pmaidhof

Fred, How were you intending to "game" the insertion of the SEALs, or was it enough to just get them to the insert point (and them launch them as in HC)? Although this is a differing era, the theme is close to one of my last H4 gaming effort, the take down of a fortified and SSM armed island close to the mouth of the Persian Gulf. It was/would have been relying heavily on the interfacing of Harpoon 4.1, HC, and TacOps, and some other ground warfare game systems. This was the root of my initial question to you regarding the identification and classification of enemy radar and AD sites. That became the long pole in the tent for me at that time. Pete

Excellent discussion Fred. Please keep it coming...I'm glad that I'm not the only one.

Thanks Fred. I just about always struggle with providing too much or not enough information to a side. Given that I solitaire most often, you sometime wonder if you are doing it right. Thanks again, Pete

Fred, Always trying to find the right composition and balance of my pre-strike intel dump, but also not trying to belabor the point, can you give any details of the info given to the Soviet player, which I aussume is you) which may have guided the attacking aircraft to the appropriate point(s) to detect by ESM/RWR thereby confirming the previously identified radar and and SAM/AAA sites? Thanks a lot, Pete

Fred, Outstanding description, I've been slowly re-reading in order to gain some proficiency after my annual H4 summer swoon. Would you be able to describe in a little more detail your SEAD and anti-radar targeting. Was it straight ESM, a soviet pre-attack intel brief; they apparently did not wait for visual detection. Thanks again, Pete

No that's the way we like to see it.

All these RW examples/discussions are really beginning to get the wheels turning.

Ya'll a bunch of slackers

There is an old joke among Marine pilots and their ground-type brothers, that from the air, a specific vehicle under a camouflage netting, let's say a tank, looks just like a tank under camouflage netting.

Could those coastal radars have been non-military, navigational type radars - not that they would have likely escaped the wrath of the Israeli targeteers? Is there much difference between a military SS and a commercial or civilian SS radar?

Is the Sa'ar modular in design like the"mission packages" of, dare I say it, the LCS Class?

Excellent, excellent, excellent post Brad. Hope to participate in this discussion once I gain more SA.

Thanks Brad

Brad, in your stash of military systems references, do you have any info or opinion on the performance of the Russian (NATO Designation) AT-8 Songster ATGM which is carried by the T-80 and even referenced to have been carried by the T-64. This is a through-the-barrel ATGM similiar in theory to the dismally failed Shillelagh ATGM found on the US M-60A2 Tank. Thanks

Well then either I go to the shrink or you get a copy of Assault. By the way, many people see the similarity of TacOps to Assault. And how long have I been humping TacOps and its relative seemless transition into harpoon to you guys.

Didn't want you think that I fell off the wagon.

I've been pushing cardboard lately. Using the long defunct Game Designers Workshop Assault series. Basic NATO-WP fare. Units are platoons and sections. Hex scale is 250m per hex. Turns are 5min per turn. Mid 80's US, GB, FRG, Dutch, and soviets are all represented. Armor, Infantry, on and off board artillery, transport and attack helicopters, close air support, air defense, combat engineering all represented. The following is a cross post of mine from CSW. OK, The venerable US Team Bravo +, 9th Tank Bn, 91st Recon Company, Alpha Battery 5th Artillery Bn, (1 bty of S-152 "off map"),and some assorted air defense assets (a ZSU-23/4 and SA-9) met again on Maps A&B. This time I paid much more attention to sequence of play, including inherent delays in fire support, morale, and ammunition limitations. I gave each side a 20% chance of close air support showing up each friendly air mobile phase. The scenario lasted 15 minutes (3 complete turns) and Team Bravo was essentially defeated. Due to Command Point limitations (9th Tank=2 and Team Bravo=1), the Soviets moved in company stacks, A, B+HQ9th, and C. Being able to move only two stacks per phase lent itself to two companies moving while one company provided overwatch. US mobile forces, the M1-A1 plt and two sections of M-901 forces, aware of enemy indirect fire capabilities utilized primary, alternate, and supplimental positions not to fall prey to enemy artillery concentrations. Due to ATGM ammunition limitations, the two TOW sections and dismounted infantry platoons were overwelmed. Soviet tanks platoons aborbed their hits and those of the M1-A1's, took their losses, recovered from the suppression, and moved on. A-9th Tanks lost 2 steps of T-64's, Charlie 9th Tanks lost two steps as well. 2R-91 and 4R-91 also were lost in battle. The US lost an infantry plat to an 152mm artillery strike and the M1-A1 plt and M-901 section to concentrated T-64 125mm fire. Close Assault was exercised by a BRDM-2 section of 91st Recon Company attempting to overrun a US dismounted infantry plt, in cover. This close quarter battle went on for about half of the telapsed time. On the good side it kept this platoon from interfering with the armored advance, on the down side it seemed like it would not end. The shortness of the US resistance limited indirect fire to one salvo each of 122mm and 152mm. 122mm was ineffective (NE), while 152mm was devastating (E). US did roll for CAS in their Turn 3 friendly air phase. The A-10 was detected by the ZSU-23/4 radar and engaged by the the SA-9. The A-10 took a hit, but was not downed. It then suppressed a T-64 plt with a Maverick hit, even with the -2 Roof Armor Mod. Scenario was called after three turns as the Soviets had penetrated the US position. The US was out of ATGM's, lost their tank platoon, an M-901 section, and an infantry platoon. The second infantry platoon was decisively engaged in close combat.

Sounds like fun. Will have to take the plunge soon.

As it may apply.

The trick is anticipating when it, the mojo, is scheduled to arrive/leave and adjust accordingly. Entertaining series though.

YES. Mojo must come and go, well - it's Back.

Overtime, short-handed, facing elimination, all previous opponent's goals were on powerplay - so score short-handed..., that was easy.

Per CNN. Here.

The mojo might just be gone.

Wow, Oilers had that game in hand then lost the bubble. What was the score when Roloson got injured? Now he's out for the series and the backup goalie made the gaff with 31.1 left to allow Brind'Amour the virtual open netter. Let's see if McTavish (ah the 1994 Rangers) can pull these guys back togather and make this a series.