|
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAAIcsnILnk Ladies and Gentleman, time to put on our big girl panties. This is a two pronged mission. The primary mission, and the one we'll be paid for is to support the Indian Volunteers as they engage both Tibet-Chinese forces and the TLA. We will receive positional data on the front line units from the Volunteers on the ground. However there are likely more units behind them in the mountain passes. The Chinese Air Force is on stand down right now. There will be no Chinese Air Force over the Tibet operation zone. AAA is likely. MANPADS will be limited. Payment is both for the mission itself AND for performance. The more assets we destroy, the further the lines move back, the more we're paid. Secondary Mission China has two bulk carriers coming into Sittwe. Each of these contains portable SAM's, modern MANPAD systems and mobile radar. This isn't the junk we've been dealing with in Tibet. With the rail line cut through Sichuan they are trying to reinforce the Eastern front in Tibet. Which means if we don't sink these boats we've got a big loving problem. The Indians aren't paying us for this job, but it'll make it much tougher to operate in Tibet if we don't kill them. Here's the catch. We can't overfly Bangladesh. Going over Myanmar will create unpredictable results. We can, but we might have to deal with their air force too. It's not cutting edge by any means, but it could be nasty. Once we attack those ships the Myanmar Air Force is likely to respond. All we know is the ships are approaching Sittwe, but not the exact position. It's going to be like finding a needle in a stack of needles.  More specifics to come. Yooper fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Apr 5, 2017 |
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:49 |
|
|
I stand firm on my vote of four Phantoms, but I'm willing to concede buying the UAVs since I think they'll be useful. e. and of course there's an update while I'm posting. This operation looks like it'll be fun!  e2. \/\/\/ Let's just sink every ship that's in the bay of Bengal and call it a day. Mikl fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
Yooper posted:It's going to be like finding a needle in a stack of needles. You already said more specifics to come, so sorry if this was already forthcoming, but I'm going to ask a really basic question: how would we identify the ship, practically speaking? Would we need overflights? I imagine it'd be too easy by far for the AWACS's surface search radar to just be able to tell us which one it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Guessing there is no chance that those are civilian bulk carriers and that we could find out their names and maybe possibly use https://www.vesselfinder.com/ to commit some war crimes. You know possibly. Also Yooper is it possible in game for our planes to fly with their IFF disabled? Doubt it would help us too much but we could always have some planes fly just outside of Burma and look for those bulk carriers as they enter the harbour area and do a quick hit and run. koolkevz666 fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Now I wonder what sort of military hardware would make this exact type of mission much easier..... But if we can't have a frigate I guess we can at least have the Internet. Using vesselfinder.com is actually not a bad idea and a nice 21st century solution that maybe they didn't think to counter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
koolkevz666 posted:Guessing there is no chance that those are civilian bulk carriers and that we could find out their names and maybe possibly use https://www.vesselfinder.com/ to commit some war crimes. You know possibly. It would also help us find some oil tankers and other things for those who want to engage in eco-terrorism
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Can we try out our SK60s on the primary mission? With MANPADS limited, the environment should be a bit more permissive (especially if a Gripen or two run support to bomb AAA positions).
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
RentACop posted:*smoky, crowded boardroom*
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:You already said more specifics to come, so sorry if this was already forthcoming, but I'm going to ask a really basic question: how would we identify the ship, practically speaking? Would we need overflights? I imagine it'd be too easy by far for the AWACS's surface search radar to just be able to tell us which one it is. You just overfly it/get near enough. At long range you'll get a radar contact. Then it would resolve into a "Container Ship 7500 Ton" or some such. Then at closer range that turns into "Kill This Ship - Container Ship 7500 Ton". koolkevz666 posted:Guessing there is no chance that those are civilian bulk carriers and that we could find out their names and maybe possibly use https://www.vesselfinder.com/ to commit some war crimes. You know possibly. I don't think so in regards to IFF. You can fly without radar on, but Myanmar has a pretty extensive radar system. So it probably won't help much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myanmar_Air_Force In this world Myanmar is an ally to China and has committed assets to help China in other theaters. So the stuff you see listed on Wikipedia isn't exact. But it's close.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Also, what do we have for anti-shipping work? Will Paveways take them out?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Also, what do we have for anti-shipping work? Will Paveways take them out? Bacarruda posted:We already have 12 RB 15F anti-shipping missiles that the Gripens can carry. We bought 'em in our initial arms deal with the Swedes and Germans. That said I don't know if we'd necessarily want to use these missiles if bombs can work just as well, given that it's ostensibly an unarmed, unescorted freighter anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
RentACop posted:*smoky, crowded boardroom* We've been specifically told that CAS is coming and we might well want our high end fighters able to do high end fighter things, while our current CAS platforms aren't survivable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
I think ASM's might even be so overkill that they're less effective against a civilian freighter. IIRC most ASM's are designed to punch through a bunch of armor with kinetic energy before detonating their relatively small warheads in the guts of the ship. Against an unarmored target, though, it could go straight though and even if it doesn't the 200kg of explosives on board won't do nearly as much damage as a few Paveways and cost way more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
We should avoid selling our aircrafts at this point, if only because I get the feeling we are going need anything and everything with wings there is. Once we get out of this hot armpit of Asia, then we probably can sell the SK-60s to some other start-up/third world country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
Honestly I'd be happy to set the SK-60s on the shipping in the South, but we get paid more for destroying more up north and if the Grips kick in the door on the anti-air, I think we follow it up with those fat-rear end rockets into whatever we see. Is destroying the container ships - as civilian vessels with military reinforcements - a war crime and do we care if it is? Seconding on not using ASM due to penetration. In the Falklands war a helicopter shot a rocket at a submarine and it just punched straight through without detonating. I think it would be way worse here. E: yes don't sell our poo poo. If we have too many assets (and if Yooper lets us) we can send it round the other side of the world and bomb some dirt there at the same time
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
The ships in question won't be overkilled by the anti ship missiles we have. They are impact high explosive and fragmentation. A Gripen per ship is good. These are the kind of ships the Swedes designed their doctrine around sinking :P I'd try and remain on station briefly too after to assure the ships are sinking. Dedicate the Sk60s and other Gripens for the main task. If possible keep an extra LGB Gripen on standby if the main force needs extra ordnance, or if a ship needs a little extra incentive to sink. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
Our esteemed Baloogan pointed me to an awesome resource. https://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/Import?Location=imports%2F You can use this to browse airfields, radar locations, and anything else that's in that database. Where applicable I'll be using this import on our missions. This is an awesome help as otherwise I was doing this all for each scenario. This makes my job so much easier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
I think if we gently caress up them botes we probably have an easier time of it later on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
It looks like the anti shipping mission is a down payment on keeping our less advanced planes and cheaper munitions viable. Do we have the use of other Indian airbases, and if not do we want to use refueling to loop West of Bangladesh rather than needing fighters to tangle with Myanmar (we do have a tanker, right?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Do we have the use of other Indian airbases, and if not do we want to use refueling to loop West of Bangladesh rather than needing fighters to tangle with Myanmar (we do have a tanker, right?) We cannot use other Indian airbases. And yes, we have a tanker.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Yooper posted:We cannot use other Indian airbases. And yes, we have a tanker. Can only the Gripens do underway refuelling, or out CAS planes do so aswell?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Yeah if we can not violate Myanmar's airspace that would be good. Hopefully the extra time going around tacks on isn't enough for the ships to appreciably move/get to port.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:Can only the Gripens do underway refuelling, or out CAS planes do so aswell? The Gripens have Probe Refueling. The SK60B's do not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
We probably should in that case put SK-60s to CAS duty while we'll send a flight of Gripens to see what's going down in the sea. We probably can spare 2 Gripens for SEAD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Is the range at which we can identify the ship dependent on the platform being used or are we Mk.1 Eyeballing this poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
I'm thinking a four ship (two if we can scramble more if we see more AAA than we have bombs for and have them get there before the SKs) of Gripens with LGBs under them to go support the SKs by picking off AAA and carrying some Irises just in case the Chinese aren't actually standing down, and maybe serving as forward air controllers with their better sensor fit. Down south, I'm thinking a two ship of Gripens with tanker support. I don't know what sort of refueling we can put together to get them around West of Bangladesh, but if we can make it work, that's the goal. I assume the Greek buy's results aren't going to be in play for this run? xthetenth fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Is the range at which we can identify the ship dependent on the platform being used or are we Mk.1 Eyeballing this poo poo? sensor pods/packages help quite a bit
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
I'm a bit late here, but is our budget for purchasing things inclusive of our maintenance budget or not? Because if we'd need to only eat 10 year old cans of baked beans as a result of our purchases and we'd be scraping from contract to contract we should seriously consider cutting our buys significantly. And I wonder if it'd be possible to use shows of force to deter the ships from continuing? It might look bad if we're seen to be attacking an ostensibly unarmed ship, particularly since I wouldn't put it past the PRC to spin it as hardhearted mercs attacking a defenceless merchant vessel for nothing more than cash. That might make it more difficult to acquire contracts and equipment from Western nations in future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Triple A posted:We probably should in that case put SK-60s to CAS duty while we'll send a flight of Gripens to see what's going down in the sea. We probably can spare 2 Gripens for SEAD. correct me if I'm wrong, but arnt we operating at sea? why do we need sead? it might be helpful if a warship shows up, but let's be honest if a warship that can pose a large threat shows up our first action should be to freeze operations and call up our employer for a large pay increase because doing fleet engagements on our budget is bad business
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:correct me if I'm wrong, but arnt we operating at sea? why do we need sead? The SEAD would be picking off AAA up north.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:correct me if I'm wrong, but arnt we operating at sea? why do we need sead? Let me simplify it for you: SK-60s go to CAS, they get a pair of Gripens to aid them and the rest go hunt down boats. And just in case, make sure we strip off all identifying marks on aircrafts that go hunt them down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:The SEAD would be picking off AAA up north. yeah I read back through and missed the entire primary mission in a caffineless haze 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Given we're buying either the vastly superior Frogfoots or the old and busted Phantoms for CAS, I say we throw all our SK 105s into the area for the ground mission and rack up as many targets of opportunity as possible. The Sk105s are only worth $600k, and bombing the supply depot got us $500k last mission, so no reason to not go hog wild
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Is it possible (based on flight time/fuel and sensor capabilities) to have the SK-60s do the freighter attack? We aren't getting paid for that half and the Gripens are not nearly as expendable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
Do we have running costs for the Phantoms? I think it would be a real bad idea to buy 8 of them, we'd barely have enough money left over to run them for a single mission.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:Is it possible (based on flight time/fuel and sensor capabilities) to have the SK-60s do the freighter attack? We aren't getting paid for that half and the Gripens are not nearly as expendable. Points against: * The SK60s don't have refueling capability so are less likely to be able to fly around the edge of Bangladesh. If we have to go through Myanmar, the Gripens are out to play already and are much more likely to be expended in that use. * The SK60s don't have a sensor other than the Mk1 eyeball, which means they'll have to get a lot closer to the ships to ID them, and probably can't patrol as effectively as a result. * The SK60s don't have anti-ship missiles, so they have to close in to use rockets. * Those ships have MANPADs on them. If they don't have a few in the hands of guys topside they're drat fools. The Gripens have a solid sensor fit and standoff weapons, so they're much less likely to be lost taking on the ships. They're also fast enough to get back out after shooting the ships. (Do we want to have fighter fit Gripens on hand in case the Myanmar AF tries to chase? How will a slower tanker fit into our overall plan, does it tank the Gripens up over the Bay and then peel back to Indian airspace to top them off after an egress sprint? Popete posted:Do we have running costs for the Phantoms? I think it would be a real bad idea to buy 8 of them, we'd barely have enough money left over to run them for a single mission. The payouts seem to be reasonable enough to let us get back in the black pretty quickly, and I doubt we'd be routinely flying all 8, rather using them to have the ability to take a few losses and still generate a decent sortie reliably.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
In all cases maintenance cost and such are dependent on flight time for a mission. We get paid X dollars, subtract costs, and that's what we're left with. That way we can always keep flying, but losses might not be financially replaceable. Chinese Air Force is not active in Tibet right now. Ships can be identified by MK1 Eyeball, or like Baloogan said, sensor packages, like that fancy sensor package that we happen to have two of for the Gripens. A hint, the 135mm missiles won't do much to a container ship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
Proposal: 2 Gripens, 1 w ASMs and fancy sensors, 1 w Air to Air package, go wander around the ocean with tanker and AWACS support. The Chinese aren't active but the Burmese could be. 2 Gripens with air-to-ground packages plus the SK-60s run train on everything in Tibet that is hostile.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:Cool, more planes for us to fly! After the bomb boondoggle (sorry!) I've seen this motion and a motion to buy UAV's and four Phantoms. I also saw a comment to reduce the FA-50 quantity to 2. No one seemed interested in the YAK-130's, Hawk 209, Broken SU-27, JF-17, or the RF-4E. Unless I hear any motions otherwise I'll proceed with 2 FA-50's, 4 Phantoms, 2 UAV's. Call it another 6 hours or so. You guys are breaking my heart by not buying that beautiful lizard that's the Frogfoot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:49 |
|
|
Yooper posted:You guys are breaking my heart by not buying that beautiful lizard that's the Frogfoot. I'm all in on the Frogfoots, they are awesome and could provide us with a crap ton of CAS capability especially for a mission like this. My previous proposal of 2 UAVs 2 F4-E Phantom and 2 SU-25 Frogfoots.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:04
|
|