Steven

Hey Mark,

 

Just from personal experience, when the USCG starts blowing commands through a bull horn or the ships PA system demanding that I pull my boat over for a safety inspection I feel a little harassed so I imagine that a Chinese vessel going through the South China Sea, a Philippine Coast Guard vessel could board it for a "safety inspection." I have also read that their have been several historical accounts of suspected spy ships being involved in situations as well as aircraft.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-38335/US-China-new-war-words-spy-plane.html

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1999-03-24/news/9903240122_1_spy-ships-japanese-waters-maritime-self-defense-forces

 

As for boarding the suspect vessel in the EEZ waters, that's something for the lawyers to hash out and i don't recall that being possible in ANW.

 

I do know though that you can set up ship patrols in the mission editor that can pursue vessels "X" miles from their patrol route. So if you have an ASuW patrol from Ref Point A to Ref Point B, the patrolling vessels will pursue any other vessel that is within "X" miles of that patrol route (assuming the vessel is detected I assume.) One thing I have noticed is that it does appear that a Blue vessel (played by the AI), when fired upon from a Red vessel that it will maneuver away from the Red.

 

Again from personal experience from the US Navy, our ship, the USS England CG-22 boarded several vessels in the Gulf of Oman during Operation Desert Shield. I don't recall the circumstances yet I remember that they were boarded because their was a "suspicion" of those ships aiding Iraq. What those suspicions were, I haven't a clue but the Gulf of Oman is approximately 135 miles wide when measured from Muscat to a point due north to the Iranian coast and I'm sure that we were not anywhere near the territorial waters of Iran or Oman so one could assume that the suspected vessel was in the EEZ. I would also assume that if a US vessel that is actively engaged in a conflict with the country that I may or may not be aiding, 8 Harpoons within firing range would have a great affect on getting me to stop.

 

Setting posture will have a great affect on how a side handles a contact. For example, a USA vs. China scenario could have USA1 and USA2 sides which could have only recon aircraft on the USA2 side and setting the posture to Neutral to China and China's posture to the USA2 side neutral as well may keep the recon A/C from getting shot down. Setting the China posture to hostile to the USA2 side I believe will cause the A/C to be shot down, but I haven't confirmed that.

 

It's an interesting question, how a hostile posture handles a neutral contact when played by the AI. I'd be interested in the answer.

 

Good questions Mark.

 

Steve

Just brainstormed the morning and thought how some of you would think of the US being the aggressor, the Red side? I've been researching the US Navy's return to Subic Bay and the reaction of the Philippines and China yet I haven't heard any reaction from Russia or North Korea. Some groups in the PI are against the return of the 7th Fleet and China seems neutral for the most part.

 

So first off, has anyone read how China and North Korea are reacting to the US returning to its Cold War roots in Subic and second, your thoughts of the US annexing the PI in a Harpoon 3 scenario? China would appear to be the forerunner against the US occupying the island nation and with North Korea still struggling against unification, a US held PI would cause most certainly some tense headlines. Third, who would be the major players? US, China, and North Korea most likely but how do the minor players handle this such as Vietnam, Japan and South Korea? Finally, Russia's posture possibly siding with China presumably?

 

The link is a story to the involvement of China in North Korea, possibly a tie-in to the scenario perhaps?

 

http://thediplomat.com/2013/01/27/would-china-block-korean-unification/

 

Thanks everyone involved for making this a fun and challenging game.

 

Steve Raymond

 

 

Mark,

 

Played Passage to Denmark (1991) with mixed results.

 

1) TF Romeo sucessfully made the transit to Copenhagen without a scratch yet I lost 8 aircraft, essentially losing the scenerio. The game is set up in a way that allows the player to have contacts auto-identified or not. This is my downfall as I have yet to sucessfully play a scenerio where I have to send my A/C to ID bogies and end up getting positive ID's on them at the cost of my own A/C being shot down. It's difficult to say how to engage a contact when one has to be nearly on top of the other.

2)The 2 sub contacts that I had seen could not be positively ID'd so I steered clear of them. They didn't appear to be very aggressive or did they not see the TF? I had them blazing through at flank speed and possibly just out ran them.

3)The AIM7's and AIM9's didn't fare well against the MIG's or even the TU-16's. I Had to eventually send the F16's in with cannon fire to down the Badger and the TF took care of the MIG's once they were in range of the SM-1's.

4)The surface vessels were difficult to attack with Harpoons from the TF but Kormorons up close with active jammers did the job.

 

The scenerio took a bit to develop but once it got going it got nasty. Not a lot of enemy SSM attacks but the Russian aircraft made the transit difficult. Just as fun of a scenerio with less contacts and assets as mine with 200+ aircraft and two dozen ships.

 

Steve

Well, I finally got to play it through. Here are some observations...

 

I used auto-datalinks setting (I’ve had to abandon full realism because it’s too full of “realistic” issues in the game engine) but I’m sticking with aircraft logistics. I’ve played this before so I have some idea what is coming and will probably do better than I did the first time around, but we’ll see if I can actually win this…

 

(Observation...would the ships be arranged this way, with the carrier all by itself without escorts?)

As I had understood it from my days with short range SM1's and Sidewinders, CG's and DDG's would be positioned within range of those ships weapons. In this day of AIM-120's, longer range SM2's and OTH engagement I had assumed that ship positioning would be further apart. Would hate to have all my eggs in one basket.

 

17:01. Game start. A lot of targets are auto-detected (was this intentional?) and so I’m going use my T-hawks and hurt them, especially radar and SAMs. Also bringing my ships closer to shore to make it easier for the helicopter.

I've tried playing without auto-detect a few times to the point of tears. I'd loose the game so bad that I only use it on select targets. I think since you brought it up I'll pull up my big boy britches and try it again.

 

(One observation...the generic all-in-one-facility airfields are easy to knock out. It’s harder to take out an airfield if you actually plan out the base with hangers, runways, etc.)

I've used the runways vs. the all in one facilties and those runways take a lot of time to take out. The AI will rebuild it too if you dont completely destroy it. I think they are 1400DP. That's a lot of bombs. I wanted to focus on taking out individual units, (i.e.,aprons with aircraft on them) and the all in one could simulate just the runway.

17.09. Missiles on their way. Wow...the Ohio SSGN has a lot of cruise missiles. Air patrols and strikes groups forming up. I’m putting up my heavy bombers with cruise missiles while I can. I’m putting up about a dozen Hornets of various loadouts, ready to start looking hard at ships and sink the ones who are hostile. Since I’ve got Weapons Free (is this deliberate?) I can just send them on their way and let them do their job.

 

17.14. Merchant detected and I’ve set up a mission Ship Strike/BoardingTakeover and will assign helicopters to it. But first, I’m going to take a look at and possible eliminate a Russian ship that is right in the way of any choppers going towards the merchant. Pesky Russian warship!

 

17.24. Incoming missile warning! I think these are heading towards the airbase but I’m not sure.

 

(Observation...I would have added somewhere extra for the planes from the one base to land. Even if there is nothing else there, perhaps an airstrip in Greece or Italy to which any survivors of the base nuking can flee.)

Now what fun would that be? Got to have some drama!

 

17.38. Putting up a flight of six strike eagles. Tried to use the cruise missiles from the B-52s, but they would not fire. Database error or something else? (As it turns out, they fired eventually, but not until I was closer to the target. Was this an error on the missile range, or did the aircraft have to get close enough to get a "target lock" on the actual targets? Or something else?)

I'm not sure on this. I have never been able to use the AGM-158, either version, on any aircraft. I thought I had the AGM-86's on the B-52's just for that reason. As for the AGM-158 I believe it was a sensor issue in the DB. I have yet to see it resolved.

 

17.47. Lost a Lancer en route to Damascus. Many targets hit with T-hawks. Time for another round.

 

17.51. Lost the other Lancer. Still have problems with the cruise missiles on the B-52s. Odd.

 

18.26. I’m in the middle of a ferocious but rather one-sided battle with various ships being sited, identified as bad guys, and sunk with Harpoons, Mavericks, and anything else I can throw at them. Also dealing with some enemy aircraft, but now that I've zapped their airfields, they have nowhere to go and are just crashing as they run out of fuel. There’s a bit of real information overload at this point. Probably realistic but hard to keep track of everything I’m doing. By the end, I've sunk half-a-dozen enemy warships, including a Slava, without getting even a scratch on any of mine.

Yes, lots of stuff going on. I'm going to have to try to slim these things down.

 

18.45. Firing cruise missiles, finally, from the B-52s.

 

20.23. With the impact of the B-52s cruise missiles, the northern group of targets is pretty much obliterated. But the air base in Turkey is under attack by missiles. I get most of them, but a few get through and they are nukes and the base is HISTORY. And so are a couple of squadrons of American aircraft! Ack!

 

22.46. Got the CH-53 chopper on station over Damascus. Did I do it in time?

 

0.59. Mission failure!

 

According to the end-of-scenario report, where I was failed was to complete both parts of a two-part victory condition, stationing the helicopter and getting possession of the merchant ship. I'm not sure which one I failed. I did get the helicopter on station, but was it too late? And I did hover helicopters right near the merchant, and they had been assigned to a "strike/boardingtakover" mission (and so did not actually damage the ship with the marines onboard). So I don't know if these are game engine glitches or if I did something wrong.

Another "I don't know." Maybe v3.11 is a bit better with boarding/takeover. The process is not a 100% guarranted and it may take some time. I think it's an important victory condition and should be in the game.

 

Overall, this was a very interesting scenario. Even though I did not win, I had fun. Thanks, Steven.

Thanks for your input. I'm going to give one of your scenerios a spin in the next week or so.

evaamo,

 

I am not the resident Game Engine or Database guru here yet as I understand it, v3.11 would have improved boarding capabilities. You might wish to hit this question into a new topic rather than as a reply to this topic. CV32 and TonyE will for sure be able to get you a more thorough answer.

File Name: Chinese Aggression

File Submitter: Steven

File Submitted: 22 Nov 2012

File Category: Scenarios

 

A Japanese oil research vessel has been attacked and sunk off the coast of China and survivors have been taken hostage by pirates. The PLAN has claimed that the vessel was a military ECM vessel that had been hampering Chinese military communications and was well within Chinese territorial waters. The PLAN has threatened to sink any vessel and shoot down any aircraft that dare to approach the location of the sunken vessel or any attempt to rescue hostages.

 

Click here to download this file

That way, they know they're cheating if they do something else, although I imagine in the case of the Fire Scout it would be pretty obvious.

Exactly right. Why play the game to cheat so I've accepted the fact that their are going to be limitations to the game. Atleast the VC will accept a sub-type A/C and a fighter circling overhead for a CAP mission won't satisfy the VC. Good to bash brains with you towards a solution.

By setting the A/C type in the VC, any aircraft will satisfy the VC so now to find a way to get the CH-53E as the rescue helo. Also the VC can be setup for sub-type of A/C so you can specify TRANS (helo) or ATK (fighter). This would prevent a F-15 loitering in the poly zone and rescuing the hostages. Again those A/C have to be in the air during the scenerio design. And it seems that if you specify the sub-type of A/C, any one of them regardless if its launched or not will meet the VC. Also a specific base or carrier may be selected that the rescue A/C must be launch from. So my only problem is getting a specific A/C to be the rescue A/C that is not already in the air.

Just confirmed that the helo must be already in air when the scenerio starts. I confirmed this by renaming the helo in the designer as "Rescue Helo 1" and setting that helo as the helo to meet the VC. The rescue helo satisfied the VC while any other helos launched would not complete the VC since the other helos were not named Rescue Helo 1. Not an ideal way to play the game but the option is their.

OK so here's what I did. US and Neutral, the postures I think are irrelevant for my example. Since I can't seem to get a CH-53E to posses and board a ground unit I had the helo hover overt the CIV target. The CV was for "On Station" at 2130hrs for 5 minutes and the time had to be set for "Relative" vs. "Absolute". The scenerio had to have a CH-53E already airborne and that unit had to be the one to hover over the CIV target. So in other words the player cannot launch their own helo and use that one to accomplish the CV. The hover helo had to be already marked as the helo in the VC before the game even starts. It was the only way I can get an "On Station" VC to work. It doesn't sound right to me but I'm working on it still.

Nice job Mgellis. I'm going to attempt to set up my "Battle of Damascus" scenerio with that as a VC.

I'm working on something similar right now. One of the Victory Conditions will be hovering an aircraft over a CIV - Evacuees facility to simulate a rescue operation. The area that has to be reached is about one square mile; I figure this is big enough that if the aircraft is on "hover" it should be able to remain on station for the 20 minutes necessary.

 

If I can get it to work, I will let people know; if not, I will try something different and see if I can get that to work.

I tried that too but if their are hostiles to the CIV and they are within range, the hostiles will take them out.Possibly changing the VC to protect might be easier?

"The system right now is behaving as advertised, [although] occasionally, we will have some issues with it on the ground," he says. However, this is usually easily fixed by shutting the aircraft down and then restarting it.

That doesn't sound like a very convienient solution and I'm thinking that pilots who are trusting their lives to this multi-million dollar machine are not going to want to shut the A/C down to clear a problem and then restart it as their adversary is releasing their payloads.

 

In the end I ended up losing the scenario because I was unable to trigger the Victory Condition for the SEAL's rally point. I set the CH-53s to hover there for way more than the required 3 minutes... and I did that before 21:00, at 21:00 and after 21:00. No luck. Will try again and if I'm unable to make it, I will let you know.

 

 

cheers

-E

I've tried getting the victory conditions on the SEAL's Rally Point and I wasn't able to do it either. I'm thinking to possibly change the VC and making the rally point a red side which would allow the helo to board and takeover the rally point. I know I've done it once, stinks that it can't be done again. Thanks for your input. Such a fantastic game that allows scenerio design and then get feedback from players in return.

Hey Gunny,

 

Keep up the great work on HUD 4 DB.

 

I have made a scenerio where surface units must locate a lifeboat/liferaft as part of VC. I have been using the CIV Drifter [8m/12kts] entry it but may not be the most realistic representation.

 

http://daesungeng.en.ec21.com/Totally_Enclosed_Lifeboat_Life_Boat--411866_411867.html

 

This link has a list for enclosed lifeboats with various sizes. My concern is the speed and RCS. The drifter with a top speed of 12kts seems a bit fast for a larger enclosed lifeboat and I would think that a small, slowly drifting inflatable 6-man life raft, seemingly impossible to locate in the real world, would be even more difficult in the dark and in heavy seas. In the Harpoon ANW world, Auto Detect is a great tool for keeping targets out of sight yet once a target is located, I believe its the RCS that rules whether a weapon will engage a target. Also the drifter is armed which may hinder boarding.

 

Thank you,

 

Steve

Hi Steven... I played your scenario last night and initially I didn't take it too seriously as I was playing it to kill some time... but boy did I pay a heavy price for my lack of commitment!!! I ended up playing it for 4+ hours to salvage the little honor I had left after such a beating!!!

 

I will give it a second try this weekend and I really hope to obtain a different result this time!!!

 

SPOILER ALERT... DON'T CONTINUE TO READ IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED IT:

 

My main problem was detecting the russian base to the north-east on a timely fashion... and I ended up with an incoming volley of nuclear Kent's that saturated the Turkish base AAD and basically destroyed it. I had most of the aircraft in the air at that moment, taking care of both syrian bases... some of them ended up ditching when they ran out of fuel since there wasn't a field to divert to, and some others casualties of Mig-31s.

 

The other problem I had was due to my underestimation of the Slava cruiser's offensive jamming activities... I spent a lot of time (and foolishly lost a few A/C) dealing with it, since it was disrupting my operations. Once the Slava was taken care of, the rest of the ships were easy. I wasn't planning to use many of my tomahawk missiles on the two land bases... but using the D variant was definitely a great aid for dealing with the S-200s. The rest was setting up a few SEAD raids using Growlers and JSOW-laden SuperHornets. In the end, losing the base in Turkey forced me to use the rest of the Tomahawks to wipe the land facilities. I had to use the stock of 109's from the CG, the DDG and the Ohio to accomplish the task.

 

In the end I ended up losing the scenario because I was unable to trigger the Victory Condition for the SEAL's rally point. I set the CH-53s to hover there for way more than the required 3 minutes... and I did that before 21:00, at 21:00 and after 21:00. No luck. Will try again and if I'm unable to make it, I will let you know.

 

Boarding the bulk cruiser was no problem (after dealing with the rest of the ships of course).

 

All in all this was a fun scenario, which I failed mostly due to my "informal" attitude towards it at the beginning. Making good decisions from the start is fundamental to winning it with minimum losses. Shall report back after my second round with it!!!

 

Thanks for sharing it.

 

cheers

-E

As I played the scenerio it had been difficult to complete the VC by hovering over the SEAL Rally Point and I'm not sure why. I'm not sure if was the altitude or if I had set the area to small and I wasn't directly over it but I had done it so let me know if you're having issues so I can change it out for another VC. On my end the Delta time was 5 minutes, not 3 minutes as you stated so I'm not sure if that was the reason or if you just mis-quoted.

That Russian base in the east was a doozie and I'm glad I put it in their. It will rip your heart out if you think you've got the game won and those bombers start let loose some nukes. Glad to hear to from you. Steve Raymond

Thanks Mgellis, I'll have to try the "rouge" side. I've read about it before but never implemented it. I have noticed that neutral sides can and will be shot if they pass within range of red units. I just put a scenerio in the downloads section that has several sides and a neutral so escorting them through hostile air space becomes a necessity.

 

If I have two Russian sides, friendly to each other, will I have one side hostile towards blue and one neutral? If I understand you, if I fire on the hostile Russian side, the neutral will turn hostile to the blue side?

 

Thanks, Steve

Just tried the two Russian sides, one neutral and one hostile. I couldn't get the neutral side to fire onto the blue side but I can see the value of this posturing. A good tool to have.

Thanks Mgellis, I'll have to try the "rouge" side. I've read about it before but never implemented it. I have noticed that neutral sides can and will be shot if they pass within range of red units. I just put a scenerio in the downloads section that has several sides and a neutral so escorting them through hostile air space becomes a necessity.

 

If I have two Russian sides, friendly to each other, will I have one side hostile towards blue and one neutral? If I understand you, if I fire on the hostile Russian side, the neutral will turn hostile to the blue side?

 

Thanks, Steve

File Name: Battle of Damascus

File Submitter: Steven

File Submitted: 15 Oct 2012

File Category: Scenarios

 

A joint service scenerio with USN, USAF and Turkish units tackling a heavily fortified Damascus. Blue side must react towards an aggressive regime by neutralizing WMD sites and a Russian air base while boarding a suspect arms ship and position a helo to recover US Special Forces in downtown Damascus. You must also hunt down the defunct leader of the country.

 

The Russians have sided with Damascus and have conveniently positioned the air base with bombers somewhere in eastern Syria that is moderately guarded with a wing of fighters. It is a distance from the US base in Turkey making in-flight refueling necessary of the F-15 and F-16 fighters patrolling the area for the base. It will not be easy to locate but if you track inbound and outbound aircraft, you may give yourself a general idea of its location. Just pay attention to the enemy air units leaving the area as they may be nuclear armed bombers enroute to your base. Destroying the base is a victory condition.

 

A WMD site is located north of Damascus, is heavy guarded and have several targets to be be neutralized in order to meet the games VC. Also to follow the story line, the ousted leader of Syria is holed up in a bunker inside Damascus and your search aircraft must fly low and slow in order to locate the target. This bunker is also a VC. A Russian arms ship is being escorted into Syria and must be boarded and yet again it is under heavy Russian escort. Boarding is also a VC. A predetermined location inside of Damascus has been labled in order to postion a CH-53E to recover special forces and the helo must be in postion hovering over the location no earlier than 1900Z or the VC will not be met. Just to add a bit of frustration their will be neutral units in the air as well as on the surface.

 

The scenrio has many targets and units and runs a bit slow yet it has a scenerio duration of 8 hours and can be played easily in an afternoon with a 15-30 second time compression. Thank you for considering playing this scenerio.

 

Click here to download this file

You might want to check the Postures settings for the sides involved under Edit/Sides/Postures to insure both sides are set as Hostile to each other. An error there could explain why supposedly hostile units are reporting their positions and you are unable to attack.

 

I don't really know what to tell you about the Missions, but someone here can no doubt help you out with that as well.

 

Buddha

So my duty here since I am not an avid giver just an avid taker, I will give some information today. When one becomes soooo enthralled in Harpoon scenerio design and makes half a dozen sides, one wold be apt to mess up in keeping the postures straight. Thank you TEPonta.

After designing a scenerio and returned to play it, the game shows all the enemy units, the enemy units paths and does not show any missions that were made in the scenerio editor. Also Blue side cannot attack any Red side units. Message states no enemy units or contacts selected. Any ideas on what happened?

 

Thanks, Steve

Hey 'Pooners,

 

I'm doing research on the E2C Hawkeye and any limitations that it may have, specifically smaller targets on the water. Can the radar see smaller, sleeker yet fast moving fiberglass ships aproximately 50 feet in length moving at 100 knots? Any help is appreciated.

 

Thanks to all,

 

Steve

How many want to bet the pilot had to change his skivvies after that first attempt. Holy smokes!

I wonder if the CO had another billet planned for himself? Water breaking over the bow on our ship and the Captain didn't let unessential crew outside the skin of the ship let alone land a helo. Bravo Zulu to the pilot.

I had asked a similar question when I designed a scenerio with the US attacking Iran and the reaction of Arab countires. With such a swift and massive retaliation, I think any US military installation, US Embassy or government facilty or US company with locations in Middle East countries would feel quick political and possibly violent pressure from the host country regardless if Tehran had been involved with financing or planning the attack in Boston. If Tehran did have involvement, I think the UN/NATO pressure would be slightly less intense. But with 4 million people dead in Iran, Yemen and Afghanistan, the UN and NATO for sure will receive pressure from countires with populations in the affected areas. This would be economically a near death blow to the US.

 

Tony E brings up the best point. We play our favorite military strategy game on a machine that is most likely built in China. We buy a lot of our favorite and expensive items from the Chinese and they could possibly accept the attack on Iran as an indirect threat to them. Production of Chinese products bound for the US as well as US products meant for China could be stretched thin but to what level is tough to say. I also see the value of the US dollar in a rapid freefall and the US credit rating being downgraded, possibly to junk status, as China, our biggest debt purchaser, probably not wanting to have a a whole lot do to do with US dollars or debt. China probably would make out like a bandit as the dollar would fall and the Yuan would probably intially dip due to world insecurity then modestly rise. Gold, which China holds large amounts, could skyrocket. Curious on how American military defense contractors would handle a near worthless dollar and subsequent purchases from the DoD.

 

The reaction of Arab countries falls immediately behind that of China particularly because of oil. With a third of the worlds oil coming from an Arabian country, their reaction would determine the price of oil. But as I see it, if a pipeline is attacked in Africa and oil goes up a few bucks, I see oil markets spiking with attacks on Iran. Even as most Arabian countries hold relatively calm to good relations with the US, an attack on brother country makes it a tricky proposition.

 

But "terroists working with Iran" is a broad statement and the involvment of Tehran, I feel, would be key to this scenerio and the first 72 hours.

 

Fantastic thoughts Mgellis and Tony E.

Fellow Harpooners,

 

I have a theoretical scenerio in the works where Iran invades Manama Bahrain in retaliation for EU sanctions. (I figured the 5th Fleet HQ and the US Embassy would be good targets.) It appears that on my machine the more units their are in the scenerio the slower the game runs (slewing doesn't work well.) So since I wanted to have red targets in the Straits of Hormuz, Tehran and on Bahrain, would breaking up the scenerio into two or three smaller scenerios would make it run any smoother?

 

Thanks to all as usual.

 

Steve