In a message dated 9/29/99 2:00:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, - - Ryan
> Montieth Gill writes:
<< This begs a question. Can a VTOL do an opfire vs an aerospace, assuming its
in arc of its weapons? The military guys always note the difficulty
of fighters attacking helo's in RL. They move around on you but still get to
hide down in the brush. (one pass he's here, the next pass he's over
there and shooting at you as you come in...)
> [quoted text omitted]
This is endlessly debated in my working circles. The advantage is totally to
the jet if he gets spotting. This can come from visual or from AWACs. The
footage of the HH-60 shootdowns in Iraq (blue on blue by F-15s) shows it
all. The helos do not even see the attack coming (Not that they were worried
about being attacked by their own planes but they were still in a dangerous
area).
If the Fast Movers cannot get spotting then the advantage lays with the Helo.
Stay low, use terrain to mask and take your shot. You have a plane against a
nice cool sky, they have to shoot against the cluttered ground. Also if you
can get the Jets to increase dive angle (move towards them at best speed) you
can get them to break off the attack. No one likes diving at the ground and
pushing into a steeper dive.
So far the jury is still out but it looks like the Jets usually win.
> Rmako1@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/29/99 2:00:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, - - Ryan
By the way Bob is a helo pile-ut (82d Airborne and Coast Guard) with
about 17 years stick time and still going.
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 Rmako1@aol.com wrote:
> This is endlessly debated in my working circles. The advantage is
The
> footage of the HH-60 shootdowns in Iraq (blue on blue by F-15s) shows
Ahh but this was a pair of transport helos. Not a pair of Attack helos down
next to the terrain. Attack helos like Apaches, the various OH series,
Agustas, and the forth coming Commanche all operate down next to
the trees. They move from cover to cover in close terrain to take advantage of
the cover.
There is even a rocket system for equipping the Cayuse or other OH type helos
that fires out to a certain range and then bursts in a wall of flechettes. Its
designed specifically to hose an attacking aircraft.
> If the Fast Movers cannot get spotting then the advantage lays with
Also if
> you can get the Jets to increase dive angle (move towards them at best
Obviously its not as easy as shooting at a tank that sits on the ground.
Perhaps a pilots opposed die roll would be in order for the attack to procede.
> Ryan M Gill wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 Rmako1@aol.com wrote:
shows it all.
> Ahh but this was a pair of transport helos. Not a pair of Attack helos
What makes you think transport helos don't do that either! You need to go on
some of the rides I have been on.
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Los wrote:
> What makes you think transport helos don't do that either! You need to
I'm not saying they don't pilot awareness is an issue. Perhaps that was a 3
unit that got plastered by the 15's. But then Blue on Blue is always tricky
and generally a big fubar...
> Ryan M Gill wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Los wrote:
As an aside are there any Fratracide rules kicking around for DS?
> Los wrote:
Not on my site. I've assumed that future information systems would be able to
prevent that.
As a thought though, one could assume that the roll for support is also a
check for possible fraticide. Rolling under the number required, could
optionally mean that the support strike is targeted on a friendly unit. Then
if the incoming Aerospace or VTOL mission rolls under it's leadership number,
the strike lands on a nearby, randomly selected, friendly unit? For Artillery,
it would automatically on a friendly unit.
Thoughts?
Sounds like a good rule. Also units that are within a close proximity of enemy
units receiving direct fire (or being fired through) could also be subject to
some check which may result in fratarcide. I happen to believe that there will
always be such incidents. It has as much to do with being in a keyed up
chaotic state of affairs as it has to do with any technical factors. The very
nature of having so much data about everything at the lowest levels on up
ensures that we will never be able to grog it in a timely manner. It actiually
clogs up the machine (I've seen it happen many
times at NTC/JRTC not to mention Desert Storm) Unless of course they
invent a new kind of human that can absorb all this info.
Los
> Andrew Martin wrote:
> Los wrote:
In a message dated 9/29/99 11:05:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
los@cris.com writes:
<< Sounds like a good rule. Also units that are within a close proximity of
enemy units receiving direct fire (or being fired through) could also be
subject to some check which may result in fratarcide. I happen to believe that
there will always be such incidents. It has as much to do with being in a
keyed up chaotic state of affairs as it has to do with any technical factors.
The very nature of having so much data about everything at the lowest levels
on up ensures that we will never be able to grog it in a timely manner. It
actiually clogs up the machine (I've seen it happen many
times at NTC/JRTC not to mention Desert Storm) Unless of course they
invent a new kind of human that can absorb all this info.
> [quoted text omitted]
Not to cut into this discussion too much but "friendly fire" incidents which
you guys are describing is NOT the same thing as "fratricide". The best quick
example of fratricide is: A fighter pilots gets a tone on his heat seeker and
pickles off one that needs to maneuver more so the second one fired has a
straighter shot. The second missile sees the burning motor of the first
missile and homes on it instead of the target aircraft. One weapon destroys
another friendly weapon. Homing torpedoes occassionally do this too. Heat
seekers and homing weapons often home on the first weapon's detonation too.
> Popeyesays@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/29/99 11:05:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
Heat
> seekers and homing weapons often home on the first weapon's detonation
Fratricide (as a military term) is defined in FM30-100 (operations) "as
friendly casualties to personnel or equipment incured due to mistaken blue on
blue enagegements. Friendly fire and fratricde are one in the same. In fact
friendly fire is used more commonly than fratricide in militray circles. It
soudns like you're trying to distinguish between equipment and personnel
losses?
***
Fratricide (as a military term) is defined in FM30-100 (operations) "as
friendly casualties to personnel or equipment incured due to mistaken blue on
blue enagegements. Friendly fire and fratricde are one in the same. In fact
friendly fire is used more commonly than fratricide in militray circles. It
soudns like you're trying to distinguish between equipment and personnel
losses?
Los
***
Just to be pedantic, fratricide would be equivalent to LOSSES due to friendly
fire. I gather that sometimes you get lucky and can duck friendly fire.
I thought fratricide was more intended for intentional kills, such as the
Vietnam era 'fragging', but I thank you for getting me clear on this.
Now, I'd love to try and get this back on topic; I'm REALLY trying to think of
a way. No joy.
The_Beast
> At 8:47 AM -0500 9/30/99, devans@uneb.edu wrote:
First place I heard of fratricide in a military sense was in ICBM
tactics. It was part of the dense-pack deployment theory for, IIRC,
the Minuteman. Apparently in a dense-pack deployment the first ICBM
incoming throws off the targetting solution for the next few missiles incoming
(heat, blast, radiation etc). The solution is to stagger your arrival times,
but this allows the defender to get a launch off. Anybody care to correct my
memory?
> I thought fratricide was more intended for intentional kills, such as
There's something that'd make an, er, interesting optional rule for
SGII....
[quoted original message omitted]
> Ryan M Gill wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 Rmako1@aol.com wrote:
Got any more specific on that one? I do know of a 2"75 rocket warhead
that works just like that (the WDU4/A) but, if I'm not mistaken, that
was for anti personnel use. Can't remember exactly, but there are two
versions: one with some 4000 small flechettes and another one with way less,
but off course lot bigger flechettes.
> > This is endlessly debated in my working circles. The advantage is
The
> > footage of the HH-60 shootdowns in Iraq (blue on blue by F-15s)
shows it all.
> Ahh but this was a pair of transport helos. Not a pair of Attack helos
Just an FYI for you folks I was with AWACS during Desert Storm. One of our
birds spotted a "patch of sand" about 50 feet wide that had one edge with an
approach speed of @150knts, and the other edge was going away at about the
same speed. (Red Flag: This is the @ size of a Hind blade plane)
Overflight by an F-15E, spotted a Hind hideing between two sand dunes.
The pilot was reluctent to engage with missiles. (All he had left was two
Sidewinders and two Laser Guided Bombs) (The Hinds Aphid outranges the
Sidewinder) The pilot asked for and recieved permision to illuminate the
target with his laser pod. About 20 seconds later, scratch one Hind D. ("Shot
down" by a 1000 lb bomb. Direct impact on the rotor hub assembly) The targer
never even knew the 15 was in the area. The 15 was at high altitude and speed
and the Hind never had a chance. Spotting, evasion, and stealth is everything
on the modern battle field. More so in the future.
Randy
In a message dated 9/30/99 11:39:54 PM Central Daylight Time,
> ShldWulf@aol.com writes:
> "Shot down" by a 1000 lb bomb.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHH THATS GOTTA HURT!
I've heard about that story. Quite amazing. Did he get to paint it oustide his
canopy?
Los
<side note: a lot of interesting folks are staringto pop out of the woodwork,
RB70 operatiors, slick pilots, AWACs crewmen> we gotta put these guys to
work.>
> ShldWulf@aol.com wrote:
> Just an FYI for you folks I was with AWACS during Desert Storm. One of
The
> pilot was reluctent to engage with missiles. (All he had left was two
In a message dated 99-09-29 06:02:14 EDT, you write:
<<
This is endlessly debated in my working circles. The advantage is totally to
the jet if he gets spotting. This can come from visual or from AWACs. The
footage of the HH-60 shootdowns in Iraq (blue on blue by F-15s) shows
it all. The helos do not even see the attack coming (Not that they were
worried about being attacked by their own planes but they were still in a
dangerous
area). >>
Didn't British Harriers shot down one or more Argentinian Huey UH-1's
during the Falklands?
Perry
> UsClintons@aol.com wrote:
> > "Shot down" by a 1000 lb bomb.
Actually, no. A 450kg bomb on the rotor mast - I doubt they felt a
thing.
> At 5:31 PM +1000 10/3/99, Alan E and Carmel J Brain wrote:
I'm starting to think that the laser guided bomb is becoming our most
effective weapon. Asides from this, I recall a documentary on Discovery (the
US Army channel!, and yes, it's not what I consider a
canon source) about the F-111 in Desert Storm. Adter the fixed
targets were mostly blown away, they sent the F111s on night sweeps hunting
tanks. A 2000 lb bomb on the rear deck will take out any MBT. I don't
precisely recall the number of tanks claimed by this combo, but iirc it was in
the hundreds.
Hmmm... how many damage chits would THAT draw?
Anybody want/able to verify this story?
> At 08:55 AM 10/3/99 -0700, you wrote:
I have read something similar, I think it was in James Dunnigans book about
Deseret Storm. Anyway, it was F-16's mainly, with other aircraft thrown
in for good measure, that went on the tanks sweeps using LGB's. IIRC, the
F-16/LGB mix killed more tanks and other AFV's than any other weapons
system, including A-10's. My memory is shaky here, so the Apache *may*
have actually killed more than the Falcons. I'll need to find it and check. I
don't believe that the F-117's were ever used in the "tactical" role,
being
used only in the "strategic/operational" role. I could be wrong though.
> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Ludo Toen wrote:
> Got any more specific on that one? I do know of a 2"75 rocket warhead
Found it in a recent Gunston book I just picked up. M255 rocket, as I recall
its a 70mm zuni type that is useful and can be set to burst at certain
altitudes. It is intended to be effective against an air attacker...
> Michael Carter Llaneza wrote:
Tom Clancy quotes a story like that, but for groups of 4 F16 carrying, IIRC, 4
1000lb bombs each. The group would come back for reloading
after killing about 14-15 tanks per mission. It was called "tank
plinking" and considered very effective.
> Hmmm... how many damage chits would THAT draw ?
A suggestion, use existing DFO chits damage versus tank top armour rating (1
less than front), but there's, say, 4 shots the aerospace plane could try.
Roll pilot quality dice versus tank signature dice to get a direct hit?
> Don Greenfield wrote:
> actually killed more than the Falcons. I'll need to find it and check.
I
> don't believe that the F-117's were ever used in the "tactical" role,
The F-111 and F-117 are two distinct aircraft. The F-111s were used on
the Libyan raid in the '80s. I'm sure they saw plenty of action in Desert
Storm.
> At 09:26 PM 10/3/99 -0400, you wrote:
Umm, oops. I read F-117 instead of F-111. My mistake. Although, I don't
recall reading anything abut the Aarvarks in Desert Storm. Anyone else?
> On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Don Greenfield wrote:
> Umm, oops. I read F-117 instead of F-111. My mistake. Although, I
I seem to recall Varks being used in the tank plinking role as well. They
could carry a bunch of lgbs and had an internal (its in the bomb bay and
rotates out for use) Pave Tack laser designator. They can carry no less than
24 Mk 82 500 lb bombs.
During the gulf war they flew more than 4,000 sorties with one aircraft
slightly damaged. I believe they were mainly used on NBC and command centres.
[quoted original message omitted]
Just a note or two on the use of LGB's for Tank plinking:
During DS, the LGB's were used at night against non-moving targets....
the way the sensors track the DFO tracks in a spiral around the beam, so it is
pretty bad at tracking a moving target...
The F-111's were used extensivly in DS, they carried and deployed the
"Deep Penatrator" GBU's used agains the super hardened and buried deep
bunkers, noteable the "105 howiter barrel" bombs, and the 109's which went
after and killed those "hard to get" places...
Randy
> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Ludo Toen wrote:
> > There is even a rocket system for equipping the Cayuse or other OH
> Got any more specific on that one? I do know of a 2"75 rocket warhead
Found it after a bit of looking.
M255 Flechette warhead for the Hydra 70 Rocket. 2500 28 grain flechettes
plus three tracers for air to air and air to ground use. The fuse can be
set to operate at 500ft to 6000ft.