broncepulido

I see LCS will employ probably Sonar 2087, as reflected here: - http://news.usni.org/2013/08/21/lcs-mission-packages-the-basics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral_combat_ship#Anti-submarine_module Also worring comments in the Wikipedia entry about the use of LCS to escort carrier groups! Link: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/04/02/lcs-wargame-reveals-new-tactics-amid-controversy/

The new North Korean entry nuclear missile KN-08 Nodong C is introduced now in the magazine of the North Korean missile bases 52666 No-dong Missile Base, 52896 Hochon Missile Base and 52897 Yangdok Missile Base, but in those bases neither in the DB is provided a launcher for KN-08 Nodong C (also the three bases have 23mm/81 burst in the magazine for 59534 mount 23mm/81 ZSU-23-2 Bty, but only Hochon gets actually the mount).

Because a typo the new entry North Korean Golf SSB has a duplicated 60975 TT mount, and not the pretended mount entry 61064 KN-11 SLBM.

Interesting analysis: http://www.hisutton.com/Analysis%20-%20Sinpo%20Class%20Ballistic%20Missile%20Sub.html

Very minor issue: - Loadout 55811 SIOP (Nimrod MR.2) has 1xSSQ-954B DIFAR, it should be 126xSSQ-954B DIFAR, as in other Nimrod loadouts.

SPOILER ALERT --- ---- ------ --------- On force composition: The NATO and Swedish forces are historically correct, aside the number of helicopters and ASW patrol aircraft (were present three planes, very probably 2xGerman P-3C Orion and 1xFrench Atlantique 2, as in Dynamic Mongoose 2014). After a few hours of search I did find almost all the NATO warships and submarine present, only lacking the identity of Norwegian and US submarines, and confirmation of the French ships as D646 Latouche-Treville, and the oiler Durance-class Somme A631 based at Brest (my guess was correct at last). And later surprisingly I found the complete force naval composition in an unexpected source (I almost don't see videos usually), here, in the minute 1.36 is the complete force in the log of German submarine U33!: https://www.dvidshub.net/video/402124/dynamic-mongoose-2015-norway-part-1#.VU8giGAcR-E The lacking submarines were Norwegian Type 210 Utvaer, and not least than the sorpresive USS Seawolf (SSN21), for many based at the West Coast!

File Name: Exercise Dynamic Mongoose 2015. Historical Training Scenario. File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 11 May 2015 File Category: GIUK Exercise Dynamic Mongoose 2015. 4-14 May 2015. Historical Training Scenario. A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for the EC2003 Battle for GIUK Gap Battleset and the HCDB-150502 1980-2015 era Platform Database or the HCDB2-170319 new standard 1980-2025 era Platform Database. This scenario is designed with the Advanced Scenario Editor and to be run with HCE 2015.008+ or later. Image: Swedish submarine Gotland, British frigate Portland, Spanish AEGIS frigate Blas de Lezo and Dutch NH90 Caiman helicopter. US Navy photo taked off Bergen 4 May 2015 by Commander David Benham, as consequence in public domain. Retrieved from http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/photos_119170.htm This scenario is designed to be played from the Blue/NATO side or from the Red/NATO side. You should play a few times first the Blue side to avoid spoilers, and only later play the Red side. After the eventful year of 2014 and the not less eventful first four months of 2015 and with the World beginning the so-called Second Cold War, the President of Russia Vladimir Putin (ex-KGB lieutenant colonel) was showing clearly his plan to recover the Russian Empire and later Soviet territories for reinstitute the greatness of his Russia, and to guarantee his passage on the History as saviour of the Rodina. From May 2014 Putin provoked in succession the Crimea, Ukraine, Donetsk, Baltic States, October 2014 Swedish submarine incursion, G-20 Brisbane meeting naval crisis, November 2014 Faslane submarine incident, frigate Yaroslav Mudryy February "Channel Dash", April 2015 Finnish submarine incursion (for many observers causing the pre-mobilization of Finland reserve forces), and constant and multiple overflies with military warplanes entangled in potential incidents with commercial flights. When the big anti-submarine exercise Dynamic Mongoose did begin in 4 May 2015 was interpreted by many journalists as an answer to the latest Russian actions and menacing postures, but it was actually a yearly exercise. But in the current world situation was legit to think otherwise, more with the intervention in the exercise of Swedish Navy elements, probably as consequence of the Russian-attributed Swedish submarine incident of October 2014, as Sweden is not a NATO member, but did participate as partner. Of course this is a training exercise and actually shots, torpedoes and missiles aren't fired and nobody is hurt ... Enrique Mas, 10 May 2015. Click here to download this file

10 May 2015 modification: main title year changed from "2105" to correct "2015" !!!

Loadout 55764 ASW (For Lynx HMA.8, in service from 1995) should not include SSQ-947B Ranger active sonobuoy, as was employed 1968-1995 and retired then, better remplace them with SSQ-954B DIFAR, passive sonobuoy in use from 1988, as employed in loadout 55762 (for Lynx HMA.8 and Wildcat HMA.2). Another problem is the sonobouys in the loadouts are not traceable in the DB editor (I think from ever), when you click in the DB table sensor part and you click in a sonobouy entry to see in which loadouts is employed, you get no results.

A Little issue in HCDB-150205 (detected a week ago but only remembered now!): - Ship entry 4037 Tuo Chiang lacks any sonar type, is Mk46 Mod5 ASW torpedoes are in consequence useless. She employs an not-identified type of towed array sonar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuo_Chiang_class_corvette

An incredible article "The Taming of the Screw" !!!: http://americanhistory.si.edu/subs/anglesdangles/taming.html

Typhoon has ducted screws: https://battlemachines.wordpress.com/tag/soviet-submarines/

I remember this, the new Russian Yasen-class SSN has clearly an unshrouded screw and probably cavitates: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA_(%D0%90%D0%9F%D0%9B).jpeg

Intrigued on if the Improved Los Angeles-class (from USS San Juan) has a ducted screw and it qualifies them for the "Does not cavitate" flag. I don't remember any photo of any Los Angeles with a ducted screw, but ... Analysing navysource.org photos (I saw all the boats photos today!), some curious results here: USS Jacksonville (SSN-699, Flight I) launching ceremony, unshrouded screw probably covered with tarpaulin: http://navsource.org/archives/08/700/0869914.jpg USS Buffalo (SSN-715,Flight I), clearly unshrouded screw (this was a very difficult one to detect in the thumbnails!): http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0871520.jpg USS Oklahoma City (SSN-753, Providence VLS sub-class), probably unshrouded screw: http://navsource.org/archives/08/701/0872331.jpg USS Greeneville (SSN-772, San Juan I688 sub-class) in dry dock, showing a first glimpse of "the thing" covered by tarpaulin (whithout the next model photos, impossible to determine clearly his shape). But not evidence of a true ducted pump-jet: http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0877226.jpg Model of USS Greeneville (SSN-772, San Juan I688 sub-class), showing clearly "the thing", apparently a seven blade screw, entoured by a narrow annular circle welded to the blade tips. But not evidence of a true ducted pump-jet: http://navsource.org/archives/08/pdf/0877242.pdf USS Cheyenne (SSN-773, San Juan I688 sub-class), annular circled screw covered by tarpaulin. But not evidence of a true ducted pump-jet: http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0877329.jpg As sideshow, an interesting photo of the JFK CVBG in the USS Albuquerque (SSN-706) section: http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0866913.jpg Cracked sonar dome of USS Groton (SSN-694), caused by a air bubble not evacuated previously to going deep: http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0869411.jpg Launching commemorative booklet of Glenard P. Liscomb (SSN-685, forerunner of Los Angeles-class), with a comparative of US and Soviet naval forces!: http://navsource.org/archives/08/pdf/0868509.pdf Curious and detailed model of USS Tullibee (SSN-597, a small, silent and slow hunter-killer submarine)(five blades screw?): http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0859704.jpg

Great update! Thanks Brad! Very minor issues in HCDB-150205: - Loadout entry 57295 Precis-LR (for USAF F-4E) lacks ground attack weapons (probably 2xGBU-15(V)1/2). - The new and useful ship entry 4038 Cyclone (2014) lacks the ships names (they should be the same of Cyclone (1993) less Cyclone, transferred to Philippines). . Submarine entry 6524 is classified as SS, should be SSN.

3 May 2015 modifications: - Use of the just today issued HCDB-150502 database, to replace Cyclone (1993) with Cyclone (2014), equipped with Griffin light anti-ship missiles (one of the aims of the scenario, to test counter-swarm tactics). - Little text modifications, to add the idea of "is usual to seize a ship because a court order, but only anchored or in port, never sailing or in transit".

Notes: - The starting positions of US forces are mostly speculative. - VP-26 The Tridents was at the incident time actually based in Al Dueid, Qatar. - USS Farragut (DDG-99), USS Typhoon (PC-5), USS Firebolt (PC-10) and USS Thunderbolt (PC-12), all were some 60 nm near to Maersk Tigris (Note: the Cyclone-class patrol ships were equipped with Griffin short range anti-ship missiles from March 2014, with 2xMk60 four missile cannisters each ship. All are based in Manama, Bahrain). Some sources: http://news.usni.org/2015/04/29/pentagon-unclear-why-iran-seized-maersk-tigris-u-s-destroyer-3-patrol-craft-nearby http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/details/ships/shipid:1635726/mmsi:538005749/imo:9694581/vessel:MAERSK_TIGRIS https://gcaptain.com/ais-reply-shows-moment-maersk-tigris-was-picked-from-busy-shipping-lane/ http://gcaptain.com/maersk-tigris-at-anchor-in-bandar-abbas-crew-safe/ http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/23/two-iranian-warships-now-escorting-iranian-cargo-ships-off-yemen.html http://gonavy.jp/VP_VP26f.html

File Name: The Maersk Tigris Incident. 28 April 2015. Alternate History Scenario. File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 02 May 2015 File Category: Middle East The Maersk Tigris Incident, 28 April 2015. Alternate History Scenario. A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for the Middle East IOPG Battleset and the HCDB-140909 1980-2015 era Platform Database. Image: An MH-60S Knighthawk flies by the guided-missile destroyer USS Farragut (DDG 99) during a replenishment-at-sea evolution in the Arabian Sea on Dec. 4, 2012. The Knighthawk is attached to Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 8 and is assigned to the Military Sealift Command USNS Bridge (T-AOE 10). DoD photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Kenneth Abbate, U.S. Navy.(Released). Origin: DoD and Wikipedia. This scenario is designed to be played from the Blue/US side or from the Red/Iranian side. You should play a few times first the Blue side to avoid spoilers, and only later play the Red/Iranian side. From 28 April 2015 the container ship M/V Maersk Tigris, in operation from 2014, 62292 t DWT, chartered by the Danish company Maersk Line, world's largest container shipping company, and flagged in the Marshall Islands, which the United States bears security responsibility for, in one of the numerous 2014-2015 naval incidents, was intercepted and seized while she was transiting through the Strait of Hormuz sailing from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, to Jebel Ali (a UAE port near Dubai) by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) light crafts, after some warning shots over the bridge. The ship was seized, as by the Iranian explanations, because an allegedly unresolved cargo claim over unpaid debts brought by the Iranian company Pars Talaie ten years old (is usual to seize a ship because a court order, but only anchored or in port, never sailing or in transit). But many analyst suspect is only an excuse of the theocratic Supreme Leader of Iran to justify to his people his naval capabilities, after the failure a few days earlier to use sea lanes to send weapons and support to the Yemen Revolutionary Committee and the Shia Islam's sympathizers Houthi fighters faction in the ongoing Yemen 2015 Civil War (Just near 23 April 2015 the Iranian frigate Alborz and the oiler and supply ship Bushehr were escorting nine Iranian cargo vessels off Yemen, but their access to the coast was denied by Saudi, Egyptian and American warships). After the seizure, at current times (2 May 2015) in the real world M/V Maersk Tigris is anchored in the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, waiting for the issue solution. On this alternate history scenario the IRGCN fails a first attempt to seize Maersk Tigris, the ship flies and demand support from the near US forces, doing the military engagement inevitable. Is of consideration Iran only compromises his Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) ships to seize Maersk Tigris, and not his regular Navy, probably to avoid escalation in the conflict and in case of failure use IRGCN as scapegoat, saying was IRGCN decision to seize Maersk Tigris. One of the purposes of this scenario is to capture the speed, chaos and flavour of this type of asymmetrical engagements, and to test the swarm attack theories. Enrique Mas, 2 May 2015. Click here to download this file

Working on it, I hope tomorrow ...

Arleigh Burke's Phalanx: Entry 3107 Arleigh Burke IIA (CM): - Phalanx Mk15 Blk1B should be aft arc, not forward arc: USS Spruance: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/The_amphibious_assault_ship_USS_Peleliu_(LHA_5)%2C_top%2C_and_the_guided_missile_destroyer_USS_Spruance_(DDG_111)%2C_bottom%2C_conduct_a_replenishment_at_sea_with_the_fast_combat_support_ship_USNS_Rainier_(T-AOE_7)_140624-N-HU377-304.jpg USS Michael Murphy: http://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/ddg112/Pages/default.aspx Entry 2402 Arleigh Burke IIA: - This class should be equipped with only one Phalanx mount (rear arc) and not two mounts. Inclusive previously to 2013 some were not equipped with Phalanx (see below): - See "Ships in class" table and sub-variants, also see weapons table: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer#Ships_in_class - Probably DDG-79 to DDG-84 not were fitted with Phalanx previously to 2013 (See "Ships in class" table), but this is only a minor issue:

ZVb is "Mansfield Lahm,Iran AP", the rest "do not use".

Also in Kuwait bases!

Yeah, the same effect and "don not use" as base names in Iran!