New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios



Message

Gunner98 -> New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 1:56:43 PM)

OK Guys, mixing it up a bit - here is the first in the series from the Indian Ocean.

Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce


You’re commanding the US 5th Fleet (re-established Dec 93, HQ - USS La Salle), based in Manama Bahrain. Your command oversees both afloat and shore-based units that rotationally deploy or surge into the Gulf. Units under your command are American (USN, USMC, USAF and US Army), British, French, Italian, Spanish, and Australian. Although much of your force is off on independent operations in the Indian Ocean and beyond, the primary responsibility in this region is safe and secure passage of commercial shipping through the Persian Gulf and Straights of Hormuz.
For this task you have: The USS Saratoga CVBG patrolling in the Gulf of Oman; 16 independent warships patrolling different areas of the Gulf and Straights, from several nations; one submarine; several support vessels; several air squadrons; and a mine countermeasures group.

So a quiet day in the sun - that might change[:D]

As always comments and critiques are most welcome.

Updated to V1.1 uploaded

Change Log:
• Added an additional task which will come to play later in the scenario.
• Fixed some loadouts and ammo on the Saratoga
• Fixed some typos
• Put the E2Cs on the AEW msn
• Changed up the French Aircraft
• Changed out the Floreal for the new FS La Fayette
• Fixed the Lua for the Quatari ships
• Fixed a couple issues with some surprises and generally adopted some of Andrew’s suggestions

V1.23 loaded



AlexTheLlama -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 5:05:09 PM)

Thanks for posting this. A few things right from the off (I haven't even started the time yet):

  • There's 96 unusable A-model Phoenixes (Phoenii?) aboard Saratoga.
  • Would it be possible to enable quick turnaround for all loadouts, not just fighters and ASW? It would help the Harriers and minehunting choppers especially.

I'm sure I'll think of some other minor quibbles later! I can't wait to sink some hours into this.



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 5:36:29 PM)

quote:

Would it be possible to enable quick turnaround for all loadouts


...Wait for it!...[:D] lua is a great thing...

I look forward to your points. Will get rid of the Phoenixes.



B



Primarchx -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 9:51:56 PM)

Soudi Arabia? [:D]



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 10:20:55 PM)

Edit: what he said!

Other quick items:
Sara AEW only has Prowlers assigned, not E-2s.
Sara has HARM As onboard, but her aircraft require Bs or Cs.



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 10:59:32 PM)

Must be fixated on 'O's today [;)] - RFA Orangeleaf is in two places at once, she is in Med Fury and Persian Pounce!

She needs to be replaced by RFA Bayleaf.

B



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/25/2017 11:56:22 PM)

Multiple unidentified bogeys inbound on bearings to my dispersed patrol vessels, and the Sara miles away. Crap! Scramble what I've got, get the helicopters airborne and running ashore. We're gonna lose some ships...



Coiler12 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/26/2017 3:17:11 AM)

The briefing and title makes reference to a "background document", has that been written yet?



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/26/2017 9:45:03 AM)

Not yet, sorry. Its about 1/2 done, will try and get it out this week.

B



benefant -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/26/2017 9:15:05 PM)

The allied forces have many aircraft with loadout reserve - no missions

There are many aircraft in 'maintenance' ist this good at songle unit airbases???
This make sense at regular grouped airbases with many facilities



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/26/2017 11:24:50 PM)

benefant

That's just part of my design. You start the scenario in a state of peace, tensions are rising that is why there are quite a few AC getting ready with an hour reduced on their time to ready.

The AC on Maint has been debated quite a bit on the forums. I use a fairly generous figure of 15-25%, and in this case it is closer to 10%. I could simply reduce the number of AC that I give you but since this is a series of scenarios I think it adds to the feel of the game, and historical accuracy, to have them there.

For the ones with no loadouts and Reserve - your Sqns are on sustained operations for 4-7 months at a time. They will only load out to meet the tasking that the ATO gives each Sqn, the remainder are on rest or routine maintenance. Now when the war/game starts you have options. But I don't think the numbers are out of order at the start.

It also gives me some room for balance if people tell me that I've made it too difficult. Unlikely as that may be[:D]

Enjoy
B



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 12:05:41 AM)

This is odd. I've got a UAE missile boat taking Exocet shots at a passing tanker, even though the sides are not hostile. Has anyone else seen this?



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 12:16:17 AM)

Strange

Could you check to see what the posture setting for his mission is?

Tx



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 1:15:12 AM)

He's weapons tight, side posture is friendly to neutrals. He's engaged offensive, but only has targeting vectors to the clump of Boghammers around Abu Musa, not the tanker. Unless this is a case of Exocets fired at something else locking on to the wrong thing? (In which case this is a desirable feature!)



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 1:19:23 AM)

Incidentally, that Badger waaay out behind me is a very nice touch. Is he just looking? Has he got a raid lined up behind him? Is he just a distraction? Do I really waste a set of F-14s to go after him? [&:]

And who the heck thought it was a good idea to sell F-14s to Iran! [X(]



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 1:25:35 AM)

Hmm, my guess is that he fired at the Boghammers and the Exocet turned on its radar and found a nice juicy target in its arcs - much nicer than a poky little fiberglass bathtub! I think I'll turn his WRA to not fire at Bogs. I noticed that you need to be extra careful with harpoons and plot each and every course to make sure that when the radar turned on only your target was in view, otherwise those tankers are missile magnets.


B



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/27/2017 1:26:09 AM)

Ahh you like him do you? [:D]



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/28/2017 12:53:03 AM)

We'd better clear the straits? I could walk from shore to shore on Iranian speedboats, and never see the skies through the clouds of MiGs!



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/28/2017 1:14:43 AM)

[:D]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcYmlfhShIg



ClaudeJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/28/2017 10:57:14 PM)

Very appealing B!

As for the French forces, unless of course you did that by design, the Mirage 5F might not have been deployed out of France as it can't be air-refueled, nor the Mirage F.1C which would have probably been kept in France for air defense duties. What was usually deployed instead was the Jaguar and the Mirage F.1CT.

Floréal (F 730) might not have been engaged there (would be kept around the Réunion island), a LaFayette class frigate would have been used (they were specially designed for that environment).

Would that be useful if I dig in the archives and assess what could have been the French navy and air force in your context?



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/28/2017 11:25:15 PM)

Jan
Thanks that would be useful. All I have to go on is this article, http://warisboring.com/warning-mig-25/#.8f03mkdc7

It confirms your assertion that it was Mirage F.1CT rather than F.1C, and the Jaguar: I'll fix that for sure

But there are several others referred to as well.

As for ships I am at a loss - If the Floreal is patrolling near Reunion, would their be another OPV near Mayotte? Or would the one OPV cover both areas?

Any help would be useful

Edit: Also looking for what forces would be in and around Djibouti. I am tracking EC 4/3 'Vexin' with Mirage F.1CT & CR but am not sure how many, and probably a Frigate.

Would there be mine clearance forces in Djibouti?

Also looking at the LaFayette and they don't start arriving until '96 and I am looking at '94.

Thanks

B


B



ClaudeJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/29/2017 3:06:19 PM)

The EC 4/30 « Vexin », callsign « Mousquetaire » (Musketeer), on BA 188 would be, as mentioned by Philippe Colin in his article "Les mousquetaires de la mer rouge" published in Air Fan magazine issue 187 (June 1994), 10 Mirage F1C-200 strong with 10 permanents pilots (deployed for 2 years) plus at least two young pilots deployed for 45 days to gain some experience in desert conditions.

It's the only unit permanently deployed outside France and with a special livery :
[image]https://www.escadrilles.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/F1_1992_33-LC_JFL.jpg[/image]

Their mission is to defend the airspace of the Republic of Djibouti, provide intelligence and secure BA 188 for the aircraft going to the Réunion.
Loadouts seen there are CAP (Magic and 530F, #391), rocket (+ECM, #14326) and recce (RP35P, not in the DB). 250 and 400 kg bombs are also mentioned.
At Djibouti is also based the ETOM 88 “Larzac” (Escadron de Transport Outre Mer) with an unknown number of C-160.

As for the ships, I believe that a couple La Fayette class ships would have been plausible in 1994 given your context (they were delayed quite a few times since 1989 due to a lowered priority) and that wouldn't be the only surprise. I'll get back to you in a few days as I have to do some research to back up my suggestions regarding the Navy as a whole.

Have you thought about the Belgian Tripartite-class minehunter by the way? They were deployed right there in 1991 (buffed up with Stinger, manned by Dutch mariners, and Milan missiles, manned by paracommandos).



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/29/2017 3:29:40 PM)

Thank you very much for your investigation. The Djibouti Sqn will feature prominently in my next scenario.

I think your reasoning on the La Fayette works in the context and I'm sure one would be appreciated by players - although I note it doesn't have a lot of air defence.

I also noted from Wiki: because the experience of the C.70 class, with an intended 20 ships cut down to only 9 (the 7 Georges Leygues-class frigates and 2 Cassard-class frigates) had taught that project downsizing and reorganisations could lead to badly balanced naval capabilities

Do you think that there may have been a few more C.70s produced in the run up to 94 - I'm thinking of the two Cassard class that were canceled.

Edit Becoming curious on Dassault aircraft - found this excellent site: http://www.airvectors.net/idx_smap.html



AndrewJ -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (6/30/2017 2:54:54 AM)

Quick note: Looks like there's a 'Lua script execution error' in the Quatari Ship Damsah event.



Maromak -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/1/2017 3:12:39 PM)

Couple of typos.


Scenario Description

Units under your command are American (USN, USMC, USAF and US Army), British, French, Italian, Spanish, and Australian.

Side Selection and Briefing

3. Patrol the Straights of Hormuz for mines and any other obstructions to navigation



Maromak -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/1/2017 3:40:25 PM)

Did you intend to assign EA-6Bs to the Saratoga AEW mission rather than the E-2Cs?


[image]local://upfiles/27647/6F972C485CC446A3A17BFD1687E128EA.jpg[/image]



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/3/2017 2:29:01 AM)

Thanks Maromak
The E-2C's should have that mission.

Found the Lua error, it will probably happen with the other Qatari ship as well - in the message I had an ' in the text and it derailed the command.

Fixed up all the other points so far - thanks guys.

Working on #3 - the Nimitz will have a busy time heading to the Med.

B




AlexTheLlama -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/3/2017 5:05:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Working on #3 - the Nimitz will have a busy time heading to the Med.




What about IF 2?



Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/3/2017 5:08:05 PM)

#2 is next after #3 - had to get the timing right between them so running #3 first



AlexTheLlama -> RE: New Scenario for testing Indian Fury 1: Persian Pounce (7/3/2017 5:09:44 PM)

Can't wait. MF 1 + 2 as well. Chop chop! ;)



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1