RA-5C

Got mine Friday and the DVD Case was extra think... shame for just a single disk. You could have put a copy of Red Storm Rising in it. ;-)

I'll check this evening when I get home.

Unable to save any edited scenarios. Running Windows 10Pro. Game runs fine. Thoughts?..

Sorry... should have looked at the list first. Mea cupa...

My nomination... Darren Buckley. I don't think there is any elaboration required. Those that knew him would agree and those who didn't... you don't realize your loss.

I've heard about that... I think they call it "Aegis"...

So in building a CVBG for instance, I would want to start with my FFG's and then DDG's before I get to the CG's, assuming my formation is in the reverse order (ex. CG's towards center, next layer DDG's followed by FFG's on the outer perimeter?..

How does the GE/A.I handle ASM/SSM attacks as it pertains to SAM's? Using this example: Platform A: Center of formation; SAM's with a 50nm range Platform B: 25nm from Platform A; SAM's with 35nm range Platform C: 40nm from Platform A, 15nm from Platform B; SAM's with 25nm range (assume ships are positioned in a straight line from Platform A to C) A missile is inbound and is headed for C (assume it's origin is Point D which is 100nm from C on the same bearing) Which ship will launch to intercept?

I believe SAR is too complicated to factor into the game because the current victory conditions would really have to get into things like morale and manpower you would have to get into an inventory control process for select crew (ex. pilots, aircrew, etc.) if a a/c goes down and you loose the crew, your manpower would be affected... but since they lost their a/c too... bringing them back is more for morale then need; at a base where extra a/c would be available, this could be a factor (ex. I have 10 crews but 12 a/c), but at sea... odds are you have more crew then a/c

Replenishment could be factored into the game engine based on simple table values (making "wild-ass assumptions") similar to refueling tanker or supply ship would have to be joined to the group tanker or supply ship would have to be joined to the group a time value would be assigned to each item X amount of time per gallon/pound of fuel transferred X amount of time per item (ammo, missiles, etc.) If you really wanted to dive into it, you could base the time factor on using helo (VERTREP) or ship-to-ship (UNREP) require the ship being serviced to detach from the group join the supply vessel split from the vessel when finished and rejoin the group (this would take into account speed/maneuvering issues) Taking into account inventory (no more endless ammo on CV/CVN's) controls that are applied to shells and missiles (SAM) the system would look at the total allowed quantity of an item (ex. AGM-88's) (this would have to be defined per unit type) look at the remaining inventory on hand transfer the difference using the time factors applied (this would "top off" all items) Again, if you really want to go nuts... set controls on how much and what the supply vessel could carry. Using it in longer scenarios, you could then based your supply load out on your task group's needs. If you plan poorly... you arrive with Harpoons when the carrier (for example) is dying for AAM's. It would make the play more realistic... but would require micro-management that some players may not desire/be suited for... therefore you may want an "auto-resupply switch" where you join the group and "poof!.." instant supplies!

From By Sea, Air, and Land (Edward J. Marolda/Naval Historical Center) Chapter 3: "Throughout the Rolling Thunder campaign, the Navy maintained units in the Gulf of Tonkin to retrieve downed fliers from the sea and from North Vietnam and Laos. Normally, two destroyers were deployed to the forward, North SAR Station (20N 107E) and another two to the South SAR Station (19N 106E). To carry out rescues in North Vietnam's lethal environment, one UH-2 Sea Sprite helicopter equipped with self-sealing fuel tanks, machine guns, and armor was nested on board a ship at each station. Another four similarly armed and armored Sikorsky SH-3A Sea Kings (the primary rescue helicopter) were based in one of the Yankee Station carriers. During major air operations, one or two SH-3As orbited over the destroyers. Each of the other aircraft carriers carried a detachment of three unreconfigured UH-2 helicopters devoted to sea rescues. Air Force Sikorsky HH-3E helicopters, Grumman HU-16 amphibian aircraft, and A-l Skyraider escorts also operated in the gulf. To provide the SAR helicopters with enemy ground fire suppression, communications, and other support during operations, the fleet kept four A-l, A-4, or A-7 attack aircraft airborne and ready for action. Under the overall control of Commander Task Force 77, the SAR Coordinator directed the Navy's effort from a North SAR Station destroyer. This officer guided the actions of the airborne on-scene commander and arranged for additional support when it was needed. The fleet's search and rescue forces saved many American aviators from death or captivity. From 6 June 1964 to 1 November 1968, 458 of the 912 naval air crewmen downed as a result of combat or noncombat operations in North Vietnam, Laos, or at sea were recovered. While the retrieval of aviators from crash sites on land, when at all possible, took somewhat longer, the rescue at sea usually occurred within 20 to 30 minutes of the aircraft loss. The effort was not without cost, however, for 26 men were killed, wounded, missing, or made prisoner, and 33 aircraft were destroyed during SAR operations. This measure, however, returned valuable air crews to the fleet and improved the morale of naval aviators, who knew the Navy would do its utmost to rescue them from hostile territory or waters."

But do they work?.. I asked my doctor for a script for Viagra and he said giving me viagra would be like "putting a new flagpole on a condemed building..."

Nobody loaded your dice. Dice?.. plural?.. not die? So that's my problem... I've only been rolling the one die!..

Without in ANY way wishing to impugn the courage of the recon folks, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Weasel drivers had the worst odds in 'Nam. Please correct me if I'm wrong ... 18 RA-5Cs were lost in combat during the war, giving it the highest loss rate of any Navy aircraft in the conflict. 13 Vigilantes were shot down by flak, two were shot down by SAMs, one was shot down by a MiG-21, and the other two were lost to unknown causes over enemy territory. The loss rate was high because the missions were unusually hazardous. Vigilantes were used for both pre-strike and post-strike reconnaissance. Pre-strike missions were relatively safe, but the North Vietnamese quickly realized after a target was bombed a reconnaissance aircraft would soon arrive to evaluate the damage, and so post-strike missions were generally conducted in the face of an enemy that was thoroughly alert and waiting. Vigilantes flying post-strike reconnaissance missions tried to follow the strike elements in just after the last bombs fell to reduce the risk.

True... most were bunkered but some were also used to reduce the modification costs for the TLAM's.

Ah yes... like the saying goes... "the Mk-50's you use in Vegas stay in Vegas..."

Yes, and I'm guessing Rabbit was playing the older stock NACV battlesets (rather than the EC2003 battlesets)... I have never really enjoyed nor agreed with the basis for the EC200X Battlesets... I guess when you've played the "real game" against Ivan and his friends, realigning the world order is something I associate with SciFi. The alliances created in these battlesets, in my opinion, are not realistic therefore I never really enjoyed them. I would loved to have seen older battlesets (60's 70's and 80's) when the Cold War was real and so were the advesaries. The original Harpoon was based upon the "Dark Empire". I guess scenarios that are based on fiction rather then reality deviate from what I've always enjoyed about Harpoon. I am sure others find them "interesting" and again... I am a big fan of SciFi... but for me it will always be "cowboys and cossacks". From the way things are currently going... this may no longer be a historical question.

Yes, and I'm guessing Rabbit was playing the older stock NACV battlesets (rather than the EC2003 battlesets), which means he was using the stock, non-editable database. Even in the EC2003 battlesets (using the HCDB), the Sparrows have a PK of 40-55 percent (depending on variant) and Sky Flash has a PK of 55 percent. Not very impressive stats when pitted against a maneuvering Flanker. Still... 10+ missiles per a/c?.. come on...

I downloaded and updated my game engine to the 2008.0047 release and noticed something interesting... Flankers are impervious to missiles! 6 Flankers coming out of Norway (NACV Battleset) were confronted by 12 Phamtom's and 4 Tornado's with a total of 64 LR Air-to-air Missiles... and within 15 nm of the targets and all I was able to get for 64 launches was one kill! So when did we change vendors for the Skyflash/Sparrow Missiles?..

One question... regarding "...new official HCE BattleSets: Caribbean, South Atlantic, South Africa and the Middle East." Where might we find these battlesets so as to create scenarios for them? I am currently running version 2008.024 (Build Feb. 13, 2008). Did I miss an update?.. do I need to purchase these?..

As for the topic... I was asking that of Les and Gordon and the gang back in 1990. Replenishment (along with capturing bases) has been one of my "wish list" for years. But question?.. I don't think assigning a point system is very accurate? Let me write up my thoughts and submit them later this weekend.

Should I start "before" or "after" the Hail Marys?.. Let me spend some time writing this up this evening (just got Tony's email yesterday on this; have been away from this forum for a while) and I'll post and you guys can start asking questions... okay?

So I'm safe overwriting: