAN B: ROUND THE WORLD UPDATED Secondary Mission Plan B: "Round the World"  *please note the new target location -- this map features the wrong harbor site. 1. Saab 100 AEW&C takes off early before the mission and lands in Calcutta. 2. Strike package (High CAP Gripen, Ahab anti-shipping Gripens, Big Pig tanker) take off from home base. 3. Strike package and head around the western edge of Bangladesh, flying in formation with Indian tankers to keep our planes topped up while over India. 4. Saab 100 AEW&C takes off and joins up with the strike package. 5. Strike package proceeds over the Bay of Bengal. If possible, Indian tankers continue fueling us over the Bay of Bengal. If not, our tanker takes over to refuel the strike group while over water. 6. Use the Saab 100 to locate the freighters and any escorts. If we can positively ID them from long-range (i.e. look for the frigate's radar, use that ship-finder website, etc.), then send in the anti-ship missiles. If we can't ID them from long-range, have the High CAP flight visually ID them with the Litening pod, then pull out of the Chinese's weapons range. 7. Send in Ahab anti-shipping flight. Fire a total of two missiles at any escort and one missile per freighter. 8. If the enemy ships are not sunk or heavily on fire. Have the High CAP drop one Paveway total per target. 9. All aircraft RTB. Use our tanker and the Indian tankers to refuel as needed. If possible, rendezvous with the Indian tankers over the Bay of Bengal Have the Saab refuel at the Andamans or Calcutta if needed. 10. BONUS: If time allows, have the returned Gripens get new aircrews, load up with the max GBU-12 Paveway loadout and join the "Maximum Profit" close air support mission. ROE: Fire if the Burmese or Chinese take any hostile action (lock us up with radars, fire missiles or guns, order us to stop our mission). Once the Chinese ships are sighted and positively ID'ed, all aircraft are cleared to engage them as needed. If we have to abort due to fuel or damage, we'll abort to the Andaman Islands, then ferry the planes home, using Indian tanker support. "High CAP" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with the long-range loadout of: GBU-12 Paveway laser-guided bomds IRIS-T missiles 300-gal drop tanks Litening targeting pod Mission Primary: Protect the tanker and anti-shipping aircraft. Secondary: ID the ships with the Litening pod. Tertiary: finish off any Chinese ships not immediately sunk by the missiles or not heavily on fire. "Ahab" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles Meteor medium-range air-to-air missiles (?) RB 15 anti-shipping missiles 300-gal drop tanks (?) Mission Primary: Sink the freighters Secondary: Protect the tanker and engage air targets threatening the flight. "Big Pig" Aircraft KC-135 Tanker Mission Primary: Keep the strike package refueled. "Eyeball" Aircraft One Saab S100B AEW&C Mission Primary: Locate air targets and vector High CAP onto targets. Secondary: Identify the shipping targets. OR Secondary Mission Plan A: "Direct Route"  This one is a little complicated. Because of the long range, we need to do a tanker drag and keep the tanker close to the fighters for most of the mission. The Saab AEW&C will orbit north of Myanmar and give us info about the Myanamar air force's reaction to our airspace violation. They get as close to the border as possible to give us the max radar coverage possible. The strike package (two high CAP fighters, two anti-shipping fighters, the tanker) will head south and cross Myanamar airspace as fast as possible. The tanker will squawk a civilian transponder code and will ID itself as a civilian airliner. The fighters will try to stay close and hide in its radar shadow for as long as possible, they will not have their radars on. If the Burmese intercept us, send the CAP fighters to intercept them. Try to get on their six. If they make any hostile gestures (locking us up with radar, etc.) then shoot them down. The fighters will head south and try to locate the freighters. The High CAP birds will stay up at around 20,000-30,000 feet with their radars on. If any Myanamar fighters try to intercept the anti-shipping fighters, then they will intercept. If the Burmese show any hostile gestures, shoo them down. The anti-shipping fighters will use radar to locate likely ship targets. They'll drop low, visually ID the targets, then pull back, fire off their missiles and head for home. Once the targets have been sunk, then we'll head for Kolkata and land there. If that's not feasible, then we'll take the long way home and loop around the western edge of Bangladesh to RTB. If we have to abort due to fuel or damage, we'll abort to: Veer Savarkar International Airport in the Andaman Islands "High CAP" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: RB 107 Meteor missiles IRIS-T missiles 300-gal drop tanks Mission Primary: Protect the tanker and anti-shipping aircraft "Ahab" Aircraft and Loadout Two JAS 39 Gripen strike fighters, each with: IRIS-T short-range air-to-air missiles RB 15 anti-shipping missiles 300-gal drop tanks Mission Primary: Sink the freighters Secondary: Protect the tanker and engage air targets threatening the flight. "Big Pig" Aircraft KC-135 Tanker Mission Primary: Keep the strike package refueled. "Eyeball" Aircraft One Saab S100B AEW&C Mission Primary: Locate air targets and vector High CAP onto targets. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 12:58 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Stago Lego posted:I choose Phantom Frog. It even sounds like a Metal Gear codename. I would like to suggest to add a RF-4E to this for recon. We have two recon pods for the Gripens already. No need for the RF-4E. Quinntan posted:The problem I have with the Su-25s is that a lot of their stuff requires the aircraft to keep flying towards a target to keep it tracked. This makes them a lot more likely to get shot up by enemy short-range air defences such as Iglas and even AAA. This isn't such a huge deal if our target is stationery, such as the bridge and arms dump we were dealing with last time, but if we should have to take on a moving target, this is a major disadvantage. At least the Mavericks on the Phantom and Gripen are fire-and-forget. Couldn't agree more. The Frogfoots have to get low and slow to engage ground targets. They have to get into the dirt where enemy MANPADS, AAA, and SAMs can eat them alive. If you want light, cheap strike, we should go ahead and do Option B and buy the Phantoms and Golden Eagles. They both have standoff fire and forget capability. Phantoms can fire the Mjolnir missile and Maverick missiles. The Golden Eagles have JDAMs and Mavericks. Both also have long-range air-to-air capability. The Phantoms have four AMRAAMs, which are almost as good as our Meteors. And the Golden Eagle can easily be retrofitted for carry them. Bottom line, the Frogfoot is slow, vulnerable, and a one-trick pony. They got shot up pretty bad in Afghanistan in the 1980s. And the muj only had basic AA weapons. Imagine what's going to happen in 2019? The Phantoms and Golden Eagles are multi-role fighters that bring a lot to the table. They'll hit harder and they'll stay alive longer. chitoryu12 posted:Gonna vote for Option B. I don't want us splitting supply lines between Warsaw Pact and NATO when we've got such a big stockpile of NATO gear already. Seriously. This. Buying Frogfoots creates massive logistical hassles for us and is going to cost us a shitload of extra money. With the Phantoms and Golden Eagles we can at least cross-use some of our sutff.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:I'm not keen on using RBS-15s against the bulk carriers. They're not likely to cause significant damage against a full-blown container ship, so if the weather's clear enough for us to lase from high altitude, we're probably better off dropping Paveways on 'em from high altitude. If the freighters are escorted, though, they'll be invaluable, so we probably want to haul some along just in case. Our GBU-12 Paveways may weigh 500 pounds, but they only have 192 pounds of explosives. The Rb 15s have a 441 pound warhead. The RBs will gently caress up a ship. That's what they are designed to do. Modern warships aren't armored, so the warhead is optimized for unarmored targets. It will will gently caress up a freighter or a destroy pretty much equally.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Package B - 302nd Motostrelki Company This looks like a good deal. We don't have any NATO small arms, so running two supply chains won't be an issue. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
To help people make up their minds. Here is the INTEL we haveYooper posted:
Yooper posted:Due to construction issues at Daiwei the freighters have been re-routed to Sittwe. This significantly reduces the distance we need to fly. Yooper posted:
Yooper posted:
And here the the MISSION PLANS Bacarruda posted:
Psawhn posted:
Psawhn posted:
Quinntan posted:
Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 10:06 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
So that we are all on the same page, what would people say if I modified Plan B? I'm worried about the possible presence of that Chinese frigate, so we need more anti-surface firepower. And if we're avoiding Burmese airspace, there's less need for dedicated fighter work. Here is what I would change: -The High CAP birds carry GBU-12 Paveways, a Litening pod, drop tanks, and IRIS-T air-to-air missiles. They will ID the frigate and the freighters with their Litening pod (the AEW&C bird can also help spot radar emissions from the frigate). -Once the targets are ID'ed the anti-shipping birds will drop in low and pop the frigate with a missile each and then fire one missile at their chosen transport. Then they will RTB to Calcutta (or to our home base, if needed). -Once the threat from the frigate is gone, the High CAP birds will finish off any unsunken ships and then RTB to Calcutta (or to our home base, if needed). -The Tanker will meet up with the RTB'ing Gripens and keep them fuelled until we can land in Calcutta (or to our home base, if needed). -The AEW&C bird only has about 1,300km range will need to land at Calcutta to take on gas before heading over the Bay of Bengal. It will need to be launched very early in the morning, so that it can gas up and then take off from Calcutta to meet with the strike package. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 08:33 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Ok, why am I some set on bringing along anti-shipping missiles? One, we need some serious standoff capability to deal with the potential Chinese frigate. If we drop bombs on the frigate, they're going to ram a SAM up our asses before we can finish laser-guiding our Paveways to the target. Two, the RB 15s are more accurate. Three, the RB 15s are more lethal. Four, being longer-ranged, more accurate and more lethal, means the RB 15s can kill all three ships with 3-4 missiles and then get out of Dodge. If we're solely using laser-guided bombs, we have to tool around over the target guiding weapons, dropping extra bombs to make up for misses, and assessing battle damage. That's going to burn fuel, and it means we spend a lot of time faffing around off the Burmese cost, just asking to be intercepted while we're low on fuel. I'm not opposed to bringing along some GBU-12s as a backup. But they shouldn't be our primary weapon. I get that they the RB 15s are drat expensive. But we need to do this job right, or else we risk losing a Gripen to a SAM or a Burmese fighter. And that is much more expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 09:06
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
 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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
 "All pilots, start your engines. We're going."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Edit: For future requisitions, can we please have a runoff between the top two and consolidate similar buys? I have a feeling hexaphantom or all phantoms would have won mano a mano against the platypus plan that's neither fish nor fowl. I'd like to see the package deals that Yooper proposed. Have each package be geared towards one aircraft (i.e. all Phantoms, all day), one type of aircraft (strike fighters, etc.), or one mission set (strike, etc.). Maybe throw in a UAV with the package or something as a side bonus. It limits our choices a little, but it keeps things cleaner and simpler. And there's less voting to keep track of.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Buy mid- to late-block F-16s. They can carry HARMs (or can easily be modified to carry them). They can use many of the same weapons the Gripens can. And surplus ones are reasonably available and affordable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Eric Prince of Blackwater fame is apparently bombing Libya with Emirate cropduster reincarnation of IL-2. Ironically, if we sold off the Saab 105s and bought these, we'd have a more capable (and cheaper) ground attack aircraft. If we have the chance (and if we plan on operating in safish ground-attack environments), we might want to consider picking up a few of these. http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/2254/ http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/4354/ Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
power crystals posted:But not this. F-16s are too competent to be interesting. This entire outfit is based on plan Bs, get us some of those Polish Fitters or some other such nonsense if we wanna drop ARMs on some assholes. The more unreliable and single-role aircraft we have, the more goons we can potentially get into the air simultaneously, after all! Then there is only one choice for our SEAD mission. http://www.avrovulcan.org.uk/other_photographers/598_wideawake.jpg
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Taking over a third-world country to use as our own personal fiefdom is honestly not the worst idea the thread has ever had... I'm honestly surprised it's taken this long.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Lessons learned] -Dedicated CAP needs to act like dedicated CAP. Ditching the Meteors for GBU-12s and IRIS-Ts was a mistake. We hamstrung our fighters and it cost us Dandywalken's Gripen. -Keep everyone together. The southern strike force got too strung out and couldn't support each other. If they'd kept formation better, we'd have kept that Gripen. -RB 15s are awesome. Even I underestimated just how great they were. We killed every ship with only one missile eahc. -The RB 60 Saab 105s SUCK. We should sell them and buy something more capable. We either go high-end and buy light fighters (FA-50s, upgraded Kfirs, etc.), modern COIN aircraft (A-29 Super Tucanos with laser-guided bombs), or CAS aircraft (*sigh...Frogfoots...) -We need to get better at Rapid Tempo operations -- not getting the quick turn around and having the Max Profits Gripens wandering around cost us money. I'd intended to have the northern Gripens be airborne over the strikes to be ready to intercept the Chinese -- I should have made it clearer that they shouldn't have been doing wandering CAPs. -The altitude shenanigans at the end cost us a Jf-17 kill. That was a missed opportunity. Triple A posted:We are now officially a somebody in the geopolitical game. Buy a replacement for the Gripen and order a lot of anti-air kit. I would rather like this to stay off the front pages. The good news is that the Burmese and Chinese won't want to admit that we slapped around their navy and air force, so I suspect they're going to keep quiet. The Indians will remember what we did today. I think we're going to get some good future missions after today. And with that 747 shootdown, The Myanamar government is NOT going to look good. Maybe the victim's families will contract us for a revenge mission? Quinntan posted:The Gripen was valued by Klaus and Petersen at $37 million, so in actuality we came out of this up by only two and a bit million. Killing the Chinese SAMs will help us out in the long run. But yeah, that loss sucked and it was probably avoidable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Given that we [spolier]lost a Gripen this mission[/spoiler] and given that we have a fair amount of cash on hand, I think we need to consider another aircraft buy. Here are the things we should look for in an aircraft: 1. Carries guided weapons. The GBU-12 have been rockstars on every mission. Meanwhile, the RB 60's rockets have done virtually nothing. We literally would have made more money if we'd let the Saabs sit on the runway all day. 2. Multi-role. So far, we've had CAS, strike, anti-shipping, and air-to-air missions thrown our way. We can't afford more one-trick ponies. 3. Similar to our current inventory. This makes our logistics, maintenance, etc. easier and saves us money. I propose that we sell the RB 60s and buy new aircraft. We currently have $117,560,660 in the bank and can make $3,600,000 if we sell off the RB 60s. That gives us enough money to make a sizable aircraft buy. That's enough to give the RB 60 drivers new birds and get the reserve goons new aircraft. We can also see what the Ukrainian museum's inventory holds. Here's my preferences for procurement. We can put our man Jack on the case. 1. Modern 4th and 4.5th-generation strike fighters. My preferences are for Gripens or F-16s. If that fails: F/A-18s, FA-50s (upgraded with AIM-120s) 2. Modernized 3.5th Generation fighters. Since we already have Phantoms: Greek F-4Es, Turkish F-4E Terminators, Israeli F-4E Kurnass, German F-4Fs. 3. Electronic warfare and SEAD aircraft: EA-6B Prowlers, Tornado ECR 4. Light attack. These are good options: A-7 Corsair II (http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/4237/), Jaguar (http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/1290/), AMX (http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/947/) and Hawk 209 (http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/4087/) Vando posted:When building mission plans in future we should probably start adding instructions on prioritising targets/splitting salvos if we're on a turkeyshoot like this. The number of rockets bouncing off tanks and strings of 4 bombs atomising platoon remnants was painful to watch play out. Agreed. We should tighten up the weapons release orders next time. Dropping four bombs on a platoon of tanks does make sense (one bomb per tank, more or less), but the number of bombs we spent on soft targets was sometimes kinda dumb. Yooper, let me just say that I'm loving the production values of this LP. There are lots of really great little touches that set this LP above and beyond. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Apr 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 19:36 |
|
|
Dandywalken posted:What nailed me btw? I'm on a phone so can't read the log. Was it a gun kill? R-60? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-8_(missile) One of these got fired into you from really close range. aphid_licker posted:What's the selling point for light attack vs. just letting some multirole airframe drop a bomb? Flight hour cost? Cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate. It also gives goons more pilot slots.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2017 16:33
|
|