Jump to content

Jason

Members
  • Posts

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Jason's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. Jason

    IRC chat down?

    Just tried opening up the IRC chat with both xchat and the Java portal....both are down....did someone trip over the plug?
  2. exceleent i didnt know we had such a subforum
  3. I just wanted to get an idea of how many different sites everyone browses to get information on military matters... ill start with an obvious one www.globalsecurity.org please add your links!
  4. Ok...since this is one of the most fired up forum topics i have seen in awhile...im going to throw my two buoys into the water.. First of all i rarely post here, i do most of my talking on the IRC chat, which i hope all of you try to get into, some really good discussions go on there, harp related and otherwise. Secondly, a little background on me. I was in the US navy for 10 years, all of that time was as an sonar technician/submarines, and i spent the most time as an ST-S on the USS Topeka. I have been a student of naval warfare and tactics pretty much all of my life...having read everything i could get my hands on and even some of the rare stuff i shouldnt had gotten my hands on. ive been playing harp a LONG time, and seeing the best of it in Tony's hands with HCE. Now to the main question of if the AI is too good or has an unfair advantage. I would have to say no, BUT it does things so damn well, our human mistakes make it look otherwise. Ive been playing HCE more than usual lately due to this thread and i cannot come up with anyone single reason why the AI would have a behind the scenes advantage. Ive shot missiles at AI targets, hes shot back and tried to shoot down said missiles...some were knocked down, some got through and killed the target. My Air to Air engagements pretty much go the same way. And in the real theater, the underwater fight, i can get to a target group and kill with torps and or missiles and get away. i use various ways to achieve wins in battles. One of the things the AI absolutely hates is when you attack from different directions at the same time, as do targets in real life. hit em where they aint looking. coming from just one direction guarantees that all the weapons will be pointed at you. One of the posts in this thread described an attack on Keflavik with f-4G's with HARMS. Id like to know if the base was radiating at the time. hard for HARMS to do much damage if the base was being sneaky with radar. plus your description made it sound as if the attack was from one direction, therefore everything was pointed at that threat axis. And lastly you have to look at the scenario itself, some are unbalanced, some are pretty even. One of my favorite scenarios is from the MEDC battleset 6.0 Libyan Skirmish. (a bit mistitled, because Libya throws dozens of planes at you, and a couple of kitchen sinks) It makes for great practice on how to handle AAW for a CVBG. and about everytime i play it, i rarely lose one plane, Phoenix missiles are great to have but sooner or later it gets down to knife fights and even then the AI doesnt get much chance. And after youre done with the air battle, planning the strikes on the airbases takes a bit of work because of the SAM threat, i tend to use multiple packages and again, different directions to achieve my desired results. Just before i started typing this out, i was playing a simple GIUK scen, and lost a RN Lynx on a ASUW mission with sea skua. I had it looking for two nanchuka's that i needed to find, and the nanchuka's downed her after she fired the skuas, and the skuas died because they didnt have radar illumination anymore. i went in dumb and paid for it. I did it mainly to test the theory of the AI. The AI is spot on as far as im concerned, and while there are a few issues, the issues arent really the issue here.
  5. ok....after thinking long and hard about how to improve an already great sim, here goes... 1. Area Missions..i would love to be able to set barrier patrols...if HCE had that well i would prob just faint 2. Strike Planner/Editor: This is being bantered about on IRC, and it would make for another great addition. 3. Logistics: The holy grail....unreachable? 4. Ability for 64 bit systems to use the scenario editor: This would go a LONG way in letting the world know that harpoon IS evolving and not going to stay in the past. Most computers sold today are 64 bit systems. the next few are just fluff and here just to make tony smile. 5. A nice intro video....lol it would pump up any noob to the awesomeness of the sim 6. Maybe a new icon displaying where a ship was sunk, or where a plane was shot down for AAR use?
  6. one thing id like to see is the ability of the launcher to read scens that are not in the CE directory structure....i keep all my downloaded scens on an external HD and point the game to them manually before the start of a game....
  7. Quite. Like that MiG-23 in Belgium two decades back. The problem is targeting, not intrinsic to the weapon. ok , i have to ask, what was a mig 23 doing flying around in belgium in 1989? i missed this story.......
  8. so if im reading this right, the us navy is going to let the harpoon missile fade away and use all tomahawks? What kind of negative impact will this have on the name of our favorite simulator?
  9. heck with this! use the phalanx! once the pirates figure out we are using the big boy instead of this fancy water gun they wont mess with anything with a US flag
  10. I have transcribed an except from Norman Polmars book "Cold War Submarines" that describes just how good SOSUS is. Might be handy for you scenario developers out there. SOSUS SOSUS was a network of hydrophones emplaced on the ocean floor to detect low frequency noise sources. During WWII, the US, British, and Soviet navies installed limited capacity acoustic arrays on the ocean floor in shallow waters, primarily at the entrance to harbors. After the war, the US Navy began the development of deep ocean arrays. The first developmental SOSUS type array was installed at Eleuthera in the Bahamas in 1951-52, followed by a small experimental array off Sandy Hook, south of Manhattan. The first operational test of SOSUS was conducted from 26 April to 7 June 1954 during an exercise labeled ASDevEx 1-54. Additional SOSUS arrays were placed along the Atlantic coast and, from 1958, from the Pacific coast of the United States and off of Hawaii. In 1960 arrays were emplaced in Hudson Bay to detect Soviet submarines operating in that area. Overseas installations followed in areas that Soviet submarines were expected to transit, for example, the north cape, the GIUK gap, the deep channel running north to south in the Atlantic basin, and in the straits leading to the Sea of Okhotsk in the Far East. The SOSUS arrays are linked to shore stations by cable. At the stations, called “Naval Facilities” or NAVFACS, technicians scrutinize the readouts of the cacophony of ocean sounds and attempt to discern sounds or “signatures” of submarine types and even specific boats. The first NAVFACS were established in 1954 at the Ramey military facilities in Puerto Rico, Grand Turk, and San Salvador. Eventually, at the height of the cold war, there were some 20 NAVFACS located around the world. The NAVFACS would advise or cue regional ASW commanders of their detections to enable air, surface, and submarine forces to be directed against suspected Soviet submarine locations. SOSUS was vital for the effective use of aircraft and submarines in the ASW role because of the limited search rates of these platforms. According to a 1954 report on the performance of the SOSUS in the Bahamas, ranges out to 600nm were obtained. However this was not the average. The average was about 300 to 400 miles reliable. Later improvements in arrays and processing increased detection in SOSUS ranges. Published material indicates that in optimum SOSUS areas a submarine could be localized to within a radius of 50 nm. Signifigantly it was also found that SOSUS could detect and track overflying aircraft. I HIGHLY recommend finding a way to obtain this book, it is simply a must for any serious enthusiast for submarines and how they were built, used, and misused.
  11. VERY VERY useful tool that normally you would have to get from a book like Janes, and then not until the info was out of date. This document now resides on my HD, ready for use in any upcoming scenarios.
  12. It is with great trepidation that I approved your post. Take it easy guys, that was at least straddling the line, if not a few nm over it! First off let me say it was not my intent to insult anyone. the original post asked for a comparison between hce and anw, which, in my few words tried to sum up my experience with the two sims.
  13. ill chime in on this....hang on to your hats... anw vs hce well it really isnt about competing against each other product wise but hce is a tried and true way of playing harpoon on the puter. It is the "legacy" ANW, when it works, is simply the best way to play, but for me needs some things patched up before i can start playing it again, but that is all talked about on other posts and in various other places.
  14. im kind of wondering how hce handles asw patrols by aircraft. I send out a p-3 or a s-3 on a patrol, and making sure the loadout is asw, and once they get to the location of the patrol, all they do it seems is fly around in circles, loitering...arent they supposewd to start a line of sonobuoys? or maybe a box MAD search? Or am i not doing something, or doing something wrong? Any help or tips would be great
×
×
  • Create New...