gt4586c@prism.gatech.EDU (WILLETT,THOMAS CARTER) (02/12/91)
I have found it extremely convenient to use harpoon anti-ship missiles against airfields and port facilities. their nice 60 mile range lets you unload before getting into range of the anti-aircraft batteries. then next best and actually appropriate ordnance are the HARM missiles with only a 40mi range so you get blown away. Has anybody else engaged in this possibly immoral and probably unrealistic use of harpoons and do you think it is sporting? -- thomas willett Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta gt4586c@prism.gatech.edu "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." - Salvor Hardin (Foundation)
ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) (02/12/91)
In article <21803@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt4586c@prism.gatech.EDU (WILLETT,THOMAS CARTER) writes: >I have found it extremely convenient to use harpoon anti-ship missiles >against airfields and port facilities. their nice 60 mile range lets >you unload before getting into range of the anti-aircraft batteries. then >next best and actually appropriate ordnance are the HARM missiles with only >a 40mi range so you get blown away. Has anybody else engaged in this >possibly immoral and probably unrealistic use of harpoons and do you think >it is sporting? Yes, I find it convenient too. You can't fire poons at bases, but you can fire the SLAM, a land attack variant with a walleye guidance system slapped on the front. You also can't fire TASMs (Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile) at land targets, or TLAM-C's (Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Conventional) at ships. Sigh. Is this sporting? I think it is. If a Kirov fires a SA-N-6 at me at 40 nm when I am at high, fine. But if he (Russian ships are he, or it) fires one at me and then I go down below the RADAR horizon, and he doesn't have a chopper up to guide it (that's why God created Tomcats...), I'll use my poons against his bases. As for the poon vs HARM problem, in NACV (the second battleset), HARMs have a range of 70nm. Problem solved. Ah, NACV. A Baku class carrier (new version of Kiev) once fired 16 SA-N-9's at a bunch of my missiles at the same time. I don't think so. Guidance? What's that? And then there are the times that my Tomcats turn and run after firing Phoenixes at FORGERS(!) at 80nm...sigh. That Forger might chase it down with it's 4nm range missiles...better not close... -- Ted Woodward (ted@cs.utexas.edu) "Mad scientists HATE shopping for shoes!" -- Peaches
gdm@cs.columbia.edu (George Michaels) (02/13/91)
I have found that blowing up the other guy's airfields is the KEY to winning most scenarios. As long as you have an operative airfield and the other guy doesn't, you have an UNLIMITED supply of ammo where he does not! I will use Harpoons, HARMS, and Martels to waste the other guy's bases ASAP. It is truly glorious to play the Russians in a scenario where you have Backfires. The 250 NM Kitchen is a superb standoff weapon because you can launch them with almost total disregard for enemy interceptors. the Backfire can then use its afterburners to cruise off into the sunset, while only a very lucky F-15 can catch them. Since the Russians have this wonderful standoff weapon, it is only fair as the Nato player to use harpoons to the same effect. I almost never use guided missles or iron bombs except to finish off a mostly dead airfield which has already had its SAMs knocked out. PS The North Atlantic Convoy Battleset is a lot of fun. Unfortunately, most of the scenarios have a LOT of ordinance, and it runs very slow on my SE. Does running the game on a 68030 based Mac make a big difference? George Michaels Columbia University
jch@public.BTR.COM (Jack Hwang) (02/21/91)
In article <186@victoria.cs.utexas.edu> ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) writes: >Is this sporting? I think it is. If a Kirov fires a SA-N-6 at me at 40 nm >when I am at high, fine. But if he (Russian ships are he, or it) fires >one at me and then I go down below the RADAR horizon, and he doesn't have a >chopper up to guide it (that's why God created Tomcats...), I'll use my poons >against his bases. As for the poon vs HARM problem, in NACV (the second >battleset), HARMs have a range of 70nm. Problem solved. Well, it's not the problem of sporting. It is the problem of realistic. During the champaign against Soviet Amphibous Assult at Iceland, one of my subs sneaked into the center of the Red Fleet, and fired 20 Tigerfish and 4 Mk8 torpedos at the same time, with her 6 torpedo tubes! The other thing I don't feel satisfied is the poor dodging capability of the ships. We should not depend on the hit ratio of the incoming missles or torpedos to avoid been hit. There should be a way to use chaffs, decoy torpedos to distract the threatens, as well as some sophiscated movements to dodge with a single command. Well, I havn't finished the fist set. Thus I can't say anything else. Jack Hwang
ASB110@psuvm.psu.edu (Andre Sean Brown) (02/21/91)
Speaking of realistic, how's this for a naval realist. In the last scenario of GIUK, The Duel, I chose to be a NATO commander. After the Akula and the Sierra discovered my main battlegroup's position, and sunk one of my CG (I think it was a Tico, although it could have been a Virginia.) Anyway, I retaliated by launching all my long range ASuW at the Soviet group, including the Tomahawks on my Improved Los Angeles Class SSN. To my dismay, the two Slavas and the Kirov knocked out all of my missiles. When I try to get closer so I can attack him with my Harpoons, he attacks again and this time, sank a DDG and another cruiser. After racing at flank speed, I finally got within range and fired all my missiles at the main targets, namely the Kirov and the Slavas. Again, it failed as only one of my harpoons got through and it missed the Kirov. I turn my battlegroup around and race for Iceland. Meanwhile, one of my sub, the Los Angeles class SSN, penetrated the ASW screen and I ordered it to attack the Soviet group. To my surprise, it destroy all of the targets! And this was done with only using Mk48 torpedoes since I had exhausted all the tomahawks and harpoons in the previous attack. Does this sound realistic to anyone? It is one thing that a attack sub could attack convoys of merchant and oilers and destroying it, but it is another thing to destroy an entire battle- group that comprise of over 15-20 warships. If I had known that earlier, I wouldn't even bother with the missiles. Anti-surface missiles could be shot down and it is more likely to miss, however, Mk48 topedoes couldn't be shot down and with it's probability of 80% success rate, less likely to miss it's target. Any thoughts?