Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare

 
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 >> After Action Report >> RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:17:10 AM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		The damage area continues to grow and ultimately engulfs all the A/C and destroys them along with the ground targets. In hindsight probably not the best attack profile on the US side…





Attachment (1)

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 31
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:17:39 AM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		I did these experiments to determine the extent of what CMNAO can simulate in the area of strategic nuclear warfare. It seems pretty much anything at a high degree of realism/fidelity.

Scenarios can be created to simulate:
1. A/C based nuclear strikes
2. Submarine based nuclear strikes
3. ICBM based strikes/exchanges
4. Regional/limited nuclear exchanges - naval/land forces targets
5. Even an entire global nuclear exchange including detection via satellite/early warning systems, ABM defenses, bombers and interceptor/SAM defenses, SSBN strikes including SSN trail and prevention of launch, and even testing first strike/response wrt to ICBMs/Bombers/SSBNs.

Finally I reviewed the databases and all of the above can be simulated using weapons in any period from 1949 thru the near future.
This includes for example Strategic Bombers like B-29's, B-36's, B-47's, B-58's, B-52's, B-2's. SRBM/IRBM/ICBM/SLBM/cruise missiles like Atlas, Titan, Minuteman 1/2/3, Peacemaker, Pershing.
This is only US weapons - many other country's nuclear weapons are included.

I even found the XB-70 Valkyrie in the DB and had to test it - 90000ft at 1800kts. What's going to catch that?

In summary quoting a local radio add's final remark - "Mind Blown"

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 32
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:50:34 AM   
Rob322

 

Posts: 578
Joined: 8/16/2004
Status: offline 		Looking at post 30, the blast wave was not a perfect sphere, was that due to terrain? In fact, have you run any tests on what the blast wave over a target in a hilly/ mountainous terrain? It'd be interesting to see if that or other factors like weather has any affect.

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 33
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:52:30 AM   
Tomcat84

 

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline 		Very nice!

One thing that amazes me: I am an air war nut so that's what in focused on most. I have spent hours on command already in beta and yet there is so much detail I haven't even begun to explore yet like this or satellites. Truly awesome for me

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 34
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:54:06 AM   
Emx77


Posts: 419
Joined: 3/29/2004
From: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Status: offline 		Are there cities in the simulation? What about civilians? I'm asking this because it would be interesting to recreate Bravo Romeo Delta inside CMANO.

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 35
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 8:00:25 AM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		Rob322 - just looked at the elevations surrounding the target and it does seem to correspond to the shape of the terrain but I would have to leave it to one of the developers to comment definitively on this and your weather question. Should be easy to test in the editor though.

Emir - From what I've seen all I can currently place is facilities (buildings, batteries, troops) not entire cities and populations. Once again a dev would have to definitively comment on that.

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to Emx77)
Post #: 36
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 8:23:57 AM   
Jakob Wedman

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 3/20/2013
Status: offline 		With buildings, structures and bridges you could build pretty detailed cities. Years ago I made a program in R that generated random buildings given city size, radius, limiting arc (for coastal cities) and main axis, and then if you don't like random cities you could build them with buildings one by one in Google Earth

acb3, have you looked at the ICBM fields (US/USSR)?

_____________________________


(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 37
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 8:42:05 AM   
Maromak


Posts: 1030
Joined: 12/26/2007
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Thanks for recording your testing. Very interesting!

_____________________________

Certa Cito

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 38
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 12:38:36 PM   
Broncepulido

 

Posts: 385
Joined: 9/26/2013
Status: offline 		Great report and apparently great game! Thanks acb3!

(in reply to Maromak)
Post #: 39
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 1:10:11 PM   
Paul Wykes

 

Posts: 267
Joined: 3/4/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		Thanks for posting this. Really interesting, and highlights what the game engine can do.

(in reply to Broncepulido)
Post #: 40
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 2:50:36 PM   
CapnDarwin


Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline 		Very nice test of capabilities. The only thing that I see that would add to the realism is targeting the MIRVs before launch within the path of flight. Still very cool.

+1 to the Dev team!

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 41
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 7:32:03 PM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline 		The possibilities are endless....Thanks for doing this indeed.

(in reply to CapnDarwin)
Post #: 42
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 8:09:13 PM   
amatteucci

 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline 		I just setup a quick 1983 war scare scenario (only ICBMs and EW radars). Tried to launch a massive soviet attack on US ICBM fields but the PC slowed to a crawl (OK I didn't expect it to actually manage hundreds of MIRVed missiles speeding towards their targets, I just did it for fun).

Anyway I was still wondering about the possibility to simulate, in principle, such a strike with Command. I noticed that missile silos have, more or less, all the same stats (special armor, ca. 4000 DP) from the early '60s filmsy models to the super hardened late '80s ones. I don't know how nuclear explosions are modelled in the game but it seems they are pretty capable to obliterate everything inside their blast radius, regardless of the overpressure those structures are meant to be able to resist to.

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 43
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 9:04:25 PM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		I suspected a full scale nuclear exchange could potentially cause a real performance hit on the computer. Just curious, how many missiles/MIRVs/targets did you setup? Can you save the scenario and upload so I can play with it? What are your computers specs?

On the subject of cities, I was thinking with the editor you could set up classes of cities (small/medium/large) populated by numerous facilities. Then export these 'template' cities out and use them to build scenarios of varying numbers and mixes of cities in different countries. You could even incorporate defenses (SAM, Interceptors, etc) for them based on certain time periods, nations, weapons. Then the scenario would be setting up a specific country/time period/region and the player has strategic assets (ICBMs, SLBMs, bombers, Cruise missiles, even CVBGs with nuclear armed A/C) and has to assign them targets to best penetrate the defenses and destroy the targets.

Just rambling here - but first I need to spend time learning and exploring the editor.

< Message edited by acb3 -- 9/28/2013 9:09:09 PM >

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to amatteucci)
Post #: 44
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 9:38:50 PM   
amatteucci

 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline 		Here you go. Consider that this is not actually a scenario, it's just a map upload of the various ICBM bases so I could test fire missiles all around the globe...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 45
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 9:46:45 PM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		Thanks will try tonight.

Just stated playing with the import/export units function of the editor and found all the pre-built unit groups included with the game - including US ICBM forces amongst many other things. This is just the tip of the iceberg - there are all sorts of pre-built bases and weapons complexes broken down by country and even time periods. Looks like the Devs have already anticipated this line of thinking.

Look under \Command Modern Air Naval Operations\ImportExport to view.

This simulation (calling it a game is long past) continues to amaze...

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to amatteucci)
Post #: 46
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 9:51:32 PM   
Grim.Reaper


Posts: 1355
Joined: 12/31/2009
Status: offline 		Thanks for sharing your tests...helped me make the decision to purchase!

_____________________________


(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 47
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 10:16:23 PM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		In the below image I used the pre-built unit/group file for Grand Forks AFB. It has an ICBM farm of 150 Minuteman III silos.
I placed 2 Delta III's off the Pacific coast and did a full launch - 16 SLBMs x2 SSBNs x3 MIRV each = 96 re-entry vehicles.
At this point in the launch the first warheads are about to detonate, and most of the remaining missiles have MIRVed.
My i7/3.4GHz processor has been running at approx. 30% utilization total. Makes me wonder if my computer would blowup trying to simulate a full nuclear exchange.

Grim.Reaper - I am sure you won't regret it - it is just going to get better...

More to come...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by acb3 -- 9/28/2013 10:23:36 PM >

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to Grim.Reaper)
Post #: 48
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 10:42:52 PM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		And here is the image as the last of the RV's impact. In the end only 22 Missile silos were destroyed after 96 RVs impacted.
In the log I saw a number of reports of misses (impact not close enough to the silo) and warhead malfunctions.
Next I will restart the scenario at right before the first impacts and try to launch all the Minuteman III ICBMs.
I'll have fire extinguisher for my computer nearby.

For now - real life is intruding...





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 49
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/28/2013 11:04:31 PM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline 		I too have been playing around and took a B-2 with Nucs and attacked some North Korean bases. The nukes killed the base but also killed the B2. I was using a mission to accomplish this so I think there might be an issue with the AI with Nuc Bomb drops, I am not sure.

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 50
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/29/2013 5:46:05 AM   
Rob322

 

Posts: 578
Joined: 8/16/2004
Status: offline 		What's the widest spread for MIRVs have you seen? 100 miles, 300?

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 51
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/29/2013 5:58:52 AM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline 		This is my favorite thread in the whole world.

_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to Rob322)
Post #: 52
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/29/2013 5:59:42 AM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		JRyan - I saw the same thing with my B-52 run over Cuba. Maybe need to look at the yield of the weapon vs. the speed by which the bomber can egress from the target.
I plan on trying a B-36 Peacemaker attack on a large defended Soviet city next and will see what happens.

Below is the image of the US Minuteman III full launch while the Soviet RV's are raining down. This definitely slowed things down - 90 Soviet RV's and 100-140 Minuteman III launches at the same time.
1 Sec in the game was taking 4-5secs of realtime to process. But it was still chugging along...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by acb3 -- 9/29/2013 6:00:08 AM >

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 53
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/30/2013 10:58:51 AM   
K 19

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline 		Joshua: Shall we play a game?
David Lightman: Oh!
Jennifer: [giggles] I think it missed him.
David Lightman: Yeah. Weird isn't it?
Jennifer: Yeah.
David Lightman: [typing] Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?
Joshua: Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
[Jennifer laughs]
David Lightman: [typing] Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War.
Joshua: Fine.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Lightman: [typing] Is this a game... or is it real?
Joshua: What's the difference?
David Lightman: [muttering] Oh wow.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Great thread, acb3.

< Message edited by K 19 -- 9/30/2013 2:30:39 PM >

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 54
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/30/2013 9:02:09 PM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		K19 - exactly the movie I was thinking of in the last few posts when my computer was dragging tracking 100's of nukes.
I need a WOPR...

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to K 19)
Post #: 55
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 9/30/2013 9:29:35 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline 		I knew this would happen...

[Waits patiently for triad-oriented SIOP scenarios to appear]

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 56
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 10/1/2013 12:03:32 AM   
acbennett3


Posts: 352
Joined: 12/21/2004
From: Montana
Status: offline 		I'm actually playing around w/an early 50's scenario with B-36 Peacemakers launching a strike on the Kola Peninsula from Thule AFB Greenland. Going to see how outdated the B-36 became with the introduction of the Mig-15. First test was not pretty. Now I know why they were playing around with hanging the XF-85 Goblin or F-84 off a bomber for these long range missions.

That would be 1 leg of the triad - more to come...

_____________________________

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Santayana

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 57
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 10/1/2013 12:43:59 AM   
ultradave


Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline 		Nice report. Amazing what can be done. The more I see and play, the more it's obvious that while this looks like updated Harpoon, there is WAAAY more under the hood.

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to acbennett3)
Post #: 58
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 10/1/2013 1:17:46 AM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ultradave

there is WAAAY more under the hood.


Bingo!

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 59
RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare - 10/1/2013 8:22:46 PM   
amatteucci

 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: acb3

I'm actually playing around w/an early 50's scenario with B-36 Peacemakers launching a strike on the Kola Peninsula from Thule AFB Greenland. Going to see how outdated the B-36 became with the introduction of the Mig-15. First test was not pretty. Now I know why they were playing around with hanging the XF-85 Goblin or F-84 off a bomber for these long range missions.

Curiosly enough, I was recently trying to model B-36 raids into the Kola pensinsula too!
Had some problems escaping the blast wave of the bigger bombs (i.e. the fifteen megatonners Mark 17 and Mark 24)

Speaking about the MiG-15 vs B-36 issue, I do think that the ceilings capped at 40,000ft further exacerbate the defender's disadvantage.
In mock combats F-86 Sabres had a difficult time in reaching B-36s flying at 55,000ft. The bomber just had to engage into a banking turn to let the pursuing Sabre just stall. Of course it's known that the MiG-15 had a higher ceiling than the F-86 but I doubt it'd had been that effective over 50,000ft.

P.S. The number of systems included in the database and of situations that are, in principle, replicable with this game, blows my mind! I never thought there would be a game that would have let me intercept soviet bombers over Alaska with F-89s firing Mighty Mouse rockets!

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> After Action Report >> RE: Strategic Nuclear Warfare Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
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

1.096