Out of touch

[Chris21wen]

Not the game, me.

I left the RN in 1979 so my practical knowledge of military stuff dates to that time, seaslug and seacat missiles as an example. In game terms I played the Harpoon extensively but not even that was 10-15 years ago.

How things have changes. Littoral Combat Ship to start with. What the heck is a LCS I asked. Then you've got the UAVs, the new types of missile, the different decoys (although the game deals with these).

There's Stealth ships but I've still got no idea how to use them correctly. I played the classic Norway series and won all of them but the last using stealth boats. Played it three time but got my head handed to me on a plate each time. Definitely don't understand how to use them.

Lot to learn it's like transporting someone from the dark ages into the WW2.

[Dysta]

"Hey! More thinking, less shooting!"

Technological 'marvel' is suppose to be superior not just by stealth, precision and maximum firepower at minimum output, but also foolproof and easier to understand how it works. But so far we are failure to see how LCS could apply such demands.

No worry, we still try to prove LCS is a good platform in CMANO... Or maybe not.

[Dimitris]

Paul? [:)]

[Airborne Rifles]

Being an Army guy I'm no expert on modern naval and air systems either. I play slowly and pause the game whenever I come across something I'm unfamiliar with so that I can do a little research here or on the web. I've found it is a really rewarding and educational way to play the sim.

[Dysta]

x2

But for few 'realism' players, they prefer to search while still playing. Yet, the choice that you can pause and think calmly is still very important.

[.Sirius]

Hi Chris,
Nice to see ex RN here Im still serving myself done over 34 yrs and leave next year I'm an old school RP so now where your coming from,you have 2 databases to use I created the Cold War Database from 1946-1979 and Ragnar from 1980 to near future, the great thing about Command is that its a sandbox so you create anything you want, theres some great tutorials out there as well as some god stuff on youtube, if you have any problems pm me and Ill get you my email to you

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Not the game, me.

I left the RN in 1979 so my practical knowledge of military stuff dates to that time, seaslug and seacat missiles as an example. In game terms I played the Harpoon extensively but not even that was 10-15 years ago.

How things have changes. Littoral Combat Ship to start with. What the heck is a LCS I asked. Then you've got the UAVs, the new types of missile, the different decoys (although the game deals with these).

There's Stealth ships but I've still got no idea how to use them correctly. I played the classic Norway series and won all of them but the last using stealth boats. Played it three time but got my head handed to me on a plate each time. Definitely don't understand how to use them.

Lot to learn it's like transporting someone from the dark ages into the WW2.

[SeaQueen]

How things have changes. Littoral Combat Ship to start with. What the heck is a LCS I asked.

For the longest time nobody could tell me either. Eventually I got pointed to a paper in "Proceedings" on the Street Fighter and Wayne Hughes' book. The thing is, I found myself saying, "Oh! You mean it's a frigate or corvette!" Immediately very smart people said, "No no no, it's not a frigate or corvette." Now... they've finally decided it IS a frigate.

Wow...

There's Stealth ships but I've still got no idea how to use them correctly. I played the classic Norway series and won all of them but the last using stealth boats. Played it three time but got my head handed to me on a plate each time. Definitely don't understand how to use them.

In my opinion, don't put too much faith in stealth. It's only so "stealthy" and unless you have a good feel for how stealthy being stealthy actually is, it's safest to assume the worst (i.e. that you're easy to detect).

[skjold89]

I'm by no means no expert, but stealth ships have the RCS of like a small fishing boat, instead of a frigate size. A fishing boat is still quite easy to detect, just a bit harder.

If i am wrong, please feel free to correct me.

[.Sirius]

Hi yeah rule of thumb a Type 23 Frigate has an RCS of a fishing boat, although a Type 23 is late 1980's stealth ie no right angles on the exterior of the ship they still give a paint on radar

ORIGINAL: Skjold

I'm by no means no expert, but stealth ships have the RCS of like a small fishing boat, instead of a frigate size. A fishing boat is still quite easy to detect, just a bit harder.

If i am wrong, please feel free to correct me.

[SeaQueen]

You're not necessarily wrong, but when ever people say, "object X has the radar cross section of a European (or Asian!) swallow (or some other object)," they aren't actually telling you anything. If you're seeing an RCS quoted as anything other than dB, you're most likely looking at something which is intended to obscure the truth. It doesn't tell anyone anything useful.

Radar cross sections are frequency dependent, they are also aspect dependent. That means that a given aircraft, ship or weapon might be completely invisible or easily visible depending on the band of the radar, and on the direction from which they are observed. Furthermore, in an era where multistatic sensors are a reality, you now have to worry about an object's multistatic radar cross section, which is usually some average related to the different angles from which the object is being sensed. I will be really surprised if anyone can find real radar cross section numbers on any modern aircraft. If they do, someone is most likely going to go to prison.

You also have to ask what you mean by "difficulty to detect?" What you're really talking about is signal excess versus range. Changing the radar cross section changes the distance at which a given sensor-target combination produces signal excess and therefore influences the median detection range. All of this, btw, depends on a lot of statistical assumptions about the nature of noise.

What does all this mean about "stealth" ships? A "stealth" ship being sensed by some radar, at some frequency, will have it's median detection range by that sensor reduced by some amount. How much is that? It all depends. What is it useful for? Once again, it all depends. Ships, weapons, aircraft, all tend to have very different sorts of radars. They're constrained by different restrictions on space, weight and power. When you put it in those terms what does "stealth" buy you on a ship? It's really hard to say. Apparently some countries think it's quite valuable because they invest money in it. Why? Without some pretty hard core computer modeling, it's hard to say exactly.

ORIGINAL: Skjold

I'm by no means no expert, but stealth ships have the RCS of like a small fishing boat, instead of a frigate size. A fishing boat is still quite easy to detect, just a bit harder.

If i am wrong, please feel free to correct me.

[NakedWeasel]

The main (there are others) drawback of the LCS is it's lack of firepower, which is further compounded by the fact that the US Navy has allowed itself to go too long without a credible anti-ship missile other than the aging Harpoon. The LCS's lack of dedicated VLS capacity to make room for aviation assets and mission modules makes them too lean, and basically paper tigers, IMO. I think there has been some recent common sense reapplied to the design, and the US Navy is addressing the ASM gap by assessing at least 3 separate weapon systems to replace the Harpoon, but it's going to be a while before anything is fielded, and no assurance that more extensive VLS facilities will ever be added to the basic ship classes.

[magi]

ORIGINAL: Airborne Rifles

Being an Army guy I'm no expert on modern naval and air systems either. I play slowly and pause the game whenever I come across something I'm unfamiliar with so that I can do a little research here or on the web. I've found it is a really rewarding and educational way to play the sim.

Me too... One of the things I love about this game......

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: NakedWeasel

The main (there are others) drawback of the LCS is it's lack of firepower, which is further compounded by the fact that the US Navy has allowed itself to go too long without a credible anti-ship missile other than the aging Harpoon. The LCS's lack of dedicated VLS capacity to make room for aviation assets and mission modules makes them too lean, and basically paper tigers, IMO. I think there has been some recent common sense reapplied to the design, and the US Navy is addressing the ASM gap by assessing at least 3 separate weapon systems to replace the Harpoon, but it's going to be a while before anything is fielded, and no assurance that more extensive VLS facilities will ever be added to the basic ship classes.

That's how it looks to me too.

I've just finished playing South China Sea Clash against the PLAN. This scenario prompted the post. In it the US has 2 x LCS and 1 x Arleigh Burke Flight IIA plus a number of land base air assets.

Almost from the off I noticed the US had no shipboard ASMs but loads of Tomahawks, sub and AAW weapons. I also noticed the LCS have almost nothing capable of taking on anything larger than a rowing boat. In the scenario neither did anything other than offer themselves as targets, they'd have been dead if it wasn't for the DDG defensive capabilities.

[AlGrant]

Hi Chris,

Also Ex-RN here (left in 2001). I do find that depending on the time period of the scenario.
Anything from mid 70's to about 2005 and I'm pretty much OK. Much earlier of later and I often find myself checking the database.

One thing I've recently started to do is to keep a log when playing a scenario. Almost a mini journal of main events and what I do or intend to do in response.
I find this makes me think far closer about what my plans are (they often change) and also is a huge help on longer scenarios when I open a saved game I've not played for a few days.
Of course the game log lists the events but having a note of how I was planning to deal with them often helps me pick up where I left off.

Al

[ExNusquam]

ORIGINAL: Chris H
Almost from the off I noticed the US had no shipboard ASMs but loads of Tomahawks, sub and AAW weapons. I also noticed the LCS have almost nothing capable of taking on anything larger than a rowing boat. In the scenario neither did anything other than offer themselves as targets, they'd have been dead if it wasn't for the DDG defensive capabilities.

I say this every time someone brings up South China Sea Clash, but I think you're underestimating and misusing the LCS. The LCS has phenomenal ISR capability, from it's decent search radar and usual complement of 3 helicopters. The RAM isn't bad as a defensive weapon either. Furthermore, the LCS has insane maneuverability, and if you don't exploit that, you're not using them to their potential.

While the LCS might be a bit under-gunned, they do have very unique capabilities (They're a speedboat with 3 helicopters!) and bring quite a bit to any engagement. It's just about using them so you can maximize their advantages.

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

ORIGINAL: Chris H
Almost from the off I noticed the US had no shipboard ASMs but loads of Tomahawks, sub and AAW weapons. I also noticed the LCS have almost nothing capable of taking on anything larger than a rowing boat. In the scenario neither did anything other than offer themselves as targets, they'd have been dead if it wasn't for the DDG defensive capabilities.

I say this every time someone brings up South China Sea Clash, but I think you're underestimating and misusing the LCS. The LCS has phenomenal ISR capability, from it's decent search radar and usual complement of 3 helicopters. The RAM isn't bad as a defensive weapon either. Furthermore, the LCS has insane maneuverability, and if you don't exploit that, you're not using them to their potential.

While the LCS might be a bit under-gunned, they do have very unique capabilities (They're a speedboat with 3 helicopters!) and bring quite a bit to any engagement. It's just about using them so you can maximize their advantages.

That brings me back to the reason for the post. I don't know how to use them.

They do have a good sensor array and do carry helios but in this scenario carry no weapons. As far as speed and maneuverability is concerned or their own weapons I never had need to test them, the DDG sorted out that out.

[magi]

Chris……… The reason you are having difficulty in understanding how to apply these particular mix of surface assets..... I believe is the point the scenario designer trying to make…

In the early 90s after the collapse of the Soviet Union… United States Navy went from being a Bluewater force… to a brown water force... With its alpha mission and doctrine being assault from the sea…. And that required different tactics and asset mix…
As there were no longer any serious surface threats.. they removed the ASMs from most of our service combatants ... with the belief that if and when they had to prosecute that type of target it would be done with air assets… The LCSs were designed as lower cost platforms that would operate in the literal environments with the mission focus of ASW, mine counter measure, patrol craft in lower threat environments.... In higher threat environments they would operate under the cover of more powerful platforms....

However…… With the rise of a capable Chinese navy with their current stated intents and the reemergence of a Russia's navy.... The dynamics have changed and we are at the beginning of seeing the United States Navy and it's allies evolve and adapt to this new reality… We live in a very interesting time indeed....

I believe that the scenario of the "South China Sea clash" is one of the best small scenarios in CMANO..... It well show our limitations in our current doctrine in these changing times..... It is one of my favorite scenarios in which I play an editor mode… as a sandbox scenario wherein I fool with the mix of assets and weapon systems…

I wish I knew who the author was… as I would like to tell him… Well done… That brings me to another point… I believe all scenario titles should have their author attributed .....

[Cheechako]

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

ORIGINAL: Chris H
Almost from the off I noticed the US had no shipboard ASMs but loads of Tomahawks, sub and AAW weapons. I also noticed the LCS have almost nothing capable of taking on anything larger than a rowing boat. In the scenario neither did anything other than offer themselves as targets, they'd have been dead if it wasn't for the DDG defensive capabilities.

I say this every time someone brings up South China Sea Clash, but I think you're underestimating and misusing the LCS. The LCS has phenomenal ISR capability, from it's decent search radar and usual complement of 3 helicopters. The RAM isn't bad as a defensive weapon either. Furthermore, the LCS has insane maneuverability, and if you don't exploit that, you're not using them to their potential.

While the LCS might be a bit under-gunned, they do have very unique capabilities (They're a speedboat with 3 helicopters!) and bring quite a bit to any engagement. It's just about using them so you can maximize their advantages.

If you add 8 NSMs to the LCS to mimic the new frigate, the ship becomes really quite effective. I still think they should have removed the 2X 30mm guns and replaced them with some VLS to shoot ESSMs. A 57mm, 8 NSMs, 32 (or even just 24) ESSMs, 24 Hellfires, a SEARAM, and multiple helos makes this a very potent mix. Sure, it's not doing large air coverage like a burke, but ESSMs give it a legitimate air picket as well as the ability to engage anti ship missiles further out, leaving the SEARAM for last resort shots.

[DESRON420]

The ongoing MALABAR 2015 exercises involve both a Freedom-class LCS (Fort Worth) and the latest Japanese Akizuki-class destroyer (Fuyuzuki). The Akizuki class is somewhat akin to the "LCS with VLS" idea. It will be interesting to see what the USN small surface combatant program takes away from this year's MALABAR trials, both from the Akizuki class and ongoing work with the Indian Shivalik class.

[Dysta]

As far as I saw those comments above, its weaponries worries most players with some and mostly same reasons. And it isn't even being treated as 'jack-of-all-trades' at all.

When a small corvette that can shoot missiles to change the Syrian history, the LCS is getting shadowed even more, maybe land-strike mission is suppose to be for air force or carrier pilots, but think again, not everywhere can be deploying luxurious air supports when conflict is happening so suddenly.

One day the US gunboat will shoot something like this, and we can talk about its effectiveness again: