Operation Hammerblow

Post All Your Missions Here

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Neil Willis » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:34 pm

I get your point regarding mission duration with an extra 4 aircraft. However we always need to be able to accommodate all our participating pilots, and - unusually perhaps for a Thursday night - we had 7. I suppose one way around it would be to reduce the weapons payload of each aircraft, or to restrict them to less effective weaponry. Alternatively, increased attrition could whittle down the numbers into a more effectively balanced scenario. I guess the alternative would be to have 2 almost identical missions running together on the same map - though geographically separated - which could be included or ignored depending on the turnout, or even used to have 2 flights try to out perform each other in terms of time to complete, number of targets eliminated, or in maximum survivability terms.
Group Captain Neil Willis - RAF Air UK
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Neil Willis
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3651
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 2:44 pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Flyco » Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:52 pm

It is possible to have additional content added to missions if participants exceed a set number. However, this can upset the balance of the mission and increases the scope for errors in the programming. Hence the rule, 'Any fool can defeat even the best foolproof plan'.

To try and get round the problem of missions starting before everyone is ready, I have started to include, as the first trigger, the condition that nothing starts until the first Hog (or Boar, or Pig etc) aircraft leaves a trigger zone set up around the departure airfield.
Squadron Leader Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image
Flyco
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 2:30 pm
Location: York

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Galm99 » Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:26 pm

Updates:

Second flight added
Enemy ground forces to reinforce airfield after trigger criteria.
Dreadnaught will now report their position periodically.
Allied ships will not take longer to engage the enemy Frigates, making them more of a threat to aircraft.
Enemy ships may or may not enter the area to counter the allied ships.
Tanker issue rectified.
Loadouts fixed.
New briefing card issued to first post.
All triggers edited to accommodate new flight.
Enemy Fighters dependant on Mirage 2000C usage.
JTAC will report when he is online within the mission.
Flight Lieutenant Matt Purnell - RAF Air UK
Image
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Galm99
Site Admin
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:55 pm
Location: Amesbury, Wiltshire

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Neil Willis » Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:39 pm

Excellent work Matt. We'll run it again next Thursday night and give it a good run through again.
Group Captain Neil Willis - RAF Air UK
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Neil Willis
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3651
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 2:44 pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Galm99 » Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:45 pm

Sounds good! the amount of triggers I have had to edit/add for the new flight alone is madness :lol: , let alone the new triggers I had to create anyway.

but the mission should last longer mow, you will know where badger is and when the JTAC is available...and a few new surprises.
Flight Lieutenant Matt Purnell - RAF Air UK
Image
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Galm99
Site Admin
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:55 pm
Location: Amesbury, Wiltshire

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Flyco » Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:58 pm

Matt, a quick account of yesterday's Op Hammerblow, flown by just 3 of us. My TacView recording was not too clear, bu these were the main points - I think.

Started Ok, but there was no sign of Dreadnaught, either in the mission or on Tacview.

The main problem, I found was the Russian ships - the US ships sailed serenely west and took no part in the proceedings. This left the Russians to use their Tor-equivalents to hit us whenever we dropped below 20,000 ft, which made Maverick use very problematic. I am not sure that we got any warning of the naval missiles - certainly they gave no EWR trace and I am not sure that they gave a MWS warning, although given the Mavs being launched I couldn't be sure of this. Both Tornados were knocked out by Russian naval missiles.

The Russian incoming column appeared without any interference by Dreadnaught but we didn't have enough ordnance to deal with them.

On reflection, had we not assumed that the US navy would take care of the Russian ships, we might have done better to go after them. However, that would have required more ac and ordnance.

Quite good fun if a little frustrating - I can't help feeling that the Russians cheated by bribing the US Navy and Dreadnaught to hold off!
Squadron Leader Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image
Flyco
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 2:30 pm
Location: York

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Galm99 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:55 pm

Dreadnaught are spawned after a set mission criteria which i believe may be quite strict at the moment if you had little ammo for the russian column so that will be easy to alter as it is a little strict at the moment...the US ships however will require a detailed look as they should have been seen sailing north to give the ruskies the good news.

Do you feel the ships are too much of a pain due to the missile issue? Or are they bareable just forcing flight restrictions?
Flight Lieutenant Matt Purnell - RAF Air UK
Image
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Galm99
Site Admin
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:55 pm
Location: Amesbury, Wiltshire

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Flyco » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:09 pm

If we had detail of the 'naval Tor' and could see them on our ECM kit they would not be insufferable. That is assuming we had the weapons to kill them. I don't know what would be the effect of a Maverick or GBU-12 on them. I will load up the mission on my stand-alone and give it a go.

Clearly with only 3 ac on the night, we were never going to be able to knock everything out, It was the uncertainty that got to me. I am a bit of a 'by the book' operator and like to be well briefed and properly prepared. Others may of course relish the unknown.

Having asked for more to do last time, when we had about 6 aircraft available, it is probably a bit much to complain about too much going on. Perhaps if the follow on elements could be triggered only if the first elements were achieved, that might help. Last time the Russian ships were taken care of by the US navy, this time they weren't.
Squadron Leader Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image
Flyco
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 2:30 pm
Location: York

Re: Operation Hammerblow

Postby Galm99 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:45 pm

No problem Alan, I will look in to how I can alter the mission to best achieve all goals with any number of ac. I feel I got a little carried away making more targets :lol:
Flight Lieutenant Matt Purnell - RAF Air UK
Image
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Galm99
Site Admin
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:55 pm
Location: Amesbury, Wiltshire

Previous

Return to Missions

cron