Into The Dark Nordcap

[vettim89]

This is from the Community Scenario Pack and it intrigued as the scenario description basically tells you you are going to come out on the short end of the stick. The scenario represents a Soviet assault on northern Norway in the first days of a war set in 1985. The set up for the battle is that the Soviets have a surprise attack "from the barracks" meaning little of no warning.

As the NATO player the seagoing assets are a Los Angeles Class SSN (La Jolla), a Trafalgar Class SSN (Trafalgar), two Norweigian Type 207 SSK, four PTGM, and two Norwegian Frigates. The are several squadrons of F-16A pre-loaded for AAW and a dozen F-5s pre-loaded for ASuW. You ALso have 6 P3 and 4 Sea Kings. Initially only a few F-16s are ready for launch. The game begins prior to the commencement of hostilities. You receive increasingly urgent warnings over the next several hours indicating the Soviets are on the move. I will credit the author that even though I know what's coming there is a level of palpable tension that builds as the messages become more dire.

An image of where everything starts

[vettim89]

In the first few hours the only activity is the launch of a bunch of MPA by the Sovs. Eventually about six hours in a message appears announces the SOviet fleet has sortied and the appear shortly thereafter. We have a large CVBG built around Kiev, Kirov, and Udaloy and some other escorts. There are also two groups of OSA PTGM and one group of Nanuchka FFL

[vettim89]

Eventually the "balloon goes up" shortly after 0600 local. A vigorous air battle breaks out over the North Cape that I did not have the presence of mind to grab a screen shot of because my limited resources dictate A LOT of micromanaging.

[vettim89]

You can see from the image above the SS Kobben is in position to ambush the Kiev group. Shortly after things "go hot" she engages the Udaloy and Krivak on the edge of the formation. The Krivak is hit and sinks. No info on the Udaloy as Kobben is sunk almost immediately. As there was no torpedo in bound warning, I am assuming this was an RBU hit. I think it is possible that the Udaloy may have taken a fish but didn't sink. No way to tell.

Edit: I was able to get the F-5s in to destroy both OSA groups but lost five of their number as they were jumped by MiGs on the was home

[vettim89]

Immediately after the air battle calmed down, new targets appeared: transports heading for Banak AB. Most of my F-16s were RTB by this point and the few I had in the air were not in position to intercept until after the transports had delivered their loads and were RTB. I was able to chew up the formation but I almost immediately started taking fire from non-visible units at Banak. I am assuming some mortars were dropped along with other units. The AB control tower was destroyed and then the shelling stopped. As of this point, nothing new here

Of note, one of the reasons I was able to get so many transports is because they hung up on the Exclusion Zone over Finmark

[vettim89]

Things calmed down after the airborne landing although the continued sound effect of the mortars hitting become annoying very quickly. My F-16s started coming back on line and I tasked one to hunt down some MPA off the Norwegian coast. Took out several of them

[vettim89]

but the limited range meant they could not protect Trafalagar and she was jumped by a Bear-D I think. She is not sunk but is out for the duration of the scenario I have to believe

[vettim89]

Shortly after the time in the last post Trafalgar has another torpedo dropped on her and is sunk.

After that a second round of air combat takes place over northern Norway. I lose three out of 4 F-16 and shoot down two MiG-31 and two MiG. Obviously I cannot afford such trades but am taking a fatalistic approach to this scenario

Also, the Kiev group starts lobbing long range SSMs at y frigate group. Odd behavior that it was ones and twos instead of a concentrated strike. Eventually they exhaust the Sea Sparrow magazines in both FF and sink them both. Also my PTGM which had been hiding in a fjord were discovered and the Nanuchkas did them in with SSM. Frustrated that hiding deep in a the fjord did not help

[vettim89]

After the air battle subsided the Sovs followed my lead and sent MiG-31s to hunt my P-3s. They only succeeded in damaging one before I could get F-16s in place to shoot down the attacker

[vettim89]

The Kiev group keeps pushing into the Norwegian Sea. My second Type 207 tries to get into position for a shot but is sunk before she can get a shot off

[vettim89]

Out of order post. I did try to get my Bullpup armed F-5s into the action but they failed to penetrate the stout SAM screen. I lost all the aircraft in this raid

[vettim89]

Now down to only the Los Angeles. I send her on a high speed end around to get around the Kiev group. I get her into position to fire off some shots but once again she is engaged by a torpedo within seconds and sunk. I did, however, get the Udaloy for my efforts

[vettim89]

I decided to end the game at this point as I had no offensive capabilities remaining. Here are my losses

[vettim89]

Here are the Soviet losses

[vettim89]

I did enjoy this scenario because of the basic premise: you are going to lose, just try not to lose too badly. I cannot tell you my final evaluation because the game crashed every time I tried to open the score screen (this has been reported).

There were a couple of things that were a bit annoying. One was all the civilian traffic which I realize was added for realism sake. That said, the Sovs never reacted to them nor did they react to the Sovs. I would think if a war broke out that any civilian that wasn't insane would beat haste for the nearest port. The traffic in this scenario just keeps sailing in merry circles. The second thing was the presence of the MiG-31s. These were dedicated PVO fighters and would not have been committed to the tactical air battle. Sov doctrine put nation air defense as a separate organization to frontal aviation. IMO, they didn't belong in this scenario

That said, I did encounter SU-15s quite often. Embarrassingly I was unfamiliar with this aircraft so it was kinda cool to learn something new. Although research shows that this was a PVO fighter also. Hope you enjoyed this little foray into writing an AAR

[BeirutDude]

Of note, one of the reasons I was able to get so many transports is because they hung up on the Exclusion Zone over Finmark

Thanks for the AAR enjoyed it!

[Gunner98]

If you liked this one you would also like Northern Fury #1 H-Hour which is a similar but I think more in depth setup. In NF-1 the only civilian traffic are evacuation flights, but you will also fine MiG-31 & some MiG-25.

Agree that they are PVO aircraft and dedicated to AD however, in the opening moves of the war, if NATO is caught napping - using them in areas adjacent to home airspace in a BVR role is not unrealistic. I don't think, anyway. Also as Soviet airspace expands, how far will PVO defensive responsibilities expand? Not far enough to overextend but north Norway is within the real of the possible I believe.

B

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

If you liked this one you would also like Northern Fury #1 H-Hour which is a similar but I think more in depth setup. In NF-1 the only civilian traffic are evacuation flights, but you will also fine MiG-31 & some MiG-25.

Agree that they are PVO aircraft and dedicated to AD however, in the opening moves of the war, if NATO is caught napping - using them in areas adjacent to home airspace in a BVR role is not unrealistic. I don't think, anyway. Also as Soviet airspace expands, how far will PVO defensive responsibilities expand? Not far enough to overextend but north Norway is within the real of the possible I believe.

B

I actually started the NF scenario line this weekend. Cannot deny that 58 scenarios is a bit daunting but I am up for it.

Before I say anything else, I have utmost respect for anyone that publishes a scenario to the Community Pack. I have one there myself (Baltic on Fire). I know how hard it is to design and implement a properly running scenario. So please don't take my criticism as an attack on the scenario author, merely my own observations about Soviet Doctrine.

So here is my take. The Soviet system divided tactical aircraft into two branches: Frontal Aviation and PVO. Frontal Aviation was the tactical arm of the Air Force tasked with Air Superiority, ground support, counter air, etc. PVO was the National Defense part of the Air Force. It was tasked with protecting the skies over the USSR. More specifically the job was to prevent the penetration of the air space by USAF and to a lesser extent RAF strategic bombers carrying nuclear weapons. That was the sole reason for PVO's existence. To put it into Western terms it would be better to think of PVO being part of the US Strategic Air Command (SAC) rather than as part of the Tactical Air Force. Point being that as the Soviet Air Force Command structure was set up, the PVO was considered a strategic asset along with SLBM, ICBM, and long range strategic bombers.

Scenario designers have the freedom to play with the database and OOB as they see fit. It is, after all, their scenario, and they are the ones taking up the arduous task of designing and debugging the thing. My point was that in a real world scenario, there is no way the General in charge of the PVO assets in the Kola Peninsula would release his fighters to the local tactical commander. I believe the answer to the question would be something along the lines of,"Comrade General,exactly how would the diversion of my interceptors to your area of responsibility improve the strategic safety of our homeland? Tell me, Comrade, how would I explain to our leaders that Capitalist strategic bombers were able to penetrate our air space because my interceptors were chasing Norwegian F-16s around the North Cape especially considering that most of them don't even have long range air-to-air missiles? Nyet, Comrade, my command and its assets are the first line of defense against the Yankee bombers, and I will not do anything to endanger our homeland. You need to find a solution to your problem with the assets your already have"

So in my scenario results, the Sovs lost 8 MiG-31 and 21 SU-15. The PVO would not even contemplate risking their assets in a tactical battle for that very reason. My point is that just looking at OOBs of the Soviet assets on the Kola Peninsula during the Cold War without understanding that each asset had a specific role means you lose some realism. Going back to the beginning, that is within the designer's purview because they are one putting in the work. My comment was just as an aside in my AAR that the MiG-31s shouldn't be there, but, as The Dude would say, "That's like just your opinion , man."

[Gunner98]

Well you've got more than opinion behind your argument, I would only quibble that the PVO is more akin to NORAD than SAC but everything I've read on the subject agrees with your thoughts.

I guess my point is that in border areas; north Norway, Black Sea, eastern Turkey, Iran, sea of Japan, Mongolia etc there is some scope for intermingling. Indeed airspace management alone would indicate either the PVO aircraft are flying in conjunction, or at least communication with VVS - or they're not. I suspect in the early days that was the case, if a threat was incoming airspace would be given to PVO and everyone else would be told to park, or more likely some form of procedural control (all VVS operate below certain altitudes or something).

Playing around a bit I found that the later era strengths and weaknesses of the two types of aircraft could be useful. Also in the era of airborne C2 the scope for integration was more likely. We describe an action like this in the book, where VVS fighters were mixing it up with NATO but when the F-15 AMRAAM combo came into the fray the VVS pulled back under the umbrella of AA-9s from MiG-31s engaging BVR under the guidance of a Mainstay (another PVO asset). Fully agree that PVO interceptors should not and would avoid at all costs getting into a dogfight or in any real risk envelope.

You'll find this setup a few times in the Northern Fury world, perhaps too often with too much risk. In my world the upheaval to the military started at the top and there were several sacred cows lead to the slaughter... SSGNs attacking civilian shipping instead of carriers, Yankee notch engaging with conventional missiles, strategic flanks taking priority for instance... But I think it makes for a good story.

B

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Well you've got more than opinion behind your argument, I would only quibble that the PVO is more akin to NORAD than SAC but everything I've read on the subject agrees with your thoughts.

I guess my point is that in border areas; north Norway, Black Sea, eastern Turkey, Iran, sea of Japan, Mongolia etc there is some scope for intermingling. Indeed airspace management alone would indicate either the PVO aircraft are flying in conjunction, or at least communication with VVS - or they're not. I suspect in the early days that was the case, if a threat was incoming airspace would be given to PVO and everyone else would be told to park, or more likely some form of procedural control (all VVS operate below certain altitudes or something).

Playing around a bit I found that the later era strengths and weaknesses of the two types of aircraft could be useful. Also in the era of airborne C2 the scope for integration was more likely. We describe an action like this in the book, where VVS fighters were mixing it up with NATO but when the F-15 AMRAAM combo came into the fray the VVS pulled back under the umbrella of AA-9s from MiG-31s engaging BVR under the guidance of a Mainstay (another PVO asset). Fully agree that PVO interceptors should not and would avoid at all costs getting into a dogfight or in any real risk envelope.

You'll find this setup a few times in the Northern Fury world, perhaps too often with too much risk. In my world the upheaval to the military started at the top and there were several sacred cows lead to the slaughter... SSGNs attacking civilian shipping instead of carriers, Yankee notch engaging with conventional missiles, strategic flanks taking priority for instance... But I think it makes for a good story.

B

Yes, as you pointed out, the scenario designer has within their set-up the ability to create a back story explaining why certain units are present. That is part of the fun of designing scenarios.

Certainly, one can see that even though PVO/VVS are separate commands that their areas of operations overlap especially around the North Cape/Kola Peninsula. I suspect there had to have been some sort of joint AD HQ involved. Or perhaps the PVO had sole responsibility for AD while VVS and the naval air units in the area had only offensive responsibilities. Considering the Soviets emphasis on central control I could see the latter to just as likely as the former. In fact that might actually make for an interesting scenario where the player only controls one side and a neutral side plays the other half of the Soviet aid defense structure. That's just me doing crazy talk. I could also see that as the war wore on and perhaps VVS air losses were starting to mount that a call would be made to release some PVO aircraft form national defense responsibilities.

In this particular scenario I saw MiG-31s venturing out over the Norwegian Sea to engage MPA and offensive fighter sweeps by SU-15. Again, within the right of the scenario designer but those should have been MiG-23s and maybe MiG-25s not the PVO fighters.