Today's Random Picks from HHQ (08/07/2006)

[Dimitris]

THE BATTLE OF LATAKIA 1973
by Quinton Van Zyl

DATE: 6/7 October 1973
TIME: 21:30:00 Zulu
LOCATION: Eastern Mediterranean Sea

ISRAEL vs SYRIA
***************
The 1973 Yom Kippur War that was fought between Israel and her Arab neighbours was the first naval conflict in which missiles were used.

On this, the fist evening of the war, the Israeli naval command decided to force a confrontation with the Syrian navy in the hope of securing a decisive victory and gaining control of the sea.

The Israeli navy consists of SAAR missile boats, armed with Gabriel I SSMs. They are up against Syrian Osa class missile boats, armed with the longer-ranged and harder-hitting SS-N-2 Styx missiles. As with most missile boat encounters, this one promises to be fast and deadly once the action begins.

Download the scenario and the 1965-1979 database here: http://www.harpoonhq.com/harpoon3/scenarios_1960-79/

---

THE TYPHOON DEFECTION
by Klaus J. Behrmann

LOCATION: EAST ASIA
DATE/TIME: 20 FEBRUARY 2003, 17:00 H Z

The deal between China and Russia to purchase two Typhoon-class SSBNs together with nuclear warheads did not materialize - mainly because Beijing found a cheaper alternative: a Russian submarine captain is willing to defect with his boat to China for a "fee" of USD 20 or more millions.

When his defection is detected, the hunt begins, and Russia alerts every possible subhunter in East Asia. However, the Chinese want their prize at all costs...

THIS SCENARIO SHOULD BE PLAYED WITH THE NUCLEAR OPTION ENABLED.

Download the scenario and its corresponding database here: http://www.harpoonhq.com/harpoon3/overs ... index.html

---

WORLD WAR 3 1985 - ATLANTIC OCEAN PART 6: RORSAT
by Ragnar Emsoy

NATO vs. SOVIETS

LOCATION: VIRGINIA CAPES
DATE/TIME: 17 SEPTEMBER 1985, 18:00:00Z

By the mid-1970s it was estimated that at least three out of four satellites in space were being used for military purposes. To deny the enemy the use of space and space assets in time of crisis or war, both superpowers began researching and testing of Anti-Satellite (ASAT) systems in the early 1960s. The intended targets were primarily low-orbiting reconnaissance, electronic intelligence and ocean surveillance satellites.

The Soviet Union's only operational ASAT was the Co-Orbital ASAT. The system was basically a killer satellite, known locally as 'Istrebitel Sputnikov' (fighter satellite), launched from the ground and placed into orbit close to the intended target, guided by on-board radar. The 1,400kg ASAT interceptor would then detonate the conventional explosive warhead within a kilometer of the target, destroying it with shrapnel fragments.

The Co-Orbital ASAT system was initially tested from 1963 to 1972, after which the system was declared operational. The test program consisted of around twenty launches that demonstrated the system could be used from orbital altitudes of 230 to 1,000 kilometers. The tests ceased in 1972 after the Soviets signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty but were assumed again in 1976 in response to the US development of the Space Shuttle, viewed by the Kremlin as a carrier of space-based weapons.

A new version of the Co-Orbital ASAT was introduced from 1978 to 1982, with test intercepts taking place about once a year. The range had been extended to as low as 160 km and as high as 1,600 km, and the ASAT was now able to intercept the target in a single orbit. The test flights ended in 1982, with many interceptors being kept in operational readiness at the Baikonur launch site in Kazakhstan.

The United States' first anti-satellite program began in 1962, and although many systems were eventually tested, none had become fully operational by 1980. In 1979, four years before the advent of President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the United States Air Force issued a contract to Vought for an ASM-135A Air-Launched Miniature Vehicle (ALMV). This three-stage missile, weighing about 2700lb at launch and being 18 feet long, would be launched from the centerline fuselage hardpoint of an F-15 Eagle against a satellite in low-earth orbit. The missile would use an infrared seeker to home in on the target and attempt to destroy or disrupt it by scoring a direct hit.

Captive flights began in the early 1980s. The first actual launch of an ASM-135A from an F-15 took place in January 1984, with the missile being aimed at a predetermined point in space. Three subsequent launches were made against celestial infrared sources. The launching aircraft had been specially wired to accommodate the missile and was provided with a backup battery, a microprocessor, and a datalink for midcourse guidance.

The first flight against an actual target satellite took place on September 13, 1985. An F-15A took off from Vandenberg AFB, zoom-climbed to 80,000 feet and launched the ASAT against the test target, orbiting at about 555 km above the earth. Both the first and second rocket stages fired successfully, and the miniature kinetic kill vehicle separated and homed in on the satellite, destroying it upon impact.

The test was carried out only one day prior to the outbreak of war. Two F-15As wired for the ASAT have now been relocated to Langley AFB on the US East Coast and married up with a handful pre-production ASAT missiles. The intention is to try to knock out Soviet RORSAT oceanic reconnaissance satellites in low-earth orbit.

[Author's Note: In reality, the Soviet ASAT program was later abandoned. The US program effectively ended in December 1985 when a ban was put in place on testing the missile on targets in space. The plan was to modify twenty F-15As for the anti-satellite mission and procure up to 112 missiles however the ASAT program was officially terminated in 1988.]

INTEL:
The Soviets rely heavily on ocean surveillance satellites to detect and track movements of NATO naval vessels and merchant shipping. Two basic types of reconnaissance satellite systems are used - Radar Ocean Reconnaissance satellites (RORSATs) and Electronic Ocean Reconnaissance satellites (EORSATs), known locally as US-A and US-P respectively.

The RORSATs are usually deployed in pairs. To increase the ability to monitor foreign fleet movements they circle the earth at a very low operational orbit of 255 km and a nodal period of 89 minutes. By restricting the orbits to between 65 degrees south and 65 degrees north latitude, the observation time is concentrated over the major oceans of the world where Western naval activity normally takes place. The paired RORSATs reside within the same orbital plane but cross the equator 25 minutes apart, and because of the earth's rotation, the ground track of the second RORSAT is displaced more than 250 nm west at 45 degrees latitude. The RORSATs are outfitted with a large radar powered by a compact nuclear reactor, and the width of the area observed by each satellite is approximately 240 nm parallel to the orbital track.

The EORSAT signal-gathering satellites obtain data on the location of western shipping by listening for radar, high-frequency communications, and other active sensors. The satellites fly at an altitude of about 420 km and cover a wide area of ocean in each orbit. The solar-powered EORSATs are normally formed into constellations of two to three satellites working together, closely linked with the RORSAT satellites.

By war outbreak the Soviets operated five ocean surveillance satellites. The two RORSATs were launched on August 1 and 23, 1985, working in coordination with a pair of EORSATs put into orbit a few weeks earlier. The fifth satellite, an EORSAT, was launched only a few hours prior to the initialization of hostilities.

MISSION:
Mission planning has been performed in the Strategic Air Command's Cheyenne Mountain complex in Colorado. The intended target is the first of the paired RORSAT satellites; the ground track has been drawn on the tactical map.

The ASAT-armed F-15A is to take off immediately and fly to the weapon release point. Zoom climb to an altitude of 80,000 feet and launch the ASAT, all under computer control. The first stage will propel the missile to a precise inertial point in space on collision course with the target satellite. The second stage points the third stage, the miniature kill vehicle (MKV), at the target so that the infrared image can be detected. The 30lb third stage then separates, and, guided by the IR seeker and employing 63 maneuver motors, collides with the satellite at a closing velocity of 15,000 miles per hour.

It is estimated the missile will have 80% chance of destroying the target.

Download the scenario and the DB2000 database here: http://www.harpoonhq.com/harpoon3/scenarios/#10


This thread is only for the announcement of scenarios hosted at the Harpoon HeadQuarters

[hermanhum]

Have these been tested to work?

SZO file archives - Home of the Harpoon3 PlayersDB
 
    FilesOfScenShare  

HarpGamer.com - Home of the HCDB.


 

[Flankerk]

As mentioned before these are tested to work before posted to the site. Anyone is welcome to contribute to that testing and many scenarios are modified as a result of this.
New contributors are welcome and we ensure that scenarios are at least as accurate and well researched as possible. We have no problems with a scenario posted for fun, and if someone wants to venture into the new area of scenario writing we can contribute tons of helpful advice.

Scenarios that struggle are those that are poorly researched, are perhaps too large a scale for a first scenario, or those where the author would not want any changes to be made regardless. There are several HHQ stickied notes on scenario building.

We have experienced difficulties retesting these to 3.7 due to the navigation bug. I seem to recall a major part in the navigation bug being introduced by yourself Herman ?

Once that bug is resolved we should be able to rapidly retest these , which I believe is soon. Why anyone queried a bug about ships deliberately forced to travel inland by the scenario writer is slightly beyond me. I would have thought a period of scenario testing might have discovered this flaw in said scenario ?

It is reassuring to note that you as a result have reintroduced some modicum of testing....

Scenarios hosted at Harpoon Headquarters are at least tested , but the retesting will likely get underway with more venom once we are at 3.7.1.

Herman I know you don't like our scenarios, I gather you don't like us, or at least most of us at HHQ, and I gather you certainly don't like our research. However you kind of have to admit, secretly you rather like our databases don't you. [:D]

Go on, just this once you could admit it !

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: Flankerk

As mentioned before these are tested to work before posted to the site.

<< snip >>

Scenarios that struggle are those that are poorly researched,

<< snip >>

Scenarios hosted at Harpoon Headquarters are at least tested , but the retesting will likely get underway with more venom once we are at 3.7.1.

Just tried RORSat and found the satellites flying at 110m off the ground.

Unless they were modelled after Skylab, I can't see how any level of research [short of basic game testing], could explain this.

As before, a little less complaining and a little more testing will prevent a recurrence. [;)]

Evidently, this has not changed since day it was posted, six months prior, January 21, 2006

P.s. This has NOTHING to do with the Nav Bug.

SZO file archives - Home of the Harpoon3 PlayersDB

FilesOfScenShare

HarpGamer.com - Home of the HCDB.

[Flankerk]

I think I did mention that this worked in 3.6 and that retesting will commence once the nav bug is sorted ?
I don't actually recall rubbishing your scenarios at any point but seem to have attracted a number of insults from you lately............

[Dimitris]

Herman, this is a known problem with the 3.7.0 exe and has been documented here. The developers have been informed of it and hopefully will have a fix for it on 3.7.1 or one of the forthcoming released patches. It is clearly a game engine problem and not a scenario problem. And you are already aware of it because you posted on that thread.

I will not speculate on why you chose to ignore this fact and instead blame the scenario developer(s) for lack of testing etc.

Also noted is that fact that you are the sole person in the entire community actively picking on other people's scenarios. I will not comment on this either. Nor will I enquire as to the ANW-compliance level of your own creations. As usual, I have trust in the community's judgement.

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[hermanhum]

Folks, if you'd only take a little time and actually EXAMINE the files you will see that it has absolutely nothing to do with the problem reported here.

The problem is with the scenario. This is not a game bug. I managed to 'fix' the problem with the ScenEditor issued with the game. All you have to do is:

1) Open the game
2) Order the satellite to stay at altitude.

It is as simple as that. The fact that no one bothered to look, first, before announcing and inviting folks to play it is the crux of the matter.

Let me re-iterate. The problem found in the RORSat scenario is not a game engine-related problem. It can be solved with pre-existing tools because I just did it.

[Flankerk]

Herman, the suggestion was made in another thread that it would be reasonable if say posts by Harpoon Headquarters were not commented on by PDB folks and vice versa.

Is that something you would be willing to abide by ?

I haven't seen a response by you to that relevant thread, so I do not know what your thoughts are.

[hermanhum]

That is an impractical suggestion. This is a Matrix forum.&nbsp; All the threads here are owned by Matrix and not by any individual members.&nbsp; Threads and fora are not matters to be divided up as territory or property.

A forum is for the meeting and exchange of ideas and does not simply serve as a billboard for advertising or demagoguery.

The logical conclusion derived from the suggestion is that I would never post comments on any thread started by hhq-admins and vice-versa.&nbsp; That would be a sad day, indeed, if that happened.

What would be next?&nbsp; Dividing up all the new members?&nbsp; Never posting ideas if someone from the 'other side' has already posted?&nbsp; That would be ludicrous.

The saddest fact is that some folks believe that there are actual 'sides'.&nbsp; In my opinion, this has only happened because some folks have unilaterally declared themselves to be 'US'.&nbsp; Of course, whether or not anyone else agreed, everyone not 'US' is automatically made one of 'them'. &nbsp; It only takes one 'side' to make the division.

I don't see any difference at all.&nbsp; I play all forms of Harpoon and use all the different databases and play every single scenario published: H3, ANW, and Harpoon Classic.&nbsp; I see no distinctions.&nbsp; It's all Harpoon to me.&nbsp;

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[FransKoenz]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Flankerk

PDB folks

I'M ONE OF THESE 'PDB-FOLKS' TOO!!!!!!!! [yes, with caps on!!!]

I have not taken part of any of these childish, not-to-the-point discussions and other flamatory stuff but I like to state here that my contributions to the PDB are all legitime. The Original Database is for free use [with credits] and we worked with that principle. there is no way of plagiarism.

Flankerk accused Herman Hum more than once of plagarism. If Flankerk wants to claim that accusion he should go to court instead of screaming and shouting here.
PDB is better, compact, without sneaky inputs, such as weather balloons with KGB-agents, hidden entries to make sure that the player never wins, corrupted entries to sabotage scenarios, etc. etc. That is the difference between DB2k and PDB.

If you accuse Herman, you accuse me because I am one of the developers of PDB, I know how to deal with the Database-Editor and it is only a matter of work to get things working. Herman Hum has spend more than 8 months to get the PDB ready with the help of more than one persons, me included. So Flankerk, stick that plagiarism-issue in your a** or take a lawer to proof your alligations.

Second:

Is this the way AGSI or MATRIX wants to sell a game? with flames, contradictions, alligations? I have a Key/Lock version of Harpoon 3, I have to pay at least €50,= for a cripled game full with bugs and as I am informed I have to print out the shortcut-list myself [sounds rather Jewish, or to avoid racism-alligations, it sounds like Gerrit Zalm,Secretary, our national Guard of the Pennies]. Packadge will be at least another €5-10 [maybe more]. Can you imagine?I can live with the DOS-outlook of the game. I must say I like it, but I simply hate it that have to pay for a car without wheels.

The ECM-question and the Missile-issue was discovered by Vincenzo Baretta and me while playing the game "End Run" with ANW, in the same session we suddenly noticed the next strange thing. 60 missiles flewing into a single Prowler with ECM on, I know it because I was the one who played the game and noticed that very strange behaviour. I have asked Herman to report this bug because I did not want to show up on this Forum at all with this. So Herman was not bombing bugs, but only doing the thing I asked him to do; report the bug.

The atmosphere here is the result of conflicts from the past. Whenever you visit a Harpoon related website, you meet the same flames, but I have never seen so much serious things happened as on this forum.
The Moderation is very bad. This could only happen because the moderator is not able/capable to run a forum about a game with so manny controversial events since it was created. It is time that Matrix shows up with decent moderation of this forum.

Greetings
Frans Koenz [aka Taitennek]

P.S.
English is not my native language, so please forgive me the grammatical errors.

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[David Heath]

Listen to both groups I am really tired of coming in hear and reading all the useless posts and side comments. Both sides better start to ignore each other real fast. I personally do not want to see the word plagiarism posted in this forum again. The next person who feels they need to state any more quote unquote facts may very well be shown the door.

The moderation of the forum is fine and I am happy with the job Dale has done in spite of some users here. Knocking my MOD after he is trying to give everyone some space is never going to gain you any respect around here.

I highly recommend that each side NOT comment about the other scenarios... for the record this is not a request.

David Heath
Matrix Games