SAR is a longtime dream of Unclepoon (Don Gilman) so it is one of the few directives we have, to implement SAR in HC.

 

Chat 9/26 on IRC:

 

[22:36] TonyE: one thing DonG wants to see is Search and Rescue, I'm

interested to hear what he has to say.

[22:37] AOA: I like that

[22:38] TonyE: seems easy enough to me in HC, we have mobile land units,

we just need to make a land unit type that the friendly side must detect

(player side as it stands can see all player units, all the time)

[22:38] AOA: simulate emergency beacons after the destruction of a unit?

[22:38] TonyE: yah, I suppose that would help

[22:40] AOA: then the unit has to be "attacked" with rescue equipment??

[22:40] AOA: WHat would be the objective?? The benefit?

[22:40] TonyE: I think you are right with the attack with rescue

equipment

[22:41] AOA: In real life, rescuing a pilot is important because it is

expensive, but crews are not simulated in the game, so loosing the crew

is not an issue.

[22:41] TonyE: I imagine the objective is to rescue before the enemy

kills the rescuee, thereby allowing victory conditions to work

[22:41] AOA: ok, so it would have victory conditions purposes....

[22:43] AOA: could the rescue help in reducing ready times for A/C,

simulating that some of that time is crew rest, and therefore, if a

pilot is rescued, there are more pilots, then aircraft are ready more

often?

[22:44] TonyE: I'd dream bigger and think about logistics where the

rescued pilot goes back into the pool of pilot resources, which may

affect how often you can fly, sure.

[22:45] AOA: exactly

[22:45] AOA: wow, here is an idea!

[22:46] TonyE: I wonder if planes randomly create downed crews as they

are killed, boy that could be a mess.

[22:47] AOA: So the beacon goes off, but it can be detected by either

side, right? If your enemy picks the crew up, then, after a Guantanamo

treatment session, your enemy obtains imformation, such as location of

certain units.

[22:47] AOA: no need for sensors.

[22:47] AOA: your prisoner talks!

[22:48] AOA: yes, random

[22:48] TonyE: hehe, it was a manageable situation until you had that

last idea

[22:48] AOA: some die, others survive and want to avoid being captured

by the enemy, therefore, you are forced to rescue them

[22:50] AOA: or they will talk! So every time you pick up an enemy

prisoner, you get a momentary update of the positions (or certain

positions) of the enemy.,

[22:50] TonyE: I certainly like the idea

[22:53] AOA: For example, if you pick up a fighter crew, you get an

update of all aircraft positions, if you pick up an E-2 crew, you get an

update (estimate) of the aircraft and subs positions...

 

 

Don Gilman e-mail notes after seeing the chat:

 

The Intel part is probably a bit overkill as it takes a few days to get someone to talk, most scenarios are over by then. Talk to Rabbit about how all of that works.

 

Eventually doing crew morale to impact search and attack values would have a fatigue factor, pilot crews as cargo, repair crew as cargo (might as well model them too).

 

But really I was looking for crew units, crew count and rescue capacity as attributes of Platforms, SAR missions and VC penalties for NOT rescuing crew if you are Western. So it's a BIG modifier. That was in the ORIGINAL 1988 design. And I believe the architecture still supports just that.

The 'downed pilot/rescue-ee' should probably a nuetral unit so that it can be 'attacked' by rescue equipment from either team. I'm pretty sure that giving the player the ability to 'attack' a neutral is already there or could be added easily, just need to make it possible for the AI to do it...while not attacking things you don't want the AI to attack.

I wonder if mobile land units are the only option. There are plenty of SAR/CSAR scenarios where the "rescuee" would be in the water. Or is it too hard to implement it so that both land and sea are covered ?

I wonder if mobile land units are the only option. There are plenty of SAR/CSAR scenarios where the "rescuee" would be in the water. Or is it too hard to implement it so that both land and sea are covered ?

 

I see no reason why you couldn't have a 'lifeboat/swimmer' unit that could be plucked out of the sea. I wouldn't think it would be hard to make 2 distinct rescuee units.

I honestly hadn't thought about water landings. Probably a good tie in with amphibious units, floatplanes, etc. There would be no incredibly difficult thing about having a land type and a water type if it came to that.

[17:08] AOA: could the capture of an enemy crew be translated into a temporary increase of sensors range and effectiveness?

[17:09] TonyE: it is possible, yes, I have to wonder if that is going too far for HC though.

[17:09] TonyE: that or something along the lines of what you mentioned before, maybe show a few of the other side's units for a bit

[17:10] Bucks: wow

[17:11] Akula: hmm, why couldn't it just give you a quick locate on a group (similar to the old sosus net in the GIUK battleset)?

[17:11] AOA: I think the important factor that currently we are missing is that in any conflict, there will be assets allocated to SAR, and currently, nobody is in the need to allocate those resources.

[17:11] Akula: you get the contact for a few seconds, then it dissapears

[17:11] TonyE: hehe, yah, what Akula said

[17:12] Akula: I do remember that playing the old DOS version....giving away my age again...lol

[17:12] Akula: basically you could get an exact fix, and the uncertainty box grows over time till the contact dissapears

[17:13] AOA: Yeah!!! the old SosuS!!! LOL that was long time ago!

[17:19] Akula: does that even still exist in the latest version? I haven't really played the GIUK BS, since I played it so many times all those years ago. lol

[17:19] TonyE: yep, SoSUS is still there

[17:19] AOA: wow

[17:20] Akula: well then you sort of have something to work from, lol

[17:22] AOA: OK, I admit that it may be unrealistic to expect that a captured crew will speak immediately, but, what if when you pick up the crew you can also pick up from the debris maps, codes and orders? I know, overkill, but still trying to provide a good reason for a commander to allocate forces to SAR.

[17:23] * TonyE leans towards overkill on that one

[17:23] TonyE: ANW can have it

[17:24] AOA: I know...

[17:24] TonyE: not that it isn't doable, and gives a good reason to drop a bomb on the crash site

[17:24] Akula: lol

[17:25] AOA: I mean, the concept would still be the same, Tony, pick up a crew --> increase sensors efficiency for some time.

[17:25] AOA: I was thinking about how to justify such a behavior.

[17:25] Akula: well there is a real reason why navies scuttle damaged ships that look as if they could be captured

Light Complexity Approach

 

Key details:

1. Does not break scenario file format

2. Breaks save file format (I don't think we can do SAR without breaking save files but this approach comes painfully close)

3. Works as much as possible with code we already have

 

Description:

Units to be rescued are placed in the SE, no new downed crews or stranded VIPs are created in the course of play. This simplifies the changes to Victory Conditions as a more dynamic number of rescuees breaks the current VC model.

 

'Recovery' mechanism. The simplest approach is what Akula mentioned, fire a weapon at the rescuee to recover them. The cool side benefit is that very little change is needed in Victory Conditions as units are still being killed and we make VCs for things killed in HC. Add a flag in the DB for weapons that can rescue, only those weapons can rescue a rescuee.

 

How to craft a rescuee? Akula suggested they be neutral units. That is a novel and obvious thought that hadn't crossed my mind. Still I think my preferred approach is to have a flag applicable to ships and mobile land units that denotes them as rescuees (meaning they are not automatically in the players communications network, and that they can be fired on by friendly forces).

 

How to detect a rescuee? Whenever another friendly group (unit?) comes within 10nm of the rescuee, the rescuee becomes localized for the friendly side. For the opposing side to detect the rescuee, they must be within 7nm (ranges subject to discussion). This eliminates the need for a new sensor and ESM type. To aid in initial detection, suggest placing suspected coordinates of rescuee(s) in the orders file.

 

Obvious Challenges in this Approach:

1. Arming platforms with SAR weaponry would be quite a process. Easy enough to add it to many helicopters, but what about the inherent capability of just about every sub/ship/land unit to grab a rescuee?

 

Please comment, keeping in mind the goal here is to keep the model as simplistic as possible. Also feel free to craft and post a more complex model.

Rabbit, Don (Gilman) would like your input and real life experience to weigh in on the SAR topic. In your experience, how does the whole process work out in the real world I suppose starting at the unfortunate moment you realize your steed is not going to make it back to base?

Rabbit, Don (Gilman) would like your input and real life experience to weigh in on the SAR topic. In your experience, how does the whole process work out in the real world I suppose starting at the unfortunate moment you realize your steed is not going to make it back to base?

 

My ship at the time (USS Ashtabula) was OSC for the SAR efforts in the case of Muriel McBride, lost off the Norton Sound at the end of the '70's. Because she was the first female sailor lost at sea in the modern era, our op received a great deal of scrutiny at the time. We've all done our share of SAREXs over the years, but this was the only real-life situation I was ever involved in personally. We started with a Datum and searched outward, not unlike an ASW search substituting probable drift as a substitute for probable submarine movement.

 

It seems that adapting existing ASW search methods within the program might be an approach to any SAR efforts in appropraite scenarios. Also, a "Time on-station" victory condition using a small area centered on the object of the search effort might be an alternative to weapons firing as a means of completing the mission. The only problem I see with that is replayability, since I'm not sure if there's a way to base an on-station area on an object with variable start points as opposed to a fixed geographical position.

 

Just some thoughts:

 

Buddha

Rabbit, Don (Gilman) would like your input and real life experience to weigh in on the SAR topic. In your experience, how does the whole process work out in the real world I suppose starting at the unfortunate moment you realize your steed is not going to make it back to base?

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?

Yup, we're in a months kind of hurry, not an hours kind of hurry

From an e-mail from DonG

 

*

SAR Vision:

A scenario option would be to include SAR operations. The database and Scenario Editor should support a Survivor loadout and missions for a/c. The Formation Editor should have a SAR check box. The Victory Conditions should have an option for counting survivors and each side should have a value to rescuing your own forces. A universal value may be appropriate from rescuing neutral or enemy forces). Survivors fade based on their location and Scenario conditions. It would be nice if some mechanism would modify the survivors fade rate based on enemy/friendly territory (yeah that’s a piece of work to implement)

 

Behaviors:

Survivors are created when a unit is destroyed.

A different survival rate is applied to sub, a/c and ships.

All units survivor rate is modified by Scenario (Temperature) and Unit type and how the unit was killed.

Sub survivor rates are also modified by depth.

A/C survivor rates are also modified by altitude.

Land Units/Bases could have have survivors (i.e. Dunkirk). Low priority to implement this.

Survivors can be transferred between vessels (again low priority)

 

Some fixed wing a/c could have a SAR loadout that would slow the fading of survivors in the water.

Helo’s may have a SAR loadout (as above) and a capacity to remove survivors.

Ships and subs would be the same.

Survivors fade slower during rescue operations (i.e. getting any help keeps hope and people alive)

 

 

Reality

Probably would make sense to implement only unit survivor type to start with and tune it up before doing all 3 units types. I’m sure you can find holes in what I’ve put down and can add lots of value to what I’ve written.

 

*

Some feedback on the current release, we don’t want me posting to Matrix so I’m just going to send you an email (although I could get an alias….)

 

We need a generic ship picture – abstract is fine – to put in the newer BattleSets when “No picture available”.

 

And the sunk ship picture in WestPac – when playing the Japanese – is a pic of the broadside of the New Jersey!

 

I’m pretty sure you know that listing land contacts as surface when the SA comes up is confusing – but I am fairly sure you’d have to hack any sort of fix for that at this point. Here is why I bring it up. I had a combined strike package going into Hanoi and the SAM sites and bridge, and airfields were all grouped together, as you develop land, the ability to filter/sort would be nice.

For what it's worth, I'd say focus initially on aircraft crews possible surviving and providing for possible rescue. It would most likely involve fewer rescuees. Overwater first because over land will quite possibly involve ground units landing and securing the downed aircrew. Wouldn't deployable ground units be something akin to the mother/child/grandchild discussion over in amphibious operations thread?

 

Somewhat in the weeds, a USMC TRAP (Tactical Recovery of Aircraft & Personnel) would/could include CH-53/MV-22's, a dismountable security team to secure the site, rescue team to find and secure the aircrew, and a support team to secure HV pieces of gear from the wreck, and to facilitate the recovery of the downed aircraft or ensure the destruction of critical or HV gear. All of these cats and dogs would then need to re-embark onto the hogs or ospreys to get back to friendly sites.

A variation of the SAR possibilities as regards scenario design is rescue of refugees. I was directly involved with the 'Nam evacuation in '75, and there are still situations that arise on a smaller scale in the Caribbean. Frequent Wind/Eagle Pull was total organized insanity IIRC. If I can work out the mechanics, maybe I'll give a scenario a shot. Any and all suggestions are welcome.

 

Buddha

A variation of the SAR possibilities as regards scenario design is rescue of refugees. I was directly involved with the 'Nam evacuation in '75, and there are still situations that arise on a smaller scale in the Caribbean. Frequent Wind/Eagle Pull was total organized insanity IIRC. If I can work out the mechanics, maybe I'll give a scenario a shot. Any and all suggestions are welcome.

 

Buddha

 

Here here for NEO Operations, took part inside the US Embassy Monrovia Liberia in August 1990 for the evacuation of US citizens and third nation "friendlies".

 

NEO = Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation. They come in the permissive and non-permissive environments, and are a specialty of a Marine Expeditionary Unit (SOC), often now deploying within ESG's.

 

I'd still say aircrew first, but all for full blown NEO's for sure.