Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

Love the idea, here's what I'd try a combination of HARMs and Harpoons. It's always better to shoot off missiles and have them be shot down than lose aircraft. Forcing the enemy to exhaust his inventory of SAMs in self defense is frequently a perfectly good tactic.

quote:

Love the idea, here's what I'd try a combination of HARMs and Harpoons. It's always better to shoot off missiles and have them be shot down than lose aircraft. Forcing the enemy to exhaust his inventory of SAMs in self defense is frequently a perfectly good tactic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikeCK
I know the Navy used [..] six intruders dropping [..] Rockeye cluster bombs to take out a number of Libyan ships in 1986 but of course they were just fast patrol boats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikeCK

Well keep in mind that I would be coming in on the deck as fast as I can and drop cluster munitions or retarded bombs. Biggest ship is a frigate and a destroyer and the rest are corvette types. Not the preferred method of attack but if I'm going to be short on anti-**** muscles I think it could work. Their radar so would not be able to pick me up until one extremely close and moving that fast they wouldn't have much time. Worth a shot anyway. I know the Navy used a – six intruders dropping it rock I cluster bombs to take out a number of Libyan ships in 1986 but of course they were just fast patrol boats.

The key I guess would be keeping 20 feet off the deck and moving in just sub sonic

quote:

I like to stream in Harpoons and hold back HARMs until the ship formation begins lighting up against Harpoons. This gives you lots of FCRs to target and gives the AI a tough choice between going after sea-skimming ASMs or high-speed ARMs. Usually it enables lots of ARM hits which then aids the remaining Harpoons to get to target.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BrianinMinnie

Is Toss Bombing simulated in the game? could you High speed, low level dash in, lift your nose, toss 16 dumb bombs, then turn back down to the dirt before catching a face full of sams?
Maybe have a wingman firing ARMs at the same time to keep the radars head down?
I realize this was a nuke tactic from the old days but could you pull it off with Modern Iron bombs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cik

it isn't simulated, and it would be arguably useless anyway. toss bombing doesn't have the range to throw over the horizon, so you'd end up in the SAM WEZ well before you entered throw range.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikeCK
Well, all i proved is that I am still incapable of attacking multiple targets without using "manual attack". My F-111s got right on top of the ships and then stated circling while being shot at only one dropped bombs. Weapons were free and all ships were on the target list. Figured the AI would sort out which planes attack which ships. Error on my end somewhere. But, they all got to the target unharmed since the SAMS were taking out my HARMs.

Facebook
Twitter

quote:

ORIGINAL: butch4343

CIK,
I take your point that the toss attack isn’t modelled in CMNAO that’s why I suggested the GBU-24 attack, with a 2000ft release height it’s a pretty close match to the release height for a toss attack.
Junk SARH SAMs is a bit of a stretch, the RN had 23 surface ships, 9 (40%) of those were equipped with either sea wolf or sea dart , SAM systems less than 10 years old. Granted the older Sea Slug (1st Gen late 1950s SAM) was useless, but only the two county class were equipped with those. Seacat equipped 11 of the smaller surface units, this was again a short range system designed to replace the 40mm bofors gun system on surface ships. Sea Dart scored 4 hits out 5 in the medium arena, and two out of 19 for the low level targets, Ill caveat this by saying numerous sea darts were fired ballistically, in order to provide a distraction for attack pilots, if you take them out , then although not a great score, it delivered more than was expected of it. Seawolf did well however was too few in number. Not sure if you were aware but it was a Sea dart that knocked down and Iraqi Silkworm in 1991 that was targeted on the USS Missouri.
The real reason the RN suffered horrible losses in ships, especially at sea, was that the RN due to the lack of AEW coverage, this contributed significantly to losses, as it forced the TF Cmdr, to push single/ double units out ahead of the main group of warships along likely threat vectors, the natural argentine tactic was to bomb the first warship they came across and that’s totally understandable. That led to the loss of the radar pickets.
You are correct blowpipe scored few kills, but I haven’t seen anything that says they were fired from TF ships, the RAF and Army had Rapier once they landed, and the SAS/SBS had access to stinger, BTW the SAS lost their only qualified Stinger instructor in a crash at the start of the war, so it was very much on the job training when the SAS fired stingers.
List of major surface ships (Less carriers and amphibs)

Destroyers
1 Type 82 Class (Sea Dart) 1973
5 Type 42 Class (Sea Dart) 1975
Cruisers
2 County Class (Sea Slug) 1962
Frigates
2 Type 22 ( Sea Wolf) 1979
7 Type 21 (Seacat) 1974
4 Leander Class (Seacat/Seawolf) 1963
2 Rothesay Class (Seacat) 1958

23 surface ships

Regards

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cik

quote:

ORIGINAL: butch4343

CIK,
I take your point that the toss attack isn’t modelled in CMNAO that’s why I suggested the GBU-24 attack, with a 2000ft release height it’s a pretty close match to the release height for a toss attack.
Junk SARH SAMs is a bit of a stretch, the RN had 23 surface ships, 9 (40%) of those were equipped with either sea wolf or sea dart , SAM systems less than 10 years old. Granted the older Sea Slug (1st Gen late 1950s SAM) was useless, but only the two county class were equipped with those. Seacat equipped 11 of the smaller surface units, this was again a short range system designed to replace the 40mm bofors gun system on surface ships. Sea Dart scored 4 hits out 5 in the medium arena, and two out of 19 for the low level targets, Ill caveat this by saying numerous sea darts were fired ballistically, in order to provide a distraction for attack pilots, if you take them out , then although not a great score, it delivered more than was expected of it. Seawolf did well however was too few in number. Not sure if you were aware but it was a Sea dart that knocked down and Iraqi Silkworm in 1991 that was targeted on the USS Missouri.
The real reason the RN suffered horrible losses in ships, especially at sea, was that the RN due to the lack of AEW coverage, this contributed significantly to losses, as it forced the TF Cmdr, to push single/ double units out ahead of the main group of warships along likely threat vectors, the natural argentine tactic was to bomb the first warship they came across and that’s totally understandable. That led to the loss of the radar pickets.
You are correct blowpipe scored few kills, but I haven’t seen anything that says they were fired from TF ships, the RAF and Army had Rapier once they landed, and the SAS/SBS had access to stinger, BTW the SAS lost their only qualified Stinger instructor in a crash at the start of the war, so it was very much on the job training when the SAS fired stingers.
List of major surface ships (Less carriers and amphibs)

Destroyers
1 Type 82 Class (Sea Dart) 1973
5 Type 42 Class (Sea Dart) 1975
Cruisers
2 County Class (Sea Slug) 1962
Frigates
2 Type 22 ( Sea Wolf) 1979
7 Type 21 (Seacat) 1974
4 Leander Class (Seacat/Seawolf) 1963
2 Rothesay Class (Seacat) 1958

23 surface ships

Regards

Butch

thanks for the history lesson (that sounds snide but I'm not being sarcastic, i don't know very much about the falklands war)

i don't mean that the systems themselves were junk (for the time period) but understandably mid-late 70's developed radar SAMs will have a great deal of problems with ground clutter rejection due to insufficient computer processing power. this enabled the argentines to ingress at low altitude against ships with at least some hope of success. a russian destroyer in '89 is going to have way less problems with that as it's both later and they are equipped differently with more focus on IR SAMs which don't suffer most of the problems you get with semi-active radar missile launchers.
on the silkworm: it's impressive that such an old system could do that but styxes don't sea-skim (AFAIK) so the argentine attackers did have that advantage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikeCK
Well, all i proved is that I am still incapable of attacking multiple targets without using "manual attack". My F-111s got right on top of the ships and then stated circling while being shot at only one dropped bombs. Weapons were free and all ships were on the target list. Figured the AI would sort out which planes attack which ships. Error on my end somewhere. But, they all got to the target unharmed since the SAMS were taking out my HARMs.

Manually enforced an altitude from which they could not drop....?

(If you try manual allocation it should tell you why it cannot drop at the specific moment)