General

Would the AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk FLIR targeting pod take up a hardpoint, in place of another weapon, when completing an F/A-18 data forms? Thanks

Courtesy of PeterG on the A_Willing_Foe group. "First 3 batteries in line 5 km FEBA, last 2 batteries 10 km FEBA, each battery is 15 km apart. Batteries are organized in line, shallow V, diamond or box with launchers 100-750 m apart depending on terrain. Diamond seems more common with 4 launchers and Straight Flush is in the middle of the launchers." Thanks Peter.

Began a test scenario of a "veteran" USMC BLT+ attacking a "competant" Iranian Revolutionary Guards Infantry Brigade on a map of the greater New Bern, NC area. See general map here. The game starts with Opfor with an infantry battalion in the vicinity of Cove City, SApring Hope, and New Bern itself. The artillery battalion is in the vicinity of Chip. The armored reconnaissance company is screening to the south centered on Pollacksville. The USMC forces are conducting an advance to contact with a BLT OBJ 1 being the airfield at New Bern and with the MEU OBJ A being Washington. First turn, an LAR Company with a 155mm battery in DS engaged an Opfor Armored Reconn…

Here is an elementary question for resolving combat with the Ground Combat System - NOTE: I have never been accused of being a mathlete and last night "worse". Once the opposing forces ratings are calculated and modified, the instructions advise you to divide your rating by the opponent's and then the opponent's rating by yours to come up with simple odds. Each player rolls the D6 secretly and applies the result to himself. Last night I totaled up the the two forces found in HNR2003 and after doing the calculations the results were something to the effect of US 2.2 and Iranian 0.46. When I then take these figures to the Combat Results Table, I believe that I …

Stratsims LLC presents the CIC Warfare Plotter, a Windows tool that can aid your paper wargames. Originally developed to help develop rules for the upcoming Stratsims CIC sim, the program has value in H4 as well as a means to place units on the map, move the units according to their heading, speed, and time increment. Find more details, a demo, and purchase link at: http://www.stratsims.com/CIC_MP01.asp Stratsims is headed by five gentlemen from Harpoon Classic Gold's team, including the four founders of HarpGamer itself. We are striving to create a warfare game/sim that we've always wanted, incorporating many of the desires of those who assist us along th…

Interesting . Per Air War South Atlantic, p.84, at the close of 04 May 1982. “The loss of the Sea Harrier at goose Green caused further change to the Task Force’s operations. Never again were these precious aircraft to be hazarded in low-level attack missions involving flights over well-defended targets. From now on, when atacks on ground targets were required, the Sea Harriers would either bomb from a high altitude or use toss bombing methods, which were less risky but also far less accurate.” Was this lesson unlearned by forces in place to defend against the never to occur Warsaw Pact attack in western Europe and again in Kuwait/Iraq during the 1991 war?

This thread will be used to follow my feeble attempts to determine acceptable employment of this weapon system versus a an enemy air defense site consisting of 4x SA-6b TEL's, 1x Straight Flush Radar, 1x BTR-60 PU, and 2x ZU-23 AAA. The attacking force is rightly or wrongly 2x AV-8B II+ equipped with a Litening II pod and 2x GBU-12D, and have a general azimuth towards the radar. An attack limitation discovered so far is the aircraft's rapid approach towards the targets versus its ability to detect and classify these targets before their speed overtakes the target area. My first solution, which I began last night, has the section of Harriers split into Dash-2 t…

The two merchantmen and a tanker left at dawn under an escort of Grayback gunboats to link up with the LCS “Task Group” (is that the right term for a three ship sub-grouping) 10nm outside of the port of Freeport. The USN LCS’ will escort these vessels to the port of Coupville. The LCS’ are equipped as follows: LCS 1: F(12)1 Mk48 VLS w/24 ESSM//1 Mk91, F(21)1 Mk31 w/21 RIM-116A RAM, P/S (1)2 12.7mm, A®1 Mk15 Phalanx Block 1B 20mm/76, ACommand and Control Module (Cooperative Engagement Capability), A Helicopter Platform fitted with RAST w/3 RQ-8 Firescout VTUAV. LCS 2: F(1)1 Bofors Mk3 57mm/70//F GFCS, F(21)1 Mk31 w/21 RIM-116A RAM, P/S (1)2 1…

Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) has been caught unprepared by a German-made K-130 FFL. RQ-8 Fire Scout had already detected the FFL but due to the make-up of Coalition Forces, the FFL was not initially classified as a hostile contact even though Country X utilizes K-130’s just as our coalition partners, the German Bundesmarine. The LCS has been equipped primarily for Counter Mine operations. In addition, per page 21 of Harpoon Naval Review 2003, the LCS is equipped with a total of five Mission Packages, specifically MP’s 1,2 3, 7, and 8. In detail, the Mission Packages entail: MP1 (1)1 Bofors Mk3 57mm/70//F GFCS MP2 (12)1 Mk48 VLS with 24 ESSM//1 Mk91 MP3 ®1 M…

In response to lst night's discussion on the Rolling Airframe Missile, please see the attached manufactuer's link and once there the data sheet in the upper right hand corner. RAM

Per PaulK and as always sounds well-founded and appropriate. "Here's the math on your problem: fuel factor of 3.53kg/nm 145kts/240=0.6nm Performance Effects Altitude effect = 2.5 (just my way of stating 1/.4) Throttle effect = 4 The "Performance Effects" are used to determine range equivalents (in terms of fuel expended) for aircraft that deviate from Clean loading, Cruise altitude and Cruise throttle setting parameters upon which the basic endurance numbers are based. Range equivalent of fuel used based on Altitude (and load) effect = 0.6 X 2.5 = 1.5nm Range equivalent of fuel used based on Throttle effect = 0.6 X 4 = 2.4nm What this says is…

Also a response from DaveS (msg#3688) on the Admiralty Trilogy Yahoo Group. (In the case of a pair of Litening II pod equipped AV-8B II+ dropping 2nd Gen SALH-guided GBU-12D's on a small ground target. Is it true that the designator capable of effectively designating the target provided that the designating aircraft keeps the target within its 270 degree frontal arc (per 6.3.4.2.2)? i.e. the designator is not restricted to the 12/3 degree detecting/classifying field of view and theoretically the "optic" lens can "slew" side to side within the 270 degree frontal arc of the designating aircraft? "In the case you are talking about, I would say yes. I know th…

Some initial thought: JDAM has twice the range 8.0nm than the GBU-12D (4.0nm) benefits the aircraft actually launching. Drawback, launching aircraft needs to be above VLow and Low altitude bands. (per 6.3.4.2.4) JDAMs launched from Medium altitude are resolved on the Medium Altitude Dive Bomb Table. Also must have advanced or computing bombsight. Better guidance I/GPS versus SALH for the Paveway. pH from AV-8B II+ (computing) at medium versus a "small" target = only 12%. From High or VHigh pH goes up to 23% due to computing at the Low Altitude Dive Bomb Table. Still seems weak - launching aircraft is vunerable further out at that altitude, will add comm…

While it does not appear in Annex B, here is what I have gleened from the manufacturer and fas.org. They give roughly the same info: Size/Signature: VSmall (my idea) Sensor: CCD (Day only) or FLIR (Day/Night) (would need to assign a generation) Ceiling: 15,000 feet Speed: 65kts Cruise, 110kts "dash" Range:100km Fuel: 11 USG Would you like to add anything to that?

In Annex B of H4.1, the F/A-18C/D lists among its sensors: "...FLIR and Laser Spot tracker can be carried in a pod." It is not listed in as ordnance. What type is it? In Annex G2, an AAS-38A/B is described as "FLIR for F/A-18" but does not list the spot tracker, could it be inferred?

Is the "accuracy bonus" discussed in 6.3.4.2.4 that a weapon, such as JDAM, is resolved on the Dive Bomb Table (Low or Medium depending upon the altitude it is launched)? Per DaveS (msg #3689) on the Admiralty Trilogy Yahoo Group: "If a GPS guided weapon is used against a nonmoving target it gets the bonus and you would use the Low or Medium altitude dive bombing tables as appropriate. If the target is moving and the weapon does not have terminal guidance, treat it as a dumb bomb (if it does have terminal guidance, treat it as a PGM)." Short answer: yes, the GPS accuracy bonus is resolving it on the respective dive bomb tables.

The following is the answer that Mr. Brooks A. Rowlett posted on the Admiralty Trilogy yahoo group in response to my question of whether there is any limitation to the effectiveness of sighting with FLIR when flying in the VLow altitude band. On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:28 PM, Pete Maidhof wrote: > I guess the idea came from limitations of AS radar vs VLow > a/c to the effect of 10% of the max range. The limitations on AS radar are from ground clutter reflecting radar signals back into the radar set. This clutter acts as random energy into the receiver and can be viewed as in effect increasing the noise level of the radar, thus requiring a much stronge…

If my earlier "SA-9" and "Back-Up Optical Sighting" posts were not clear, how about the questions/assumptions posed a different way. Is it safe to assume that in H4.1 all of the land-based SAM's found in Annex S without inherent radar systems are intended to be part of an overall air defense coordination network which will facilitate targeting information from radar systems – to C2 nodes - to those firing units? That a radar set or anti-air system with an inherent radar should be part of the scenario T/O. That those systems with an inherent radar capability (SA-6b with Straight Flush or SA-8 ) may have an optical sighting back-up only if duly noted in Annex…

The following is half walk through, introductory moves of a scenario being tested. A pair of AV-8B II+'s (section) were patrolling 75nm west of Larak Island@ Medium Altitude, around 5,000', when it's 3rd Generation RWR detects a radar emitting from the island. While the section leader reports in to the Expeditionary Strike Group, they have detected the radar by ESM as well. The section is vectored into conduct a SEAD mission with the 2x AGM-65E Mavericks carried by each Harrier along with Litening II pods. The section descends to Low altitude about 70nm out. The Harriers accelerate to 580kts and at 23nm descend further to VLow. These pilots are veterans and…

I am stepping through an engagement between an AH-1W vs a ZSU-23-4. The AH-1W, with a 2nd Generation APR-39A(V)1 RWR and AGM-122A SIDEARM at low altitude can detect the radiating ZSU-23-4's Gun Dish Radar at 69nm (ZSU is on terrain <100 feet high)and engage it with the SIDEARM after conducting a pop-up to Medium Altitude undetected between 4nm (Gun dish detection of a Small Target) and 6nm (max range of the AGM-122A). The SIDEARM inflicts 1DP. How would this attack be resolved? 6.3.4.2 Guided Weapons appears to be where I should find the instructions, but it only addresses Command Guided and Semi Active Radar (SARH) Weapons, Semiactive Laser Homing (SALH) Wea…