Matrix Games Forums

https://kriegsimulation.blogspot.com/20 ... .html#more

Interesting just to see how it works. Good for a simple and quick/dirty look. But there are all kinds of things that could be done differently on both sides.

This is a tricky thing to do properly and successfully, getting the AI side to do it is even trickier.

Add in a 2nd or 3rd CG, DDs & FFs to complicate the targeting and add close in defence, an AOR to act like a big shiny target and a carrier is quite well protected from a single Regt sized attack. Not to mention CAP.

An air division is needed, 3x Regts plus separate recon and jammer support. Very difficult to get the AI to do properly.

I did a Regiment (-) sized (12 BACFIRES) raid vs. a CVBG in the Red Tide DLC, Scenario 2: Kobayashi Maru. The video of the actual attack part is here: https://youtu.be/UTetEpbu5hw. The AAR is here: http://www.grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=25950.0

If memory serves, I got about four hits on the CVN, but I had to target it with all 24 AS-4's to achieve that. Also, this was in a fairly benign environment-The USN CAP did not intercept the Tu-22Ms. And there were no AGEIS-equipped escorts. So Gunner's estimate of a minimum of 2 Regiments is correct.

The Backfire regiment threat has always reminded me of the AShBM threat. For it to actually work, a lot has to be in place and work just right. There's so little room for error on the Chinese side that I have always wondered if its worth the investment.

thewood1 wrote: Wed May 11, 2022 5:27 pm The Backfire regiment threat has always reminded me of the AShBM threat. For it to actually work, a lot has to be in place and work just right. There's so little room for error on the Chinese side that I have always wondered if its worth the investment.

That was one of the points I tried to illustrate in the Kobayashi Maru scenario: coordinating a multi-axis strike that can sink a CVN is tough (but not impossible). In fairness, the defense against such a strike is also difficult. All the equipment needs to be working and the crews need to be on top of the situation and respond promptly and effectively to the threat. IRT the AShBM threat: that may be a more difficult threat to counter, because relatively few weapons platforms are capable of detecting and engaging the AShBM. The flip side of the issue is that ships still need to be found and localized, which is also not easy (although it is easier than it was when I was on active duty).

According to the wikipedia the Tu-22M are part of the Russian Aerospace Forces. They are located, with google maps links, where they can be seen parked in:

Olenya airbase in the Kola peninsula. I count 31 in the pic.

40th Mixed Aviation Regiment.

https://www.google.com/maps/@68.1596926 ... a=!3m1!1e3



Belaya airbase in Irkutsk. I count more here, 33.

Elements of 326th Heavy Bomber Aviation Division (HQ: Ukrainka).

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.9079751 ... a=!3m1!1e3



Dyagilevo airbase, Ryazan. 43rd Center for Combat Application and Training of Aircrew for Long Range Aviation. 9, for training they must be more than enough.

1st Instructor Heavy Bomber Aviation Regiment

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.6491611 ... a=!3m1!1e3



Shaikovka airbase in Kaluga. 26 though some of them look abandoned or missing parts.

52nd Heavy Bomber Regiment

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.2103524 ... a=!3m1!1e3



Many more in the russian version of the wikipedia, listed as old, however the Tu-22 appear in the google maps pic, like in Kamenny Ruchey in the Pacific and is said as storage. 5 visible, the site looks like very badly maintained.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2405067 ... a=!3m1!1e3

Tu-22M launching kh-22 missiles? And some more info.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/w ... at-ukraine

Kh-22 (X-22) used to destroy a civilian building, Lozova, Kharkiv Region.



The full video:

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/152 ... P1r7MqAAAA

I really don't see how this would work. Considering the Cole survived a 40 ton explosive charge I don't see how a few hundred pound missile warhead would sink... anything.

mustang191 wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 4:51 am I really don't see how this would work. Considering the Cole survived a 40 ton explosive charge I don't see how a few hundred pound missile warhead would sink... anything.

Remember guys, this is the troll, just ignore him.

BobTank63 wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 8:02 am

mustang191 wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 4:51 am I really don't see how this would work. Considering the Cole survived a 40 ton explosive charge I don't see how a few hundred pound missile warhead would sink... anything.

Remember guys, this is the troll, just ignore him.

Can you elaborate then.

mustang191 wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 4:51 am I really don't see how this would work. Considering the Cole survived a 40 ton explosive charge I don't see how a few hundred pound missile warhead would sink... anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing

"Around 400 to 700 pounds (180 to 320 kg) of explosive were used."

Not only that, but the small fiberglass boat was not quite along side and barely moving. A Kh-22 is a supersonic missile with a 2000 lb warhead of RDX. That would make it at least 10 times the size of the Cole explosion. And then add in the impulse from the missile body and any unused rocket fuel. How did you come up with 40 tons? That boat could barley haul a half ton.

Can you at least moderately educate yourself before typing? I will say that it does give me chuckle.

thewood1 wrote: Sat May 28, 2022 5:07 pm

mustang191 wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 4:51 am I really don't see how this would work. Considering the Cole survived a 40 ton explosive charge I don't see how a few hundred pound missile warhead would sink... anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing

"Around 400 to 700 pounds (180 to 320 kg) of explosive were used."

Not only that, but the small fiberglass boat was not quite along side and barely moving. A Kh-22 is a supersonic missile with a 2000 lb warhead of RDX. That would make it at least 10 times the size of the Cole explosion. And then add in the impulse from the missile body and any unused rocket fuel. How did you come up with 40 tons? That boat could barley haul a half ton.

Can you at least moderately educate yourself before typing? I will say that it does give me chuckle.

I stand corrected on the weight. However most warheads today are filler. The mk 48 is 80% aluminum and TMETN.

A modern 2000lb warhead is actually around 200lb of RDX and the rest oxidizer. There's not even details on the AS 4. A kitchen is marginally larger than a tank HE shell, in other words not steel penetrating at all.

As for 40 tons I think I was confused with the USS Tripoli which had a enormous fuel fire.

"I stand corrected on the weight"

This is the best news I've heard today. You actually read and comprehended something. Starting out with small things like this is the best way get on the path to getting better.

Now, to keep the momentum, I'd suggest going back to all the other threads you disrupted since you joined a couple weeks ago and really take the time to read and understand all the responses and the great source material posted. It'll take some time, but we will all be patient. I'm sure you'll have a few setbacks here and there, but we're here to help. I'll take on the role of your sponsor. If you feel yourself slipping and not reading the stuff that you and other forum members post, I'll be there to talk you through it.

thewood1 wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 2:59 am "I stand corrected on the weight"

This is the best news I've heard today. You actually read and comprehended something. Starting out with small things like this is the best way get on the path to getting better.

Now, to keep the momentum, I'd suggest going back to all the other threads you disrupted since you joined a couple weeks ago and really take the time to read and understand all the responses and the great source material posted. It'll take some time, but we will all be patient. I'm sure you'll have a few setbacks here and there, but we're here to help. I'll take on the role of your sponsor. If you feel yourself slipping and not reading the stuff that you and other forum members post, I'll be there to talk you through it.

Please, troll me more.

See, thats OK that you slipped a little. And as a troll, its good progress when you think you see one yourself. I'm not a troll. You seem to have a genuine reading and comprehension issue. We are here to help.

A Styx barely sunk the eilat which was old. A as 4 sinking a cruiser has a lot less explosive and is dubious.

mustang191 wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 3:05 am A Styx barely sunk the eilat which was old. A as 4 sinking a cruiser has a lot less explosive and is dubious.

Lets highlight a few words here to help you out. "barely sunk"...sunk is the important word here. "A as 4 cruiser" is a weird phrasing. Not sure what you mean. But this is better. It means your comprehension is improving.

thewood1 wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 3:12 am

mustang191 wrote: Sun May 29, 2022 3:05 am A Styx barely sunk the eilat which was old. A as 4 sinking a cruiser has a lot less explosive and is dubious.

Lets highlight a few words here to help you out. "barely sunk"...sunk is the important word here. "A as 4 cruiser" is a weird phrasing. Not sure what you mean. But this is better. It means your comprehension is improving.

Keep trolling.

Now that is a setback. But we can overcome it. Just focus and go slow.