broncepulido

A carrier wing very similar to this, I did consult casually yesterday: http://sinodefence.com/liaoning-varyag-class/ Shenyang J-15 (Flanker-D) carrier-based fighter X24 Changhe Z-8 ASW X6 (Super Frelon-like) Kamov Ka-31 (Helix) AEW X4 Harbin Z-9G SAR X2 (Dauphin 2-like).

How many times Cameron did change catapults for skijump ramp?

24xAGM-114L Hellfire launchers for LCS (three targets and three missiles in flight simultaneously per launcher as stated on the video images?): http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis/naval-technology/1900-q-a-a-with-the-us-navy-on-lockheed-martin-hellfire-missiles-for-littoral-combat-ships.html

Note as this article (the same reference reflected on the Wikipedia entry) states the speed of Dolphin II class as 25 knots, I'm not sure if true, but I remember the "old" Type 210 (Norwegian Ula-class)as capable of 23 knots.

So ridiculous! If the air-launched range is 4,3 nm, vertically launched should be even less than 4,3 nm!!!

Radar 997 Artisan 3D, from 2011 replacing Radar 996 (AWS-9) and others in some large UK units. Is a SS and HF/3D radar, my estimates are range=108 nm, PH=65. At least employed by: CV Queen Elizabeth-class (I0C 2016?)(entry 2828). LPD Albion-class from 2011 (entry 3078). LPH Ocean from 2012? (entry 2208). Some FFG Type 23 CUP from 2013, first ship equipped HMS Iron Duke (entry 2972). [url=http://www.baesystems.com/enhancedarticle/BAES_164913/artisan-3d-medium-range-radar-type-997

Opinions in Mer et Marine about the Russian Mistral-class issue, the same conclusions as in some Facebook fora these days, adquisition by NATO (in French): http://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/bpc-russes-lepreuve-de-force

The ASX-1 TISEO primitive air-to-air Electro-Optical target identification system on F-4E (employed experimentally in Vietnam in 1972, on series 84 late F-4E series planes from 1983) is only some 13-20 nm, as stated here: http://books.google.es/books?id=4DqU1ckzg9cC&pg=PT57&dq=tiseo+phantom&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nNL9U5z1NKGh0QWO9oH4BQ&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=tiseo%20phantom&f=false (this is mostly a note for ulterior research).

In the SE cycle through Blue installations with your Backspace key and you will find two instances of the installation. Likewise, in the GE, clicking on the same icon twice will yield two instances. With two different group codes (as Warsawa ZWA and Warsawa ZWB, as example).

Yeah, all boats reflected here: http://russian-ships.info/eng/submarines/project_877.htm

SPOILER ALERT !!!!! I don't see clear why the Red and Blue naval groups are static, without course, speed or alternate starting points.

At last a new scenario! Thanks! Try to playing it the next days, but very busy with real life issues. Aside the below notes, a very interesting scenario based on current facts. Revised with the new 32-bit scenario editor, apparently without problems, thanks Tony! BEWARE, SPOILERS CAN APPLY !!!! ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Some minor notes about aircraft and other platforms employed, specially about employ dates (in my personal database I write on each platform, after painful research, dates of his use, as example the entry KC-13E is (1982-2009). It simplify very much scenario building). Minor notes (if my own notes are correct): US/NATO: - The very old B-52D Stratofortress were retired in 1983 (and B-52G in 1994). If you would change some plane type on the scenario, it must be this, replacing with B-52H. - EC-135K Head Dancer was in service 1961-1996, we can employ EC-135W Rivet Joint (1966+). - KC-135E was employed 1982-2009, replace it with in service KC-135R (1984+)or KC-10A Extender (1981+). - The UK tankers VC.10 K.4 (and the rest of VC.10 variants) were retired in 2013. The remaining UK tankers Tristars were retire near March 2014. The only fast jet tankers today in service are theorically the Voyager KC.2/3, but they will not capable to refuel fighters to end of 2014 (but I suppose can be capables in a emergency). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_VC10#2000s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_TriStar_(RAF) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT#United_Kingdom But Voyager perhaps capable to do air-to-air refuelling from Summer 2013: http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/mission-systems/about-us/mission-equipment/media/news/raf-completes-first-voyager-three-point-tanking-flight.aspx A very good VC.10 site: http://www.vc10.net/ - The old Polish Foxtrot (641K)-class submarine Wilik was retired in 2003. We can replace it with the Polish Kilo-class Orzel (1986+) (Submarine entry 6152 Kilo (877E)(And beware, the first Kobben-class submarine Kobben/ was transferred for spares and employed as training ship, not in service in the Polish Navy): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORP_Orzeł_(1986) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORP_Wilk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobben_class Russian: - MiG-27K Flogger J2 were retired in 1997, as the rest of single engined Russian combat aircrafts. - Tu-16P Badger-J was retired circa 1994, as most of the support Tu-16. We can employ An-12PP Cub-C as stand-off jammer (or more aggresively some of the very scarce Su-24MP). - Entry 10293 MIG-31M was cancelled circa 1995, but we can employ entry 11000 MIG-31BM or entry 10999 MIG-31, with loadouts with AA-9a or AA-9b Amos SARH, AA-X-13 Arrow ARH is not in service, was cancelled circa 1997.

Modification 10 August 2014: slightly reduced time on station of the Blue side to get combined Mínimum and Total victory conditions. Now should be theorically feasible to meet for the Blue side the victory conditions ever if the convoys starting point is the farthest to the destination point (Cubi Point/Subic Bay/Manila Bay zone).

Note: the USS Barbel (SS-580) was not a SSN, was one of the three last operational SS on USN. I'm not sure the 11 helicopters were down when embarked on ships. On this scenario only a Soviet ship is capable of carry 1xKa-25 helicopter, the Uporny (Kanin Project 57A DDG). I think the other 10 lost helicopters are lost in ferry flight from Cam Ranh Bay to Soviet ship groups (as programmed on the previous 7FLT1 scenario, for replish losses of helicopters on the Soviet ship groups), I don't reprogrammed those flights (for that I should delete Cam Ranh Bay and add the new formation edition patrols and long range aircraft patrols), I imagine the helicopters did take-off and fly to the group ZWS (on this scenario without helicopter capable ships) go without fuel and are losses.

Modifications to entry 3053 Zumwalt (DDG-1000): - 2x57mm guns replaced by 2x30mm Mk6 guns. - Radar SPY-2 VSR, S-band (L?-band) radar (currently designated SPY-4 VSR) deleted because cost (but it will be installed on CVN-78 Gerald Ford). Modifications to entry 3269 Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78): - Add SPY-4 VSR, three-faced S-band radar (entry 43535, previously designated SPY-2 VSR). Note: SPY-3 MFR is the three-faced X-band radar component, installed in both Zumwalt and Ford, as here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier#Sensors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zumwalt-class_destroyer#Dual-band_radar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-3 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/vsr.htm And as stated here, the SPY-3 is smaller, more precise and with shorter range than SPY-4: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/dbr-specs.htm

About the ship entry 2111 Osa II (205U): This Osa entry and many others are ever confuse. This entry, because some systems (SA-N-5, ESM) and the Russian ship names (aside the boats generically named OS2xx) match more with the Soviet/Russian variant 205 Modified depicted here: http://russian-ships.info/eng/warfareboats/project_205.htm My idea is this entry should change his "Country" from "INTL" to "Russia" and the name/variant changed to "205M/205 Mod", as: - It is currently another entry (3354) for the Soviet/Russian Osa II (205U) without SAM and with the same SS-N-2b (P-15U). - Is ESM equipped, the export variant not were equipped with ESM (also showed in the russian-ships.info entry, only the Soviet/Russian variants are equipped with ESM: radio direction finder ARP-58SV). - The names match Soviet boats only (probably boats modified to 205 Mod). - The boats are equipped with SA-N-5 mount aft, only the Soviet/Russian boats were equipped this way (1x4 launcher MTU-4 SAM system «Strela-3M», sometimes called on Western sources SA-N-5, but more strictly on the DB SA-N-8 Gremlin quad aft, with SA-14 Gremlin (Strela-3)(1974+)). As depicted on the russian-ships.info page, with the basic change of SS-N-2b (P-15U/T) for SS-N-2C (P-15M), the "Country" changed to "Russia", and SA-N-5 mount replaced by SA-N-8 mount aft, we get directly the correct Soviet/Russian Project 205M/205 Mod (Osa II Mod), and as were modified between 1971 and 1976, and the Strela-3 was in service from 1974, we can think this Osa II variant was in service from 1974. Probly these boats were also equipped with First Generation Decoys (On some ships (R-6) added 2 decoy RL UB-16-57UM) Text about the Soviet/Russian 205M/205 Mod variant on the aforementioned page (sometimes a confuse text, incoherences, translation and line composition issues):

Very little text modifications a few hours after the release, the Blue orders notes are now: Notes: As result of the research on this scenario, I found the Australian FFG-7 frigates were not equipped with helicopters between 1980-1984, with three Bell 206B-1 Kiowa liaison/general purpose helicopters from 1984, and with six AS 350B Squirrel (Fennec) liaison/general purpose helicopters between 1985-1991. Only from 1991 the SH-60B were operational and employed from the Australian frigates, as stated here: http://www.mcmanus.ca/97RAAFSC/reynolds.htm ). All the sensors and weapons systems of the USS New York City (SSN-696) depicted as of the entry Los Angeles (1989)(1988-1995) were employed at least from 1987, and because that is showed on this scenario that submarine variant. The Japanese P-3C Update II.5 Orion (1982-1990) can't use ASM-1C (Type 91)(1991+) anti-ship missiles, they were introduced only in 1991.

File Name: Battle of the USS Midway 1988. Hypothetical scenario in WWIII. File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 04 Aug 2014 File Category: WestPac Battle of the USS Midway 1988. Hypothetical scenario in WWIII. A Harpoon Commander's Edition scenario for the EC2003 Battle for Western Pacific Battleset and the HCDB-130818 1980-2015 Era Platform Database. Image: USS Midway (CV-41) on the Persian Gulf in 1988, with F/A-18A on deck. Photo retrieved from navysource.org and taked by a US Serviceman, and in consequence public domaint. Attributed to Kelly Scherer, SFC, USA (Ret) (Former AO1). This scenario is designed for play with the US-Allied/Blue side or with by the Soviet-Vietnamese/Red side, to avoid spoilers is better to play a few times first the US-Allied/Blue side, and only after the Soviet-Vietnamese/Red side. This is a complex scenario and worth of play many times for the experienced Harpoon player because a lot of random elements and composite Total Victory Conditions requiriments. This is the third scenario of a series inspired in old boardgames of the 1970's and 1980's, but modified mainly to introduce the accumulated knowledge about weapons and forces deployment after the Cold War end. In the wake of the Black Sea naval incident of 22 February 1988, and with other clashes droved to WWIII and after the neutralization of a Soviet convoy to Philippines with support of his old Vietnamese allies on the South China Sea, carrying weapons and on board the new revolutionary government to be imposed on Philippines, the US and Allied forces need to keep a firm operations base in Philippines. As consequence, two Allied convoys with MPS ships are sailing to Manila to reinforce Philippines against any new Soviet attempt, and to keep at bay the Soviet-driven local insurgence. Another US force of amphibious ships is probably sailing to reinforce the Luzon Strait. At same time two Soviet convoys with reinforcements are sailing to Vietnam. Some of the remaining Soviet Long Range Aviation elements at the campaign start in Vietnam have returned, as most of the 3rd Tactical Fighter Wing based at Clark AB. Another risk for the Allied convoys will be the Soviet submarines. Is probably both side have displaced an aircraft carrier to the South China Sea. To get Total Victory both sides should arrival on time and destination with his convoys. Enrique Mas, August 2014. Click here to download this file

thanks by that interesting info

As matter of fact, it was ready seven days ago, but the file was corrupted!!! At least I can open it with the OLD scenario editor, and traslate the data to a new file (is based on 7th Fleet third scenario)

Ufffff, ok, I was thinking about three CVNs!!!!

Also, the main idea when I design a scenario it's not to make it hard or easy, is to make it credible and to use it as historical simulation. On this pair of scenarios, my idea about they are credibles is if both sides can win, if not is a failure to my design and historicity aims.

Ok, I will do a look to the victory conditions. On an almost ready scenario (for the last week, but later the almost definitive scenario file became corrupted!) almost all the red elements do you request are present.

Now perhaps it's time to play the Red side on both scenarios, perhaps tougher ... And a hint on both sides and both scenarios, it's relatively easy to get a Mínimum Victory with some simple goals (example,to sink a BB, SSN or CGN against the blue side, probably a good propaganda for the red side and a loss of moral on the blue side), but harder to get Total Victory, as usually requieres to get an on station time for amphibious, merchants or MPS ships, to reflect the wider strategic campaign goals.