donaldseadog

This is a very good question, well worth a study. My impression has always been that on first detecting me the AI will only attack with the nearest plane with AAms but that some time later (I don't know how long) it kind of thinks to its self, ..."that plane group is in range of my fighter (that is already on an intercept) should I fire, and it does". Trouble is for AI you've either gotten out of range or shot him down in the meantime. I think this is one of the 'dumb' parts of AI, in air defence or groups already assigned a target. Now my perception here could easily be wrong, I've not had a close look, just a feely thing. Don Thomas

File Name: ECM-HARM exercise File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 8 Mar 2011 File Category: WestPac DB Used: HCDB-110225 Authors: Don Thomas Battleset-WPac: .scq - WPac - WestPac A development of my earlier ECM-SEAD scenario, here you have four aircraft that are HARM armament capable. For this bonus you pay with stiffer opposition. To save time you might like to use the attack helicopters on some of the easier SAM sites and the MRL unit on the primary target. Don Thomas Click here to download this file

Hi Roberto, In Harpoon using aero tankers can be a bit fiddly so one thing I sometimes do is to put some tankers in the formation about the attack groups home base out in the outer sector in the direction of the attack. (use a 255 mile outer radius for the formation). With the attack group on their way out I select the attack group and use the "join" command (F7) to join to the base (which contains the tanker in the formation). In the 'transfer window' 'move' one or more tanker from the base group to the attack group and execute, check that the attack group (now with tanker) is heading at an appropriate speed, use the refuel command (alt R) to start refuelling (and top up the attack groups fuel tanks), then let the tanker land back at their base. I do a similar thing on the way home. Now this is nice and easy BUT is open to cheating as you can do this type of joining with the tankers and attack groups being a considerable distance apart - so its up to you not to cheat by only doing it with the planes in close proximity. It does though I think allow a fairly automated way of carrying out a refuel operation in something like a realistic manner. Fully loaded planes use quite a lot of fuel taking of so by having a drink about 250 mile out from base (and another one 250 mile before reaching base) makes quite a big difference to their operating range without putting the tankers too close to enemy fire. Also by having it in the base formation you can put a CAP fighter near the tanker available for intercept if necessary. Don Thomas

This in particular fills in my gaps, thanks Don

I'm wanting to do a short series of scenarios as ECM, SEAD and related operations with instructive orders. I need confirmation/ further comment on some ECM stuff. My summary is : Offensive ECM has (in the loadout window of the carrying unit) Target = Radar, Range > 0 (and not "Horizon") It reduces the likelihood of enemy radar picking up any aircraft in the effective area of the ECM . Defensive ECM has Target=Radar, Range =0. It only reduces the likelihood of enemy radar picking up the unit carrying the ECM. Jammers have a Range = horizon and reduce the likelihood of enemy missile hits on the carrying unit. Question: Can "Jammers" have Targets other than Radar, eg Infra red to defeat infra red homing missiles? If the Jammer has "Radar" as the weapon Target, will it effect other eg infra red homing , missiles? Do/can bases or other surface units have ECM capability 'builtin'? Don Thomas

File Name: ECM-SEAD exercise File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 3 Mar 2011 File Updated: 3 Mar 2011 File Category: WestPac DB Used: HCDB-110225 Authors: Don Thomas Battleset-WPac: .scq - WPac - WestPac A small scenario concentrating on SEAD, ECM and bombing/ assault attacks with only minor distractions. Something of an introductory exercise. Use standard Database version HCDB-110225 (or newer) and Westac battleset. Most weapons are short range with no ARM for the player so close in work, ECM and planning are necessary. Also the scenario includes as the primary target a "Secret Base". Any comments on improving the usefulness of the "Orders" for inexperienced players would be welcome. (PS I do not claim to be an EW expert) Don Thomas Click here to download this file

Only the radar guided weapons have a consistently reliable performance when it comes to bearing only (BOL) attacks. The electro-optical/infra-red (EO/IR) weapons, the anti-radar missiles (ARMs) and the acoustic homing weapons (torpedoes) are virtually useless in the BOL mode. (To be clear, you can't currently launch torpedoes in the pure BOL mode, although you can drop them on targets with an area of uncertainty). Keep in mind, as well, that weapons launched in BOL mode will search only along a narrow bearing, have finite seeker angles (45 degrees for missiles, 90 for torpedoes), and limited seeker acquisition range (minimum 5 nm, maximum 20 nm for missiles, dependent on missile speed). A BOL missile might encourage the enemy to light up more radar and give you a 'red' fix. Might not too. hee hee, what fun is this uncertainty. Don Thomas

I've seen this sort of thing happen and never had time to look at it thoroughly but usually it seems to happen if say the tanker has joined a group from another home base. It will be interesting to see the outcome of saved game analysis. A problem similar to this was resolved some time ago, though your situation might be different. I think you need to mention in what GE game version you observed the problem. How many non tanker units were there? The tankers refuel one unit (but not one plane) at a time so it takes a fair while to refuel a group with more than one non tanker unit. You do have to do a bit of mental arithmetic when sending out tankers that have close to the range of the shortest ranged non tanker unit, you have to take into account cruise speed differences as this might shorten the range of the tanker if it is cruising below its own cruise speed. (ie time duration as against distance range) Hope you can get a new save done as tanker stuff always seems tricky. Don thomas

***SPOILER ALERT****** AAR TaskF77, an HCE scenario by 'CV32' Situated and time toward the 'close' of the Vietnam conflict. Opened the game in pause (cluck cluck) to have a look around and get familiar with some of the ships and planes of this 'Cold War' database scenario. Checking against thorough orders appropriate courses are already set for naval groups with AFS requiring a decision as to destination at end of currently set course and AHS requiring further course laid out to reach Saigon. Air bases Karat and Saigon appear likely to suffer air attacks from nearby enemy bases, re-equip landed A7s with ARMs for an initial SEAD op and make staff reminder. Do a 'Save as' to set the saved game name to TaskF77, check game settings.. We have three days to go ........ Set the clock ticking. 21:23 Set a recon Phantom patrol from Karat north 550 n.m. Ferry some extra phantom fighters Karat to Saigon, may be needed to escort out the civilians (also guessing Saigon will get heavier air attacks than Karat) Start doing the rounds getting reports of local air defences patrols. 21:24 Set fighter CAPs close in east of Saigon outside of Cam Rahn Bay SAM range. Set fighter CAPs east of Karat set AEW patrol east of Karat Ferry one air tanker Saigon to Karat (some Karat based attack units will need a drink mid air. Set an air tanker on patrol close in west of Saigon (in case) 21:30 Carrier group Enterprise (AEC): minor change to DD placements giving a tighter formation, put out ASW choppers ringing 180 deg about current northerly course, and a pair of Tomcats CAP to the north. One each Hawkeye AEW and Prowler EW (keeping some prowlers for first offensive move) 21;33 The prowler is airborne and picking up (ESM) SA-6, SA-5 and Mig 23 around Cam Rahn Bay (ZZb). Those sam are my first target. Lauch strike 4 A7 (shrike armed) with 2 Tomcat escort against land units Zzb. Launch EW escort (two prowler, angled to A7's strike path, each with their own Tomcat) Send out fast Vigilante recon to surface group AFS currently picking up Coral Sea survivors More Mig 23s and a mig 25 picked up ESM, send in three separate flights of single Tomcats and maintain watch on enemy movements toward Saigon. 21;37 exact fixes on Zzb air patrols. 21;42 set intermittent radar for Enterprise AEW patrol and set ACM (radar) enterprise EW patrol. 21;44 Set ECM active two EW escorts Three Osa deetected visual by A7 strike groups, 77 mile NW Enterprise, Osa speed heading indicating attack on Enterprise group, re-route A7s and F14s around Osas, launch four A7s (precision) ASUW strike on Osas. A7s closest to Osa engage radar to attempt to cause radar emissions and ARM target, but their not obliging. A7s go into enemy SAM range, radar off. 21;47 ASUW strike group go to military The US Navy's second submarine design (after USS Tullibee) to incorporate a turbo-electric powerplant, the USS Glenard Peed and light up radar, enemy CAP vectored on intercept course, reassign one tomcat. 21;51 Four Phoenix away, Tomcat (ATA) lights up radar. Proceeds to sparrow range on intercepting Mig 25s. ASUW strike group requests weapon release without exact target fix, re assign attack point and go to medium alt. 21;52 splash one Mig, ATA recalled for fear of SAM SA5), Tomcat escort (ARA) assigned remaining MIG, 3 phoenix away, radar guidance activated. More enemy CAPs vectoring for intercept, assign tomcats, A7s get exact fix on three Osa, weapon release. Splash second MIG. 22;53 All walleye miss osas, four A7s (GP) assigned attack, unsuccessful A7s return home. 21;54 two mig25 in aam range, four phoenix away, no hits, last phoenix and sparrows away, tomcat and escorted A7s turn home and run. Nearby Tomcat supports with two phoenix, and heads home. Two more sparrow from second nearby tomcat, and run home. Mig is at full reheat, 1600kts is a hard target to hit, now steering clear, but too late, one Tomcat down, last four phoenix in range away. ..And don't forget we're in SA5 range so get out ASAP. 21;56 splash one foxbat, still one left anad a pair of MIG 23 are on their way out. Assign more Tomcats off Enterprise persuing Mig comes into range of two more sparrows of Tomcat on way home, let loose and go to reheat. WHAT, out of now where one DE of AFS group go to the bottom, they know e're here so light up every thing and seek out the source. 21;57 finally the second MIG25 takes a splash, but MIG 23 on their way out so redirect the Tomcats. AFS picks up host of attack aircraft close in to the west, no intercepts in range so we're hoping for point defence to be up to scratch. One Tomcat (escorting now unecessary EW) is 233 n.m. Range, send her in to mop up returning enemy strikers and send EW home. 21;58 Semmes (AFS) gets three Yak 28s. Tighten up the formatino and move Semmes to the west of Nitro for better AA protection (replacing lost DE). The horse has bolted but send out 6 phantom interceptors and an air tanker to patrol east of AFS. Atleast we'll be ready for the next strike (if we survive this) Sead loadouts ready Saigon and Korat, of they go for Cam Rahn Bay and Da Nang respectively, 5 attack and one phantom escort per flight. Schedule for F11 out of Korat bound DaNang in 15 mins as follow up. 21;59 another Yak down but five more small planes approaching. 22;00 Osas have gone active radar but nearby ARM loaded strikes won't attack? Relying on outcoming bombers. 22;01 ID floggers atacking AFS, one splash, re assign Semmes postion to bring up rear mounted SAMs (group's only LR AA), hope they start firing. 22;02 a pair of unidentified enemy small planes cruising at medium altitude towards Enterprise at remaining EW patrol, its Tomcat let goes three phoinix and the group heads home. Intercepting Tomcat fires three phoenix on approaching Mig 23s, Migs attaacking AFS down to two aircraft, Semmes (despite its SAMs in range) is leaving it to the guns of Benner. Reassign Semme's formation location to west of Nitro. Splash two Mig 21 (proximate EW group now heading home). 22;03 A7s attack Osa's, four 500 lbs a target, one A7 lost one Osa sunk, close one mile and re-engage. Last but one Mig 23 attacking AFS beaten by Benner's fine gunnery. Another A7 lost but both Osa's in range, let go 5 bombs a piece, two Osa's to the bottom. Ays go home. Five small aricraft detected approaching Enterprise NW, assign Tomcat pair. 22;04 Away two phoenix, target retreating single Mig23. Re assign two pair of A7s (and tomcat escort) to attack Zzb 22;05 four phoenix away and head home, target five approaching unknown enemy. Add four more phoenix from second Tomcat group, continue closing. Last flogger shot down AFS, commendation for the Benner gunner Splash four (out of four phoenix) SU7s Vigilante visuals three fast torpedo boats headed for AFS at 40 knts (80n.m.), launch of Enterprise four A7 Gps to attack. AFS kills sonar and goes intermittent air and surface search radar. Last SU7 down. 22;06 Air appears clear betwenn Enterprise and Zzb except for retreating Mig, (but remember SA5), Tomcat goes to reheat, fires of two phoenix. New contact, four large planes 135 nm NW Enterprise, headed straight in, vector Tomcat (already on reheat) to intercept along with single Tomcat 120 nm east of target and launch two more fresh off Enterprise. 22;07 Splash last Mig. Four Phoenix away for four large in bound, reheat Tomcat heads home out of SA5 range. 22;08 Two SS high alt missles inbound AFS, 34 nm out. Radar up (leave it on this time) and hope for SAM action from Semmes, (check standing orders for SAM firing rates). 22;09 Goodridge (FRAMII) gets two hits and sinks. Assign nearest Tomcat to patrol over AFS. Send reprimand to Semmes. Four more high altitude missiles inbound, re assign AFS formation and warn Semmes captain his command is on the line (and his ship) 22;10 Four inbounds, two phoenix away at extreme range, Tomcats close at full (military) throttle to next fire point. Two small airborne approaching Enterprise 95 nm NNW, within range of and assigned to Tomcats now dealing with four large inbound...Three phoenix away. 22;11 scratch one badger, four Phoenix away. 22;12 Warfare Officer advices to engage full radar screen for enterprise group, radar on. Vigilante 40 nm W AFS, goes intermittent surface search radar. 22;13 Scratch two Mig 21, one EW badger, three remaining phoenix of to meet remaining two badger. Four sidewinder and cannon remain. One more badger down, time for some close in action. All four and a couple of cannon burst for good measure, “lets go home Tiger one”. “Yeah Tiger leader, and I saw that last Badger turn to scrap” 22;22 Zzb within ARM range, no sam 'red' on the search screen close at full throttle, lost one A7, continue to close. Fire one ARM at SA5 to try and get a radar emission, no go, SA6 comes up 'red' three ramining shrike away, turn and run. Four out of four missiles inbound AFS burnt by Tomcat, remaining on station till fuel bingo. Two more A7 SEAD off Enterprise closing Zzb ETA 6 mins Five A7 SEAD closing Zzb from Saigon ETA 8 mins. Two shrike get through to SAM, no indications available as to damage 22;23 EW Prowler picks up ESM on small oiler in harbour Zzb, nice target later if we can get rid of the SA5. Vigilante coming home at 8% bingo, may need to hot foot it if things get hot so put up an air tanker of Enterprise. 22;24 four small contacts vectoring towards F111 attack flight, send phantom CAP out of Korat to intercept. Single A7 proceeding home from SEAD attack on Zzb, fly to medium alt and engage radar to assist attacking A7s and risk the SA5 22;27 Phantom fires its four sparrow on enemy contacts. Continues to close. Large airborne 58nm NW Fenner, vector local Tomcat Scratch ¾ mig 21, 1 phantom goes home low on ammo, second Phantom closes to AAM range 5 A7 attacking SA5 (Zzb) fire two 'trigger' shrikes at SA5, and backtrack to close on SA6 showing red on the screen. Bingo SA5 lights up within 1nm range, gett those shrike out pronto,5 away, close with rockeye under full throttle. Three more shrike off, still closing... SA5 is destroyed, close on SA6 at cruise and let A7E get in closer with long range shrikes. One at base three at only SA6 showing 'red'. A7Es going home to mama. 22;28 Tomcat fires only two sparrows at 6 large inbounds, hope he's good with cannon. ... Two out of two, badgers go for a drink. Two sidewinder against four, now just canon... 22;29 A7 let go three rockeye at SA7, scratch SAM, close on SA6 Two more 16As brought down by AIM9s, two to go and only canon left. Three rockeye and another SA6 bites the dust, but loose two A7s,at bingo, next target 3 nm,,, go home. Too late, last three A7s lost. Time to re group and plan next assault on Cam Rahn Bay now that the SA5 is gone. Time to get heavy, sending in 7 intruders with EW and FGT escort. 22;33 Semmes is firing at the remaining bombers, but they get Benner crippled with substantial damage. Benner limps for Subic Bay at 9 knts. We can only hope sho makes it. One badger down and Semmes fires another missile salvo... Last badger down but they did their job. AFS reduced to only Nitro and one susrface escort. Re plan course and head for Subic bay with crippled Benner. 22;34 Phantom engages remaining Mig 21s with sparrow. Splash Mig. Phantom returns home Korat. 22;35 Five small planes on radar 35 miles E Saigon heading in on strike path. Returning Phantom escort ordered to full throttle while intercepts scrambled from Saigon. Meanwhile two flights of thunderchiefs sent to attack Zzb to augment the southerly attack from Enterprise. 22;37 pursuing phantom fire four sparrow, Saigon CAP fire 6 sparrow, splash 5 Mig 23s. Phantoms return home. The four A7s have picked up the three torpedo boats, split into two close from opposite sides and attack. 22;39 target one in range, 5 500lb bombs away...one P4 sinks target two and three in range, 5 each .... both go down. A7s go home. 22;40 trouble, two small fast planes four nmwest of returning vigilante headed on intercept. Vector up Tomcat at reheat from 120 nm south and attempt intercept by nearby A7s. Vigilante goes reheat and its tanker a waiting moves out form Enterprise. Toothless nearby Tomcat goes to full throttle to maintain radar watch and co-ordinate intercepts. Solid contact lost, A7 proceeding but not able to make intercept under present situation. Suspect bogey has retreated on seeing vigilante go reheat. Keep armed Tomcat closing. 22;41 Two small contacts approaching Saigon, engage Saigon CAPs and vector aditional Phantoms to intercept. One SU17 downed by CAP, one by interceptor. CAP low on AAMs and ordered home, interceptor maintaining loiter and patrol. 22;43 solid radar fix again on small interceptor now headed NW and ceased interception of vigilante. Armed Tomcat in pursuit, A7 resume cruise home, Tomcat (out of ammo) maintaining radar fix. 22;46 Four GP strike with Fgt escort depart Enterprise for target Zzb ........... We're down four ships including a carrier, that enemy port is going to pay. 22;47 Two small airbornes approaching Saigon from the north at 20 miles, assign three airborne Phantoms to intercept. 22;48 three sparrow away... strike one Su17, two more sparrows loose....... second fitter down. Phantoms loiter close to Saigon. 22;50 Vigilante gets a drink, solid fix on bogeys lost for some time now and pursuing Tomcat vectored for home at 50% bingo. Two that got away.. 22;55 5 A6 sead approaching Da Nang with one Phantom escort two mile astern, lost an A6, Phantom orderd up to full speed with radar engaged, picked up uncertain contacts close to the NE, engaged one sparrow, one hit but lost another A6, fired two sparrow and got another hit and lost another two A6, last A6 got to ARM range and fired then fled with escort. One ARM hit Da Nang. 22;58 Two small contacts in our path home, Phantoms vectored slightly to side with radar on, bring in A6 sidewinders and fire the only two while close the phantom at full throttle from the south to engage its sidewinders. One mig 19 down from sidewinder, phantom fires three sidewinders at 'uncertain' target position. 22;59 Two foxbats on reheat 14 nm NW and closing on attacking air group 38 mile out from target ZZB, engage with Tomcat escorts, four phoenix, two sparrow. Group split with escort closing target and strike and EW running low.. One Foxbat down, fire two phoenix, two sparrow ...Second Mig19 down Phantom and A6 proceed home at 600kts... 23;03 re staged attack on Zzb EW goes high and detects SA5, SA6 and Mig 19s within 35 nm S of Da Nang. No long range SAM detected in threat radius of attack on Cam Rahn Bay. Continue withdraw of Da Nang attackers, continue close attack on Cam Rahn Bay with Tomcat on area CAP. 23.04 F111s approaching Da Nang go vlow and continue close on Da Nang A6 drop 4 2000lb bombs on Khobi oiler in Cam Rahn Bay... sunk, proceed to harbour complex. 23;04 Prowler split off attack group as it approaches short range SAM and harbour complex target. 11 2000 lb bombs away, complex takes hits and suffers 45% damage, planes leave scene and head home climbing to medium alt to give radar assistance to BAI attack. S-60 pops up and downs four A6 in one go. Rest of group licking wounds and returning home with Port in disarray. 23;07 3 F111s lost to Fresco. Re asses strike on Da Nang. 23;09 Lost Recon Phantom (left forgotten with radar burning West of Hanoi) 23;11 Commence C141 flights, 3 planes leave for Clark Afb Thunderchiefs approach Zzb defences, 2 750 lb bombs away, one S-60 destroyed.. 23;11;30 three thunderchief lost, over SA6 battery, 4 750 lb bombs away...SA6 destroyed, closing 1nm to next targe, port complex, all bombs away and go home Second flight coming in on port defences, S-60 target, 5 500lb bombs away Last known air defence at Cam Rahn Bay destroyed, proceed to port complex to unload before going home. 23;14 8 thunder chiefs drop 123 500 lb bombs..port 61 % damage with 4 strike planes off Enterprise closing 23;15 twelve planes in 3 flights set off Enterprise for continous bombing sorties of Cam Rahn Bay port complex 23;16 A7s drop 16 2000 lb bombs on Cam Rahn Bay port complex 70% damage. 23;17 departing Enterprise: 2 prowler 6 tomcat and 2 air tankers to patrol SE of Da Nang to conduct fgtr sweeps and prepare for long range SEAD attack. All available A7 re arming for SEAD/ Precision bombing. 23;19 3 more starlifters depart Saigon for Clark Afb 23;23 three tomcats stationed on CAP Soth and East of Cam Rahn Bay. One prowler maintaining offensive ECM guard. 23;27 3 mig 23 visualed 1 nm from 8 plane thunderchief flight, 8 sidewinders fired.. three thunderchief lost to AAMs, only one Mig downed, 5 more sidewinder and 5 cannon burst while remaining thunderchief go to reheat. Two Mig bite dust. Two Phantom on patrol Saigon head out at full throttle to assist. 23;29 one small fast plane out of Cam Rahn Bay headed for patrolling Tomcat, 3 phoenix allocated. . . . One foxbat down. 23;31 two small planes out of Cam Rahn Bay 3 phoenix fired and Tomcats go home with sparrows to spare. New Tomcats patrols leave Enterprise. 23;32 two Mig 23 downed. 23;33 Saigon, 3 Phantom armed GP ready to back A6 bombers refuelling and re arming. 23;38 4 Walleye head for Cam Rahn Bay, 23;40 24 500 lb bombs... Cam Rahn Bay 84% damage 23;41 16 2000 lb bombs away...92% damage. Four C-131 depart for Clark Afb 23;45 48 500 lb bombs...Port destroyed 23;48 3 Phantom intercepts depart Saigon for CAP SW of Da Nang 23;48 We get minimum victory... Conclusion: Scraped in but shouldn't have lost two ships from surface Group AFS, I should have provided the CAPs off Enterprise as required by the orders. Maybe next time.. Don Thomas

File Name: Kangaroo (BS Australia, DB HC_65to80_DB) File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 27 Feb 2011 File Category: Custom DB Used: HC_65to80_DB_110226 Authors: Don Thomas Battleset: Australia Battleset-Custom: .scz - Custom BS - Custom BS Kangaroo Exercises A scenario for HCE utilising the database HC_65to80_DB_110226 (by divefreak) and battleset Australia (by donaldseadog) An early - mid 1960s small scale joint Naval exercise (Australia/USA/NZ) off the Australian coast proximate the Coral Sea. Things go wrong when a USSR shadow gets in the firing line. Australian, USA and NZ joint naval exercises have been progressing for ten days of the Australian Great Barrier Reef and into the Coral Sea. Two days of continuous at sea replenishment exercises completed 24 hours ago and two surface groups are preparing to conduct warfare exercises. The replenishment group is returning to Brisbane via the 'tight' “inside passage” of the Great Barrier Reef.... Click here to download this file

I assume you're in the scenario editor, its easy to miss looking at what database is loaded (has it on the screen footer). You might be interested in this: a little fiddly to set up but I find it useful. I have a second executable of Tony's HCLauncher in a separate folder, I have separate respective shortcuts (with different names) to the two executables on the desktop. The second executable, once open, I have substituted the GE file name with the file name for the scenario editor. With this arrangement both launchers keep their respective settings from their last outing. This lets you select the database for the scenario editor from the launcher window (and also battleset) and gives you a quick reminder as to what is about to get loaded. You need to watch for long file paths etc due (I think) to the 'age' of the SE. Also if using Divefreak's databases remember to either select his 'RSR' file in launcher or have it resident in the base folder (I believe it can be left there as it is compatible to the standard). If you use it by selecting in the launcher you might not be able to also select existing scenario files for editing (I guess there is a character length limit in the argument passed on to the scenario editor). If nothing else its fun having more toys Don Thomas

Hey Thecrazedog, we all start as midshipman and try to work up to admiral. The guys like CV32 will help you heaps if you let them, I know from experience. For my game play I usually only play from Battlesets EC2003 or newer, they have the editable databases and generally seem to work more realistically. Most of the old scenarios are redone in the newer battlesets anyway. (PS I wouldn't use a skyflash against anything with more than a pop gun to fire back with) Subs can be killers, make sure you're not going too fast (maybe go down to about 10 knots) and if you've been advised (look at the orders) there are subs about get out lots of ASW aircraft and look for the subs because they are there looking for you. Make sure you get the hang of how the game drives, start with a walk through scenario, there should be a good one in the westpac battleset (I don't have HUE, still waiting for physical release, but its in HCE so I guess its with HUE). Then I'd suggest go for scenarios that don't have too many planes, they make it hard work and need you to do lots of micromanagement if you want to have a chance of surviving. If you really think things are going bad for you with out explanation, try the cheat mode (ctrl alt S) for a while and get to see what AI is doing and why its clobbering you, nothing like knowing how the enemy works. Hope to soon hear things are improving for you, but keep smiling and laughing, one day you might think AI means "absolute idiot" Don Thomas

"jet" engines have a few parts that spin very fast with extremely close tolerances and at very hot operating temperature. I don't know times and guess it depends on the materials used in the most demanding parts but generally warm up is necessary to get everything evenly heated up to an acceptable level before going to operating speeds and pressures. The turbine blades are pretty vulnerable and I seem to remember pretty trick metallurgy gets used there in modern units, that would undoubtedly help. There are also means available (and I think only used in military applications) where effective preheating is used to shorten warm ups. Probably something in general aeronautic engineering sites (or paper in the library ) that would explain it. I'd be interested to hear what you find out if you look further. Don Thomas

Thanks Don The AI will redirect aircraft soon after damage. It will land aircraft that can still land on the damaged runway at that runway, it will only divert if some planes in the group need a longer runway. No priority will be given to undamaged airfields at this time. No idea on how to compromise with distance at this point. Likely it will be trivial to land at the closest correct-sized base to the original base. The AI will be pretty stupid about using redirected aircraft since they will not be able to perform an pre-planned duties. So they'll still take off for air intercepts, ship attack, MLU attack but they won't conduct any scenario-designer listed longe range patrols/strikes/ferries since they aren't in the right location. Sounds better than I'd hoped for, at least the aircraft will still be being put to use if possible. Will be interesting to see if targetting runways after SEAD ops will be better value than trying to wipe out the whole base, especially for countries with less technical equipment. Might even be a bonus for AI in the hands of good scenario authors. Thanks again to you and Brad for so much work and great ideas. Don Thomas

I'd equate installation size to be a multiplication of the number of runways times their length as measured in HCE (1=small helo, 6=vlarge as Tony showed us earlier) I'm working here with the idea of "cuts" and take two "cuts" to reduce a runway's effective length by one HCE length (ie vlarge to large) I'll call the HCE # for runway length as RWL# the number of runways as RWN#, the current number of cuts as cuts# and current airfield condition (inverse of damage) as AFD% My guess at a repair algorithm is: repair time(hours) per cut = 6/RWL#/RWN#/AFD% e.g. That means 2 hour for a vlarge two runway airfield at 50% general damage to repair from an effective large runway back to vlarge. It is rough but simple. It does mean that multi runway airfields get back to full operation much sooner but this reflects not only the larger establishment but also the likely hood that one of the runways is much less damaged. I keep seeing a tussle between a good simulation and AI getting a fair go. Will the AI be able to redirect its aircraft soon after the damage has occurred? Will priority be given to undamaged alternative AFs and for long range units how to compromise with distance? How will AI utilise AC that have been redirected? I don't want to see the player getting a very big reward for minor damage that only takes an hour or so to repair. That said I think 2% base risk is good. I think it shouldn't go higher for more damage unless AI has some way of making a decision on the risk, maybe just that it only takes the higher risk if there is no suitable AF in range. Don Thomas

So if I have kept up, that would double the range at which many common torpedos might gain acquisition (but they still have a PH <100%), but for top shelf items it won't be making more than about 25% improvement in acquisition range. Taking Tony's ball park one second game time per 'look' once in acquisition range that does sound like a pretty good fudge, still maintaining a noticeable difference twix varying levels of sophistication but giving standard gear a more realistic chance of a hit. It will be a vast improvement (some of us will keep our hair for a decade longer I think ). Don Thomas

My thought is that you're dead right about using torpedos as being "challenging". In my game experience (and obviously many others judging from posts) it is often beyond challenging - down right unbelievable. Obviously Harpoon is about being realistic and this seems to be a case where in order to get the realism a fudge is necessary. Have you tried any runs with the fudge in place? If fudge + actual = 1 nm, is that still a bit tight for game engine? Once acquisition is obtained there is still a less than 100% probability of a hit isn't there? Is there a probability aspect of obtaining an acquisition even when within acquisition range, I'm assuming it is like sonar contact probability? Unless the target has really scarpered or the original computations for the fire were way wrong, it surely has to have a few throws of the dice for acquiring the target. The fudge has to be enough to give the torpedo its chance of getting its contact. If the acquisition range fudge needs to be significant to do that then the probability of getting the contact (once in range) could be fudged down a bit if needed to balance any overly large acquisition range? Should we do a few tests of different fudge levels? Do any of the logging readouts give 'die throw' results for obtaining acquisition or anything that would indicate that the torpedo is getting its chance of acquisition? What ever I vote for the fudge. Don Thomas

Its probably a function of the limitations in the sea mines and minesweeping models, more than anything. The range of the sea mine you're using is 0.5 nm, while the range of the minesweeping gear is 1.0 nm. Without a very good sonar set, however, it is extremely difficult and risky work. I am careful about increasing the effectiveness of the minesweeping gear because it would make them very good at killing submarines (since the mines are modeled essentially as non-mobile submarines). Likewise, I am careful about decreasing the effectiveness of the mines because we cannot hope to simulate the number and density of actual minefields. Hence, for every mine you destroy in HCE you've probably cleared a much larger field in RL. I am, however, always open to suggestions about potentially improving the model. Some thoughts on this: What about changing the DP for the mines to '1' and any anti-mine weapons similarly have their damage limited to 1. In this way, they would be fine for hunting 'mines' but be quite ineffectual versus regular submarines. Unless of course this is already the way it is done, I honestly have not gone poking through the DB lately so my memory is rather vague. Would this make them vulnerable to being cleared by inappropriate weapons? e.g. you can sink them (because they are a submarine) with a small torpedo but in RL I'd think it unlikely for a torpedo to hit the mine as it is so different in size to the intended target (I could be wrong, I'm guessing). I think the present works OK, if not perfect. It is tedious and slow work with the correct gear and unlikely to succeed with the wrong gear - at least that seems pretty realistic. Don Thomas

File Name: Singapore 1942 (HCWW - IndoChina) File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 19 Feb 2011 File Category: Custom DB Used: HCWW-100326 Authors: Don Thomas Battleset: Indochina (by Divefreak) Battleset-Custom: .scz - Custom BS - Custom BS Circa 1941 Japan invading Singapore, but not factually based. Uses Divefreak's Indo china battleset and CV32's HCWW database (version 100326 or newer). Plenty of aircraft action but at the end of the day Blue must deal with a superior naval force. Don Thomas Click here to download this file

Agreed. I might take a stab at this (and the above) over the weekend if someone does not beat me to it. You guys got me here (again), how do you 'see' runway damage in current GE?? I am of the mindset is that they should be permitted to land even if they cannot then take off again from the same damaged runway, but within reason. Very large aircraft landing at a runway damaged to STOL level would seem nonsensical, but I could buy, for example, the same aircraft being able to land at a Large or perhaps even Small runway. I think the degree of compromise acceptable depends on how hard it is to code the AI a fair go at redirecting turned around 'planes. If this is hard then I'd agree with an outright allowance to land anything that could have landed before the damage. If the 'plane in question needs a vlarge 'strip but the 'strip is down to STOL then at least there is a fair delay before it can takeoff, that is still way better than at present. I like where the suggestion is heading, but I am willing to accept no change in the current arrangement. In reality, I guess it would really just mean more crowded hardstands and taxiways, with resulting stress on the ATC, sortie rate and damage resistance. I agree, sounds good but too hard. I am okay with this approach as long as the risk isn't too high. Presumably ground controllers and pilots would choose to divert elsewhere rather than land at unacceptably high risk (unless of course there were no fields to which to divert). I agree with Brad but the decision whether to divert or give it a go would be fine for the player but could this be done fairly for AI, from previous comments I assume not. How about something like: if damaged runway is 'shorter' than 'plane's requirement by # (where # is from the HCE runway size numbers) then probability of loss is 2% times # ? EG a vlarge 'plane landing on a damaged to large runway is 2% probable of crash, on a damaged to small runway is 4% (if I've got the runway sizes correct). My thought is there is a mix of experience in the pilots so some will breeze it in while others are at their limit so some will crash but not many. Don

If you like the way it works, despite the 'Fixed AD' missile symbol, I will add it to other databases, starting with the HCWW. Seems to work fine. If you add some Sams to the 'base' in the SE then the symbol goes to mobile icon, in either case I think small price to pay for a handy little tool (I think). Don