Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Air power

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany >> Air power Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Air power - 2/10/2003 2:51:46 AM   
Paul Wykes

 

Posts: 267
Joined: 3/4/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		Hello,

Couldn`t see if this has been discussed already, so I`ll ask the question anyway.

Will the player be able to control the air assets? If so how much control will the player have?

Could I request an air strike at airfields or is it not that involved?

Thanks for any responses
Post #: 1
- 2/12/2003 5:01:32 AM   
byron13


Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline 		Right now, I don't think any of us outsiders know enough to answer how much control you've got over air assets. It appears that helicopters will be handled much like a land unit with full movement control. I'm guessing that fixed-wing assets will be handled more abstractly with relatively little control.

Based on the scale of the game, I don't believe you'll see any airfields on the map. Off-map interdiction would probably be beyond the scope of the game, though there may be some abstract assignment of a/c to interdiction with some kind of penalty on reinforcements or supply for the other side. But that's a guess. I'm fairly sure, though, that you can't move a flight of F-16s to airfield X on the map, and tell them to bomb it. Any fixed-wing bases would be waaaaay off the map.

We welcome more questions so that we can provide more uneducated guesses. ;)

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 2
- 2/12/2003 11:52:18 AM   
DavidW75

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 10/9/2002
From: Alabama
Status: offline 		Yes I would like to second Byron's uneducated guess. :)

Although this is a little off topic I have always wanted to see a game based on the air campaign over Germany.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 3
- 2/13/2003 3:52:39 AM   
Paul Wykes

 

Posts: 267
Joined: 3/4/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		Thanks for the replies.

An abstract way of showing the air battle was what I expect to see.

Can`t wait for the finished product

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 4
- 2/14/2003 3:39:51 AM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		Our friend Byron wins a cigar! He has indeed nailed it almost precisely.

In the original game all helicopters and aircraft were off-map and called in as needed to strike particular locations. The inbound and outbounds routes, mission profile, etc were all out of his hands so it kind of looked like an artillery strike overall.

Given my fascination with helicopters and their possible impact of many parts of modern war, I made them maneuver units just like the tanks and the off-map aspect was canned. They move and fight just like everyone else. At some point I need to find out how many hours they can go so that they can be summoned back to base for rearming in some plausible way. Right now they just mysteriously start to recover supply when they fly away to a quiet area and are put on Rest & Refit.

Strike aircraft sorties were handled as per the original game, but having had an interesting conversation with JrCar, I came up with a much more elaborate scheme that I have yet to implement:

Assuming I am reading my notes correctly you start by requesting air support against a particular location. It may be arbitrarily denied based on scenario planning priorities and random chance. Assuming that it is OKed you are given an estimated time to arrival of 5 to 60 minutes. If this is OK (it may not be if it isn't quick enough) you are allocated the mission. Two minutes prior to arrival there is a quick check to make sure that enemy interception, HQ counter orders, acts of God, or random chance hasn't taken it away from you. You will also have the chance to decline it if you no longer need it. Assuming that the mission is still on, you can specify a 'one pass' (safe but inaccurate) or 'two pass' (much more accurate but much more risky) approach. With all this info in hand, the computer will then work out the chance of the aircraft being shot down on the approach, the accuracy of the drop, and the chance of shootdown on the egress. Then you will get the full sound effects of the mission resolution. I'm not planning to have any graphics representing the strike other than the bomb explosions and possibly (I'm not promising this) a colourful jet impact if it is shot down.

I have seen a lot of ??? numbers re AA and SAM lethality (not yours JrCar!). I don't honestly know right now if the chance of a NATO fighter bomber being lost on a single pass is 33% or 3% or 0.3%. The Soviets and Pentagon claimed the former number. Apparently actual US Army testing of captured equipment strongly suggested the latter but were not given wide prominence.... This is where my natural skepticism comes in and we will tweak this during playtesting.

The air element is coming along but will not be nearly complete when beta starts. I have been concentrating on the tanks / ivf / arty stuff. Helos, air, and engineers are in the next round when I get the first one just right!

Cheers all, Rob.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 5
- 2/14/2003 4:02:46 AM   
Paul Wykes

 

Posts: 267
Joined: 3/4/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		Thanks rob for the concise reply. I realise that the air aspect will perhaps be one of the last matters to deal with.

I to have always been fascinated with the potential of helicopter power, so I look forward to controlling those helo gunships!

On the subject of aircraft I`ve seen some photos of harriers taking of from autobhans, with comment saying that NATO forces trained to use "temporary" airfields such as fields and autobhans, but the USSR used this idea even further and wer emore prepared for such matters.

I don`t know if any of this is correct, but I thought I`d throw something into the pot:)

Paul

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 6
- 2/14/2003 8:54:34 AM   
byron13


Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by RobertCrandall
[B]Helos, air, and engineers are in the next round when I get the first one just right! [/B][/QUOTE]

Aw, don't even bother. Who needs air support when you've got tanks? It's like: who needs croutons when you've got a filet mignon?

By the way, I don't smoke.

Sounds like JR has some insight into CAS. I'm curious whether it is the guy on the ground or the guy in the plane that makes the decision to make a two-pass run. My bet is that it is not the guy calling for the support. Otherwise, it would always be, "Hey, look ***hole. I've been holding off this tank regiment and getting pounded by his arty for the past three hours. The least you could do is make two passes . . ."

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 7
- 2/14/2003 10:02:16 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		Byron,
I don't recall that sepecific bit in my emails with Rob... (in fact I think Rob has gotten some conversations mixed up?) But my understanding is that it is the pilots decision, and depends very much on the following:

ability to clearly ID target,
Closeness of friendlies,
AD threat.

Troops close - two passes
High AD threat, troops not close - one pass
clearly ID target, troops not close - one pass
High AD, troops close, no clear target, abort.

The Fire Support Coordination Center (FSCC)in the DIV HQ receives requests from their subbordniate units, and coordinates fires (arty, helos and air) under the priorities allocated by the J3. This is so you don't have arty rounds and planes in the same airspace. It is the FSCC that determines where and when the air turns up, the troops can not normally talk to the air direct. If there is plenty of time (8 or more hours?) then the air will arrive at a designated time, otherwise its on call in a cab rank system.

Rob you may want to think about limiting arty falling in a location when an airstrike is inbound, plus (and Sabre can confirm?) I thought helos normally keep out of the way when air is inbound to limit the chance of blue on blue "encounters"

Cheers

Rob

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 8
- 2/14/2003 9:38:30 PM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		Well yes, I did elaborate on JrCar's suggestions a little re the two pass / one pass thing.

Don't forget that as the player you are the officer commanding the bn / reg (or brigade) and you get a commo link to the fly boys as of right - assuming it is working at the moment. Your job is to maneuver units and apply fires to fullfil the intent of your commander as expressed in the mission briefing. You are not the poor junior officer at the front actually up to his ears in T-80s - he definitely would not have a link to the pilot and be making any last minute adjustments.

My understanding of NATO SOP is that a two pass mission profile is the peacetime norm. My guess is that after a day or two of losses and near losses many pilots would just make the one pass and get out of there. Their orders are to prioritize on themselves, their aircraft, and on the mission in that order. Making one pass is not a question of bravery but of simple combat effectiveness in the larger sense. Living to fight another day is important too.

In light of JRCar's most recent post I should look again at my scheme. I like his heuristic. Once again the value of airing a design before implementing it is vindicated!

Any more comments?

Cheers, Rob.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 9
- 2/15/2003 2:27:03 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline 		Rob

Most attack helicopters are going to run out of ammo long before they do fuel. We would usually fly for about 90 minutes, then get gas, which takes about 20-30 minutes depending on how long you have to wait in line:) I have actually been fully fueled and re-armed in under 10 minutes, then it's back out flying till I either run out of ammo or fly about 90 minutes. The longest number of flight hours I ever logged on a day was 14, and that was performing live fire operations. Typically though, in a European environment, I can easily see 10-12 flight hours per day for the crews. Oh and the FARP's (Forward Arming and Refueling Points) are placed well forward, and in some cases moved by helo, so that turn around time is pretty quick.

Fixed wing...you got it pretty right there. The A-10s will come in, make 1 or 2 passes depending on the threat. F16's and other faster movers you can count on making only a single pass.

Sabre21

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 10
- 2/15/2003 3:51:20 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		Thanks Rob, thanks Sabre.

Rob its' my understanding that the brigade doesn't normally get a commo link to the air, it all goes through the FSCC. This means it is realistic that the player cannot micromanage the air, and can only call for air on a designated target.

In a CAS cab-rank (rather than deliberate air campaign role) their is probably a 5-30min delay if the air is available.

Can I suggest the following:

Scenario tells player that air missions are available (and number?)

Player designates target as a request CAS (also if immediate or delayed?)

5-30 min delay as FSCC coords the fires plan (player should be told that they have been allocated a strike or not, and about when it will arrive).

Arty fire near strike point ceases prior to and during CAS attack.

CAS strikes in one or two passes (actually the first pass is usually used to ID the target, and then the air will make one or more passes depending on threat).



This encourages the player to think about their fireplan and how the strike falls into there concept of manouvre. Air won't be the "silver bullet".

Cheers

Rob

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 11
- 2/15/2003 4:07:26 AM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		FWIW, that pretty much falls into the doctrine that we were taught as FOOs' and BC's. Fast air was never expected except as part of fire plan. FOO's at the combat team level would probably not have access to it.

For reference, a typical FOO fire plan (for a combat team) is planned, adjusted and fired within 30 minutes and usually only has 4 targets at most.

At the BC level we often allowed for the use of fast air in a fire plan - but only one strike on one target. A typical BC's fireplan would take 30 to 60 minutes to plan, adjust and fire and would support a BG attack and would involve a regt (3 bty's) of guns as well as any dedicated mtrs etc firing on 4 to 10 targets.

So, even 30 minutes is a pretty quick response for fast air, it should definitely by used as part of a deliberate fire plannign process and not as a rapid response weapon.

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 12
- 2/15/2003 4:21:51 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline 		Actually.......US Tac Air, although pretty rare, occurs in about 3 cases. It may be handled differently by different nations.

The first case is as noted above as part of a Fire Plan and usually coordinated up through Corps HQ. In these cases, aircraft are pretty much controlled by Forward Air Controllers either in the air or on the ground.

The second case is where aircraft are assigned to a sector for a given period of time. These aircraft then will orbit an Initial Point (IP). We were usually briefed if there were any sorties available in sector, and if so, what their call sign was, what type of aircraft, and usually what kind of ordinance. These aircraft are controlled then by the requesting platform. I have called in many airstrikes using this case. Once ammo is depleted, they leave station.

The third case is where aircraft are returning from or enroute to a mission and diverted to a target of opportunity. If they are enroute to a mission, someone from higher HQ has diverted them, if they are returning from a mission with extra ordinance, it's usually at the pilot's descretion.

That's how I have seen Tac Air used in my time.

Sabre21

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 13
- 2/15/2003 5:23:00 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		US TAC-AIR, even in the 80's, was very flexible compared to most other countries. On-call CAS as Sabre noted on an IP could be called in very quickly, but would normally only be 2 ships (not much supppression, a few minutes and they would be gone, but very useful against an armoured penetration!).

Sabre I had forgotten that the helos' would be on the same air net and so could call for targets, but did you still go through the FSCC?.

Using air to strike in depth is really part of a larger fires plan, using them on the FEBA or on the friendly side of the FEBA (such as in a penetraion of the front) is what the CAS is all about.

Cheers

Rob

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 14
- 2/15/2003 7:19:41 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline 		Hi Jr

We didn't have to go thru any other link to contact the Tac Air. We had the same type radios and were given the freqs and call signs of the pilots on station. It was typically two aircraft, on occasion 4.

You're right in pointing the difference out between CAS and Interdiction as the deeper strikes are called. The F111's, F15E's, and F117's would be used primarily for the deeper strikes. The A10's, F4's, and F16's would be used primarily as CAS.

Sabre21

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 15
- 2/16/2003 9:11:45 PM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		I'm drinking this all up. When we reach the exhaustion point I'll try and summarize it all and use it!

Cheers, Rob.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 16
- 3/6/2003 2:44:54 AM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by IChristie
[B]FWIW, that pretty much falls into the doctrine that we were taught as FOOs' and BC's. Fast air was never expected except as part of fire plan. FOO's at the combat team level would probably not have access to it.

For reference, a typical FOO fire plan (for a combat team) is planned, adjusted and fired within 30 minutes and usually only has 4 targets at most.

At the BC level we often allowed for the use of fast air in a fire plan - but only one strike on one target. A typical BC's fireplan would take 30 to 60 minutes to plan, adjust and fire and would support a BG attack and would involve a regt (3 bty's) of guns as well as any dedicated mtrs etc firing on 4 to 10 targets.

So, even 30 minutes is a pretty quick response for fast air, it should definitely by used as part of a deliberate fire plannign process and not as a rapid response weapon. [/B][/QUOTE]

I was rereading this with great interest. I'm a little unsure of the abreviations though. Is "BC" = Battery Commander, "BG" = Brigade Group. "Regiment" follows the British convention in Canada and refers to what our American friends would call a battalion.

Did you see this 'cab rank' stuff? That was the practice in WW2 I have read and was highly regarded in practice. I didn't know they still did it though - it implies a considerable surplus of available sorties to be able to put them up just on spec like that - so is that strictly a US thing? I presume your experience suggests that the Canadians learned from the Brits not to expect that sort of luxury....

Does anyone even know now what the OB of the respective air forces was? I thought we had 2nd TAF in the north and 4th TAF in the south but I can't find it now that I am looking for it. Also, each WP front would have its own air army but I don't know the designations. Anyone have that off the top of their heads?

Cheers, Rob.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 17
- 3/6/2003 3:08:03 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline 		THE GDW Modern Rules "Combined Arms" had a decent full blown NATO/WP OOB ca late 80s including air units. I have a copy made I can send you if you send me snail mail by email.

As to lethality of SAMs all of the above answers are correct. It depends on the engagement geometry. I can send you some examples with the OOBs.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 18
Some info for you - 3/6/2003 3:34:13 AM   
Paul Wykes

 

Posts: 267
Joined: 3/4/2001
From: UK
Status: offline 		Hi,

I don`t know how relevant this information is (or how accurate) but I`ve got the following from a book I`ve got to hand (published in 1989)

USAF in Europe 36th TFW based at Bitburg, West Germany operated F15 eagles.

USAF in Europe 32nd TFS based in netherlands operated F15 eagles

Canadian Armed forces. operated F18 (known as CF18) from Sollingen W Germany (example squadrons no 409, no 421). At the time, there may still be some F104 operating, as they were replaced with CF18s

USAF in Europe operated F16s from Hahn W Germany (50th TFW), from Ramstein W Germany (86th TFW), and also from spain

UK operated Tornados from Laarbruch and Bruggen as did the west german airforce

Harriers from RAF Gutersloh

USAF operated F111 from the UK and some F4s from spangdahlem.

Hope this info is of some use. :) OOops looks as if Paul Vebber may have the answer for you. (replied as I typed all this:)

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 19
- 3/6/2003 3:58:38 AM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Vebber
[B]THE GDW Modern Rules "Combined Arms" had a decent full blown NATO/WP OOB ca late 80s including air units. I have a copy made I can send you if you send me snail mail by email.

As to lethality of SAMs all of the above answers are correct. It depends on the engagement geometry. I can send you some examples with the OOBs. [/B][/QUOTE]

Hmmm, Combined Arms rings a bell. I may have it already somewhere - let me have a look first.

Engagement geometry - I am trying very hard to avoid just that subject! Let me get back to you later about that!

I wish my memory was as good as yours for all these things. I have masses of materials on the shelf, but can I put my hand on it when I need it? Nooooooo.

Cheers, Rob.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 20
Re: Some info for you - 3/6/2003 4:00:09 AM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Wykes
[B]Hi,

I don`t know how relevant this information is (or how accurate) but I`ve got the following from a book I`ve got to hand (published in 1989)

[/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks Paul!

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 21
- 3/6/2003 4:03:25 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		Rob you are right with your abbreviations but only major airforces (like US and USSR and maybe UK) have the "cab ranks" (using dedicated aircrew and aircraft like A-10 and SU-25) and usually only when they have local or complete air superiority. For every one else it is very rare, and usually only carefully planned, when and if you get some Close Air Support.

And you don't get it in bad weather conditions :)

Cheers

Rob


[QUOTE]Originally posted by RobertCrandall
[B]I was rereading this with great interest. I'm a little unsure of the abreviations though. Is "BC" = Battery Commander, "BG" = Brigade Group. "Regiment" follows the British convention in Canada and refers to what our American friends would call a battalion.

Did you see this 'cab rank' stuff? That was the practice in WW2 I have read and was highly regarded in practice. I didn't know they still did it though - it implies a considerable surplus of available sorties to be able to put them up just on spec like that - so is that strictly a US thing? I presume your experience suggests that the Canadians learned from the Brits not to expect that sort of luxury....

Does anyone even know now what the OB of the respective air forces was? I thought we had 2nd TAF in the north and 4th TAF in the south but I can't find it now that I am looking for it. Also, each WP front would have its own air army but I don't know the designations. Anyone have that off the top of their heads?

Cheers, Rob. [/B][/QUOTE]

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 22
- 3/6/2003 5:13:56 AM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		Actually, by BG I meant "Battle Group" which is a battalion sized combined arms organization. In Canadian doctrine the assigment of Close Support Arty personnel is as follows:

Forward Observation Officer - Combat Team (Company)
Battery Commander - Battle Group (Battalion)
Regimental CO - Brigade Group (Bde)

Arty obsevers move with the "supported arm" and more or less form part of the HQ group although they may deploy some distance away to get a better look at the terrain.

A FOO fireplan typically uses his bty and the BG's mortars

BC's fireplan typically uses all three bty's of the reg't plus any other Bde fire support resources

CO's generally only coordinate deliberate fire plans (i.e. 12 to 24 hours in advance) and would draw on arty in the div and corps reserve as well as his own reg't.

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 23
- 3/6/2003 5:21:25 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		Oops my bad! Sorry :)

Cheers

Rob

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 24
- 3/12/2003 1:04:23 AM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		My summary of the preceeding discussion follows. Hopefully I haven't mangled it too much. Coding starts this week at long last.


Flashpoint – Fixed Wing CAS Sorties

1. Doctrine for both sides allows for a certain number of fixed wing air close air support sorties within 40 km or so of the forward edge of battle area (FEBA). Whereas this is an extremely high-risk area for these valuable assets, availability will be limited and reserved for high payoff targets. Long-range artillery and helicopter assets remain the preferred platforms for routine fire missions within this zone.
2. The game will offer a simplified Fire Support Coordination Center (FSCC) screen that represents the divisional coordination of all fire assets. (We should move the off-map arty to this screen too.) The screen identifies the type and quantity of generic fixed wing air sorties that have been made available [0, 2 or 4] for use by the player during the turn.
a. ‘Cab Rank’ sorties - are available for use subject to a 5 minute delay. Generally, only US forces would have cab rank air sorties available.
b. ‘Fire Plan’ sorties - are subject to a minimum 30 minute delay since they must be coordinated through a Corps / Army HQ first.
3. The player can request some or all of his available sorties to be used against a CAS target as of a certain time, which is not less than the minimum delay and not more than 30 minutes beyond the end of the current turn. He has no control over the mission profile otherwise (not his job). Ordnance is presumed to be conventional (not nuclear) HE bombs. Precision guided bombs? Fuel air explosives?
4. Five minutes prior to air strike arrival all artillery fire into the general area (CAS target and surrounding eight locations) of the strike will cease. All helicopter units will move out of the area. Arty fire cannot resume until five minutes after the observed conclusion of the air strike.
5. On arrival the air strike commander will evaluate the situation on the ground with a view to deciding if one pass (safer but less accurate) or two (riskier but more accurate) is indicated. Factors to consider are:
a. Ability to clearly ID the target [are there any visible enemy units at all in the target location: yes / no, the intended target may have moved away in the meantime, use standard spotting rules to get an idea],
b. Closeness of friendly units [< 1.5 km?, yes / no], and
c. Hostile air defense threat [high, medium, low].
6. Generally the result will be:
a. AD high, and either no clear target or friendlies are close: abort, else
b. AD medium and no clear target and friendlies are close: abort, else
c. Friendlies are close or AD is low or no clear target: two passes, else
d. One pass.
7. If the CAS target location is empty of targets when the air strike arrives, it will still be bombed unless the mission otherwise aborts.
8. A sound effect is rendered of an approaching jet(s) for each pass and the CAS target location is flashed. AD fire SFX is rendered. The actual path of the aircraft is not shown and does not necessarily go through the CAS target if this is the first of two passes.
9. The impact zone is determined based on the original CAS target location and calculated accuracy of the drop. This is a ‘national rate’ modified by visibility / weather, number of passes, and effective AD fire.
10. On the ordnance delivery pass the bomb SFX are rendered in the impact zone [just one 500 m x 500 m location in size?] and combat losses immediately taken to all units in the impact zone.
11. If an aircraft is shot down then a crash location is picked at random on the map and the appropriate SFX and animation are rendered. All units in the crash location take combat losses.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 25
- 3/12/2003 1:21:02 AM   
DavidW75

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 10/9/2002
From: Alabama
Status: offline 		:D Patience pays off again. Great to hear Rob. Good luck with the coding.
A day over is a day closer ;)

_____________________________

"I ain't never been nothing but a winner" Paul W. 'Bear' Bryant

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 26
- 3/12/2003 11:42:02 AM   
jrcar

 

Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/19/2002
From: Seymour, Australia
Status: offline 		Rob that looks good. Note that PGM's are normally so stand off that the mission profile would not be on the map (I'm thinking laser designated low-hi-low toss bombing from 5-15km, but that would need a unit to designate the target), but in the timeframe of the game I think iron bombs are the primary weapon, followed by strafing (A-10, F-16, SU-25).

I think the SOVIETS could have organised a "cab-rank" type system, but it would be more tightly controlled and less responsive unless you were the directly supported unit. My understanding of the US concept was that any HQ in the area on the net could call juicy targets.

Are you including chemical weapons in the game? TACAIR would include those.

Maybe you need a mission profile as well, be it strafing or bombing (iron, , submunitions, PGM, chemicals)?

For a two ship formation I think an area of effect of 500x500m is appropriate, with maybe a bit of random leakage into adjacent squares, especially along the track of the target.

The effect on armour (unless strafing or submunitions) should be negligable, its softer units like HQ's, arty and log elements that are the main targets, also enemy assembly areas and fixed facilities (bridges).

BTW did you think about TACAIR recon missions (including UAV's)? An imagery intelligence report is normally prepared and disseminated within 30mins of a recce mission returning to base.

chers

Rob

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 27
- 3/12/2003 11:25:07 PM   
IronManBeta


Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline 		JRCar - Thanks for the added thoughts! Recon I can't really worry about now, but the others ought to be feasible.

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 28
- 3/13/2003 6:12:13 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline 		Rob

Here is something that will help you with the Air Force OOB for Nato and WP for 1989.

Sabre21

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 29
- 3/14/2003 10:48:49 PM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline 		Rob,

Question in regards to one point:


4. Five minutes prior to air strike arrival all artillery fire into the general area (CAS target and surrounding eight locations) of the strike will cease. All helicopter units will move out of the area. Arty fire cannot resume until five minutes after the observed conclusion of the air strike.

I was just an American ground-pounder, but I thought that in the event of a war our friendly, reliable, courageous Air Force was going to rely on the "big sky, little bullet" doctrine: providing air support even at the risk of having a friendly artillery shell down our own aircraft. As for the Pact, I seriously doubt they had the communications and command-and-control necessary to provide the level of real-time coordination necessary to keep artillery, aircraft and helicopters out of the same air space.

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Paul Wykes)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany >> Air power Page: [1] 2   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

4.391