Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Airfield strikes

 
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 >> The War Room >> Airfield strikes Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Airfield strikes - 4/11/2016 5:33:00 AM   
Sabresandy

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/14/2016
Status: offline 		Typically, what are your procedures for taking out an airfield? Is there a rule of thumb for what kinds of targets need cratering, and with how many/what kinds of munitions? I've been running with the assumption that the heaviest bombs you have go on the runways and the runway access points (there typically being too many parking spots, pieces of tarmac, and HASes to strike), with generally mixed success. And how do you know when to stop?
Post #: 1
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/11/2016 7:34:33 AM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		Taking out AF's is difficult. In order to destroy the runway's you'll need to hit all runways AND runway capable taxiway’s multiple times with penetrating weapons and hope that you inflict enough damage to damage these runways enough as to temperary stop AC operating from them.
I generally find it easier and more reliable to hit AC shelters, hangars and parking spaces with non-penetrating weapons in the Mk84 class as to destroy the AC themselves instead of their runways.

I ran a test a few builds ago and these are the results.

Ok, I’ve run a few test regarding knocking out airfields. As we no longer can knock out runways, I’ve concentrated on knocking out hardened aircraft shelters, hangars and tarmac parking spaces.
Planes on the ground are distributed between these targets and MK 82 weapon only does little damage to all these targets, although hitting hangars and tarmac parking spaces will destroy some AC parked on/in these (35%). A heavier weapons (Mk83) does more damage (50%) and a single Mk84 destroys most (85%) planes parked on/in these targets. A tomahawk hit on these targets has about a 50% chance of destroying the AC on/in these targets while, A JSOW (broach) hit does about the same damage as a Mk84 hit while the dual purpose JSOW variant does NO Damage whatsoever (0%) to the AC stationed here ( I ran this test thrice just to be certain).
Hardened AC shelters are trickier to knock out, although a single Tomahawk hit will not destroy the shelter, it has a 50% chance of destroying the AC inside the shelter (spalling?)… A Mk82 warhead does almost no damage (3%), a MK83 does 20% and a Mk84 30% damage to the AC inside them. The JSOW BROACH has a 50% damage chance and the dual purpose JSOW variant does NO Damage whatsoever (0%). But, to my surprise, a SLAMMER does close to a 100% damage to the AC inside hardened AC shelters.
Conclusion, to knock out an undefended airfield, send 2 tomahawks (or 1 SLAMMER) at all hardened AC shelters, hangars and tarmac parking spaces for chance of destroying 90% of the AC at that airfield.

EDIT: after upgrading to B678.17, the the dual purpose JSOW variant (cluster ammunition) does now indeed destroy 60% of the AC in hangars and on tarmac spaces.

With regards.

W.


< Message edited by wild_Willie2 -- 4/11/2016 7:43:01 AM >

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to Sabresandy)
Post #: 2
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/11/2016 8:47:22 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline 		As above runways are in my 'too hard' basket. Depending on scenario length a good hit on the runways might see the a/c grounded for the rest of the scen or make a come back later on (when it is least convenient, of course). The amount of ordnance required to put a runway out of commission is pretty significant, too.

Depending on the individual air base I look for weak spots. If there is only one ammo dump, I'll target that. If there is a glut of aircraft on a tarmac or in revetments I'll target them. My preference is to destroy the aircraft. That way you know they're not coming back.

Remember also with 1.11 we're able to use recon aircraft and drones to see where a/c are parked and target accordingly...

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 3
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/12/2016 9:49:22 PM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline 		I was bored one evening a short while ago and wanted to see how much damage an arclight scenario type mission could do so I set up a mission of 15 B-52G's each armed with 51 x M117 750lb bombs to attack a large airfield for an experiment before progressing any further with the scenario and adding the actual targets. All facilities on the airfield were targeted. Out of a total of 765 bombs, 573750lbs of explosives, I only destroyed one hangar and damaged a fuel dump. I never repeated it on the formations of infantry and soft skin vehicles that I was planning on as it might be a waste of time when a couple of F4's would probably inflict the same damage.

< Message edited by zacklaws -- 4/12/2016 9:56:13 PM >

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 4
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/12/2016 11:40:31 PM   
ExNusquam

 

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline 		So I went and replicated something similar; 18 B-52Gs with 51xM117. I manually edited the flight plans for high altitude, and here was the result of the strike: http://i.imgur.com/soCSKPU.png?1

Nearly every unit on the base has some damage. While the base is still operational (runway wasn't targeted specifically), 44 out of the 45 aircraft on base were destroyed. The lone survivor was in one of the few un-damaged revetments. I'd consider it successful, and definitely effective at killing enemy air bases.

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 5
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/13/2016 7:27:40 AM   
Sabresandy

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/14/2016
Status: offline 		Duly noted, and I shall be sure to keep that in mind when I have 18 B-52s to work with. :P

I've been able to inflict some damage on runway access points with 2000-pound penetrator bombs, though I'm not sure whether it's enough to render them unusable.

(in reply to ExNusquam)
Post #: 6
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/14/2016 4:13:46 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		Command operates with runway 'cuts' so with a hit at the best possible spot a 2000m runway becomes 1000m. But a runway hit may also be at one of the ends, reducing the length by only 200m, etc. So the more cuts you can do, the better. Tactical aircraft may require less than 500m to take off. So you need to cut the runway multiple places AND block the runway access points to take it out completely.

_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Sabresandy)
Post #: 7
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/16/2016 7:17:33 PM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline 		I shall have to repeat what I did as one thing I did not have was any aircraft on the airbase as it was a quick copy and paste of an unoccupied airbase so there was only buildings as targets and also, I have a feeling that since I did it, there has been an update on aircraft being damaged in an airbase is modelled.

Give me something to do later but in no way did I see that much damage to buildings done that you have.

(in reply to ComDev)
Post #: 8
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/26/2016 4:28:04 PM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline 		Tried again, 26 B52Gs, armed with 51 M117 750lb bombs only damage done was all 60 aircraft damaged and 2 buildings on fire. The odd thing is in the expenditures the bombs are now listed as Mk82 500lb

[image][URL=http://s70.photobucket.com/user/zackl_2006/media/Screen%20Shot%2004-26-16%20at%2004.24%20PM.png.html][/URL][/image]

Tried exactly the same,This time with MK82 500lb same results but 6 or maybe 8 buildings on fire and an ammo revetment destroyed.

[image][URL=http://s70.photobucket.com/user/zackl_2006/media/Screen%20Shot%2004-26-16%20at%2003.52%20PM.png.html][/URL][/image]

I'm actually thinking it may be a targeting problem, ordering a group to attack another group is not working correctly, I zoomed in to watch what was happening on both occasions, all the bombs were dropped on the first targets that the aircraft overflew and not distributed over the whole airfield, so the game logic is not distributing the target list of 125 possible targets to be engaged by the attacking group. In theory at least 26 tgts should be engaged, not just a few

Retried a third time, all B52g's armed with M117's this time they were listed as M115's in the resuls, same amount of destruction despite breaking the group up into small groups of 3 and targeting individual parts of the airbase, all the groups did their own thing and once again targeted the first parts of the airbase they flew over. Shall have to spend a bit more time and meticuously double check everything to see if an error in my procedure is creeping in somewhere.

< Message edited by zacklaws -- 4/26/2016 5:08:59 PM >

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 9
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/26/2016 7:03:45 PM   
jimcarravall

 

Posts: 642
Joined: 1/4/2006
Status: offline 		How to take out an airfield is dependent on how long the operation is intended to last.

If it's a 24-hour scenario, hitting aircraft and runways is the most effective manner to delay or stop a first strike response from that airfield.

If it's a multi-day scenario, on the assumption that the battlefield logistics is modeled accurately, taking out the fuel and ammo storage does more permanent damage to the airfield's capability than cutting runways.

_____________________________

Take care,

jim

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 10
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/26/2016 10:09:26 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		Airbase fuel is not yet modeled...

W.

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to jimcarravall)
Post #: 11
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 12:42:41 AM   
ExNusquam

 

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline 		Are the B-52's in one big group? When I tried I used a strike mission with 6 cells of 3.

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 12
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 7:21:31 AM   
jimcarravall

 

Posts: 642
Joined: 1/4/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

Airbase fuel is not yet modeled...

W.


Makes sense.

That's not different from any other real life military training simulation.

Spent the last years of my career advising Sandia Labs on parameters for measuring logistics logistics impacts on battle conduct so they could craft a realistic module for Army battlefield training simulations. Retired in 2009, and discovered the project was still being refined.



_____________________________

Take care,

jim

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 13
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 9:06:05 AM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline 		I have tried as one large group and also as 9 individual cells of 3. The large group targeting the whole airfield as a group and also as the individual cells targeting individual parts of the airfield. Same results both ways which makes it odd as the individual cells ignore their designated target and strike the first part of the airfield they encounter.

Also odd behaviour as well which I thought had been fixed but from 36,000' bomb release is only around 1500 metres from the target. Would have thought range rings for freefall weapons would also increase with altitude and speed of attacking aircraft but they remain fixed.

< Message edited by zacklaws -- 4/27/2016 9:09:03 AM >

(in reply to ExNusquam)
Post #: 14
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 1:40:13 PM   
Kitchens Sink

 

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/4/2014
Status: offline 		Try a strike mission targeting specific installations. Set the mission to "targets only", and make sure the strike mission is set to engage mission-specific targets only. Then set the Mission WRA's to 2 or 3 rounds per target type. Each Strike Group should then allocate 2 or 3 rounds per target and move on to the next target, returning to the previously-struck targets if more weapons are needed.

It sounds like a WRA issue, however I haven't tested what y'all are doing specifically.

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 15
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 4:28:17 PM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitchens Sink

Try a strike mission targeting specific installations. Set the mission to "targets only", and make sure the strike mission is set to engage mission-specific targets only. Then set the Mission WRA's to 2 or 3 rounds per target type. Each Strike Group should then allocate 2 or 3 rounds per target and move on to the next target, returning to the previously-struck targets if more weapons are needed.



Tried two attempts at that now, same results, first TGTs the B-52G's are going to overfly get the full load of bombs and then its RTB despite in the WRA 2 rounds are selected. Bomb fall time seems correct despite the bombs being dropped very close to the TGT.

But I cannot find anywhere how to set strike mission to engage mission-specific targets only, but I doubt that would change anything anyway.

And also I would want all the B-52's to drop all their rounds on the airbase to cause damage over a wide area in one pass carpet bombing and not have to turn around for a repeat attack. All that seems to happen is one aircraft just engages one tgt with all its rounds and by the time they detonate the rest of the strike force has dropped its load on the same tgt. Perhaps if each aircraft has 30+ sec spacing then by the time they get to the release point the first tgt may be destroyed and they will be forced to attack another tgt.

(in reply to Kitchens Sink)
Post #: 16
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 5:33:25 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		For what it's worth the one time I worked with a wing of B-52's as a ground safety officer, they did just that. Came in on 1-2 min intervals at low level, unfortunately they only dropped smoke pots to mark the beginning and end of their run.

Doesn't make me an expert but your idea may work.

B

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 17
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/27/2016 9:26:22 PM   
zacklaws

 

Posts: 415
Joined: 1/10/2007
Status: offline 		For the amount of damage you would expect to happen and is happening, might as well be just dropping smoke pots.

< Message edited by zacklaws -- 4/27/2016 9:28:47 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 18
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/28/2016 4:07:35 AM   
Sabresandy

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 2/14/2016
Status: offline 		Is repair modelled and is it based on equipment available? I'm guessing not; probably another one for the feature request list to model the effects of, say, bulldozers versus a bunch of guys with shovels. (It'd only matter over multiday scenarios.)

On Operation Brass Drum, I've had strike aircraft hitting some aircraft runways with BLU-109s, as the closest thing I have to Durandals. Unfortunately I can't say as their effectiveness, since the damage bar doesn't say much about how much runway is still usable. And while parked aircraft are easy targets for Tomahawks, LGBs, or the Zumwalt's 155s, there are a whole lot of HASes to hit to make the "destroy the aircraft, not the airfield" strategy workable.

(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 19
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/28/2016 2:53:14 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabresandy

Is repair modelled and is it based on equipment available? I'm guessing not; probably another one for the feature request list to model the effects of, say, bulldozers versus a bunch of guys with shovels. (It'd only matter over multiday scenarios.)


Repair is modeled. All units have the ability and you can impact their ability to do it (as well as fight fires, floods) by setting a desired unit proficiency. This is an smarter way to do it rather than having to evaluate the endless engineering requirements and equipment (aka. Nightmare for us).

Details on that here:

http://www.warfaresims.com/index.php?s=unit+proficiency


quote:

On Operation Brass Drum, I've had strike aircraft hitting some aircraft runways with BLU-109s, as the closest thing I have to Durandals. Unfortunately I can't say as their effectiveness, since the damage bar doesn't say much about how much runway is still usable. And while parked aircraft are easy targets for Tomahawks, LGBs, or the Zumwalt's 155s, there are a whole lot of HASes to hit to make the "destroy the aircraft, not the airfield" strategy workable.


Can you confirm that you're viewing from the target's side and not seeing results?

If you're viewing from the striker's side you're experiencing the normal haze of BDA. You will not get 100% transparency. That is the correct model.

Mike

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 4/28/2016 2:55:47 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Sabresandy)
Post #: 20
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/28/2016 3:30:30 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zacklaws


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitchens Sink

Try a strike mission targeting specific installations. Set the mission to "targets only", and make sure the strike mission is set to engage mission-specific targets only. Then set the Mission WRA's to 2 or 3 rounds per target type. Each Strike Group should then allocate 2 or 3 rounds per target and move on to the next target, returning to the previously-struck targets if more weapons are needed.



Tried two attempts at that now, same results, first TGTs the B-52G's are going to overfly get the full load of bombs and then its RTB despite in the WRA 2 rounds are selected. Bomb fall time seems correct despite the bombs being dropped very close to the TGT.

But I cannot find anywhere how to set strike mission to engage mission-specific targets only, but I doubt that would change anything anyway.

And also I would want all the B-52's to drop all their rounds on the airbase to cause damage over a wide area in one pass carpet bombing and not have to turn around for a repeat attack. All that seems to happen is one aircraft just engages one tgt with all its rounds and by the time they detonate the rest of the strike force has dropped its load on the same tgt. Perhaps if each aircraft has 30+ sec spacing then by the time they get to the release point the first tgt may be destroyed and they will be forced to attack another tgt.



Preplanned Target setting here




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 4/28/2016 3:32:37 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to zacklaws)
Post #: 21
RE: Airfield strikes - 4/28/2016 3:46:51 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Thank you all for looking into this.

1) Definitely an issue with 500lb bombs not dumping on first pass. Have added that to our list.
2) At some point we decided that penetration class we're needed for runways. That being said we do think a 2000lb Unguided HE weapons should do some damage. We'll look at this further next update.
3) In general though there is a reason why nation's developed runway specific weapons classes and its not because sticks of dumb bombs were super effective. You'll also notice once JDAM/LGB classes with penetrator warheads came into play those speciality weapons stopped being bought. So I don't think we're too far off the mark.
3) IIRC bombs drop like sticks so altitude may impact the spread (and to some extent accuracy the other way). My tests on other air base infrastructure seems ok but I tend to grab sections of an airbase as my targets which kind fits the model. If you guys can produce some test files showing really wacky results we'll definitely follow up.

Relax guys. We're always with you on dealing with stuff. Some of present your posts like we don't.

Mike


< Message edited by mikmyk -- 4/28/2016 3:55:19 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 22
RE: Airfield strikes - 5/8/2016 2:39:26 PM   
ComDev

 

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline 		Improvements made B824, thanks

Small bombs don't do much damage against hardened runways though. Use heavy bombs or penetrators

_____________________________



Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> The War Room >> Airfield strikes Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.391