ASBM Defense too Easy?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

ASBM Defense too Easy?

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 >> ASBM Defense too Easy?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/2/2014 2:52:50 AM

gsmith63

Posts: 27
Joined: 11/17/2013
From: California
Status: offline

I�ve been working on a scenario involving Chinese anti-access technologies and came across a potential problem.

The DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile appears to be too easily defeated. I had an Aegis cruiser being attacked by four DF-21Ds. The CG easily defended itself with RIM-156A SAMs.

According to the log, the SAMs had a base hit probability of 85%, and no modifiers were added, leading to a final PH of 85%. That seems a bit high. Yes, the -156A was designed for terminal BMD, but I would think that this type of challenging engagement would generate a final PH closer to the 60-70% range.

Scenario enclosed. Using 1.02.

Gregg

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by gsmith63 -- 1/2/2014 5:19:32 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/2/2014 4:21:22 AM

jdkbph

Posts: 339
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: CT, USA
Status: offline

According to the Missile Defense Agency Fact Sheet (Ballistic Missile Defense Intercept Flight Test Record) as of Oct 2013, Aegis is 28 successful intercepts out of 34 tries (better than 82%) since 2002.

Is there a whole lot of difference between test scenarios and live fire here? Nothing is popping right out at me but I'm not an expert.

JD

(in reply to gsmith63)

Post #: 2

RE: ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/2/2014 1:29:21 PM

Rudd

Posts: 1501
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline

I haven't read to much on the DF-21 but this sounds like the, "How to defeat the AEGIS?" issue, many platforms w/ alot(several dozen at least) of weapons from many angles at the same time. There was a "math equation" IIRC for another game about the AEGIS, basically it tracks x, it has x number of interceptors...You have to overwhelm it's engagement capabilities. You better bring the house if you want to get to that HVU.

(in reply to jdkbph)

Post #: 3

RE: ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/3/2014 4:55:28 AM

MR_BURNS2

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdkbph

According to the Missile Defense Agency Fact Sheet (Ballistic Missile Defense Intercept Flight Test Record) as of Oct 2013, Aegis is 28 successful intercepts out of 34 tries (better than 82%) since 2002.

Is there a whole lot of difference between test scenarios and live fire here? Nothing is popping right out at me but I'm not an expert.

JD

Out of curiosity, do you know what kind of target missile/ballistic missile they used for these tests?

_____________________________

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 jdkbph)

Post #: 4

RE: ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/3/2014 3:45:49 PM

jdkbph

Posts: 339
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: CT, USA
Status: offline

There's more info HERE, HERE, and HERE... but nothing very specific on exactly what the target was.

JD

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)

Post #: 5

RE: ASBM Defense too Easy? - 1/3/2014 3:59:10 PM

CV32

Posts: 1046
Joined: 5/15/2006
From: The Rock, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MR_BURNS2
Out of curiosity, do you know what kind of target missile/ballistic missile they used for these tests?

They have typically used target vehicles that use booster stages from existing or previously employed ballistic missiles (Pershing, Minuteman, Lance, etc).

Personally, I think a pH of 85% in a wartime environment is probably a bit on the optimistic side.

< Message edited by CV32 -- 1/3/2014 4:59:27 PM >

_____________________________

Brad Leyte
HC3 development group member for HCE
Author of HCDB official database for HCE
Harpgamer.com Co-Owner

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)

Post #: 6