Simple Strike

[MauriceB]

The 3 following questions apply to the situation in this simple (180AU) save:

Simple Falklands Strike.zip

(120.5 KiB) Downloaded 30 times

1. Why are my 3 Strike Groups Spike33, Stut33, and Tiger40 RTBing due to Bingo Fuel when they have 200nm more fuel range than the distance back to base?
Am I reading this wrong?

Bingo.png (42.44 KiB) Viewed 1410 times

2. Why do the 3 Strike groups have a different RTB Fuel State than the Mission Doctrine they are on [Pebble Island (ASuW Patrol)]?
Flight:

Fuel State for Flight.png (21.82 KiB) Viewed 1410 times

Mission:

Fuel State for Mission.png (20.96 KiB) Viewed 1410 times

3. Switching to the UK Side, why are the 2 ships in the AAW Picket Area Mission not turning on their radars? The Mission EMCON states Radars: Active.

[thewood1]

On #1

I think whats happening is the specific loadout has a theoretical strike range at 36k ingress, sea level attack, and 36k egress of 350nm. The target is right on the edge of that at 334nm. In fact, at the apex of the ships' patrol boundary, the range is 350nm. I am assuming that because the strike range is not absolute, the flight AI calculated at some point along the way that fuel burn would be too high if the flight went in at sea level so turned around. Because they never used the sea level attack run, it extends the range of fuel they have. Of course that also includes the 5% reserves. If the attack was 36k all the way, it would have had plenty of fuel, not that that helps. IIRC, in RL, the Argentinians used their KC-130s to extend the A-4s' range.

#2

The person who built the mission specifically changed the the doctrine. That overrides the group's doctrine. You can see that the default doctrine is listed as inherited for the groups, whereas the mission doctrine does not say inherited. But the player can change it back if needed.

#3

Not sure why the ships aren't radiating. If I go into their picket mission and toggle the emcon from active to passive and back, it seems to work. The scenario designer would have to answer that one.

[thewood1]

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA475901.pdf

This pic is from a book "Air Power in the Falklands Conflict", by John Shields. It states that 11% of Argentinian AF and Navy air missions were aborted due to AAR issues. A-4s especially required refueling to reach targets any place but the east of the Falklands and attack at low level.

Screenshot 2025-01-17 091731.jpg (276.08 KiB) Viewed 1376 times

[MauriceB]

Thanks for the replies. Also thanks for that document. It makes great reading for a project (physical boardgame) I am working on.

1. I understood when I launched (without AAR) that the target was at the limit of the strike profiles max radius. I guess I was hoping for more accurate information in the fuel summary window. I get that there is a lot more fuel burn on the delivery of the bombs and a fuel consumption estimate is near impossible to predict. I probably have to stop looking at the fuel window.

2. I tried this again and everything is working as intended. I must have inadvertently changed something after the aircraft were added to the mission that overrode the mission setting. I just realized there is feedback provided too: If the unit/group doctrine overrides the mission doctrine the "Inherited" is not indicated (makes sense of course) BUT if the Mission doctrine overrides the Side doctrine the label is in yellow:

override.png (29.43 KiB) Viewed 1341 times

3. It looks like the scenario creator must have turned off the picket ship's radars manually (there is no way to tell though) before saving the scenario. It might have been intentional because with radars on that Type 42 DDG blows all 12 A-4s out of the sky, which wasn't exactly the historical outcome.

[thewood1]

The best way to give the A-4s the same chance they had in real life might be to put the radars on and change the proficiency to a lot lower. I also suspect that the pickets only had intermittent radar coverage in RL.

[thewood1]

If you are working on an historical board game, get the helion books on the Falklands. It has the Argentinian perspective and details.

[MauriceB]

Thanks for the tip. Was not aware of these publications.

[thewood1]

Just went through a couple sources in detail. HMS Coventry shot down two A-4s with Sea Dart. Interestingly, Only one four-plane flight from the AAF was launched because only one tanker was available. But I have confirmed that the A-4s attacked coming over the hills of an island to avoid radar. Only one A-4 drops bombs and all three hit.

[MauriceB]

Interesting. I was going to try that this morning. During the UK landings the ARG also used those hills in West Falklands to their advantage attacking ships in the sound. That's my next focus.

I've been thinking about the Strike radius and RTB stuff. When armed with a strike loadout we get the mission radius but this number seems very conservative. Now I agree it should be conservative because you need to plan a strike for worst case circumstances. What I don't like is that during execution of the strike there seems to be something hardcoded into the game that sends them home at that range with no warning. If everything is going well (high altitude and cruise setting) it appeared I had lots of fuel and the fuel range circle was very large to match my current fuel burn rate. Things will change of course once I drop low and increase speed, the range drops dramatically. But with no warning and apparently a lot of fuel the game RTB'd my units. Am I missing some kind of feedback that is about to order my units home because they hit a theoretical strike limit? I hate micro managing these missions (i.e. turn off RTB till after strike) because I'll never get beyond 200 AU type scenarios.

[thewood1]

There are ways to set up warnings. Either through lua or maybe events. In a small scenario like this one, set the "show path" to all. If you are paying general attention, you'll see the path change. I don't remember if the message system has a setting for mission events.

If you have Air Ops set as a message in options, you have the game pause when any unit returns to base. Otherwise I think the only way to do it is through lua.

[JFS737]

Re the bingo issue, the attached pic of the fuel shows a reserve of 1200kg or so. The 489 miles is too empty, no pilot plans to land empty, in CMO they plan to land with the"reserve" fuel. With about 260nm to RTB at 8mi per min is just over 30 min at about 32kg per min means the jet will burn almost all the mission fuel to RTB... landing with the planned reserves. All looks normal to me.

[thewood1]

Re the bingo issue, the attached pic of the fuel shows a reserve of 1200kg or so. The 489 miles is too empty, no pilot plans to land empty, in CMO they plan to land with the"reserve" fuel. With about 260nm to RTB at 8mi per min is just over 30 min at about 32kg per min means the jet will burn almost all the mission fuel to RTB... landing with the planned reserves. All looks normal to me.

The biggest issue isn't just with reserves, the extent of the targets patrol area will take it outside the range of A-4s loaded with a near max load. Its exactly why the Argentinians used AAR for almost all A-4 strikes.

[JFS737]

QUOTE: The biggest issue isn't just with reserves, the extent of the targets patrol area will take it outside the range of A-4s loaded with a near max load. Its exactly why the Argentinians used AAR for almost all A-4 strikes.

Yes, there is no issue with the reserves in CMO or real life. AAR is unavoidable for much of the AAF both IRL and CMO, A-4 especially. The circled value of 489 mi in the orig post includes both usable and not (reasonably) usable fuel and is not a good indication of how many miles the A/C has left to work the mission. Mission fuel in CMO is more informative.

Regards