broncepulido
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by broncepulido
-
-
About the 2023 integration of Compact FLASH dipping sonar on Algerian Super Lynx Mk140:
-
6 hours ago, donaldseadog said:
Rather tough if you are worried about harming the whales
A really good submarine exercise
Thanks for this one Enrique,
Thanks you very much Don. I keep working on Harpoon, DB limitation aside. I started an Operation Sindoor scenario and other B-2A attack on Iran, but too complex to fast finish them. Also waiting about the next Harpoon reléase on Steam.
-
1
-
-
Some (very few) sources:
Inspirated by a post by Mackie Folsom on the Navy General Board FaceBook group, of July 12, 2025: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Cs57Uu9b1/
The original Twitter or similar posts:
https://t.me/infantmilitario/60383
Probable near place:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kal%C3%A2a_des_Beni_Abb%C3%A8s
Inspiration for scenario name:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Sea_Sharks
-
Notes on some platforms:
- Algerian mixed-up LPD Kalaat Beni Abbes (2014, San Giorgio advanced derivative with ASTER 15 SAMs) is represented by CVH Garibaldi 02 #2319.
- Algerian Erradii-class frigates (2016, MEKO A-200AN) are represented by South African Valour-class #3088 (MEKO A-200SAN).
- Algerian Adhafer-class corvettes (2015, Chinese made with some Western systems) are represented by Pakistani Zulfiqar F-22P-class #3046.
-
The Med Sea Sharks, September 27, 2021. Historical Scenario.
A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for EC2003 Battle for the Mediterranean Battleset and the HCDB2-170909 (or later) 1980-2025 era Platform Database. This scenario is designed with Advanced Scenario Editor Build 2017.013 and to be run with HCE 2015.008+ or later.
This scenario is designed to be played from the Blue/Israeli side or from the Red/Algerian side. You should play a few times first the Blue side to avoid spoilers, and only later play the Red side.
Image: Algerian Navy LPD Kalaat Beni Abbes (L-474) on April 2, 2016, a San Giorgio-class derivative with very reinforced weapons, included sixteen ASTER 15 missiles. She is also employed as ASW ship capable to carry up to five Super Lynx Mk140 ASW helicopters, intended also for use in the MEKO A-200AN frigates, and equipped from 2023 with Compact FLASH dipping sonar. Photo by Messaoud Mesbouk, and took from Wikipedia Commons under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
This scenario was inspired yesterday by a comment by Mackie Folsom on the Navy General Board Facebook group, and fast researched a little time.
It’s not clear its historicity, but at least a very interesting story and scenario.
Basically at September 27, 2021, an unnamed Israeli submarine was collecting data on Algerian Navy drills, probably to know sound signature of Project 06361/Kilo II submarines opening tubes and launching 3M14E/SS-N-30B Sagaris land-attack cruise missiles.
On the Algerian side was claimed their forces ride out the Israeli submarine presence, forcing her to surface and quit the area.
For many and the lack of sources (Read the sources links on the Harpgamer website) is simply a foul propaganda action by the Algerian side, but none is clear or definitive.
Anyway is basis for an interesting scenario, but in this play both sides are more aggressive and some boats could be past of The Med Sea Sharks.
Enrique Mas, July 12, 2025.
-
Submitter
-
Submitted07/13/2025
-
Category
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
From here, EMALS and other Ford-class problems, "Naval Air: 2USS Truman Gets Dent":
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/2025041502847.aspx#gsc.tab=0
Quote: "...EMALS less reliable than the older steam catapult. EMALS was also more labor intensive to operate and put more stress on launched aircraft than expected. Worse, due to a basic design flaw, if one EMALS catapult becomes inoperable, the other three catapults could not be used in the meantime as was the case with steam catapults. This meant that the older practice of taking one or more steam catapults offline for maintenance or repairs while at sea was not practical. The navy admitted that in combat if one or more catapults were rendered unusable, they remained that way until it was possible to shut down all four catapults for repairs. During the initial at-sea tests the EMALS failed once every 75 aircraft launches. The standard for steam catapults is one failure every 4,166 launches. The landing and recovery system also had reliability problems, failing once every 76 landings, which is far below the standard of one failure per 16,500 landings. In effect, these problems with launching and recovering aircraft make the Fords much less effective than the older Truman and other Nimitz class CVNs"
-
1
-
-
On 2/20/2025 at 6:38 PM, Geoaegis said:
Working on developing my first battleset, which includes modifying the database to include current weapons, aircraft, etc. Pretty confident I am modeling aircraft, ships and subs consistent with the game rules/metrics. Also figured out how to manage mounts and weapons. However, struggling to find a good source for how to assign damage points to weapons, namely missiles. Found historical methods for calculating such as warhead weight x 0.2 = DP. Also found a NPS thesis (circa 2009) "A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COMMERCIAL OFF-THE SHELF NAVAL SIMULATIONS AND CLASSIC OPERATIONS RESEARCH MODELS" that runs through various parameters and assumptions. Do recognize there are several variables that go into calculating the base lethality of a missile and there are also several factors that affect the PH and end result on the target on impact/detonation. However, all read - not sure I have a good reference for assigning DP and PH.
For facilities, can't really find a rationale after reviewing the existing database. Found an old reference that equates facility damage point assignment to the number of 1000lb bombs it would take to make the facility inoperable. However, when I look at assigned damage points in the database, seems there is a pretty large spread. For example, looking at airfields with 1 runway that can handle VLarge aircraft, damage point assignments ranged between 2500-9000.
Any guidance or rules of thumb?
George
The best guidance keeps being Admiralty Trilogy/Harpoon updated paper rules and databases (I sometimes discord in some data and approaches, but mostly minor issues):
https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/7981/Admiralty-Trilogy-Group?src=browse7981
-
With many details on nuclear deterrence and submarine intelligence operations: https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com/?fbclid=IwY2xjawJJYiZleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSb-yAgxz_zdbn8mXkrtQuDJLLcGYd1hOOv-_vp_jS5Vtjt5ab6UwujhQQ_aem_vOGvQWFxIMI41GIN8kAfyA
-
1
-
-
-
6 hours ago, donaldseadog said:
The annex changes by the export.dll only overright the sonar data of the first sonar and rely on the loaded database having only one sonar for the platform. I think that is what's happening here. If you load hcdb2 (170909?) I think it will run ok regards this.
There is similar issue with mounts, the 'donar' platform needs to have the desired number of mounts.
As your screen shot shows there is also a desire to edit other data such as platform text, dimensions etc. If we can iron out the basics, such as the other issue you've uncovered then we can work on the niceties.
Also if I can get the basics right the export.dll will load into the SE for the scenario author to be able to make changes there and have them pass onto the GE.
One of the edits done here was the damage to one of.the chinese ships ssm mount so it was restricted to using guns against the surface ships, I think this sort of thing will also be sometimes of use the the scenario author like yourself. Small customisation for some scenarios to fine tune performance.
All great ideas, thanks for sharing!
-
Other issue, this more trascendent, about the Baka 250 Kg weapon employed by the SemiSubDroneSwarm (The SurfDroneSwarms were eliminated in the approach to the small surface group and in consequence not employed and tested, later will see to test them).
The SemiSubDroneSwarm approached the Chinese main group without problems, and fired the machine guns against the ships apparently without problems.
But when near the target ships, many problems:
- Blank dialog about possibility of torpedo attack (photo 1), but the Baka is clearly at last a missile flying very low at 50 knots as showed in photo 2 (only later, perhaps when the SemiSubDroneSwarm are nearer to the targets, is opened a dialog permiting missile attack, allowing launch the Baka with effect in the target and destroying the launcher boat, as originally pretended).
- Another blank dialog (photo 3) popping up when the torpedo attack possibility is pressed, opening the dialog but showing none allowed target.
-
Some irregularities detected running the scenario, mostly related with edition of platforms.
First, the edited Submarine entry 4107 for SemiSubDroneSwarm:
Not clear if is a single semisubmersible drone or a group of five drones, but not very relevant at last.
Attached is two photos, one of the modified/upgraded sensors in my personal use HCDB2 entry 4107 "Intrepido (U206A)", with CSU 83 main sonar and Kelvin-Hughes radar, and three other sonar systems added by me (The original 4107 "Intrepido (U206A)" has only the CSU 83 sonar).
In the edited entry 4107 for SemiSubDroneSwarm I see the CSU 83 has been replaced with Cluster Bay/Gulf, and the Kelvin-Hughes with a simpler periscope radar.
But the edited entry as SemiSubDroneSwarm keeps, I think is not pretended, my other three added sonar systems, i.e. SemiSubDroneSwarm keeps the other three sonars not showing only the pretended Cluster Bay/Gulf sonar, and that is a surpresive outcome, at least for me.
-
-
On 6/16/2024 at 5:19 PM, John22 said:
How do I find out the victory conditions in HUCE? I just played Nordic Light Scenario, thought I followed the orders correctly, but ended in a draw. I've noticed other scenarios are pretty vague about victory condition. Thanks.
Also, many scenarios are vague about victory conditions trying to simulate "fog of war", because usually you don't know very well the enemy, its forces or its aims and targets.
-
1
-
-
Against my original perception, now fighters (F-16) easily deployed in the very far north PIttufik (ex Thule):
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/f-16s-kc-135s-greenland-norad-exercise/
-
SPOILER ALERT !!!!
1993 Scenario ammo limits:
AGM-84D 32 -16 -16 (Expended all 32)
AGM-65E 60 -6 -4 -4 -2 -4 -2 -4 -2 -4 (Expended 32)
Penguin Mk 2 Mod 7 16 -2 -2 -2 (Expended 6)
AIM-120C5 48 -4 -4 -1 -4 -2 -4 -2 -4 -1 -4 (Expended 28)
AGM-114 60 -6 -16 -16 (Expended 38)
Blue side loses:
-2x -2x AV-8B 85 (Total 4, shoot down by Forgers).
-1x AV-8B 85 at 4:06:22 (Shoot down by Forgers).
-1x AV-8B+ 93 at 4:05:19 (Shoot down by Forgers).
-1xF-16 ADF (Shoot down by Forgers).
-1xF-16 ADF at 4:06:03 (Shoot down by warship SAM).
-3x Sea Apache (Shoot down by Forgers).
(Some aircraft loses were by the bad count, because Intelligence estimated 12x Forgers in theatre, but were 16x! Also, only now see with 12x aircraft shoot down Blue Side loses, and I was very near!).
Red side loses:
-2x MIG-23MF
-4x Su-27K shoot down at 4:06:22, AIM-120 and AIM-9 from Harriers.
Goa 1x unidentified fighter, 2x unidentified attack (Cruise missile strike)
Muscat -2x unidentified recce (Tu-95RTs) (Cruise missile strike), damaged to 19% by F-16 attacks with Mk84 dumb bombs.
Tu-95RTs chased by Harriers flying near US Task Force -1 (Total 3x Tu-95RTs loses).
Yak-36M -6 (2 with F-16 AIM-9, rest by Harriers) -6 -2 -2 (Total 16)
Ka-25 Ts -5 (Total 5, all by Harriers)
Ka-27PL -4 (2 with F-16 with -1 Sparrow -1 Sparrow) -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 (Total 16x Ka-27PL shoot down).
1x Sea King Mk42 -1 (Shoot down by Harriers)
4x Veer/Tarantul at 67/40 nm of the US Task Force, by Harriers with AGM-65.
1x Godavari at 67/40 nm of the US Task Force, by Harriers with AGM-65.
2X Nilgiri (Leander) at 67/40 nm of the US Task Force, by Harriers with AGM-65.
1xShankush Shishumar 1/86 SS, early sunk by ASW helicopters.
1x Papa Pr661 K-222 SSGN, early sunk by Sturgeon. (by Sturgeon/USS Finback, with 37% damage after some early Russian ASW helicopters attacks)
1x Victor I Pr671V SSN, sunk by helicopters.
1x Victor III Pr671RTM SSN, sunk at 4:06:03 by Sturgeon.
1x Udaloy Pr1155/1 92 (Early sunk by Harpoons launched by Sea Apaches)
1xSlava Pr1164/89, sunk at 4:05:59 Sturgeon.
1x Udaloy Pr1155 92, sunk at 4:05:48 by Sturgeon.
1xKara Pr1134B Kerch, sunk at 4:04:43 by Sturgeon.
1x Kynda mod Pr58/2 Grozny, sunk at 4:04:14 by Permit/USS Jack.
1x Ivan Rogov Pr1174 Mitrofan Moskalenko, sunk at 4:06:37 by Sturgeon.
1x Ivan Rogov Pr1174 Nikolayev sunk at 4:05:50 by Sturgeon.
1xKiev Novorossisk, sunk at 4:05:09 by Sturgeon (with 5x helos yet on board), achieving Minimum Victory Condition.
1x Polnockny Pr773 SDK-156, sunk at 4:04:12 by Harriers with GBU-16.
1x Polnockny Pr773 SDK-154, sunk at 4:04:12 by Harriers with GBU-16. At this moment Total Victory Condition is achieved (Apparently by 4x amphibious and Kiev sunk).
Post Total Victory were achieved these other kills:
1x Sofia Pr1552 Akhtuba, sunk at 4:03:49 by Harriers/GBU-16.
1x MIG-23MF, shoot down by AIM-120 at 4:03:18.
2x MIG-23MF, shoot down by AIM-9 at 4:03:17.
1x MIG-23MF, shoot down by AIM-9 at 4:03:15.
1x Kanin Pr57A Bolky, sunk by Permit at 4:02:59 (latest Russian escort).
1x Ropucha II Pr775M Azov, sunk at 4:02:42 by Harriers/GBU-16.
1x Alligator Pr1171/4 Nicolay Filchenkov, sunk at 4:02:42 by Harriers/GBU-16.
1x Merchant Bratsk, sunk at 4:02:09 by Harriers/GBU-16.
1x Sverdlov Pr68bis Murmanks CL, sunk at 4:01:34 after a Mk48 impact from Permit+some 5xAGM-65E of Harriers (apparently last Russian combat unit).
1x Merchant United Pioneer, sunk at 4:00:56 by Harriers/GBU-16.
1x Merchant Zhitomir, sunk at 4:00:55 by Harriers/GBU-16.
-
1
-
-
Congrats Patrick!!! Thanks!!!
Great, patience and difficult scenario.
I appreciate the slow pace, need to avoid hasty decisions, and the introduction of Sea Apache, playing most of the first day at 5-10 seconds time scale.
Also I did avoid detection the detection of the Task Force and the subsequent big Russian SSMs, or perhaps were launched and lost and undetected by the Blue Side.
I think this is my first long comment about a scenario, doing it partly because the need to keep records of the missile expenditure in a Word document, after evolutionated in the kill list.
-
Some sources (BEWARE, MANY SPOILER ALERTS):
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Quote: “It is unclear who will take over at the Pentagon and the military services when the top leaders all step down Monday as President-elect Donald Trump is sworn into office. As of Friday, officials said they had not yet heard who will become the acting defense secretary. Officials said the military chiefs of the Army, Navy and Air Force were getting ready to step in as acting service secretaries — a rare move — because no civilians had been named or, in some cases, had turned down the opportunity. As is customary, all current political appointees will step down as of noon EST on Inauguration Day, leaving hundreds of key defense posts open, including dozens that require Senate confirmation. In addition to the top job and all three service secretaries, all of their deputies and senior policy staff will leave.”:
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2025-01-18/defense-secretary-trump-16521995.html
“Greenland ready to work with US on defence, says Prime Minister”:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyp4p1x10no
https://news.usni.org/2025/01/13/usni-news-fleet-and-marine-tracker-jan-13-2025
https://www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_kirov80.htm
https://russianships.info/eng/warships/project_1144.htm
https://russianships.info/eng/today/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/americas-top-secret-u-2-spy-plane-arrives-in-britain/
https://www.thebarentsobserver.com/news/northern-fleet-gives-priority-to-faraway-voyages/422736
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Air_Policing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAGE_radar_stations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Surveillance_System
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland_Air_Defence_System
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenes_Air_Station
https://www.navylookout.com/hms-iron-duke-arrives-in-her-new-base-port-of-devonport/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-frigate-and-destroyer-availability-increases/
“In May 2024, it was officially confirmed that HMS Westminster and HMS Argyll would be retired, reducing the total number of active frigates to nine. In August (as we predicted) severe structural problems were found in HMS Northumberland and in November, it was announced that she was beyond economical repair, further reducing the frigate fleet to eight”:
https://www.navylookout.com/a-year-in-review-the-royal-navy-in-2024/
https://www.navylookout.com/snapshot-the-royal-navy-escort-fleet-in-april-2024/
https://www.navylookout.com/a-return-to-form-three-royal-navy-attack-submarines-at-sea/
Added January 4, 2025, HMS Sutherland (F81) was not available for a scenario settled on January 2025, also not yet or the 49 previous months! As consequence the full available escort for a UK aircraft carrier could be only 2xType 45 and 3xType 23 !!! (another one not ASW capable, and other one in Persian Gulf), scenario corrected on that small point:
https://mc.nato.int/missions/NATO-standing-naval-forces
https://mc.nato.int/SNMG1 (At January 12, 2025, by marinetraffic.com transponders Tromp was the only one ship in the formation, near Kristiansand, Norway.
https://navalpost.com/greyhound-u-s-navy-asw-task-group/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Station_Mayport (Base of Greyhound Task Group)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/109th_Airlift_Wing
http://www.uscarriers.net/ddg.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Greenland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airports_in_Greenland
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/american-f35-bases-greenland-nuclear-threat-russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituffik_Space_Base
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_Space_Warning_Squadron
FPS-132 stated in Thule:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Delta_4
https://www.petersonschriever.spaceforce.mil/Pituffik-SB-Greenland/
-
1
-
-
Notes on some platforms (BEWARE, MANY SPOILER ALERTS):
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
- Some northernmost bases, as Thule, are a little southern than in real life, to use this same Battleset without geographic changes.
- C-130J and C-130J-30 Hercules II (if present at Kangerlussuaq Airport) represent upgraded LC-130H-2 and LC-130H-3 of the 109th Airlift Wing, New York ANG.
- US fighters operations on Greenland are purely speculative, very probably none support in Kangerlussaq Airport and very bad weather at Piffunik (Thule) in winter.
- Dutch F-35A represent Danish F-35A.
- F-35B (UK) are not yet equipped with Brimstone 2 missiles and it's not a schedule for its integration, they can attack enemy ships only with Paveway IV at current times its only air-to-ground ordnance. 37 delivered to December 2024 (Four in US, for training and tests, and one lost), but with probably only some 32 pilots. Also, the Ukrainian crisis should limit its deployment in great numbers on HMS Queen Elizabeth. At this time are equipped with AIM-120C-5 and AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-120D are probably yet one year in the future (The recent Harpoon Annex Commonwealth Aircraft listed AIM-120C-7, but I don't find any other reference, per SIPRI UK has only AIM-120C-5, https://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/trade_register.php ).
- Australian MH-60R represents Danish MH-60R, equipped with ASW gear and weapons from 2023.
- Australian P-8A Poseidon represents British and Norwegian P-8A Poseidon.
- Australian KC-30A represents British Voyager.
- The use of some big and old nuclear submarines to insert special operations forces and/or its ship to shore connectors are both absolutely hypothetical. The three submarines are:
- A derivative of the Project 667BDR/Delta III SSBN, submarine Project 09786 Grunt: BS-136 Orenburg (Commissioned 2002 and on hopeless refit from 2021).
- The use of a Project 949A/86/Oscar II (with older and limited systems but longer range Type 65 torpedoes to represent Poseidon long range nuclear torpedoes) represents a Oscar II derivative special operations submarine Project 09852: BS-329 Belgorod (Commissioned 7/2022). Is not intended for use as SSGN on this scenario!!!
- The use of a Project 667BDRM/Delta IV represents a derivative special operations submarine Project 09787 Grunt-1: BS-64 Podmoskove (Commissioned 12/2016). Is not intended for use as SSBN on this scenario!!!
- The SSN Project 945/Sierra I B-276 Kostroma is represented by a Project 945A/Sierra II to reflect her refit.
- The use of ship entry #3328 zz Nakhimov represents the updated BCGN Admiral Nakhimov, on the last stages of her 28 years refit on early January 2025 (I did costumize it on my personal database).
- PAVE PAWS installations are employed as the very similar FPS-132.
-
-
Greenland Rush, day zero, January 20, 2025.
Greenland Rush, day zero, January 20, 2025.
A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for EC2003 Battle for the Atlantic Ocean Battleset and the HCDB2-170909 (or later) 1980-2025 era Platform Database. This scenario is designed with Advanced Scenario Editor Build 2017.013 and to be run with HCE 2015.008+ or later.
This scenario is designed to be played from the Blue/NATO side or from the Red/Russian. You should play a few times first the Blue side to avoid spoilers, and only later play the Red side.
Image: Old 12th Space Warning Squadron emblem, circa 1994 and chosen as more representative of its placement and mission that the current one. The squadron is based on Pituffik Space Base, Greenland, yet commonly know by its old name of Thule. Authored by the United Stated Army Institute of Heraldry, composed by servicepeople and in consequence on public domain. Took from Wikipedia Commons.
Few weeks ago his take on charge, President Elect Donald John Trump spoke about a possible US vindication over the Greenland territory with a strategic motivation. And also about Canada and Mexico.
For some apparently only a joke, the question was going serious at passing days, even with the Republican Party researching about a bill on it.
But was not a pun. And predictably, the declarations support the aim of China on Taiwan, and the vindication of Russia for strategic safety issues of a part of Greenland (See links provided in the “Get Support” section linked at this scenario in harpgamer.com).
This scenario is based in the usual Russian type of “special operations”: after a gray zone/covert action by the FSB topping the Greenland government, the new puppet government requested Russian aid “for defence against the US” (Followed by the usual Russian murdering of the government members requesting its aid, to shut mouths, of course, just the same alibi as in Afghanistan in 1979), and a Russian fast and surprise action of Greenland occupation with special forces, including the US bases and the very few usable airports.
And to execute its action the Russian side has very limited time to suppress the NATO opposition, to show the world a fait accompli, and Putin need urgently this global success after almost three years stagnated on the Ukraine invasion.
And also as usual, Putin has decided the better moment for the operation is January 20, 2025, just with his “friend” President Elect Trump taking charge, to exploit the disorganisation of have not a clear acting defense secretary and the Joint Chiefs of Staff present on Inauguration Day, and to install shock and awe from the first minute on the incoming Executive. Also, for many weeks was not any US aircraft carrier in the Atlantic, all operating in the Red Sea crisis or monitoring any Chinese action.
Also, is too early to the coming of Elon Musk with a miracle weapon to save the day.
Now, look for a copy of “Ice Station Zebra” (1968), watch it on the background and enjoy!!! … or not.
Enrique Mas, January 19, 2025.
-
Submitter
-
Submitted01/19/2025
-
Category
-
1
-
-
-
French SSBN activities pinned by a fitness APP, and it is not the only example:
https://www.eurasiantimes.com/french-nuclear-submarines-stealth-mode/#google_vignette
-
1
-
.png.ef5e9037335704d49aa90da15e41dc12.png)
Wargaming keeps a serious matter
in Military History
With some considerations of AI use in wargaming:
https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/2025/07/29/wargaming-is-having-its-moneyball-moment/