Fun!

 

The southeast end of the Al Hudaydah airfield looks vulnerable. A cluster of shelters (probably not HAS?), a hardstand (I see six MiG-21s there?) and what looks to be a refueling facility connected to the runway by a single taxiway.

 

A group of what look to be eight An-26 Curl transports (perhaps inoperative?) about 500 m to the north of the MiGs on the old, apparently disused part of the airfield.

 

The maintenance facilities look to be located at the northeast corner of the airfield. I see an Mi-8 Hip and a refueling bowser there too.

 

Not sure if the Etendard/Super Etendard Modernise (SEM) ever carried Durandal, so you might be limited to 250 kg or 450 kg iron bombs, 68mm rockets, or AS.30L laser guided missiles, or if this is a SEM attack in recent years, LGBs.

Fun!

 

The southeast end of the Al Hudaydah airfield looks vulnerable. A cluster of shelters (probably not HAS?), a hardstand (I see six MiG-21s there?) and what looks to be a refueling facility connected to the runway by a single taxiway.

 

A group of what look to be eight An-26 Curl transports (perhaps inoperative?) about 500 m to the north of the MiGs on the old, apparently disused part of the airfield.

 

The maintenance facilities look to be located at the northeast corner of the airfield. I see an Mi-8 Hip and a refueling bowser there too.

 

Not sure if the Etendard/Super Etendard Modernise (SEM) ever carried Durandal, so you might be limited to 250 kg or 450 kg iron bombs, 68mm rockets, or AS.30L laser guided missiles, or if this is a SEM attack in recent years, LGBs.

 

 

AN-26's and MiG's! I'll have to look "closer". I did see the helo up in the northeast. MTF I'm sure.

Duh, found them. Thanks for pointing them out. Makes the strike even more plausible.

The follow-on Strike scenario will be based upon the preceding dog fight. The actual incident's aircraft came from the French aircraft carrier Foch (R99), a Clemenceau Class CV. The aircraft will be an as of yet undetermined number of Etendard IV M's armed with 2x EU-2 250kg and 2x EU-3 500kg bombs, F-8E(FN)'s flying top cover, and to be followed up by a solitary Etendard IV P reconnaissance aircraft.

 

High Tide data annex has Etendard IV M as having 2nd Gen Decoys - anyone want to dispute that?

 

The base will be defended by a six-gun battery of S-60 57mm/71. Targets will include the "small" 50DP control tower, "small" 5DP MiG's on the hardstand, the AAA guns are "very small" and account for 5DP.

 

Environmental conditions will need to be pre-determined as well as potential sighting match-ups in order to speed play.

[Edit: Nice F-8 site as well]

 

Page in question is http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f8_16.html

 

Anyone found an easy way to navigate that site ? It's got a lot of info on the "F" series (19 pages on the Crusader alone !!!)

Can't seem to find an index for it, so I had to bookmark it with notes on how to find the other pages....

Yes, is a tricky site for navigation issues, I see:

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/Elevon/baugher_us/

And: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/uscombataircraft.html

Couple of quick questions before launch. Which would be more likely of late 1970's French naval aviators...Dive Bombing from low altitude, or horizontal laydown from Very Low? Chances of success and survival lend toward laydown.

 

Also, can anyone think of anything that would prevent the use of High Drag EU-2 and EU-3 dumb bombs?

 

Thanks, I think I hear Foch calling flight quarters...in french of course.

And: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/uscombataircraft.html

 

Thanks for the two links, obligado !!

The follow-on Strike scenario will be based upon the preceding dog fight. The actual incident's aircraft came from the French aircraft carrier Foch (R99), a Clemenceau Class CV. The aircraft will be an as of yet undetermined number of Etendard IV M's armed with 2x EU-2 250kg and 2x EU-3 500kg bombs, F-8E(FN)'s flying top cover, and to be followed up by a solitary Etendard IV P reconnaissance aircraft.

 

High Tide data annex has Etendard IV M as having 2nd Gen Decoys - anyone want to dispute that?

 

Of my readings at http://www.netmarine.net/aero/aeronefs/etend4m/caracter.htm , and http://frenchnavy.free.fr/aircraft/etendard/etendard.htm and http://frenchnavy.free.fr/aircraft/etendar...acteristics.htm

BW warning receiver. Fitted on few Étendard IVMs

BW warning receiver (not fitted on Étendard IVPMs).

i.e., RWR in some Etendard IVM and all the Etendard IVP.

In 1972 the Lepus illuminating bomblet appeared to replace the flares, too dangerous. In July the planes received electro-magnetic chaffs for the first time.

, good for the 2nd Gen Decoys, but may be only for the Etendard IVP, I remember as late as in 1982, in the South Atlantic War, Harriers and Sea Harriers depend on decoys released opening the airbrake over the argentine defences.

Alternate weapons fit are AS.20 and AS.30 ASMs (no AS.30 Laser), and I almost remember the bombs were Mk 82 and Mk 83, for issues of standarization with the USN ordnance (as the Sidewinders), but I can't confirm that now.

 

More details about the Etendard IVP and Etendard IVPM, introduced in 1978: http://www.vectorsite.net/aveten.html

A modernization program was implemented from 1989 into 1994 that fitted the Etendard IVP with an updated inertial navigation system (INS), a cockpit instrumentation update, and a DRAX 16 radar warning receiver (RWR). The RWR featured spikelike antenna fairings on the upper front and lower rear of the tailfin, with a flush antenna on each side of the tailfin. The aircraft was also wired for the Matra Magic II AAM.

Etendard IVPMs often carried pylon-mounted countermeasures gear, such as an LC III or Phimat chaff dispenser, and a Barracuda jammer

 

Enjoy,

Thanks BP, the links were great. Same for the info on the 2nd Gen Decoys, it was just a thought. As I read more deeply into the H4.1 rules, if the strikers were to employ them, or any other form of evasion on their bombing run, they would have an defensive ATA of 0.5. Either way, they will apparently have a 0.5 defensive ATA on the movement phase in which they drop their ordnance.

 

As I remember it, the aircraft, after loitering around his IP (Initial Point) comes in low, screaming fast. Pops up and inverts..."I'm in the pop!". forward air controller gives him any last words of instruction, maybe "From lead's hits, 200 North". Pilot rolls back and calls "Wings Level!" - Controller "Cleared Hot!" - BOOM!

 

Hope to get one run through this morning.

All went well for the valiant pilots of the Aviation Navale. This morning, with 4x F-8E(FN) flying top cover, 8x Etendard IV M's launched from R99 Foch on a retalitory strike against the Yemeni air base of Al Hudaydah. The primary target being the 7x MiG-21 Fishbed's located on or around the hardstand in the airbases southest corner. The secondard target is the control tower facilities. The base defenses were provided by a battery of S-60 57mm/71//SON-9. Due to the scope of the airbase the battery was broken up into pairs in order to provide essentially point defense to the MiG's, the control tower, and maintenence facilities to the northeast.

 

2x Etendards were assigned as air defense suppression and flew 30 seconds ahead of the main strike element. The strike element had 6x Etendards; 4x assigned the hardstand area, while the remaining 2x assigned the control tower facility.

 

The mission began at 0600 Local. While approaching low, the Air Traffic Control radar did detect the first approaching 2x Etendards at over 32nm, but it was determined that the fact was simply noted. When that redar operator then spotted the main strike element the alarm was sounded. Assuming 2x MiG's on alert-5, I rolled a d6 (5) and added it to the 5min to account for the early morning. 2x MiG's would get airborne by 0611.

 

Throughout the scenario, the Yemeni radar operators earned their pay. The raid was detected by thr ATC, and the SON-9 also detected both elements at 0602.0 and 0602.5 respectively (17.5nm).

 

As the air defense planes reached their two separate target areas, they both survived barrage fire by a pair of S-60's each. A single S-60 was put out of action near the ATC facility. The Etendard near the hard stand did not initially spot the guns and ended up rushing its attack, thereby missing both guns.

 

At 0604.0, the strikers attack. The single gun at the ATC site fires at lose range, but misses, despite the non-maneuvering target modifier. The 2x Etendards assigned the ATC planted 2x EU-2 and 2x EU-3 dumb bombs causing catatrophic damage levels. The ATC had 50DP, while 122DP's were applied. These 2x Etendards then egress.

 

At the Hardstand, the 4x strikers made two passes, 0604.0 and 0604.5, dropping 2-stick EU-2's the first pass, and 2-stick EU-3's on the second. Passing through whithering fire of the 2x S-60's firing at close range and against non-maneuvering targets, Dash-2 and Dash -3 reported hits on the first pass, while only Lead reported a hit on the second pass. The main strike element departs as a single Etendard IV P photo reconnaissance aircraft streaks through the target area in an effort to provide enough information for the mission planners to determine if a re-attack is necessary.

 

Here are two of the photos.

 

 

Nice job pasting that control tower. I think its safe to say that's a mission kill.

 

The MiGs on the hardstand are parked pretty close together, with no revetments. I'd venture to say any bomb falling among them (excepting No.6 furthest to the north) is going to have moderate to severe damaging effects on neighboring jets, not just from blast but from flying debris, pieces of concrete, etc, etc.

 

I'd also hazard the guess that as these MiGs on the hardstand do not appear to be pulling QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) duty, they're probably unfueled, so no added benefit from exploding fuel.

 

My 'storyline' addition:

 

MiG-21 No.1 (furthest to the south on the hardstand) gets demolished by the flying APU/starter trolley (looks like this might be the object sited between No.1 and No.2) as the bomb explodes on No.2

 

MiG-21 No.4 is moderately to severely damaged in the course of being bracketed by exploding bombs on Nos.3 and 5.

 

MiG-21 No.6 is potentially lightly damaged by blast and/or flying debris, and if so, probably repairable. Die roll?

Great post-strike pictures

Nice job pasting that control tower. I think its safe to say that's a mission kill.

 

Wish I could take credit for it, but the mark ups were supposed to represent smoke, except for the two spider like objects which were supposed to represent missed impacts.

 

The MiGs on the hardstand are parked pretty close together, with no revetments. I'd venture to say any bomb falling among them (excepting No.6 furthest to the north) is going to have moderate to severe damaging effects on neighboring jets, not just from blast but from flying debris, pieces of concrete, etc, etc.

 

I'd also hazard the guess that as these MiGs on the hardstand do not appear to be pulling QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) duty, they're probably unfueled, so no added benefit from exploding fuel.

 

My 'storyline' addition:

 

MiG-21 No.1 (furthest to the south on the hardstand) gets demolished by the flying APU/starter trolley (looks like this might be the object sited between No.1 and No.2) as the bomb explodes on No.2

 

MiG-21 No.4 is moderately to severely damaged in the course of being bracketed by exploding bombs on Nos.3 and 5.

 

MiG-21 No.6 is potentially lightly damaged by blast and/or flying debris, and if so, probably repairable. Die roll?

 

Nice "storyline", consider it part of the AAR.