Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition



Message

Paulus Pak -> Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/16/2008 8:00:45 PM)

With one carrier in postwar realities you have limited resources (no Intruders, no Tomcats so you can use only few Hornets - let's say 12 or 16 - to attack land targets. 2 or 3 Bugs with decoys, 3-4 with harms, rest with bombs - rest of Bugs have asuw/intercept/tanker tasks) and many targets. Of course top priority should be given to reducing efficiency of enemy air forces. But there could be more than one airbase in range to attack. With limited forces you can't hope to destroy every airbase in short time. The best tactics would be to reduce airbases usability with limited strikes. What would be weapon of choice for such tasks: destroying planes on the ground (without prospect of destroying an entire airbase) or denying further use of an airbase. One obvious weapon is Durandal bomb - irc it will lower runway class of an airbase (form VLarge to Large, Medium and so on). But all PCW versions of Hornets don't have antirunway loadouts (Hornets A, A+ and CW variants use Durandals or Gators). So what would you recomend? We have few choices: Paveway lgb's, JDAM's (standard and BLU versions), SLAM's, JSOW's (A or C versions)? Maybe Tomahawk's from ships? What would be best to destroy planes on the ground or damage runway itself?



CV32 -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/16/2008 9:56:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paulus
What would be best to destroy planes on the ground or damage runway itself?


I assume your question is focused on what would be best in the game.

That said, anti-runway weapons in the HCE Database (the HCDB) include the following:

* Russian BeTAB series rocket assisted "concrete penetrating" bombs
* British JP.233 submunition dispenser
* French BAP.100 cratering bomb
* French Durandal boosted cratering bomb
* USAF CBU-89/B and US Navy CBU-78/B Gator mine dispensers
* German MW-1/HZG-2 submunition dispenser

These are the only weapons in the database that permit you to directly attack only the runways of an airfield. (The Gator system, btw, is not really a dedicated runway attack weapon, of course, but since we cannot actually drop mines in HCE, this is where they find their best use).

There isn't a weapon (in the database or the code) that directly targets aircraft on the ground.



Warhorse64 -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 2:00:51 AM)

Planes on the ground seem to die in proportion to the damage done to the base. The Tomahawk missile has the largest warhead available to you, but you probably only have enough available to cover two or three bases at most, and they won't do much good at all if the target has fighter cover. If you've only got less than a dozen a/c with a pair of bombs or missiles each, SLAMs and JSOWs are likely a waste of time; you won't have enough to crack the base SAM umbrella unless you get lucky, and they don't do much damage when you do get a few in. JDAMs and LGBs are essentially two different guidance packages strapped to the same dumb iron bombs. The best bet is the standard version (better damage) of the JDAM (the extra range keeps you out of the MANPADS and AAA). However, all that said, in game terms, unless the scenario designer has done something evil like starting your carrier group in the middle of the Persian Gulf, it is almost always possible to arrange things such that you can swat the hostile bases one at a time with at least two or three of your Hornet squadrons. This tends to make the SLAM loadout look much better, since you can then launch enough of them to overwhelm the base SAM umbrella, and don't have to send your Hornets into range of same for the attack. (Of course, realistically, the carrier probably only has enough SLAMs on board for one such attack, versus essentially unlimited numbers of JDAMs.)



CV32 -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 2:35:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Warhorse64
Planes on the ground seem to die in proportion to the damage done to the base.


A prudent (and accurate) observation. [;)]

quote:

Of course, realistically, the carrier probably only has enough SLAMs on board for one such attack, versus essentially unlimited numbers of JDAMs.


A very good point.



Paulus Pak -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 9:44:32 AM)

Thanks guys for advice. So in game an ideal strike package would be a mix of planes with gators/durandals and heaviest JDAM's.
I think I will "enable" use of antirunway weapons for PCW variants of F-18.



CV32 -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 1:04:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paulus
Thanks guys for advice. So in game an ideal strike package would be a mix of planes with gators/durandals and heaviest JDAM's.
I think I will "enable" use of antirunway weapons for PCW variants of F-18.


The anti-runway weapons have been removed from "Post Cold War" versions of the F/A-18 because, for all intents and purposes, the dedicated runway attack mission using those kinds of weapons is a thing of the past. (Those weapons required an aircraft to overfly the runway/taxiway at low altitude, which was very convenient for airfield air defense systems. See Tornado/JP233 experience in the first Gulf War). These days, they're more likely to target JDAMs to hit directly along the length of the runway and/or taxiways.



Paulus Pak -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 5:58:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CV32

The anti-runway weapons have been removed from "Post Cold War" versions of the F/A-18 because, for all intents and purposes, the dedicated runway attack mission using those kinds of weapons is a thing of the past. (Those weapons required an aircraft to overfly the runway/taxiway at low altitude, which was very convenient for airfield air defense systems. See Tornado/JP233 experience in the first Gulf War). These days, they're more likely to target JDAMs to hit directly along the length of the runway and/or taxiways.


Yes I know, planes had to fly straight without evasive manoeuvres. Brits lost few Tornados and finally gave up on using JP233. Imagine, they realized failure against relatively weak (in terms of training and equipment) iraqi air defence - but in the first place they intended to use those weapons against massive soviet air defense...



CV32 -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/17/2008 7:27:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paulus
... but in the first place they intended to use those weapons against massive soviet air defense


Yes, and its difficult to imagine what might have occurred without cringing a little. So, what you're saying is, you're willing to take the risk? [:D]



Paulus Pak -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (12/18/2008 8:04:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CV32
Yes, and its difficult to imagine what might have occurred without cringing a little. So, what you're saying is, you're willing to take the risk? [:D]



Audentes (players) fortuna iuvat!
Of course I am aware that those virtual Hornet pilots in HCE will curse that idiot player who forced them to use those dumb Cold War-era weaponry. [;)]




trader -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (1/23/2009 11:48:59 PM)

Gentlemen,

Not sure if this is the right place for it, but I have a suggestion Re: the comment above - Post #6 - about JDAM's being aimed along the runway centreline (something a small attack group of fighters would likely do).

Since the "missile" JDAM in the HCDB cannot behave in the required manner, a dedicated Anti-Runway Ordnance version of the JDAM/s with a moderate standoff distance would allow for:
- Higher Ph than the unguided anti-runway ordnance (same as a JDAM),
- Standoff range of a JDAM, and
- Tailored damage to the runways.

Now, the downside is that JDAM's were presumably changed to missiles for a reason, and this would be reverting a version to ordnance. Perhaps a compromise would be to limit the range to 4-6Nm, rather than 8Nm? As an Anti-Runway ordnance it would be a LAND only weapon, so it could not be "misused" in HCE against ships (if that was the concern).

As mentioned in Post #7, I also cringe at the thought of sending any of my carrier borne assets right over a Red runway - they are just too valuable to waste - especially the Super Hornets.

The other consideration is: Will a Red airfield in HCE which has been hit and reduced from "VLarge" to "Small" (for example) actually prevent the launch of Tu-22M's or Su-27/30's (be they preset strikes/patrols or formation patrols)? If the AI forces the launches regardless of the runway size, then it will simply be a waste of loadouts.

I'll do some tinkering in a test scenario and post the results.

Live Well,
trader



Divefreak -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (1/24/2009 7:13:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: trader


The other consideration is: Will a Red airfield in HCE which has been hit and reduced from "VLarge" to "Small" (for example) actually prevent the launch of Tu-22M's or Su-27/30's (be they preset strikes/patrols or formation patrols)? If the AI forces the launches regardless of the runway size, then it will simply be a waste of loadouts.



IRC i've discused this with TOny several times...

IMHO the reduced runway still allows the launch of those planes now too large for the runway, but they can't land again. Or vice versa.





Paulus Pak -> RE: Fastest way to reduce efficency of an enemy airbase? (1/24/2009 9:05:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Divefreak

IRC i've discused this with TOny several times...

IMHO the reduced runway still allows the launch of those planes now too large for the runway, but they can't land again. Or vice versa.



You remember correctly, planes can take off from damaged runway but possibly can't land. I've just tested it... AND it was painfull! [:D]
Reduced enemy base to a STOL level, but an F-16C/D Blk 30/32 (which in db is set for Small Aircraft runway) was able to take off and got my F-18C's with aim-120C5. Unfortunately I can't confirm landing possibility, that F-16 was down before it could land...






Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.21875