need purchase advice, aircraft or no

[MOS:96B2P]

5 hours ago, Doug Williams said:

<Snip> One last question.....are Drones any good in Thick Haze?

I just did a quick test in thick haze with a US Shadow and Grey Eagle.  I was not impressed.  The Shadow was shot down by a Tungusta as usual.  The Grey Eagle spotted maybe two out of every 10 OpFor vehicles.  What surprised me was that it spotted stationary vehicles while it did not spot OpFor vehicles dashing about in the open.  You might want to do your own test but if the fight is in thick haze I think I would spend the points on Abrams.     

[John Kettler]

IICptMillerII,

The point I was trying to explore is whether US aircraft have come under MANPADS fire from ISIS as part of the larger issue of the difference between how the US is used to when conducting CAS strikes and what it would face vs Russia. Offhand, I don't know the answer to the ISIS MANPADS use question. I raised it in the context of the larger point. Further, I would note I have already provided a detailed assessment of my take on using air power in CMBS and what I recommend and don't regarding it. Also, I provided additional material to provide some context based on what we were told by the CIA's top Russian AD people about how the Tunguska came to be, supplemented by the material Carlo Copp dug up.

COLTs, and similar units, are, I argue, at a disadvantage in the game which they aren't on a real world battlefield. In the latter case, even at night, the US rangefinding/designator beam is invisible to anyone lacking thermals or not wearing NVGs. There is no provision for offset aiming, which can be used to surprise the target (with the munition seconds out but very much in the acquisition basket) even if it does have a LWR w/wo DAS. Nor can the Russians use their artillery tactic of successive designations by a single laser to walk a string of time sequenced Kitolovs or similar across, say, a row of buildings. My argument is that the current implementation directly and negatively affects the combat value of these units and that this, in turn, loops back into tacair effectiveness and ground FS effectiveness, too. Going back to ELOCAR and how it worked, a laser, unless seen from a point of vantage, doesn't present much of a target, especially on a sprawling chaos filled battlefield. It is a tiny point source, so you get the primary very slender beam (really a string of pulses) , its interaction with particulates in its path (think dust in a flashlight beam) and something called port scatter, which may be loosely termed the laser's sidelobes, to use a radar analogy. That's all there is to see--if able to do so. The upshot of these and other factors is that it's much harder, I believe, to use the Fire Support Specialists to anything like the level their real counterparts are capable of doing. Here, for example is the description of a COLT from the useful blog US Army Life.

http://theusarmylife.blogspot.com/2009/08/13-foxtrot-fire-support-specialist.html

(Fair Use)

"The COLT Team is a high-technology, deeply inserted, observer/reconnaissance team often called on to maximize the use of GPS guided munitions like the EXCALIBUR series weaponry/155mm paladin howitzers. The standard COLT team consists of a driver/Grenadier(PFC/E-3), a gunner/RTO/Observer(Specialist/E-4) and a TC(CPL-SGT), the vehicle commander who oversees the operation on the OP, and approves fire missions. COLTs are now equipped with the FS3 (Fire support sensor system) which has consolidated all of the target acquisition equipment which was previously on the KNIGHT series HMMWVs. These teams typically work closely with attack aircraft to guide air-delivered laser-guided munitions, while still providing ground support for maneuver battalions and acting as a reactive strike force supporting special operations units."

To be clear, "deeply inserted" means way behind enemy lines, and the unit is able to call in everything from mortars, tube artillery and MLRS on up to the B-52H and B-1B. All that FS horsepower runs around in one Hummer. Typical FO teams are two men, and they're a lot harder to keep alive in CMBS than they are out there in reality. I've found you have to be super cautious with them, and those special AFVs the Russians use are even worse. "Hi! I'm a really important vehicle with critical personnel inside. Kill me." I had one with a BTG, and I think it lasted a whole two minutes or so. This, mind, was while trying to minimize exposure. That's simply not how things work generally. Were that the case, some other approach would be taken. Yet somehow, even back when lasers were always red, like in the movies when the dread spot appears on someone's chest, lasers had real combat utility. Summing up, I believe the various CMBS FSS entities are far more detectable, have fewer capabilities and therefore can't perform to the high levels of their real life counterparts. As far as I'm concerned, they're at least partially hamstrung.

Regards,

John Kettler 

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

19 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

I think we knew it as wild weasel when I was in.

Wild Weasel is a term that still turns up in the popular literature, but I think the military has preferred to use SEAD since the late '80s or thereabout. When were you in service, if I may ask?

Michael

Edited February 18, 2017 by Michael Emrys

[Sgt.Squarehead]

All those nasty NATO planes trying to kill the Russian military's favourite little droid.....A2/AD. 

Edited February 18, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[MOS:96B2P]

7 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

<Snip> When were you in service, if I may ask?

1983 to 1987.  I was in the 313 Military Intelligence Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division.  My military occupational specialty (MOS) was military intelligence analyst (that's where my handle came from).  My avatar is the crest of the 313 MI Bn.      

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

The term "Wild Weasel" goes back to the Vietnam War when the US discovered how lethal SA-2s were and had to develop and field a crash response until a full-on bird could be created. Talked briefly with one our guys in my department at Rockwell about it (we built the F-100 which was the platform). He told me about the insane hours and draconian security, as well as the utter abandonment of normal procedures when it came to getting things designed, made and pars and materials procured. Effectively, it was an "unlimited budget as long as you get  it done last week" sort of thing. During the Cold War and well after, we used "SEAD" (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses). These days, it's "DEAD" (Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses). Has a nice ring to it, don't you think? Also, it's highly function descriptive. At one time while I was at Rockwell, we had the top Wild Weasel (F-4G) pilot in the Air Force. After resigning to try something new, he quickly found analysis simply wasn't as satisfying as flying, but seemed done for because he'd formally left. Needn't have feared. The Air Force wanted/needed him so badly it let him back in, something I understand just doesn't happen. The full capability briefing he gave us shortly after arriving was most interesting. 

Sgt.Squarehead,

The first pass of your jape about the Russian bot didn't process, but now I get it. Cute.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited February 19, 2017 by John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

13 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

1983 to 1987.  I was in the 313 Military Intelligence Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division.  My military occupational specialty (MOS) was military intelligence analyst (that's where my handle came from).  My avatar is the crest of the 313 MI Bn.      

Thank you for your answer and for your service. I suppose that had I been accepted by the military, intel would have been what I was most useful at...not that claims a whole lot.

Michael

[Doug Williams]

The game (finally) ended in a Draw on August 11th. I've been off these forums (shame on me) for a while, so I thought I better post something before I get auto-deleted for inactivity (if that even happens here). Good game, Art!

Here is a link to the Ladder report submitted by Art on Few Good Men (I'm Meat Grinder there.....obviously). :-)

http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/thefgmforum/threads/new-ladder-report-submitted.26384/

[MOS:96B2P]

18 hours ago, Doug Williams said:

The game (finally) ended in a Draw on August 11th.  <Snip> 

Wow, that was a long PBEM.  Did you use drones at all and if so how did they work in the thick haze? 

[Doug Williams]

6 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Wow, that was a long PBEM.  Did you use drones at all and if so how did they work in the thick haze? 

I did not, since I wasn't sure if they would be a waste of points. It was a brutal, bloody fight (as can be seen in the AAR I linked). Art made excellent use of TRPs. He's a crafty opponent, for sure.

[Sublime]

RE: Redfor air

ive had success. while i dont often do it i always use only su25s. mi35s/24s are fun just bc my inordinate love of the helo but i dont buy em

sometimes i even parse it down to one su25.

the original strikes are done on a light setting. they rarely KO abrams but strafing will knock the hell out of abrams subsystems and reliably KO strykers. brads sometimes. then if theyre stil available heavy attacks with bombs and rockets for what are for me secondary targets - inf etc.

the su25 preplotted 5 min delay setup attacks once yoy get used to the diatance most enemies will move on average in that amt of time is very effective. the 30mm will shred inf and apcs and the abrams subsystems arw degraded substantially.

only thing better to degrade abrams is a tunguska if it gets the drop -of course if theres more than one abrams or apc its toast but ive literally stunned abrams by amt of hits into just sitting there getting slammed by 30mm. best way to do that is keyhole ur tunguska

 

p.s. agree with the others. air is very iffy. arty is better 90 percent of the time. that money would go way better to some abrams which are perfect offense or defensive. or jav teams a couple of snipers anoyhet arty module and couple of 50cal hmgs.

also maybe bump up some troops to vet or more eg snipers fos and tanks

Edited September 7, 2017 by Sublime