Red Storm Rising Campaign [Scenario 4 Added For Testing]

[Grazyn]

One of the first things I tried in Cmano was shooting down a satellite wìth the F15 ASAT like in the book, but I couldn't figure out how to do it, the plane never seemed to get in a good position to launch. Anyone managed to do it? Or to shoot down a satellite in general, even with ship based missiles, is it even possible?

[Grazyn]

I stand corrected, upon further testing the F15 does indeed launch the missile, but it seems to always run out of fuel before it can reach the satellite altitude (200 and 500 km, couldn't find satellites in lower orbits). There aren't ASAT-capable ships in the DB, not even the Lake Erie which was used in 2008 to destroy a satellite, its weapons can't target them. However, I was able to shoot down a satellite at an altitude of 800 km using the chinese land-based ASAT system (SC-19).

[Primarchx]

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

One of the first things I tried in Cmano was shooting down a satellite wìth the F15 ASAT like in the book, but I couldn't figure out how to do it, the plane never seemed to get in a good position to launch. Anyone managed to do it? Or to shoot down a satellite in general, even with ship based missiles, is it even possible?

I've done it but the geometry had to highly favorable - like use the 'm' command in the editor to move the jet into the path of the satellite favorable. [:D]

[JPFisher55]

I would recommend that all scenarios be playable for either side, Soviet or Warsaw Pact.

BTW, I am pretty sure that "Red Storm Rising" was the book that revealed the existence of the F-117A. In the book, I believe that Tom Clancy called it the F-17.
The Pentagon was not happy about this disclosure. "Red Storm Rising" is the best book on a hypothetical Warsaw Pact invasion of West Germany that I have read.

[Schr75]

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

There aren't ASAT-capable ships in the DB, not even the Lake Erie which was used in 2008 to destroy a satellite, its weapons can't target them....

Try the 2018 version with SM-3 Block IIA missiles. I think you will like it[;)]

Søren

[Gunner98]

I would recommend that all scenarios be playable for either side,

Although this is a laudable goal. Building a scenario playable by both sides is more than double the time and effort. Briefings, messages, events etc take time and thought, but the big bit is making it playable, balanced and fun for both sides. Not easy and not always desirable.

Just my $.02 CAD.

B

[Primarchx]

ORIGINAL: Grazyn

...There aren't ASAT-capable ships in the DB, not even the Lake Erie which was used in 2008 to destroy a satellite, its weapons can't target them. However, I was able to shoot down a satellite at an altitude of 800 km using the chinese land-based ASAT system (SC-19).

You can always add 'prototype' SM-3s to the VLS of an older ship. I think as long as there's an AEGIS link on board they'll guide.

[HalfLifeExpert]

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55

I would recommend that all scenarios be playable for either side, Soviet or Warsaw Pact.

BTW, I am pretty sure that "Red Storm Rising" was the book that revealed the existence of the F-117A. In the book, I believe that Tom Clancy called it the F-17.
The Pentagon was not happy about this disclosure. "Red Storm Rising" is the best book on a hypothetical Warsaw Pact invasion of West Germany that I have read.

I just checked my first edition of RSR. Chapter 17 The Frisbees of Dreamland, Page 162:

"Colonel Douglas Ellington's fingertips caressed the control stick of his F-19A Ghostrider attack fighter..."

and on the next page:

"Lockheed called her the Ghostrider. The pilots called her the Frisbee. The F-19A, the secretly developed Stealth attack fighter. She had no corners, no box shapes to allow radar signals to bounce cleanly off her. Her high-bypass turbofans were designed to emit a blurry infrared signature at most. From above, her wings appeared to mimic the shape of a cathedral bell. From front, they curved oddly toward the ground, earning her the affectionate nickname of Frisbee. Though she was a masterpiece of electronic technology inside, she usually didn't use her active systems. Radar and radios made electronic noise that an enemy might detect, and the whole idea of the Frisbee was that she didn't seem to exist at all."

Other than that it is clearly labeled as F-19A, I don't see much resemblance to the F-117A. And of course the F-117A has no air to air capability, as this aircraft does. I think it can only drop iron bombs (both dumb and smart), at least in the 1980s. Afterall, in this first mission, it is going after Soviet AEW aircraft, something the F-117A cannot do. The F-19A's capabilities seem to be similar to the F-16 and F-18 in terms of firepower, minus the medium and long range AAMs.

Clancy got the aircraft's manufacturer right, but given Lockheed's previous history with the U-2 and the SR-71, it was reasonable to assume that Lockheed made the first stealth combat aircraft.

Also, reading this passage again, it seems that the F-19's DB entry in CMANO is meant to be the exact aircraft from RSR [:D]

Frankly, I think Ghostrider is a better name than Frisbee. Not least because Frisbee to me suggests a flying saucer aircraft. And since "Dreamland" is one of the nicknames for a certain location in Nevada popularly referred to as Area 51, the phrase "Frisbees of Dreamland" to me suggest reverse engineered alien spacecraft rather than a jet powered stealth fighter.

I also have a first edition of Ben Rich's book, Skunk Works: A Personal Memoir of My Years of Lockheed, and I found a couple references to the F-19 in it, in which he claims the suggestions and depiction of the F-19 were total nonsense.

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

I would recommend that all scenarios be playable for either side,

Although this is a laudable goal. Building a scenario playable by both sides is more than double the time and effort. Briefings, messages, events etc take time and thought, but the big bit is making it playable, balanced and fun for both sides. Not easy and not always desirable.

Just my $.02 CAD.

B

I agree with gunner. Besides, I don't think it would be alot of fun to play as the Warsaw Pact on the receiving end of Operation Dreamland [:D]

[stilesw]

For inquiring minds who would like to know more:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk

[angster]

Agreed, I would rather focus on a particular side then balancing from both perspective. In Dreamland, it's very hard for the AI to dodge SAM sites and patrols in a stealth fighter. The most likely scenario is that it b-lines right for your awacs.

[JPFisher55]

Ok, then make all the scenarios playable from the NATO side. I thought the F-117A was labeled the F-17 by Mr. Clancy, I stand corrected. It has been over 30 years since I read "Red Storm Rising."

[mikkey]

The Red Storm Rising Campaign would be interesting. And Frisbee is in DB3000 too[;)].

[tjhkkr]

Does the F-19 have a radar... I thought it had every passive sensor under the sun... but no radar (I say this not seeking to start trouble, just for fun and debate). I remember the old MicroProse game F-19 was modeled similarly.

[angster]

Greetings folks, here is the first scenario for the Red Storm Rising campaign: Operation Dreamland. All feedback/comments are welcome.

Briefing
The situation is dire. Soviet forces are poised to invade West Germany. With only half of NATO ground forces in place, it is up to the Air Force to even the odds. You are to execute operation Dreamland: a coordinated air operation aimed to slow the initial Soviet advance. You are to target major bridges on the Elbe river, neutralize Soviet frontal aviation bases, and establish local air superiority. To aid in this task, you are given a squadron of prototype F-19A stealth fighter.

Good luck, General! The fate of the West may well be determined by this opening act.

Tips
There are different ways to approach this scenario. You can choose to sneak your stealth fighters behind enemy lines or fight head on.

[morphin]

So the F-19A does not have Sparrow (Your write "Sparrow Updgrade" but in Database there is no Sparrow possibilites)? How do Taking down the Mainstays? With Sidewinders?

Andy

[butch4343]

Guys,

I have been musing some questions about F117 ops in a WW3 conflict. Theres precious little info on the subject out there, but Ill throw some questions into the mix.

The F117s would have come to Europe in the event of the WP crossing the IGB I believe the IOC was 1983, my first question is this;

Where would the USAF have based them? The conjecture was that RAF Machrahanish in Scotland or Boscombe Down in England would have been used, that said they deployed to the Netherlands in 1993 for the first time, was that coincidence? Should we look to where the ANG-A7s deployed during coronet solo exercises for an indication?

Secondly how many would have been sent? A detachment? A Squadron? The full wing?

Thirdly what would they hit, early sketches of stealth fighters showed them firing AGM-65s and the general theme was that the AC could get within Maverick range before it could be engaged, was that indicative of a percieved SEAD use? Now we all know what was achieved in desert storm infact I have read the nightly list of targets struck by Nighthawks, but how would this translate in the European Theatre? It would be logical to expect them to strike bunkers, but which ones? Air Defence Sector Operations Centres? Or would they have went for army command bunkers as well, what about WP allies C3?

Its too easy to assume the nighthawk would have been tasked and performed as per Desert Storm, Iraq wasnt the Warsaw Pact and KARI wasnt the IADS of the WP.

If anyone knows where I can find this intriguing information , I would be most grateful.

Regards

Butch

[angster]

Hey Andy, any F-19A labeled with Sparrow upgrade will automatically be armed with a pair of Sparrows. They will not appear in the DB but on the actual fighter. They are added to make the scenario easier, since the Maintay can eat a large amount of Sidewinders. I'll probably mention that in the briefing.

[morphin]

Thank's. With a LUA script? After take off or when? I'm 10 seconds into the Scenario...

Thank's
Andy

[angster]

They should appear on takeoff. The sparrows are on a custom mount and you should see them on the ammo counter. Let me know if you are not seeing them.

[Gunner98]

angster

The equipping of the Sparrows worked perfectly, looked odd as a mine magazine but -hay it worked, well done.

This is a good scenario, did a run through of the first hour and got unlucky. A pair of Sparrow equipped F-19's went Nape of the Earth to avoid a Mig-29 patrol and got detected by a ground SAM! Grrr, that caused a mess and made me jump prematurely. I lost those two Ghost riders as they were pounced on by about dozen Migs. The Northern pair took a longshot at a Mainstay and got it with the 2nd Sparrow. My plan was to take out both A-50's at once but the Gig was up. Sent in the other Ghost riders to bomb the center 4 runways, did ok but needed to follow up with the Tornados that were waiting in the wings. The Northern pair of Sparrow equipped F-19s then proceeded south and after hitting the 2nd Mainstay with both Sparrows and the 2nd Sidewinder she finally went down.

At this point there was a general fur-ball going on and I had lost control of the battle and screwed up my egress, losing 3 more F-19s and a couple Tornados. So need to try again.

Like I said - this is well done. The 6 inactive missions in the mission editor were confusing. They are set up for the runways, fine, I used them for my initial strikes adding AC and activating them - but they did not have the Taxiways included as targets, so I thought that was odd.

Scoring is high, but that's fine, some delineation as to what the points are for would be helpful. For instance instead of having only the 'High Value' and 'Medium Value' targets, it might be good to separate out the A-50's so the event message in the log makes it clear what the points are for.

I need to get onto cleaning up some of my stuff but will definitely play this one again.

Thanks

B