1950s missions

[Ekaton]

After playing mostly 70s-90s missions I've now tried the Fall of Seoul. It seems to be a very nice scenario, with a lot of depth and immersion, but I was shocked to see how hard it is for me to shoot anything.

1. Radars are nearly useless - operating at 36000 ft ASL they can't see anything, not even an enemy plane that flies several nm from them, inside the radar range. Is there any way to make these more effective?
2. There is a jet CAP mission, but since the contacts easily disappear without proper radar coverage the planes either circle around the last known position or fly away, becoming easy prey for the Koreans.
3. At the altitude of 20,000 ft I can even lose jet F-80C due to maneuverability I guess, what are the ways to even the odds? Would old mustangs be more effective at such altitudes?
4. Do you have any other advice to someone who is new to the 1950s technology and vintage aerial warfare?

[Gunner98]

I am really not an expert on that era but a couple things to note:

-There were no 'look down - shoot down' radars back then
-You had either an interceptor or a fighter very few AC had the capability to do both
-Ground control Intercept (GCI) was the way of the day. You need a solid ground based radar and some capable interceptors to do the trick.
-Weapons generally suck

Doesn't help much but just some thoughts.

B

[Randomizer]

I use CMANO in the fifties quite a bit and I suspect what you're seeing is reflected by real life. Gun kills with high-speed fighters is difficult, the geometry has to be just so, ammo supplies are limited and frequently there is no opportunity for any one unit to conduct multiple attack runs. Radar can be effective so what you may be seeing is the effects of terrain since CMANO models line-of-sight shadows for visual and radar detection. Certainly coastal radars and those on the steppes can be effective. I find targeted intercept missions for land-based assets often more effective than CAP except is very particular situations.

When setting intercept missions, hold on the ground them until until the target cannot evade and then launch so that the interceptors can make a quick, climbing attack. Accept that you may end up with tail-chases after an unsuccessful attack but look out for tail guns. Post strike kills can be effective in long scenarios but obviously not in shorter situations unless there is a scripted benefit to killing aircraft.

If you can get some sort of airborne radar (an AE-1 Skyraider for example), these can improve your tactical picture and facilitate setting up patrol zones or interception missions.

Other than the above, Gunner98 hits most of the high-points.

-C

[cns180784]

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

I use CMANO in the fifties quite a bit and I suspect what you're seeing is reflected by real life. Gun kills with high-speed fighters is difficult, the geometry has to be just so, ammo supplies are limited and frequently there is no opportunity for any one unit to conduct multiple attack runs. Radar can be effective so what you may be seeing is the effects of terrain since CMANO models line-of-sight shadows for visual and radar detection. Certainly coastal radars and those on the steppes can be effective. I find targeted intercept missions for land-based assets often more effective than CAP except is very particular situations.

When setting intercept missions, hold on the ground them until until the target cannot evade and then launch so that the interceptors can make a quick, climbing attack. Accept that you may end up with tail-chases after an unsuccessful attack but look out for tail guns. Post strike kills can be effective in long scenarios but obviously not in shorter situations unless there is a scripted benefit to killing aircraft.

If you can get some sort of airborne radar (an AE-1 Skyraider for example), these can improve your tactical picture and facilitate setting up patrol zones or interception missions.

Other than the above, Gunner98 hits most of the high-points.

-C

How do you setup intercept missions? for the 50's and more modern era, are they generally the same? do you use different threat response radius for them?

[Cik]

shorter intercepts are probably a good idea, and send lots of fighters. on average your fighters will be tangled up longer (if they want to kill anything, anyway) will run afterburner more. numbers are far more important, because TWS launched forward aspect ARH radar missiles aren't a thing. it really depends on the scenario though; the most important thing is the ground radar stations, so you can actually see. personally i wouldn't ever have fighters up in the air unless i had ground station coverage; the chance of being pounced by things you have no real chance of seeing is too high.

granted, patrolling is worth it if you are in an explicitly defensive position, but gaining air superiority over enemy ground is a total wash because you are vulnerable to A/C launches in radar deadzones, SAMs and flak you have no real chance of seeing before you're in it. the OCA mission in the fifties is a total pain, unless of course you have a bunch of nukes behind you. then i guess, it's probably pretty easy.

[cns180784]

I've had a number of problems with intercept missions so dont generally bother with them now. I was thinking of having them for the scenario i'm playing now, Green Tide, because the airbases i have arent single unit airfields which means they're to be targeted by the enemy. But having said that a BARCAP is needed to cover my naval surface group from the air. Two of them are Frigates one has RIM-66M the other has RIM-66E SAM's, and the 66M's are by far the best but i'm currently only just over a day or so into the scenario and that ship with those SAM's (Spanish F103) is very low on ammo for those missiles. The Frigate with the 66E's hasnt fired any yet and has 31 still left. No idea why it hasnt fired any, but the once when there were bandits within its WRA range set, it wasnt firing so i checked with allocating weapons manually and it said insufficient radar reflection/LOS to target (something like that). So seems like the FCR that guides those missiles is of poor quality.

So with the air defence of my SAG depleted its more necessary to provide them cover with my fighters and i currently have 10 (Hornets) with AAW loadouts which also need to defend the airbases and radars. Only a single MANPAD platoon providing air defence for Lanzarote AB and a MANPAD and NASAMS SAM platoon defending Gran Canaria. Problem with the NASAMS is it wont fire at all, due to there apparently being no datalink available which is provided by a nearby sensor. Think this is an issue thats been raised in the Tech Support forum and is being looked into. As the NASAM's didnt fire, they allowed Exocets to hit the AB. Luckily only 1 of 2 ammo shelters were destroyed with another ammo pad still remaining and a Hangar was destroyed with no planes in it.
Going off subject a bit there but for defending an AB from attack intercept missions would be the best option. I guess it would work easily as there is sufficient radar coverage of good quality. What gets me though is sometimes you can have an enemy jammer or tanker something like that, basically a non shooter and they could be out of radar range but ELINT or RWR could pick it up and the ambiguity can jump all over the place which could cause those a/c on intercept missions to intercept it if that comes within their intercept radius. For intercepts you only want to target attack a/c or bombers, basically anything thats a direct threat to your AB. So intercept missions can make you pull your hair out.

Is there any particular way how you set them up to work how you want them to work?

[Cik]

i've never had that problem with interception; as far as i know strike ---> air intercept missions only actually launch if you manually add targets to the list (or, i guess, will do that if you set "attack only targets on the target list"

generally if i'm operating from a base (or carrier group too, i suppose) i keep at least 4 fighters on alert status; that is, assigned to an interception mission with no targets, to be scrambled if the airfield / CVBG is under threat. that way, there is always a ready-to-go last line of defense. the bonus is that scramble missions are often very short, which means you can exploit the quick turn-around for optimal ready time (often patrols don't allow you to)

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Cik

i've never had that problem with interception; as far as i know strike ---> air intercept missions only actually launch if you manually add targets to the list (or, i guess, will do that if you set "attack only targets on the target list"

You don't need to specify targets to get them to launch but the targets must be in range and meet the posture threshold to launch. If you have an example where this isn't the case could you post it?

[Cik]

hmm, i don't know of any counterexamples. i think maybe i've just always used "attack only targets on the list" when using air intercept. is it true that they scramble as soon as something enters range otherwise? i don't know if i've ever seen that behavior. weird.

i mean, they shouldn't launch if that's checked right? am i some sort of sorcerer?

i don't think there's anything wrong with it. always worked out for me.