AAR Battle of Kessel

23 posts · Jul 27 1998 to Jul 30 1998

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:46:47 -0700

Subject: AAR Battle of Kessel

(note: this was one of two fights we had at Historicon)

Classification: SECRET NOFORN
Subject: AAR from Kessel Raid (Case Blau)
Routing: Ia OberKommado KriegsRaumFlotte Nue Salzburg DTG: 271300ZJul2194
From: Kaptain zur Raum Rudolf Bergmann (Kampfstaffel III/KG12)

This AAR covers the actions of Kampfstaffel III/KG12 during its
participation in Case Blau in the Kessel system on 25 July, 2194. referencing
document is Operations Order 227a annex B. (attached)

Ia. Order of Battle NSL
III/KG12
a. Missile destroyers, KRS von Steuben, Galland, Trautloff, RNS Ajax (on
secondment from NAC) (Each ship has 1 x type 1 beam battery and 3 salvo
missile launcher) b. Escort Cruiser: KRS Schongau (2 type 1 beam, 1x type 2
beam, 2 PDS and Area defcon) c. Battle cruiser: KRS Scharnhorst (flagship),
Gneisenau (6xtype 3 beam batteries, 1x Pulse toprpedo, 2 PDS) d. Fighter
carrier: Tirpitz (6xtype 3 beam batteries, 1x Pulse toprpedo, 2 PDS, and 4
fighter bays)
e. 4 Jagdgruppe: (I and II/JG2 and II/IV/JG26)

Ib. Order of Battle Kra'Vak (estimated) a. 6xHunter ships (6 type 2 RG systems
(2 side firing only), 4 scatterguns) b. 1xdreadnought (4 type 3 RG systems, 2
type 2 RG systems (side arc). 6 scatterguns, 2 fighter bays) c. 2 fighter
squadrons

IIa: II/KG12 warps into Kessel system and provides diversion for vital
intelligence gathering satellite recovery by the cloaked KRS Kohl. The Staffel
was not to leave until the KRS Kohl was safely away with it's package.

III: II/12 warped into system at 1300Z as per plan. We emerged at 6
light seconds from Kessel. The transit was not without difficulty, resulting
in damage to one of the fighter launch bays on the Tirpitz. This effectively
cut our fighter strength by 25%. Also KRS Scharnhorst
had three beam batteries go off line. Nevertheless, II/JG 2 was launched
on schedule and proceed to target. We know that they succeeded in destroying
the three unmanned Kra'Vak PDS arrays, but since no one made it back I can not
expound on this portion of the operation further.

Since II/12 made no attempt at maintaining EMSEC (Emissions Security),
it was relatively easy for the Kra'Vak to detect us. They took the bait and
dispatched every ship within range toward us. Kohl inserted undetected and
commenced its recovery operation.

Admiral Wender's plan was to keep the incoming enemy fleet off to our
starboard and avoid the usual interpenetrating of a standard head on fight.
Consequently, he deployed the missile ships 6 MUs ahead of our main force and
spread into a skirmish line 12 MUs across. The main force was kept in a
compact group within 6 MUS of each other. His intent was to shower the
incoming Kra'Vak with missile salvos, and launch a fighter strike to swing
wide around the aft of the Kra'Vak fleet sandwiching them between us. In our
last engagement our light destroyer screen had suffered heavily and the
Admiral had commented on his commitment to get their missiles off as early as
possible. Also it was estimated that our heavy beam batteries have a 6 MU
range advantage of Kra'Vak systems and he wanted to keep them at bay to take
advantage of the range difference.

Our plan began to go awry at once. The Kra'Vak commander maintained a tight
control of his fleet, and instead of rushing right at us manuevered his force
in a way which resulted in 60% of our missiles (Our first two full salvos) not
finding their mark. The Kra'Vak ships synchronized their movements very well.

The superior maneuver rating of the Kra'Vak ships allowed them to close to
under 30 MUs. Thus we were not able to take advantage of our superior beam
range. A number of our ships began taking hits and the Scharnhorst 50% loss of
batteries was severely felt at this range. Our destroyer screen took severe
damage with the RNS Ajax being destroyed and the KRS Trautloff suffering a
bridge hit which put her out of control for the duration of the fight. The
remaining destroyers in the screen, now moving at a high speed bypassed the
flanking KV ships, spun and fired an
additional salvo. This coincided with fighters from both III/JG2 and
IV/JG26 conducting an extended burn. Thus the KV found themselves
sandwiched between 2 missile salvos and 2 fighter groups attacking from their
aft quadrants. This took them by surprise and a number of ships suffered
heavily. It was the first good news of the battle. Our fighters would continue
to harry the KV ships from their aft quadrant for the duration of the battle.

At this point he Kra'Vak made their first error. They attempted to close range
with us. I believe that the KV should have remained at long range since their
RG systems hold their damage potential better at long range than our beam
systems. They closed to within 20 MUs of the main force, suffering another
well timed and aimed missile salvo in the process. (At this points the
destroyers were out of missiles and were allowed to drift out of the fight,
having been harried by Kra'Vak fighters.)

AT this time Scharnhorst's batteries all came back on line and the Kra'Vak
began to suffer under 18 class 3 beam batteries per turn from out heavy units.
The KV units responded with heavy and RG fire as well as the attention of
their fighters. However we could see our beams taking effect as a number of
ships began streaming atmosphere 2 Hunters Nova'd as their power cores gave
way. We suffered also as various systems would go down, be repared and go down
again. The heaviest loss came when Scharnhorst suffered a catastrophic bridge
hit resulting in the death of Admiral Wenders. Command devloved down to me.
Our main force had already swung aft while fleeing to keep the heavy beams
bearing on our pursuers. The KV ships became separated.

The high point of the battle occurred as the KV dreadnought and two hunters
closed range. Our ships were shot up and the Scharnhorst was still out of
control. Oberst Halfek's fighters were at the end of their endurance and had
been recalled. When he saw the danger to the staffel, he lead his remaining
fighters in for a desperate attack. The KV fighters had been pulled back to
pursue, but they ignored their deadly attacks and scattergun fire to press
home their attack on the dreadnought. Apparently a bridge hit on the behemoth
effectively put her out of action and spared us from her type 3 RGs at close
range. This allowed me to concentrate on the two Hunters, killing one and
severely damaging the other. Our most dangerous moments were over. We detected
the Kohl's transit beacon signaling all clear. Now to extract ourselves! I
ordered our remaining destroyers, the KRS von Stueben and Galland to execute
maximum burns back at the KV pursuers to cover our withdrawl. As the range
separated, our heavy batteries destroyed another Hunter. The final one kept up
a steady RG fire upon us, but the appearance of the destroyers and our final
salvos severely damaged this ship and she broke off action.

We were now faced with emergency repairs on a number of ships to get them
ready for Warp transit. Unfortunately Life Support on the Scharnhorst as
permanently knocked out, so the Gneisenau hove along side and pulled off her
crew, then scuttled the great ship. There was no time to affect more detlaied
repairs since more KraVak contacts wer ereported at under 4 light seconds and
we were in no condition for another fight. We then transited out of the
system.

IV. Summary. Our final losses were 1 destroyer (RNS Ajax), one Battle cruiser
(KRS Scharnhorst) and 18 fighters destroyed. Heavy damage to KRS von Steuben,
Trautloff, and Gneisenau. Light to moderate damage to all others. We suffered
349 killed and 227 injured. The Kohl escaped with the surveillance satellite.
I consider our mission a success though at a very high cost. The
synchronization of KV maneuvers signals an adaptation of their tactics in an
attempt to avoid deadly missile salvos. Never the less the KV lost one
dreadnought and 3 hunters. 2 others were last seen drifting out of control
streaming atmosphere and the last one was heavily damaged and withdrew under
her own power.

I expect II/KG12 to be out of commission for at least three weeks as we
refit. We have rendezvoused with FSU (Fleet Support Unit) 33 and are making
repairs. This concludes my debrief.

Bergmann, Rudlof Kaptain zur Raum
II/KG12     Commander (acting)

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 00:20:19 +1000

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Los wrote:

FYI NSL would use:

Confidential - Vertraulich
Secret - Geheim
Top Secret - Streng Geheim
NOFORN - KEINAUS (Kein Auslaender)
NSL-ONLY - NUERNSL

KEINAUS - Means No Foreign Access (except a certain select few under
some circumstances).

NUERNSL - Means NSL access only, ie they ESPECIALLY don't want their
allies to know this, usually for commercial reasons.

For my sins, I spent a fair bit of time in Bremen, working on
very-expensive-machines-that-go-ping for STN-Atlas Elektronik GmbH.

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 14:19:15 -0700

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

Thanks,

I have about 6 years of German and have been there a few times but was typing
the thing at work and didn't have my reference materials with me.

> Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:

> Los wrote:

From: Naismith <Naismith@s...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 23:36:40 +0200

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> > NUERNSL - Means NSL access only, ie they ESPECIALLY don't want their

Being a German, I would like to sugest: NUR NSL

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 18:26:23 -0400

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Naismith wrote:

> Being a German, I would like to sugest:

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 21:12:27 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> You wrote:

> a. 6xHunter ships (6 type 2 RG systems (2 side firing only), 4

I notice you're using Kra'Vak for what I presume is a Fleet Book-rules
scenario. What arcs&masses do you use for the rail guns, and what's the rule
on maneuverability (Thruster equal to Main Drive, I presume) and how do you
point that out?

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 23:11:50 -0400

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> John Atkinson wrote:

> I notice you're using Kra'Vak for what I presume is a Fleet Book-rules

Yes the first thing I discovered was that the FB had nothing on the Kra'Vak.
So the way we handled it was rail guns 1 2 3 all have a range of 30" max. The
to hit dr at various range per FT2. Dmage also Per FT2. Scatter gun range and
effect per FT2 though no firing in rear arc if the ship has used its main
drive. Armor rules per FB. (Top row armor. We used core systems per FB. Since
we played two battles, in the first one we tried the Kra"Vak using cinematic
movement, and in the second one we used vector movement. We liked the vector
movement better. As far as Arcs we handled them ala' FT2. The Hunters had 6 MD
and 3 Pt. thruster drives. Hmm didn't try the thruster equal manuever, maybe
we'll do that on the next battle as we tweak these Kra'Vak up to FB standards.
Hope that's
clear...

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 22:28:13 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> You wrote:

> vector movement. We liked the vector movement better. As far as Arcs

Did you let the Railguns buy more than one arc? And did you make them
weigh 1/2/4 as beam batteries?

From: Noah Doyle <nvdoyle@m...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 00:13:40 -0500

Subject: RE: AAR Battle of Kessel

What's GmbH stand for - I can't remember...it'll be needed for the
Krupp-Siemens Corporate Security Forces.

Noah

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:45:40 +1000

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Los wrote:

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:49:59 +1000

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Naismith wrote:

Jein. I'm assuming some spelling reform within a few hundred years (Official
Deletion of the umlaut). Or does Nur lack one?

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 23:00:48 +1000

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Noah Doyle wrote:
I'm attempting to find out.

Also, NUERNSL should probably be NUERNSG (G for Gemeinschaft)

Or even possibly FUCHS for obscure reasonsthat maybe one of our native
Deutschlaenders could go into.(note the spelling - I may be wrong, but
at least I'm consistent in leaving the uml out:))

From: Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@s...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 17:46:01 +0300 (EEST)

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:

> Jein. I'm assuming some spelling reform within a few hundred years

Why don't we assume an Official Deletion of all the complicated foreign
languages? It's soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much
easier if everyone just speaks the common tongue... er, English.

It may come as a surprise to some people, but "Mika Häkkinen", "Mika
Hakkinen" and "Mika Haekkinen" are all completely valid names, pronounced very
differently and only one of them is an F1 driver.

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 11:31:09 -0700

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> John Atkinson wrote:

> Did you let the Railguns buy more than one arc? And did you make them

No. All railguns fire one arc. Each kra'vak ship had 4 RGs firing forward arc
and one RG firing out of each side arc, plus a number of scattergun
submunitions (all arc). The RGs were weighted, had range to hit modifiers and
damage as per FT2. When I was making up the SSDs for the KV ships I was at
work without the rulebook (shh don't tell anyone), so I just genned up two
classes, the Hunters and one dreadnought (more powerful RGs and fighter
tubes). It may not have been right but we found our two balltes fairly well
balanced. In our last fight, it could very well have gone to teh KV given the
amount of damage my ships have taken save for some good and bie DRs and a few
heroic Damage control parties, so we both felt very good about the fightes we
had bput up and the forces at our disposal.

From: Los <los@c...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 12:05:45 -0700

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:

> Why don't we assume an Official Deletion of all the complicated

I agree to some extent. However I like to throw in a few terms just to
add a little flavor to my stories, (Esp. when dealing with Non-NAC
forces). But you know how it is with SF-gamers, sticklers for accuracy.
<g> I do believe that english will probably be Terran standard for most
outside of the ESU in particular for flight/space ops. (Sort of like it
is now for air controller.)

From: Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@s...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:30:16 +0300 (EEST)

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Los wrote:

> I agree to some extent.

Sorry, I forgot to encase my first paragraph in

<SARCASM>
</SARCASM>

From: George,Eugene M <Eugene.M.George@k...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 12:45:51 -0700

Subject: RE: AAR Battle of Kessel

Yep, we'll all speak esperanto like natives.

> ----------

From: Naismith <Naismith@s...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:55:27 +0200

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

Alan E & Carmel J Brain schrieb:

> Naismith wrote:

If you want to use the German aquivalent of "only": it's "nur" ( lacking the
umlaut). Actually the spelling reform is about to become official in Germany
(alltough the populatiopn tends to dislike it... ;-), but umlaute
(ä,ü,ö)
aren't part of the reform.

GmbH means: "Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung" (similar to
"Ltd.").
Literally it translates to "company with limited liability".

There was a badger in the privy.
        -- Granny Weatherwax returns home from vacation
(Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies)

******************************
Cyberwolf

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:15:53 -0500

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

Tre spake thusly upon matters weighty:

> Well, that's obviously sarcasm, because everyone knows that in the

Or we'll all have lost the ability to communicate due to short attention span
and we'll have to draw and grunt out our messages....

/************************************************
Thomas Barclay Software Specialist Police Communications Systems Software
Kinetics Ltd. 66 Iber Road, Stittsville Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page:
     http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page:
     http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/

From: Jared E Noble <JNOBLE2@m...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 12:27:48 -0900

Subject: RE: AAR Battle of Kessel

Urg, Esperanto - shades of Arnold J. Rimmer come to mind....

just let it die quietly   ;->

Yep, we'll all speak esperanto like natives.

> >On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Los wrote:

From: Donald A. Chipman III <tre@i...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 14:34:45 -0700

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> At 10:30 PM 7/29/98 +0300, you wrote:
Well, that's obviously sarcasm, because everyone knows that in the future,
we'll all be speaking Esperanto.

From: Jerry Han <jhan@w...>

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 17:36:05 -0400

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Thomas Barclay wrote:

Hells Bells! I do that already! (Especially after a long day at
work...)
(8-)
J.

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:28:33 +0100

Subject: Re: AAR Battle of Kessel

> Tre spake thusly upon matters weighty:

...or type them into email programs......

:)