mike_espo

Yes! This is the info I was looking for.

This has been my experience. A 'Good' solution is going to give you pretty accurate info, plus or minus a little. The longer you have a 'Good' solution, the better that info should get. Ahh. So that makes sense, if you wait, and have a Good Soltn for two or more turns you get more accurate info. Sounds good.

Thanks. Perhaps I phrased the question wrong I want to know if lets say a "Good" TMA solution is obtained on the first roll that the contact is detected: a 01!! the target is at 18 nm distance. Beyond the range of the submarine torpedoes. I am playing a refereed game. Does the ref tell me that the target is at 15nm? Does he tell me the course and speed of the contact? After all, it is a "Good" solution. I should know with a "Good" solution if my torpedoes will even reach the target. I think there should be some flexibility on what information is given players. Maybe a "Good" Solution gives range within +/- 1nm. Course and the speed within 1 or 2 knots. Conversely, a "Poor" solution should give the range within +/- 6nm and the speed within +/- 6 knots ect..... What do you think? thanks

Once a submarine passively detects a contact and develops a TMA solution, what sort of information is obtained? If a "Good" Solution is obtained, does the submarine know course, speed and range to the target? What about "Fair" and "Poor" solutions? This becomes important when firing torpedoes with limited range and enable points ect. Thanks

Anticipating a after-action report forthcoming. Intend to soften up the Iranian positons with the tomahawks from the SSN, then use the BUFFs from Diego Garcia to destroy the Fighter base and ships on the mainland, then Tarawa's air group should be able to mop up. Hopefully there will be something for the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit to do.

Thanks. But how do you maneuver the missile in the game with TERCOM guidance?

Replayed the scenario. Results did vary. But overall, it was a little less one sided. The Syrians were able to destroy a Falcon that was disadvantaged initially. Then the Israelis went to work and destroyed 4 of the 8 Mig 23s. 1 of the 4 Falcons was splashed. Seems a little more realistic.

Playing Dave's wonderful scenario: Send in the Marines from Naval Review 2003. Planning to do a surgical strike with Tomahawk LACM. Looking at the annexes at the Tomahawk cruise missiles: My question is: What is TERCOM? I know the tomahawk uses terrain mapping for guidance, but thats it. How is this played in H4? Also, the warhead strength: what does it mean 4x14 for damage? It says 4 attacks. Does this mean 4 attacks at 14 dp strength? or 1 attack at 56 points rolled 4 times? I am guessing that this only involves attacking land targets rolling on the critical hit table. thanks.

I did a Bekka valley test scenario a few days back. F-16a vs Mig 23MF. After the salvo of SARH missiles from the Syrians, the Falcons were scattered and low on energy. No kills and beyond dogfight range. But the Floggers lit the burners and accelerated and were able to close with a big speed advantage. I played the rules as written and even though a few of the falcons were disadvantaged( a flogger in its rear arc ) the falcons were still able to go first and two of the floggers that were in a position of advantage (falcon in its forward arc) were shot down before they had a chance to fire. It was a slaughter! Half the Syrians were splashed. No losses to the Israelis. Ill replay and do an AAR

Hmmm. It seems a little unrealistic that an aircraft with a 350 knot advantage in speed would not get to go first. Also, if a aircraft is behind another at the start of a dogfight, I should think it should go first irregardless of the maneuver rating. For the first round only.

Using the new Sitrep 31 air rules. Regarding Initial conditions of a Dogfight: If a F-16a with a maneuver rating of 4.0 is dogfighting a Mig-23MF with a maneuver rating of 3.0, does the F-16 get to fire first, even though the Mig-23 has a speed advantage? In my test scenario: A F-16a had to maneuver to avoid a SARH missile attack from the Mig-23MF, thus reducing its speed to 350 knots. The Mig 23 was zipping along at 700 knots before the range closed to Dogfight range. Should I have added +2 to the Mig-23s maneuver rating due to speed when the dogfight began? Now, the Mig has a maneuver rating of 5.0 and would get to go first. This would have made a huge difference in my dogfight. thanks

Thanks. Yes Tony, I saw them. Dave just emailed me with a lot of Damage Values. Now I gotta decide what matchups to do!

Just received sitrep 31 and Naval Review 2003. I already own Naval Review 2009 Looking over the new air rules, gonna try them this weekend. Just looking them over quickly, I may use parts of both. I like the randomness of disengaging from a dogfight. Also, I am not sure if it is appropriate to use pilot quality for air to air missile combat. Definately for guns. Seems much less complicated to end a dogfight. I am guessing that the dogfight is no longer "sticky".

Also, advanced types of radar, as ISAR, can provide images of the target, reflected as "classification" flag in Harpoon ANW, I think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_synth..._aperture_radar SAR and ISAR radars are in the H4.1 rules too. When contacts are detected by a radar that classified as SAR or ISAR, the detected aircraft and ships can be classified by type or class, and ground targets can be identified. Dave Thanks I just thought it would be possible with ordinary radar differentiate between contact sizes.

Yes! This makes sense. I assume this rule only applies to Surface to Surface radar contacts. Ground clutter from airborne radar is another kettle of fish altogether!