Hmmmm. Smoked Kippers.

But if it is non historic I suppose I would recomend LOMAC. Although I haven’t played it for months, not because it is no good it is excellent but for what my opinion is worth I don’t have the time to get over the learning curve. IL2 is simpler and I can find time for it.

Not at all … as I said in my post I struggle with this. I fundamentally don’t think war is a useful way of resolving political differences … but I also don’t like fascism and/or dictators. And yes, Germany started it no doubt. But, BUT, much of that excess bomload was dropped in the last few months of the war (I don’t have the data on me, but there’s some sort of – every year the bomb tonnage equalled the aggregate of what had been done to date – something like that) and Moggy’s question is whether this degree of overkill was reasonable in February 1945.

I don’t think it was.

You said it yourself. ‘The last few months of the war’. Was the war over? No it wasn’t. Sorry. My Mom was a baby when a German bomb destroyed the house and killed the family on the other side of her street directly opposite her family home. She was having her nappy changed at the time. I’ve never heard anybody appologise for the fact that I was ‘nearly’ never able to write this reply. This is not a moot point when put into context. 🙂

A patch should be out within the next week or two 🙂

😀 Kye. Is this your dry sense of humour coming through or is it true? 🙂

Phil

The promised strike is no saturation attack, if it is the first strike on a fully ready and aremd carrier group. Then there are not enough missiles to have a high chance of breaking through the defences imho.

Imho a first strike for the carrier would be not wise for the PAF. They have only a limited number of aircraft they can use to fire the AIM-39s and so those are very valuable. The Indian carrier group has two major weaknesses that a prudent commander could exploit. They have few fighters for the CAPs and the ships have a limited number of reloads for the missiles. And time is on the side the PAF. So before employing my strikers I would try to to get a good fix on the position of the strike force. While using P-3s and Atlanics with fighter cover.
the next step is to pressure the CAPs with faint attacks. Lure them out with F-7. Forcing the CAPs to act increases the pressure on the maintance section and on the pilots. And if they are stupid enough to come out of their AEW cover to engage my fighters os be it. Even if I would only achieve a 1:1 kill ration I´m winning.
Next thing usefull would be air launched decoys. If I could fire drones at teh strike force that would look like a medium alltitude strike on the enemies radars. So I would sent drones and F-7 with their radar on. The F-7 would be ordered to turn back before coming in range of SAMs. I would force them to commit their CAP again. I would force the AA defense ships to turn on their radars and if I´m lucky fighters and ships will waste missiles killing decoys. Just when the IN fighters return to refuel from their hunt for the decoys I would sent in a low level Mirage strike against the outmost AAW picket. Say 4 planes with 2 missiles each. That should give me a high chance of at least a mission kill.
Now the IN commander is forced to redeploy his forces. He will have to weaken his defenses on the south side of the group, to replace the damaged ship on the north side. Now my maritime patrol aircraft come into play. they have enough range to attack from the south side.
So my next attack would be a mdeium alltitude attack using Mirages with F-7 escorts that are flying the same speeds and headings like the drones I used before. Now the IN commander has a decision to make. Another fake raid again, or not. If he commits his CAP on the incomming strike the F-7 engage the CAP, while the Mirages attack another exposed escort.
In the confusion I would sent the P-3s in to attack from the south. Their orders would be to play it save. That means hitting an escort would be enough.
With a second escort damaged the IN carrier group becomes vulnerable. It becomes vulnerbale to airborne, surface and submarine attack. So the next strike I would use all Mirages for a strike on the carrier.
Again I would start with decoys. this time I believe they would not go for them. Then I would want a flight of F-7s using chaff bombs to create a screen for the enemy commander. If possible I would like some stand-off jamming as well.
Then another F-7 flight is sent just inside SAM range but turns north and low when engaged. Meanwhile I would try a highspeed low level attack with the Mirages using a weak point in the defenses. And then launch all I have at the center off the strike group. I would hope that the AAW ships have depleted their SAM stocks enough to be unable to engage all incomimng missiles.

The funny thing on this discussion is, that both sides have an equal chance to win. The side that screws up the first time will most liekley lose, as both are limited in their resources.

Not a saturation attack? IF the PAF get into launch position the 8 target tracks mentioned earlier will suddenly become 28 target tracks, some will be missiles some will be launchers. Even if the attackers turn away immediately (which in all fairness would probably be a prudent move) you still have up to 20 target tracks to deal with, all fast moving low flying bombs. Compared to the attacks that the Argentine Navy were able to carry out, that is a saturation attack. Its not about odds it is about risk and there is a difference. The question started as a Mirage vs Harrier discussion and quite rightly it developed into a full blown land/sea/air operation discussion. To be fair these are some of the many questions that commanders on both sides will be asking their aides. What have ‘they’ got? What are ‘they’ capable of or willing to do? What are ‘their’ intentions and so on? Obviously this is where inteligence comes into play and your inteligence is either enough or it is lacking. What I like about this discussion is that everybody is working through the possibilities, the risks, the dispositions etc etc probably in a similar manner to real life military commanders. I wonder though if real life commanders hear some dodgy ideas as well?

Fair play to your elbow me old mucker.

Phil,

with the attacker I mean the PAF. And in that sceanrio the speed of the FRS.1 does not matter. The enemies have to come close to them to fullfill their mission. If the FRS.1 just keeps the approaching PAF planes from getting a lock on the carrier group, then they win.

I think it is save to assume that the AEW helos should detect any approaching strike at about twice the attackers weapons range. Now we could also assume that we are looking at one threat axis. Mainly from the North. So the CAPs would be operating 30-50kms North of the carrier with their noses cold. Apart from the AEW pickets the ships would also not be emitting. The pickets would be positioned in the main threat axis.

The AEWs would also deploy north along the threat axis. So we can say that even a low profile strike group should be detected at around 70-100 kms away from the carrier. Even more if the strike groups escort fighters are using their radars to look for the CAP. Then the strike would be detected even earlier.
The range of the AIM-39 at low level is about 35 km. The CAP postion is about 20 kms away. So the CAP should be able to intercept the strike before they can launch the weapons. The outcome of this will depend on the escort fighters perfomance and if the CAP can surprise the strike.
I think we can assume that the strikers would press on. However they are entering SA-17 range then. Yet they still have to search for the target. So once they pop up they will be engaged. But they should be able to launch the missiles.

The calculation of the succes of the AIM-39 is based on experience from the Falklands. There no ship was hit that deployed any form of countermeassures.

I think one AIM-39 hit for the SA-17 is likely.

Short range SAMs should als be able to hit AIM-39s. Then add the CIWS and the defensive systems, then it would be unlikely that more then 25% of the AIM-39 would hit.

Still a lot of ifs and buts, if the SHARs don’t keep contact you’re screwed aren’t you? What do you do next? In the Falklands the Argentine Navy had only a handful of Exocets and they were launched in ones and twos. You are correct that they were defeated by ships deploying counter measures, in the case of, I think, HMS Sheffield, the captain was on the sat phone to London and they couldn’t use this system and operate the search radar at the same time. Bad luck, bad timing, a capability gap that no longer exists. However PAF fan is talking about a saturation strike, not a punitive attack. It is possible that the IN will get all the incoming ‘bullets’ before they reach the ships but the odds are on at least on getting through. At this point the odds that this missile will do catastrophic damage will begin to diminish but this will not be precluded. It could get into the hanger or the magazines, or perhaps the engine room leaving the ship cripples and/or burning. Suppose this is the case. Do you have a plan to pull the ship and the group itself out of harms way if it becomes evident that the mission has been compromised? Or are you just going to assume that the PAF is going to fail?