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: Ukraine 2014

 
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 >> RE: Ukraine 2014 Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 1:45:15 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Nice. I suspect that the Turks are focused on Syria and the Bosporus for the most part. I would be surprised if the Truxtun didn't have a Turkish escort.My 'guess' at the Turkish navy would be one of its four upgraded Perry's the Gabya class, I suspect that they are used as flagships, with maybe one or two of the older FFs and maybe a flotilla of no more than three corvettes.

Any Chance of a second CSG moving in from the IO or Atlantic?

I think you would see more F-16s before A-10s, which are heavily involved in Afghanistan at the moment. The AH would probably only be deployed if US ground forces are involved, but if there are US ground forces they will be in place.

I'll go start digging a big hole in my backyard to get ready for the last scenario

B

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 241
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 3:19:39 AM   
NakedWeasel


Posts: 500
Joined: 1/14/2014
Status: offline
I do have a couple squadrons of USAF F-16C, flying SEAD and ASuW out of Romania's big NATO base on the south coast. Combined with the Poles, and the Danes, and Czechs and Romanians, that is a brutal butt-kickin that the Moskva get's awoken to. To be fair, she takes the first shot at the Ukrainian Navy, and is the first to shoot at the NATO response to her aggression- but the Falcons, Gripens and Rafales totally have the last word.

_____________________________

Though surrounded by a great number of enemies
View them as a single foe
And so fight on!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 242
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 3:23:53 AM   
NakedWeasel


Posts: 500
Joined: 1/14/2014
Status: offline
Hey, I just realized, I don't have any Cannuck involvement... say whut? I bet RAF Akrotiri or Souda Bay has a little tarmac space for a squadron of CF-18s. What would be their specialty, AAW, SEAD, ASuW, or ground strike?

_____________________________

Though surrounded by a great number of enemies
View them as a single foe
And so fight on!

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 243
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 9:09:53 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
The normal deployment would be a '6-Pack' of CF-18's, an Aurora or two (P-3), and an Airbus tanker, not much but a potent 'wave the flag' force. There would undoubtable be a City Class FF in the Med, they often work with the CSGs (or at least used to), excellent ASW. Specialities for the 18's would be AAW and ground strike. Experience from Libya shows that the tanker was one of only a very few checked out for multinational refueling (at least early on), the rest including US had to stick to refueling national elements only. Also the new upgrades to the Aurora's make them very good ISTAR platforms. Although Akrotiri has a great beach you may want to put them a little closer to the action because of the short legs on the 18's, they would usually all work out of the same base to maximize support etc. Perhaps Eskiºehir near Istanbul or Larissa in Greece.

Anything you need me to dig into on this one?

B

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 244
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 9:47:51 AM   
NakedWeasel


Posts: 500
Joined: 1/14/2014
Status: offline
I have the UK Typhoons tanking from Airbus tankers already. I have an established support patrol zone stretching the length of north central Turkey. Plenty of gas for all takers ingressing and egressing from the Crimea AO. I'm going to add a couple Auroras to the P-8/MPAs as well as a squadron of CF-18s for AAW at Souda. The -18's will be greatly needed as a MIGCAP over southern Turkey and Crete. I think I'll add a multinational ASW SAG in the Aegean, including a Canadian FF or DD.

I'll have you play test it soon, if you don't mind. Always happy to hear a variety of opinions from a multinational group of players.

_____________________________

Though surrounded by a great number of enemies
View them as a single foe
And so fight on!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 245
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 10:50:45 AM   
Rudd

 

Posts: 1501
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Not sure if this has been posted yet
quote:

According to eye witness reports and local media in Crimea, Russia deployed Bastion mobile coastal missile system to Sevastopol in night of 8 to 9 March. Several witnesses recorded the movement of Bastion anti-ship launcher complex on the streets Crimea.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1618

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 246
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 12:11:50 PM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rudd

Not sure if this has been posted yet
quote:

According to eye witness reports and local media in Crimea, Russia deployed Bastion mobile coastal missile system to Sevastopol in night of 8 to 9 March. Several witnesses recorded the movement of Bastion anti-ship launcher complex on the streets Crimea.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1618



Ah, yeah I've added that to the v7 version of the scenario on the wiki. I think its the 11th Independent Coastal Missile-Artillery Brigade.

_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to Rudd)
Post #: 247
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 3:42:39 PM   
beserko


Posts: 164
Joined: 2/10/2005
From: The United States Of America
Status: offline
Budapest Memorandum

For Ukraine:
(Signed) Leonid D. KUCHMA
For the Russian Federation:
(Signed) Boris N. YELTSIN
For the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland:
(Signed) John MAJOR
For the United States of America:
(Signed) William J. CLINTON
And ratified by the Senate and house?

Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) Secretary Andriy Parubiy

Parubiy used the press conference to remind the United States and the United Kingdom of their obligations as guarantors of Ukraine’s security, according to the terms of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum under which Ukraine forfeited its nuclear arsenal in return for security assurances.

Technically guys I think we are legally bound to defend the Ukraine!

I think that the United Kingdom and the United States of America are at war with The Russian Federation (LEGALLY) ....................







_____________________________

as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns—there are things we do not know we don't know."

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 248
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 3:51:40 PM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:


The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,

Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,

Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.

Confirm the following:

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.

This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.

Signed in four copies having equal validity in the English, Russian and Ukrainian languages.


Doesn't say we have to DOW anyone who invades Ukraine, but rather that the UNSC has to assist Ukraine. The UNSC did have a meeting, requested by the Russians, recently.



< Message edited by Baloogan -- 3/12/2014 4:53:38 PM >


_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to beserko)
Post #: 249
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 5:29:40 PM   
guanotwozero

 

Posts: 651
Joined: 12/27/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baloogan
Doesn't say we have to DOW anyone who invades Ukraine, but rather that the UNSC has to assist Ukraine. The UNSC did have a meeting, requested by the Russians, recently.

The UN can't really do anything here, as Russia has a veto. That's the down-side of the UNSC system. The response will be from the EU, G7, NATO and many other multilateral groupings, as well as individual countries.

Russia is already clearly in breach of the memorandum, but there's nothing in it about any action to be taken in event of breach. It's simply a promise that's been broken.

Part of the consequence, though, is that Russia can now be regarded as not liable to honour *any* of her promises, and so will be treated accordingly. So while Russia may gain in the short term via annexation, it's likely that the long-term response will not be in her favour.

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 250
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 6:03:00 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
No problem on the play-test - well, except for time . I have some down time in the coming week or so, but it gets crazy near the end of the month, first week of Apr is fine but then I am gone for a month.

B

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 251
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 7:33:56 PM   
JSF


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/29/2011
Status: offline
I would love to test the latest version of your scenario, if possible. I downloaded the one dated 2014-02-27, but there is one or more updated version? This would add Germany to your multinational test group.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 252
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 7:38:54 PM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
The most up to date version is located here: http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/Flashpoint:_Ukraine_2014

I'm planning to move some russian units to Crimea when I get a free moment. I've moved the 11th Independent Coastal Missile-Artillery Brigade over and moved the Taylor out of the BS.

_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to JSF)
Post #: 253
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 7:40:58 PM   
JSF


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/29/2011
Status: offline
Ok, downloaded it. Will test on weekend. Though I´m really horrified how real it is.

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 254
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/12/2014 11:33:19 PM   
gregb41352

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline
Baloogan,

Great work here, but I downloaded V7 and I get a CTD upon scenario start.
Is there anything else I need to do?

Thanks for doing this.

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 255
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/13/2014 12:49:44 AM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gobadgers

Baloogan,

Great work here, but I downloaded V7 and I get a CTD upon scenario start.
Is there anything else I need to do?

Thanks for doing this.


Ah, please update the the most recent version of Command. http://baloogancampaign.com/command-documentation/patches/

_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to gregb41352)
Post #: 256
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/13/2014 4:02:33 AM   
Tomcat84

 

Posts: 1952
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Can we get some Dutch vipers in there somewhere? 6-8 sounds reasonable ;)

_____________________________

My Scenarios and Tutorials for Command

(Scenarios focus on air-warfare :) )

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 257
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/13/2014 4:10:15 AM   
gregb41352

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline
Ah, the old update to the latest version malfunction. Fixed,
working and great work. Lets hope these events do not come
to pass.

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 258
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/13/2014 8:58:02 PM   
sjgold

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
So, something I was thinking about today after reading a bit about the ultimatum for Monday, is that how this could play out in relationship to an Iran/Israel situation.

Thoughts here are..
1) Iran is moving forward with the nuclear program
2) It seems that somehow the US is keeping Israel on a short leash.
3) Russia has been asked by "The West" to assist in containing Iran
4) It would not be entirely unlikely that in retaliation for the Ukraine meddling that some sort of middle east meddling covert or overt could be done.
5) Proxy wars are back in fashion...

While there is no way in hell we would see direct Russian on Israel confrontation over the skies of Iran, my thoughts are deployment of air defense assets "Sold" to the Iranians, or possibly even some updated fighters being sold (although the training time for this might just make this effort completely ineffective in a situation that where to develop quickly after the sale).

Thoughts??

(in reply to gregb41352)
Post #: 259
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/13/2014 11:01:15 PM   
guanotwozero

 

Posts: 651
Joined: 12/27/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sjgold
...
Thoughts??

Iran:
The Iran nuclear situation is likely to have an acceptable outcome for most parties (though maybe not with Netanyahu), as the current administration seems much more amenable to some sort of deal. They are under a lot of domestic pressure as the economy squeaked badly under sanctions, and the hard-liners want to return to power. Thus they really have to make some sort of deal to avoid a return to either/both. I can't see how Russia can really interfere in that process, and Netanyaho will have to accede to any deal that the US agrees to.


Israel/Palestine:
US is indeed trying to keep Israel from taking unilateral actions as there is renewed hope of some sort of Israel/Palestine deal too, and that chance should not be thrown away by some action that will give the hot-heads the upper hand again. Russia doesn't have much clout with either party, as the Palestinians now get most of their support from moderate Arab nations and the EU. Even the Islamsists have no truck with Russia because of their South Caucusus policies, so there's little scope for interference there.


Syria:
At the moment the Assad government is gaining the upper hand as the secular rebels and Islamists fight as much with each other as the regime. However, as Russia is already heavily supporting the regime it's hard to see how they can add more fuel to that fire. Maybe if the civil war ends in the regime's favour it can turn it's attention outside, e.g. a new occupation of Lebanon. That, though, would likely spark a significant international response that a war-weary regime could do without.


Global:
Russia doesn't have too many friends around the globe - apart from Syria, really just Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and maybe North Korea at a pinch. Not exactly major players on the world's stage. The Cold War proxy wars were mostly on the back of post-colonial turbulence, and that era has largely ended so there's far less scope for local conflicts that can be stoked by Russia. North Korea is rather unstable and unpredictable, but that's not exactly a new problem. Even China is likely to distance itself from Russia's actions, as it's bad for business.


Near Abroad:
The ex-Soviet states make up the one area in which Russia could seriously interfere - but that's exactly what they've been doing for some time. The Georgia separatist wars are one example, and the effective division of Moldova another. The current Ukraine crisis is just the latest example of this trend. The USSR bequeathed a complex set of problems of minorities and autocratic states, which remains a tinder box in many places. There is scope for more trouble to break out, as Russia tries to absorb any state which contains an ethnic Russian minority. Some states are small and of little international importance, but the large and resource-rich Kazakhstan must be a little worried just now. It does look a little like Putin is trying to rebuild the old Russian Empire, though more in the style of Catherine the Great than Lenin. There's not much NATO or other international bodies can really do about that, other than supply any resistance movements that result.


International Community:
The next steps will be diplomatic and economic rather than military, as Russia becomes a pariah nation and is met with increasing trade boycotts. UN sanctions can't happen as Russia has a security council veto, but most of the richer nations will likely fall into line with such boycotts. EU, NATO, G7, maybe even G20. These will start small but increase over time, especially as Europe has to wean itself off Russian petrochemicals and that can't happen overnight. These boycotts may even extend to denial of transport through participants' territories, such as the Bosphorus and Baltic, thus making Russia's remaining trade routes more tenuous. China will likely take up some of that trade slack, but nowhere near what is lost.

Military actions will primarily be NATO safeguarding its member states, and maybe later helping to police sanctions amongst participating nations. However, I see no real prospect of a NATO vs Russia war as neither side would be keen on starting one. Russia won't invade NATO territory and NATO won't attack Russia. The only danger is of a local spark where some twitchy local commander starts something which escalates.

Notably as there WON'T be any UN sanctions, Russia will have no blockade of international waters to deal with, thus no casus belli. She will just lack customers and so have an ever-failing economy, and that can't be changed by war. Enough of that, and the leadership is likely to change.

(in reply to sjgold)
Post #: 260
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 4:53:56 AM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline


I've whipped up a simple scenario of a possible strike on Crimea by EUCOM and the HW Bush. The objective of the scenario is to destroy the 11th Anti-Submarine Brigade, a S-400 and a Bastion Bn on Crimea.

Please give it a try and tell me what you think! Its my first 'real' scenario. has AI for the Russians, triggers, events, scoring and a briefing!

Download here!

< Message edited by Baloogan -- 3/14/2014 6:14:57 AM >


_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to guanotwozero)
Post #: 261
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 7:16:03 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
Miguel, please make sure this gets on the next community pack release

_____________________________


(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 262
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 7:37:07 AM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
Yes please!


_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 263
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 5:06:25 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Baloogan
Nice, a lot going on. I'm 2.5 hrs into it and will go for a restart. Have knocked about 52 A/C, a bunch of radars, a Kashin and a Krivak sunk, Slava and Kara damaged, the Kara badly. But I've lost 7 A/C myself and need to pay more attention.

Some comments:
-You may want to reset the time at scenario start. Looks like you ran it for 20 min or so to get the ships in the right direction but just need to reset the start time.
-it's not clear in the briefing if you intend for the CSG to go through the Bosporus into the Black Sea. Recommend that you make it clear that it should not do so. Also the George Bush was sited a few days ago near Antalya, which is a better spot for it than in the restricted waters of the North Aegean, would just require a couple more tankers.
-You have the NATO E-3A's involved, I would suspect that with this much going on some US E-3Bs would be in town.
-Some form of Recon A/C, satellite, or potentially SOF units in country would be useful - I suspect we know where the SAM's & SSM's are - roughly anyway. Perhaps a marker for 'Last known location'
-I think its very likely that CVW 8 would have some of its Hornet's with an AAW loadaout, no mater what the threat
-I think your A/C count for HSC-9 and HSM -70 are a bit high. Not actually sure but it seems more likely that they would have only 5-6 helo's each
-Soviet Jammers start engaging later on in the scenario but I suspect that the Bear in the Air would be sparking up very early on. Counter that with some EC-130J's and there won't be a Garage door opener within a 1000 miles not going crazy!
-48th FW seems a bit odd. It should have 2xSqn of F-15E and only one of F-15C, all of 24 A/C each.
---Yup just checked, 492 (Madhatters) & 494 (Panthers)Ftr Sqns have Es, and 493rd (Grim Reapers)has C & Ds : Would be nice to have the Sqn names
---On that note 31st FW has: 510th FS (Buzzards), 555th FS (Triple Nickle) which only has Block 40's I believe. 24 A/C each
-All A/C are fully ready, plausible in this situation but it is unlikely that all would be serviceable, recommend having a handful down for maintenance (10% perhaps?)

Had an issue with HARMs going astray and have reported that. That caused my strike at the surface group to be less than fully effective.

Back to it now...

B

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 3/14/2014 6:14:08 PM >

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 264
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 5:17:59 PM   
RoryAndersonCDT

 

Posts: 1830
Joined: 6/16/2009
Status: offline
Thanks so much for the feedback!

I'll make the indicated changes
Ah, I got the ratio of 48th FW backwards; and thanks for the Sqn names.



_____________________________

Command Dev Team
Technical Lead

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 265
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 6:57:18 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
No problems, this is good fun. - one more big one - no airbase magazine load-outs. Realized this too late and went into the editor to jury-rig some ammo and get the Ftrs back in the air. Its good to give the player the option of unlimited or restricted. I always play restricted and didn't catch the rule tab at the start of the game.

B

(in reply to RoryAndersonCDT)
Post #: 266
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 7:53:01 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK Round 2, similar results. Only got the air war and one ship strike over with before I encountered kamikaze KC-135s! 55 A/C down, Kashin & Krivak feeding fish, Slava damaged. Only lost 2 A/C this time though. I did detect a sub in both runs, probably a Kilo. I picked it up on Radar so its probably at periscope depth, not much of a threat, you may want to squeeze it up to the Truxtun and give is a Sea Control mission - let them play cat and mouse. One difference this time, in the first go the Slava unloaded on the Truxton but it had no problems swatting the Sandbox's, didn't do it in round 2, not sure why.

I think the Air battle is a forgone conclusion. If you introduced another Regt of Su-27s later in the fight it would keep things interesting.

I'll give it another go later but this time I plan on doing it very sequentially 1)air fight, 2) ships, 3) Radars, 4)IADS, 5)SSMs, 6) Tea and medals on the objective

B

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 267
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 7:58:20 PM   
Sakai007


Posts: 279
Joined: 3/12/2012
Status: offline
looks like we got caught peeking..... US drone intercepted by Russians over Crimea

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 268
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 8:04:35 PM   
severe7


Posts: 78
Joined: 10/14/2013
Status: offline
nvm, Sakai007 was faster

< Message edited by severe7 -- 3/14/2014 9:11:39 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 269
RE: Ukraine 2014 - 3/14/2014 8:15:21 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: severe7

nvm, Sakai007 was faster

quote:

Has anyone heard anything about a US MQ-5B being taken over/hijacked by Crimean "self defence forces"? According to Swedish news the drone was flying at about 4000 meters when it was hijacked and taken almost intact by the self-defence forces. The only source for the claim is some kind of press release by a Russian company called Rostec that apparently built the hijacking system/software. There claim there are pictures and everything but the Swedish website just mentions them without showing them. Supposedly happened a couple of hours ago, but I really don't see how they could have landed it if it really was take over, it's not like they can just press "land" on a remote is it?


Well, if they manage to gain control of it, then yes, just give it new coords for the airstrip you want it to go to and 'press land'. Difficult to believe that this has happened however, not only are the data-links fairly well encrypted, they are probably directional as well. Anything can happen but this sounds to be a bit of a stretch.

B
Edit: Just read the article, it might be that they simply blocked the signal and it glided down.

B

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 3/14/2014 9:18:36 PM >

(in reply to severe7)
Post #: 270
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: Ukraine 2014 Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   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

0.736