Finally Got Around to Playing

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Finally Got Around to Playing

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Finally Got Around to Playing

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 1:36:39 PM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

I held off purchasing when this first came out. I bought a while back on sale and it sat on my hard disk unopened. I h played the original Harpoon back when it was a rules book and paper and pencil and dice affair. Played the computer version for years.

Been busy and playing other stuff and just never got around to this until a week ago. Have to say its very good once you get into it.Downloaded a few add ons and looking to try out more.

As mentioned in another thread, I'm pretty surprised at the lack of anti surface capability for the USN. Back when the Soviet Navy was the big bad wolf you be launching Harpoon and anti ship Tomahawks at enemy ships. I was playing the tutorial and looking for them.

Harpoon sure has grown up...

Post #: 1

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 3:54:51 PM

hellfish6

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

The US Fleet's offensive surface warfare is the carrier air wing now, for better or worse.

_____________________________

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 2

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 5:27:19 PM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

That just seems so odd. Like building a Fletcher Class DD with no 5 inch guns. I saw an Arleigh Burke at fleet week a while back and IIRC saw the Harpoon launchers on it. In any case I figured the VLS system would have dual purpose missiles inside.

I guess the Navy figures there are no or minimal surface threats to contend with or the Seahawks with Hellfires are adequate. Losing one or both would hurt as you would not only be losing your anti-surface capability, but also a good part of your ASW capability.

Maybe there is something I'm missing. Perhaps the cannon on the AB can fire shells 50+ miles with pinpoint accuracy and hit a moving target or they just never send them places without an aircraft carrier or air cover close by.

(in reply to hellfish6)

Post #: 3

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 6:01:16 PM

hellfish6

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

Standard (SM-1/2) anti-aircraft missiles can be used in the anti-surface role (and were used this way in the Persian Gulf against Iran), but most Burke-class DDGs don't carry Harpoons anymore. I think only the Flight I and II variants have 8 x Harpoons, with the more numerous/modern Flight IIA having none at all. Today, most of the surface fleet is geared toward air defense/BMD and strike missions, with anti-ship missions the provenance of subs and aircraft (including the USAF - who are getting the first version of the new LRASM anti-ship missile before the Navy).

_____________________________

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 4

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 6:26:47 PM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

Perhaps the Chinese DF21-D may have something with the heavy focus on BMD at the expense of other weapon systems. I'm sure it has been played with and there is a scenario with it in it and an AB to defend against it.

I'm now curious to try it out.

Still with so many navies in possession of patrol craft and other small ships armed with SSM's you would think that it could potentially put an expensive DD at a disadvantage, but naval warfare has changed since the 80's and 90's.

I guess the Spruance and Perry class are phased out and being sold or scrapped. We'll never see the battleships reactivated either. They are permanent floating museums.

Just how much of a threat is the Chinese Navy? Has the Soviet Navy become any better or is it in the same decrepit state as it was after the Cold War ended? With all of the stuff going on in the Ukraine and talk about giving offensive arms like Javelins to the Ukraine it seems like there is some potential for tensions.

(in reply to hellfish6)

Post #: 5

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 6:41:30 PM

hellfish6

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

I think the Navy's current mission set is a reflection of the current realities. We launch Tomahawks pretty frequently, so we've gotta have that capability. BMD is a big concern because 1. Funding - Congress is big on BMD (just look at the Missile Defense Agency), 2. there's a potential use for it (specifically Iran and North Korea - China less so, IMHO) and 3. No other country in the world can do either of them very well.

If anyone thought of China (or any other modern navy) as a clear and immediate threat you'd see a different force structure. But given that our current conflict (GWOT) occasionally requires TLAMs and our two most likely near-term opponents (Iran and North Korea) have large ballistic missile inventories, well, there you go.

All that being said, there's a significant movement in and out of the USN to re-offensivize our anti-ship capabilities.

< Message edited by hellfish6 -- 2/8/2015 7:41:47 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 6

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/8/2015 8:51:46 PM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

Interesting take on China.

http://nypost.com/2015/02/08/chinas-secret-plan-to-topple-the-us-as-the-worlds-superpower/

(in reply to hellfish6)

Post #: 7

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/11/2015 7:02:23 PM

Duck Doc

Posts: 693
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline

Reminds me about the decision to fly Phantoms over Vietnam with no cannons on board. How'd that work out? Just sayin'...

... And trolling. Carry on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

As mentioned in another thread, I'm pretty surprised at the lack of anti surface capability for the USN. Back when the Soviet Navy was the big bad wolf you be launching Harpoon and anti ship Tomahawks at enemy ships. I was playing the tutorial and looking for them.

Harpoon sure has grown up...

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 8

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/11/2015 7:51:59 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dale H
Reminds me about the decision to fly Phantoms over Vietnam with no cannons on board. How'd that work out? Just sayin'...

... And trolling. Carry on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

As mentioned in another thread, I'm pretty surprised at the lack of anti surface capability for the USN. Back when the Soviet Navy was the big bad wolf you be launching Harpoon and anti ship Tomahawks at enemy ships. I was playing the tutorial and looking for them.

Harpoon sure has grown up...

They had to wait years to get gun pods for those Phantoms, which were still not an ideal solution. A couple of days in port can see some Mk141 launchers put back on a DDG51, though. I actually mind the ASuW load of Burke these days less than the anemic ASuW 'payload' of the LCS, however.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 2/11/2015 8:53:00 PM >

(in reply to Duck Doc)

Post #: 9

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/12/2015 12:21:28 AM

sfbaytf

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dale H

Reminds me about the decision to fly Phantoms over Vietnam with no cannons on board. How'd that work out? Just sayin'...

... And trolling. Carry on.

To be fair those were 1st gen missiles and, electronics and missile tech has made huge advances. Also the pilots were not trained in dissimilar ACM. There was a recent article about the gun on the new F35. I think it was the program manager who basically said it costs hundreds of million to get it to work and will probably never be used and the weight could be put to much better use, but the pilots insisted on it.

Sounds like for now the VLS Standards carried can be used as SSM if the need arises.

(in reply to Duck Doc)

Post #: 10

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/12/2015 3:20:41 AM

Duck Doc

Posts: 693
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline

Valid point, I guess. However sometimes people get so caught up with an idea in their zeal they tend to throw out the baby with the bath water. I'm no expert. Just seemed incredulous to me. There are a lot of people smarter than me thinking about these things but then again you know the old saw about military intelligence being an oxymoron...

Would really like more details about how the decision was made.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

To be fair those were 1st gen missiles and, electronics and missile tech has made huge advances. Also the pilots were not trained in dissimilar ACM. There was a recent article about the gun on the new F35. I think it was the program manager who basically said it costs hundreds of million to get it to work and will probably never be used and the weight could be put to much better use, but the pilots insisted on it.

Sounds like for now the VLS Standards carried can be used as SSM if the need arises.

(in reply to sfbaytf)

Post #: 11

RE: Finally Got Around to Playing - 2/12/2015 6:08:47 PM

ExNusquam

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

A couple of days in port can see some Mk141 launchers put back on a DDG51, though.

The DDG51 already has Harpoon capability, the Harpoons were only removed from the Flight IIA (DDG79+), and that was because the helicopter hangars redesign took up space that the Harpoons needed. While I'm sure that you could slap a few on in an emergency, you'd likely see loss of some other capability.

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 12