Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Sink the Kuznetsov

 
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 >> Sink the Kuznetsov Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/24/2016 11:26:23 AM   
Zaslon

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline 		Due to the hysteria of the british media about the Russian surface group...I want to test a possible response to this hysteria...Sink the Kuznetsov and the entire of his Naval Surface group

My idea was an airstrike of Tornado GR4/A and Eurofighter FGR4 with support of Airseekers, Sentries and Predators.
But...I saw that Alarm Missile was retired in 2014. What is the british anti radiation missile in service in RAF?
I didn't find an antiship loadout for Tornados...Sea Eagle is still in use? Maybe Harpoons?

Or it is better send a British SAG?

Thanks.

< Message edited by Zaslon -- 10/24/2016 11:50:22 AM >

_____________________________


Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China
Post #: 1
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/24/2016 12:30:14 PM   
Grazyn

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 10/24/2016
Status: offline 		British Eurofighters and Tornados too I think can mount the Storm Shadow cruise missile

edit: I'm not sure it can target ships though, maybe just static targets?

< Message edited by Grazyn -- 10/24/2016 12:32:40 PM >

(in reply to Zaslon)
Post #: 2
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/24/2016 4:21:40 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Sounds good. Should add some EU diesels as well.

According to twitter a Dutch sub came up. Turned on its AIS long enough for the Russians to see

https://twitter.com/Galrahn/status/789178082716332032

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Grazyn)
Post #: 3
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/24/2016 7:33:50 PM   
.Sirius


Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

British Eurofighters and Tornados too I think can mount the Storm Shadow cruise missile

edit: I'm not sure it can target ships though, maybe just static targets?

Hi guys
anti-ship capability for the RAF is down to Brimestone, Paveway LGB and Iron Bombs :(

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to Grazyn)
Post #: 4
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/24/2016 7:47:33 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		That'd be a fun mission: sink the Kuznetsov with the present day RAF.

(Or just wait till you can maneuver a nuclear powered sub into position...)

(in reply to .Sirius)
Post #: 5
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/25/2016 9:16:19 AM   
AlGrant


Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline 		Whatever weapon system you decide upon I'd ensure it doesn't need any visual/TV targetting, the Kuz would just switch on that new smoke screen device they've been testing

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 6
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/25/2016 4:57:15 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline 		Send all of it! According to the press, they've been shadowed by a Royal Navy destroyer the whole way. I'm sure if they wanted to sink it they could back it up with land based strike aircraft. There probably also out to be at least one submarine involved and some MPA. All these things work together.


(in reply to Zaslon)
Post #: 7
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 4:00:19 AM   
MR_BURNS2


Posts: 974
Joined: 7/18/2013
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

Send all of it! According to the press, they've been shadowed by a Royal Navy destroyer the whole way. I'm sure if they wanted to sink it they could back it up with land based strike aircraft. There probably also out to be at least one submarine involved and some MPA. All these things work together.




What is this british MPA you are talking about?

_____________________________

Windows 7 64; Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz; 6144MB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970;



(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 8
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 12:21:21 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		I would assume maritime patrol aircraft...sorry, looks like you are joking.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 10/26/2016 12:51:59 PM >

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)
Post #: 9
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 12:53:51 PM   
Zaslon

 

Posts: 283
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline 		That's the question. No alarm, No Sea Eagle, No MPAs...

An airstrike with Paveway in the range of S-300F is a suicide...at least theoretically.

Only Sea Skuas from Lynx because Martlets from Wildcats are too small for capital ships.

I will add submarines and at least two British task forces in order to test all posibilities...but hey...It's scary to see that now United Kindgom retired a lot of weapons without a proper replacement.

_____________________________


Kids think about Iran and Amateurs think about Russia, but professionals think about China

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)
Post #: 10
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 1:01:16 PM   
AlGrant


Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline
quote:

I would assume maritime patrol aircraft...sorry, looks like you are joking.


I think the joke (a.k.a Ludicrous situation) is that since the Nimrod MR.2's were retired the UK currently doesn't have any MPA's ..... at least until the P-8's come online (due 2019) and unless things change they won't even be able to Air-Air refuel with UK Voyagers.




(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 11
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 1:59:56 PM   
LordFlashheart

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 4/3/2014
Status: offline 		Been pondering this one myself. (Discounting a RN SSN sailing underneath the battle group already with Spearfish primed).

Answer I suspect would be SPEAR 3 + F-35s - eventually.

And after Brimstone, Storm Shadow next weapon to be integrated (according to the Eurofighter folks) would be the Marte ER anti-ship missile. (No RAF plan to buy that though, but perhaps this might be a wake-up call to think about that? Either that or perhaps MBDA might tweak Storm Shadow perhaps with datalink/modded IR seeker to allow it to go after moving ship targets? I would imagine a Broach warhead vs a warship would be pretty spectacular.)

Currently though, discounting the suicide mission option of a Paveway/PIV medium altitude approach it seems to be either go 'Old Skool' with unguided iron bombs (loft attack?) or Brimstone. Ultra LL run-in - then pop up to 100ft to release. 9(?) Brimstones per Tornado so might swamp defences and a couple get through the CIWS. Only trouble is, that with Brimstone low-collateral warheads you'd have to hope for a lucky shot that starts a deck fire or takes out radars...

(I'm assuming here that Typhoons could adequately deal with any Su33 CAP by themselves)

Finally - if you are replicating the Kuznetsov's 'Channel Dash', you could always rope the Army in? Regiment of MLRS rocket artillery at Dover/Ramsgate with orders to wipe out a grid square when task group passes close to the coast would make for an interesting surprise...


(in reply to AlGrant)
Post #: 12
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 5:11:23 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

Finally - if you are replicating the Kuznetsov's 'Channel Dash', you could always rope the Army in? Regiment of MLRS rocket artillery at Dover/Ramsgate with orders to wipe out a grid square when task group passes close to the coast would make for an interesting surprise...


Not so much! UK is a signatory to the Ottawa convention against Anti personnel mines, and considers that the cluster munitions of that standard MLRS rocket illegal. Therefore the only munitions available for British MLRS are the ones that have unitary warheads and are GPS guided. They don't work so well on moving targets but are great for COIN targeting. Or of course the AT-2 Anti-Tank mine dispensing warhead - an interesting idea but not overly effective!

B

(in reply to LordFlashheart)
Post #: 13
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 7:34:51 PM   
Lionheart

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/12/2013
From: Surrey, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AlGrant

quote:

I would assume maritime patrol aircraft...sorry, looks like you are joking.


I think the joke (a.k.a Ludicrous situation) is that since the Nimrod MR.2's were retired the UK currently doesn't have any MPA's ..... at least until the P-8's come online (due 2019) and unless things change they won't even be able to Air-Air refuel with UK Voyagers.



The RAF want boom refuelling capability on the Voyagers for their C-17's and RC-135W's as well as the P-8's, plus coalition operations. Just a matter of waiting for the cash to become available.....

(in reply to AlGrant)
Post #: 14
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 7:51:28 PM   
Lionheart

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/12/2013
From: Surrey, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LordFlashheart

Answer I suspect would be SPEAR 3 + F-35s - eventually.



SPEAR 3 isn't going to have a big warhead, but in theory an F-35 could carry 8 which would be enough to overwhelm a frigate.

(in reply to LordFlashheart)
Post #: 15
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 9:02:44 PM   
AlGrant


Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline
Putin does like his high profile flag waving, but if there was even the remotest chance of a shooting match I think they'd be a bit more cautious with a TG that in effect contains the biggest guns in the Russian Northern Fleet - 1 ageing carrier and currently 1 operational Kirov class.

Any likelyhood of hostilities and I think the Kuznetsov group would avoid the confines of the North Sea where it would be in easy range of shore based aircraft to the East and West and sub commanders would have a pretty good idea where to sit and wait for her.

Far more likely to go to the West of Ireland (there were questions about if she'd take that route last week) and avoid the choke point of the English Channel. Much more sea room to avoid the sub surf threat and harder for UK aircraft to get out there (if Ireland refused to allow use of airspace).


(in reply to Lionheart)
Post #: 16
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 9:13:50 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		So, it actually turns out that the RAF couldn't sink the Kuznetsov? That seems to be the conclusion from the discussion here...

I hope the UK military decides to get back on the AShM band-wagon after this. (And the USN too)

Here's a corollary question, how would a USN air wing do against the Kuznetsov? Do carriers still carry enough Harpoon / SLAM-ERs to overwhelm Kuznetsov battlegroup defenses? Or, would a battlegroup's airwing have too many JDAMs and too few stand-off mobile-target weapons.

As for the Kuznetsov's battlegroup's role, it might be to threaten any US tomahawk shooters in the Mediterranean. Or, it will sail to Tartarus and constrain US targeting options there.

(in reply to AlGrant)
Post #: 17
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 9:23:43 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		I think a carrier that only had to focus on that Russian group could do it. If there are other threats (air and sub), then you might need a second one for cover.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 10/26/2016 11:13:38 PM >

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 18
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/26/2016 11:29:47 PM   
ExNusquam

 

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

Here's a corollary question, how would a USN air wing do against the Kuznetsov? Do carriers still carry enough Harpoon / SLAM-ERs to overwhelm Kuznetsov battlegroup defenses? Or, would a battlegroup's airwing have too many JDAMs and too few stand-off mobile-target weapons.


I would guess that carrier magazine composition changes with the situation (just like VLS loadouts). If the carrier was deploying for Inherent Resolve and then got tasked to deal with a non-COIN taget, it would probably be under-loaded with standoff weapons. If the carrier was deployed to the NORLANT specifically, even just to show the flag, it would be a safe bet that the magazine composition would be significantly different.

As for weapon usage, it won't be the AGM-84s that overwhelm the defenses, it will be the ECM/Decoys/HARMs that do it. Or a Mk48.
quote:


I think a carrier that only had to focus on that Russian group could do it. If there are other threats air and sub), then you might need a second one for cover.

I think you're overestimating the capabilities of the Russian task group. The only potent surface combatant in the group is the Kirov, and the Kuznetsov has an absolute maximum of 44 fighters on board, and that's assuming they took every carrier capable aircraft they had (not likely). The fighters they do have will have very limited range or will have their operational efficiency decreased by buddy-tanking. This group might have been a tough nut to crack for the USN of the 1980s, but the Soviet tech just isn't as potent these days.

As to other threats, I don't think they're particularly restrictive to the USN in any realistic engagement. The Kuznetsov's deployment route and location are quite expeditionary, and the group will be operating a large distance from significant Russian air support. ASW operations won't really constrain a USN CVG these days, since they don't have much of an ASW mission since they lost the S-3. I suspect long-range ASW would be undertaken by P-8 squadrons forward deployed.

quote:

As for the Kuznetsov's battlegroup's role, it might be to threaten any US tomahawk shooters in the Mediterranean. Or, it will sail to Tartarus and constrain US targeting options there.

In a war scenario? Possibly. More realistically, it's an opportunity for Russia to do the following:
1. Show the flag
2. Work out operational tactics with the MiG-29Ks.
3. The CGN will also provide some additional SAM coverage off the coast (and SAM coverage has been a big Russian messaging tool).
4. Did I mention showing the flag?

I think the recent piece in USNI is a very good assessment of what the Russians are attempting to achieve with the deployment.

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 19
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 1:18:27 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		I think your on the mark, its not like other navies haven't done it before.. Great White Fleet for instance.

Its got me curious though, although I agree that the Russian TG should be no match for a CSG it would be fun, have to provide some extra threats I think. I'll crank out a quick scenario this weekend once back home. The Bush is almost ready to deploy I think...

B

(in reply to ExNusquam)
Post #: 20
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 5:26:19 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		Gunner98 - maybe add in the threat of a Syrian coastal defense battery and a dispersed Russian ADN in Syria itself.

It would be interesting to see a scenario which stresses the difficulty of targeting road-mobile launchers in a congested environment. I don't know if CMANO has the ability to replicate the affect of urban terrain on searching for a target, though.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 21
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 8:09:31 PM   
mikkey


Posts: 3142
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Slovakia
Status: offline 		I look forward to this your new scenario Gunner98

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 22
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 8:27:29 PM   
Tailhook

 

Posts: 293
Joined: 1/18/2015
Status: offline 		Would the French CDG group in the Eadtern Med be better suited for this than the RAF and RN? I wasn't able to figure out which ships are in that task force.

(in reply to mikkey)
Post #: 23
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 9:37:27 PM   
AlGrant


Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline 		Well it's not the Kuznetsov but I couldn't resist having a go at her big hitting escort the Petr Velikiy - but thought I'd approach it from a different direction:

"Harpy Swarm" Large numbers of small, slow, cheap 'suicide' UAV's.

Israel produces a couple of suitable systems that have been fairly widely exported (China, Turkey and others).
http://www.iai.co.il/2013/36694-en/Business_Areas_Land.aspx

So I set a very quick scenario:
Red = Petr Velikiy, 100nm off the coast under full EMCON
Blue = 1x Harpy TEL (48 UAV) ARM seeker head, 1x Harop TEL (48 UAV)
1x Hermes Jammer UAV and an E-3A to supply locating data.

Once the E-3 had a fix on the Petr V. I launched all 48 Harop's closely followed by all 48 Harpy's on a BOL.
The Hermes jammer ran along between each swarm.


The Harops got in close enough that the first defences the Petr V. used were CIWS.
She took a good few down but enough got through to cause 39% damage, as she was under attack she also switched on her radars and the Harpy's soon got a target emission to lock on to.


Petr V. sent out SAM's but many were jammed, CIWS also got involved but again engough UAV's got through to leave here with a total of 60% damage.

The Petr V's expenditure was
------------------
56x 30mm Twin Gatling Gsh-6-30KD [375 rnds]
109x AK-130 130mm/54 Twin Frag Burst [2 rnds]
34x PK-10 Flare [SO-50]
55x SA-N-11b Grisom [9M311K-1]
32x SA-N-20b Gargoyle [48N6M]
69x SA-N-9 Gauntlet [9M330-2 Kinzhal]
------------------

I also tried a run with the Petr V's radars on but it was pretty much the same story, she started shooting at longer range but jamming took care of most of them. Without a jammer the UAV's don't even get close!

These UAV swarms are certainly not an alternative to other forces, but a couple of well timed swarms can not only do some damage but could keep an opponents air defences busy whilst the bigger ASM's follow them in.

Edit:
just to add that I think the Harop might be a little too effective in Command.
The Harpy could easily cause serious damage to radars/sensors but I doubt the small Harop warhead would do as much damage against a Kirov hull.



< Message edited by AlGrant -- 10/27/2016 9:46:53 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 24
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 9:58:50 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		The Hermes seems a bit too effective? Would the ship have HOJ mode for its missiles?

Also, is the escorting Kirov recently modernized or out of date?

(in reply to AlGrant)
Post #: 25
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 10:33:43 PM   
ExNusquam

 

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/4/2014
From: Washington, D.C.
Status: offline 		Pytor Veliky is dated at best. Her sister ships Lazarev and Nakhimov are both slated for refit and modernization but are not in service yet. Pyotr Veliky is scheduled for a refit in the 2019 timeframe.


(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 26
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/27/2016 11:45:07 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		Ok, then the jamming makes sense, a modern jammer against an outdated radar. Though the Hermes can defeat a Tomb Stone?

(in reply to ExNusquam)
Post #: 27
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/28/2016 1:25:53 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

Gunner98 - maybe add in the threat of a Syrian coastal defense battery and a dispersed Russian ADN in Syria itself


Hadn't planned on being that fancy. Was planning on something mid Atlantic and isolated, sort of a sandbox. But that's an interesting idea. Will think about it.

B

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 28
RE: Sink the Kuznetsov - 10/28/2016 4:01:05 PM   
StellarRat

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 9/14/2009
Status: offline 		From what I've been reading the Kuznetsov will sink all by itself if you can keep it out at sea for a while.

< Message edited by StellarRat -- 10/28/2016 4:15:10 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Sink the Kuznetsov 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

1.408