The 2023 North Korean Nuclear Attacks, Part 1

[SunlitZelkova]

Hello,

It's been almost half a year since I touched CMO, and I have a scenario I'd like to share.

Despite North Korea's ongoing nuclear modernization having become quite dramatic, with various exotic (for such a poor country) delivery systems like HGVs, cruise missiles, and underwater heavy torpedoes, there hasn't been much focus on North Korea in the community for awhile. Having many family and friends in Japan, this topic is of great concern to me so I thought I would take it up. Part of why I didn't play for so long was because I would get bored in the middle of setting up a scenario and quit, but I was really passionate about trying to model this and was able to pull it off.

The story is based on The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear Attacks Against the United States by Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, but updated to reflect 2023 politics.

It's a very short scenario, all you really need to do is sit back and watch. You can probably play it in real time if you're interested in observing a ballistic missile attack.

I hope you enjoy! Part 2 is coming in a week or so.

Please feel free to give feedback. I'm especially uncertain just how well the BMD is set up because a number of launchers did not fire against incoming missiles, but I checked and nothing appeared to be wrong with them- they simply can't get a firing solution from where they are deployed IRL and with the sensors available at hand.

Some notes: I'm assuming that the cruise missiles and underwater attack drones are still under testing and not deployed with nuclear weapons, and of course not the HGV.

Estimates on North Korea's nuclear arsenals seemed... off to me, it's been stuck at 20 bombs for a decade now, although I have seen a casual estimate ranging between 85-120. I went with a slightly lower number than the book proposes, with 40 bombs being utilized in the scenario.

[BDukes]

Nice show, but definitely not much to do on the player side.Looking forward to your next one.

You could angle Patriot radars toward the DPRK, the Yokosuka units stand out to me. Not even sure if they're in the slide lobes so obviously no big deal.

M

[SunlitZelkova]

Nice show, but definitely not much to do on the player side.Looking forward to your next one.

You could angle Patriot radars toward the DPRK, the Yokosuka units stand out to me. Not even sure if they're in the slide lobes so obviously no big deal.

M

Wow. I can't believe I made such an oversight. Thanks for the catch!

Fixed for the release version. Thankfully tested with the corrected version showed little change in the results from the original, which I used as "canon" for Part 2.

[DWReese]

I just allowed Part 1 to play itself. below are my observations:

The NK launches are detected.

The Allies respond by firing everything.

The first wave of SM-3s from the ship hit nothing. They end up who knows where. They fly over SK and disappear.

The THAAD CEC units fired from SK lose their communication, go autonomous, and hit nothing.

The second wave of SM-3s do hit some things.

A few Patriots hit some things.

A whole bunch of Allied bases get destroyed.

Few incoming missiles get destroyed.

In what felt like it should be a disaster resulted in a TRIUMPH.

Okay, is this how it was supposed to be?

I'm going to play it again, but I'd now like to know if what I'm seeing is what you intended, or is there something missing?

[SunlitZelkova]

I just allowed Part 1 to play itself. below are my observations:

The NK launches are detected.

The Allies respond by firing everything.

The first wave of SM-3s from the ship hit nothing. They end up who knows where. They fly over SK and disappear.

The THAAD CEC units fired from SK lose their communication, go autonomous, and hit nothing.

The second wave of SM-3s do hit some things.

A few Patriots hit some things.

A whole bunch of Allied bases get destroyed.

Few incoming missiles get destroyed.

In what felt like it should be a disaster resulted in a TRIUMPH.

Okay, is this how it was supposed to be?

I'm going to play it again, but I'd now like to know if what I'm seeing is what you intended, or is there something missing?

I've found a major issue with the way the stock events work in the game. If you want to award a player for destroying an incoming weapon, you will automatically get the points because the weapon is "destroyed" when it impacts anyways...

I've just removed the possibility of the player gaining points entirely. Triumph is now set to 0 and disaster is if you lose all 20 targets.

The updated scen is in the "scenarios ready for the community" thread.

[DWReese]

Okay, I'll be glad to check out the update before moving on to Part 2.

But first, are you finding it difficult to target the incoming missiles? Most seem to lose track after a period of time as they are no longer tracking them. What is it that YOU figure should be tracking the incoming missiles? As I said, the first wave of SM-3s are completely wasted, and there aren't enough THAADs do do the trick. Is the scenario jut designed knowing that you will lose? The only issue is, by how much? If that is the case, then okay, I get it, but that doesn't solve the tracking issue.

As a way of testing, I added a SBX-1 just to see if things would work. They work fine with that. I'm not sure that the GREEN PINE (or whatever it is), actually tracked anything. I'll have to test that some more.

Any more insight before I dive in again. I'm not playing to WIN. I'm playing to make sure that the units in the game work as they are designed.

I'm more of a tester than a player.

Doug

[kevinkins]

I wonder how the points are awarded. Maybe that needs an adjustment to match current geopolitical thinking. Any nuclear weapon landing anywhere is not a victory unless NK is turned into glass. And that's really not a victory either. So scoring this type of scenario is very difficult. It's more of a sandbox battle where the player needs to determine if they won or lost based on the briefing and in game messages etc..
Kevin

[SunlitZelkova]

Okay, I'll be glad to check out the update before moving on to Part 2.

But first, are you finding it difficult to target the incoming missiles? Most seem to lose track after a period of time as they are no longer tracking them. What is it that YOU figure should be tracking the incoming missiles? As I said, the first wave of SM-3s are completely wasted, and there aren't enough THAADs do do the trick. Is the scenario jut designed knowing that you will lose? The only issue is, by how much? If that is the case, then okay, I get it, but that doesn't solve the tracking issue.

As a way of testing, I added a SBX-1 just to see if things would work. They work fine with that. I'm not sure that the GREEN PINE (or whatever it is), actually tracked anything. I'll have to test that some more.

Any more insight before I dive in again. I'm not playing to WIN. I'm playing to make sure that the units in the game work as they are designed.

I'm more of a tester than a player.

Doug

The goal was to show off what might happen if North Korea suddenly used nuclear weapons, win or lose. I just put what is known to be there, rather than trying to build it with a certain outcome in mind.

If the SBX-1 had been at sea in the area I would have added it, but according to most sources it is currently at Pearl Harbor for maintenance and won't be out again for some time. The THAAD's AN/TPY-2 should automatically stay on and track the targets once SBIRS or the early warning radars pick them up, although I'm not sure if it can provide targeting data for the SM-3s or PAC-3s (probably not).

Also, ideally the SM-3s should be fired at missiles heading towards Japan and not the SRBMs at South Korea (which got targeted in the three times I tested the scenario), because the JSDF isn't authorized to defend another country on a whim. But this isn't really possible in the game currently, and unfortunately the AN/SPY-1D doesn't appear to be even capable of detecting the missiles heading for Japan, contrary to media claims about its capabilities. So the destroyer is a little bit of a cheat. I found that the SM-3s actually did at least succeed in shooting down the Nodongs targeting Sasebo.

If I had a better computer, I would have included the nuclear attacks in the second scenario- that is, built it as one scenario- but I didn't want it to get too big, as every airfield- Kadena, Futenma, Andersen, Misawa, Yokota, Iwakuni- would have to be a multi-unit one. So it's a bit odd as a standalone scenario, but I thought it was important to showcase missile defences and how they work in game rather than declaring "off screen" that 17 cities got nuked. It's a bold statement to make, considering how important missile defence is supposed to be in deterring an attack in real life politics.

I wonder how the points are awarded. Maybe that needs an adjustment to match current geopolitical thinking. Any nuclear weapon landing anywhere is not a victory unless NK is turned into glass. And that's really not a victory either. So scoring this type of scenario is very difficult. It's more of a sandbox battle where the player needs to determine if they won or lost based on the briefing and in game messages etc..
Kevin

"Victory" in this case is defined in military terms. I'm assuming that if a large nuclear attack actually happened, while any bombs that do drop would be considered a tragedy, the military would likely celebrate the ones they did stop.

That said, I didn't really take that into account in the scoring. I just went with a simple "you lose points each time a city is lost". Based on Reese's and my testing, it seems pretty consistent that at least 15 targets get destroyed by nuclear weapons, so that should be enough for the system to consider it a major defeat or disaster anyways.

There is no possibility of gaining points, because apparently the event editor doesn't differ between a weapon getting destroyed by interception or a weapon being destroyed in the process of hitting its target successfully.

[DWReese]

Kevin,

The issue that I keep having is the missile launch is always detected, which is fine, but after the THAADs and SM-3s are initially launched, ALMOST all of them lose their track and go autonomous. After that happens, ALMOST all of those miss and fly off to Neverland. So, the only real chance that you have is if the second wave (now much closer) is able to take out SOME of the inbound missiles. They can, and do, but most still get through. As you said, it doesn't really seem like a "Victory" when you ONLY LOSE 10 of your 20 installations due to a Nuclear attack.

I do realize that this is just a watch-type scenario, and that there is nothing for the gamer to do but watch the results, but the defense (in my opinion) needs to be more streamlined, and more focused. It's very doubtful that the Japanese destroyer would expend all (or any) of its SM-3 missiles on inbound missiles attacking South Korea, and then becoming drained, as other missiles then obliterate Japan proper. I would think that that ship would selfishly and solely GUARD Japan at all costs.

I remember the Green Pine radar from the LIVE: The Korea Missile Crisis. I believe that Mike created that one. (I love that scenario with Russia and the US competing for the destruction of various NK units. (That was VERY CLEVER, Mike.) At the time, that radar could detect everything, in all directions, and the incoming missile(s) was/were easily destroyed as it was constantly tracked. But, that scenario has now been updated, and the Green Pine now has a VERY NARROW field of vision. It essentially only detects and tracks the missiles as they leave North Korea. After that, the track is lost. I went back to that original scenario, but it has been updated to DB 499, and the Green Pine no longer has that 360 degree view any longer, and only has the narrow beam. So, that was not any help. The SBX-1 can see in all directions, and that proves that the missiles can be destroyed when they can be detected, so there is no problem there.

I'm not into nuclear war, but I do like the challenge of being able to set up a manageable defense. Perhaps I should check out Part 2 before getting too incolved here? <lol>

[DWReese]

The scenario is fine. The storyline is fine. Don't worry about that. I'm only interested in the mechanics.

The Green Pine doesn't seem to detect anything. I watched ever event second-by-second and I never observed that either Green Pine detected anything. I tried it again, and even moved the orientation, and still got nothing. Away from the area (i.e. in the desert) it seemed to work. I'm not sure what the issue is.

Other than the THAADs and the SM-3, the only other shooter is the patriot, and that is only in a terminal phase. So, obviously it's completely one-sided.

The first times that I played it I didn't realize that you had so many satellite detections. In fact, were it not for the satellites, you wouldn't have many detections at all.

The scenario is interesting.

The SBX-1 was inserted just temporarily used for testing to make sure that detection was possible. I removed it when I was able to determine that the shooters were shooting.

[SunlitZelkova]

It sounds like a database issue, unfortunately.