AAR: CMO Red Tide

Started by Tripoli, October 25, 2021, 05:13:54 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tripoli

#15
At 1100Z, I finalize the attack plan.  Contrary to (what I believed I instructed), the CHARLIE SSGN has not regained contact.  Because of this, I can't plan on using it to attrite the CVBG's AAW screen.  Instead, I will target the USS MISSISIPPI with the NADEZHNYY (Mod Kashin DDG), which is currently tattletailing the battlegroup.  My logic is that it will be impossible to coordinate the missile ToT with between the Tu-22Ms and the Tattletail, so it is more advantageous to attrite the USN AAW/anti ASM capability, thereby improving the chance of the AS-4s getting through. To minimize alert time and maximize the chance of at least one slow SS-N-2c getting through, the NADEZHNYY will launch at minimum (5 nm) range.  Assuming all Tu-22M launch their missiles, all but 2 of their missiles will be directed  to the USS EISENHOWER.  2 AS-4s will be assigned to the USS COONTZ, just to keep it occupied.

Integrating the two JULIETTE SSGs into the plan is also problematic.  Because they have to surface to launch, and because their 670 knot SS-N-3a is considerably slower than the 2300 knot AS-4, it  will be impossible to have their missiles arrive at the same time as the BACKFIRE-launched AS-4s.  The only way to fix this problem is to have the JULIETTE's launch approximately 12 minutes ahead of the BACKFIRE launch.  However, the USN E-2C would detect this launch, which would give the USN the opportunity to attrite the BACKFIREs.  As they are crucial to sinking the EISENHOWER, I can't  risk giving that much warning.  Accordingly, I will use the JULLIETs as a second-strike, hopefully in conjunction with the CHARLIE II (should it ever chose to re-establish contact with HQ) >:(

The Su-17s will execute their SEAD mission by approaching the CVBG from the SW-SE sector, attempting to divert the USN CAP to the south, away from the BACKFIREs.  2 elements of 2 Su-17s will be sent towards the GARABALDI  CHBG to conduct SEAD there and after firing their AS-9s, will  attempt to shoot down the E2C AWACs that is operating in that area.

The MAKAROV KUG will engage the GARIBALDI CHBG with SS-N-22 and SS-N-2c.  A second strike will be made with SS-N-14 in Surface to Surface mode.  The primary target for the first strike will be the GARIBALDI.  Additionally, the  Otomat-equipped FFG ITS ALISEO is a threat to the KUG, so it will be a primary target in the initial salvo.

The FOXTROT SS will be used to attack whatever USN vessels survive the AS-4s.


"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#16
Between 1030-1130Z the Soviet forces get into position.  See Image 8 for a view of the Central Med, and Image 9 for a zoomed in view of the engagement area at 1130Z.  A Battlelog is included below

Image 8.  011130Z Situation



Image 9.  011130Z Situation (Close Up)




011052Z April 85   Launched Tu-16R BADGER E from Tripoli

011054Z April 85   BACKFIRES begin climb to 36,000ft and turn toward IP.  They will soon be detectable by NATO radars.
011100Z April 85   GIRABALDI CHBG is EMCON ALPHA radiating SS/AS and FC radars
011100Z April 85   Both JULLIETS SSG are in communications with HQ and receiving targeting data.
011107Z April 85   FOXTROT SS is in in communications with HQ and receiving targeting data.
011112Z April 85   Launch 2 Su-17 from Tripoli
101115Z April 85   Received Msg from SEVASTOPOL HQ directing the KUG to engage and neutralize the GIBRALDI CHBG at 1200Z, and then transit to Libyan waters

011115Z April 85   Launch 2 elements of 2 Su-17 from Tripoli
011128Z April 85   Launch 3 elements of 2 Su-17 from Tripoli

011128Z April 85   USN Permit-class SSN detected trailing Libyan Foxtrot SS AL BADR.
011128Z April 85   NADEZHNYY (Mod Kashin DDG) Tattletailing EISENHOWER CVBG.   Activates DON KAY and HEAD NET C surface and air search radars for air and surface picture.  Begins to position itself to 5 nm from USS MISSISSIPPI. 


"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Con

Wow
Cliffhanger
Very well written and planned. Puts my tactical planning of let's throw lots of different crap in the air at the same time and roughly pointing in the same direction to shame. I am waiting anxiously to see how it plays out.
Con

Sir Slash

Me too. Damn, that looks like a whole lot of things to keep up with.  :hide:
"Take a look at that". Sgt. Wilkerson-- CMBN. His last words after spotting a German tank on the other side of a hedgerow.

Tripoli

#19
WARNING: SPOILER ALERT

The next few posts will give away some of the scenario design.  Don't read any further if you want to play the scenario.   You have been warned.... C:-)
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#20
Between 1130Z and 1153Z, the various strike elements begin to converge.  The Battle log below gives some idea of the events:

011128Z April 85   NADEZHNYY (Mod Kashin DDG) Tattletailing EISENHOWER CVBG.   Activates DON KAY and HEAD NET C surface and air search radars for air and surface picture.  Begins to position itself to 5 nm from USS MISSISSIPPI.
011133Z April 85   Minor adjustment to Tu-22M course to release point to avoid GARABALDI SAM envelope

011133Z April 85   USN CVBG remains in EMCON A (modified).  Currently not emitting radars.  Until that changes, the AS-9s will be unable to engage.
011137Z April 85   Several probable merchant surface contacts are identified near the area around the possible JULIETTE SSG launch positions.  Tu-16Rs are directed to VID contacts.  Contacts confirmed to be civilian/no threat.
011138Z April 85   F-14s intercept several of the Su-17s, but break off, presumably after VID'ing them.
011143Z April 85   Helix  from MAKAROV KUG goes active with its S/S radar to assist in targeting the GARABALDI CHBG.  MAKAROV KUG is only active with  a single air search (A/S) and  surface search (S/S) radar.  No fire control (F/C) radars emitting.
011144Z April 85   Italian F-104 closes to 7 miles of BACKFIRE flight #3 (the rear-most flight).  F-104 does not engage.
011152Z April 85   BACKFIRES are approaching weapons release point.  Weapons release confirmed for 011155Z. NADEZHNYY (Mod Kashin DDG) turns clear its SS-N-2c battery.
011153Z April 85       No contact with CHARLIE II SSGN, so will conduct the attack without him. 
011153Z April 85   BACKFIRES activate  DOWN BEAT fire control (F/C) radar for targeting.

and all hell breaks loose.....

The USS EISENHOWER begins the festivities by machine gunning with 7.62mm (!) gunfire the OKEAN-class AGI that was following it.   Admittedly, I had driven the AGI pretty close to the CVN.  ;D  But still, that is such an uninspired way of beginning a World War....
With everyone now hostile, Libya and the USN begin firing missiles at each other.  I, the Soviet commander, had been dutifully filling out my battlelog when various machine gun and missile warnings erupted from my computer.  Hurriedly returning to my main screen, I had the NADEZHNYY go active with its F/C radar and engage the USS MISSISSIPPI, while the MAKAROV KUG went active and engaged the GARABALDI CHBG.  In the next 7 minutes, I didn't do  much battle management, as number of missiles in the air were far beyond my ability to track (indicidentally, confirming why most ship defenses are fully automatic.  It really is hard to track what is happening when the missiles start flying)  The attached game log shows the violence of the battle.   In the next 26 minutes, the following ships are sunk.  I will try to distill the action in the next post.  I am also preparing a video of the action:
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x A 5327 Stromboli
9x A-6E Intruder
23x A-7E Corsair II
1x AB.212 ASW [SH-212A]
1x CG 27 Josephus Daniels [Belknap]
1x CVN 69 Dwight D. Eisenhower [Nimitz Class]
1x D 550 Audace
1x DDG 2 Charles F. Adams
1x DDG 37 Farragut
3x E-2C Hawkeye Group 0
4x EA-6B Prowler ICAP II Baseline
1x F 564 Lupo
1x F 570 Maestrale
16x F-14A Tomcat
1x FF 1040 Garcia
1x FF 1052 Knox
4x KA-6D Intruder
9x S-3A Viking
2x SH-2F Seasprite
6x SH-3H Sea King


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
56x 127mm/38 HE-PD [HiCap]
211x 127mm/54 HE-CVT [HiFrag]
5x 127mm/54 OTO Melara Compact HECVT
4x 20mm/85 Mk15 Phalanx Blk 0 Burst [200 rnds]
14x 40mm/70 Twin Breda Compact Burst [32 rnds]
1x 7.62mm MG Burst [20 rnds]
21x 76mm/50 Twin HE Burst [2 rnds]
6x 76mm/62 Compact HE Burst [4 rnds]
2x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
1x AGM-84A Harpoon IP
16x AIM-54A Phoenix
14x AIM-7F Sparrow III
1x AIM-9L Sidewinder
57x AN/SSQ-53A DIFAR
66x AN/SSQ-62A DICASS
32x Aspide
17x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
14x Mk171 RBOC Chaffstar Chaff
18x Mk182 SRBOC Chaff [Seduction]
4x Mk48 Mod 4
4x Otomat Mk1
12x Otomat Mk2 Mod I
2x RGM-84C Harpoon IB
15x RIM-66A SM-1MR Blk IV
48x RIM-66C SM-2MR Blk I
26x RIM-67B SM-2ER Blk I
11x RIM-7E Sea Sparrow
8x RIM-7H Sea Sparrow
12x SCLAR Chaff



SIDE: Soviet Union
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x BPK Kashin Mod [Pr.61M]
1x SSV Mayak [Pr.502, Intelligence Mod]
1x SSV Okean
6x Su-17M-3 Fitter H


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
10x AK-630 30mm/65 Gatling Burst [400 rnds]
24x AS-4 Kitchen A Mod 3 [Kh-22N ASM]
8x AS-9 Kyle [Kh-28]
11x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
6x PK-2 Chaff [TSP-47]
3x SA-N-1b Goa [M-1M/P Volna-M/P, 4K91 / V-601]
14x SA-N-4b Gecko [9M33M3]
42x SA-N-7 Gadfly [9M38]
8x SS-N-22 Sunburn [P-80 Zubr]
8x SS-N-2c Improved Styx [P-15M]



SIDE: Libya
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x 211 Dat Assawari [Vosper Mk7]
1x 416 Ziyad [Pr.1234E Nanuchka II]
1x S 311 Al Badr [PL-641 Foxtrot]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
1x 114mm/55 Mk8 HE(MP) HE
2x AK-725 57mm/80 Twin HE Burst [6 rnds]
2x Aspide
4x Otomat Mk2 Mod I
2x PK-16 Chaff [TSP-60U]
28x SA-5c Gammon [5V28M5]
8x SA-N-4b Gecko [9M33M3]
4x SS-N-2c Improved Styx [P-15M]
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#21
Before I post any more in the AAR, I wanted to give readers an idea of the type of damage an SS-N-22 does to a ship.  The AS-4 will do roughly the equivalent damage.  This is a Russian SINKEX using an SS-N-22.  Forward to the 0:35 mark to see the hit.

https://www.military.com/video/guided-missiles/antiship-missiles/russian-supersonic-missile-blows-away-vessel/4156566704001
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

Here is a video of the actual attack.  I would appreciate any comments on how to make these videos more interesting, as I am pretty new/inexperienced at this:
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

Summary of action
As previously detailed, the Soviet strike was hamstrung by the premature initiating of hostilities by the USN, which began shooting as soon as the DOWN BEAT targeting radars went active.  That meant that the Su-17s were not properly positioned to support the strike with their ARMs.  Additionally, the lack of communication with the  CHARLIE II SSGN deprived the strike of its SS-N-9 missiles.  However, by 1215Z, the USS EISNEHOWER has been sunk, and only the ITS GARABALDI remains of the Italian CHBG.  My game experience in this scenario is consistent with the historical exercises by the Soviet navy.  In "Soviet Naval Tactics" (pg. 262) Milan Vego noted:

"The most difficult type of joint action to plan and execute is one involving Soviet multipurpose submarines, naval aircraft, and surface ship, especially in distant ocean areas.  Such actions could probably be successful only at the very outset of a war, when the Soviets would carry out surprise massed missile strikes against US CVBGs and other Western ship forces. ...

   In theory the Soviets stress the importance of delivering a massive, concentrated, and coordinated initial strike by composite forces against enemy surface combatants.  The strikes are carried out along different axes.  The time interval between successive missile strikes must create the maximum potential for target destruction.  This is especially true for the strikes organized against US CVBGs.

   Despite the impression to the contrary, there seems to be no coordination among strikes by aircraft, surface ships, and submarines in most of the Soviets' peacetime exercises.  The reason is that the sheer number of Soviet platforms and their diversity complicate greatly any massed, coordinated strike..."


[Commentary: Thus far, in this scenario, I had difficulty in coordinating the submarines, aircraft, and ships.  Also, the widely varying capabilities of the SS=N-9, SS-N-2c, and AS-4 and AS-9 made getting a simultaneous ToT effectively impossible.  Nevertheless, the NATO forces have been seriously damaged (albeit, largely because the BACKFIRE strike was unopposed by either the Italian F-104s or the F-14s.  I'm deeply skeptical that a BACKFIRE raid like I used in this scenario would have not been intercepted 200+ miles away from the CVBG. ]


"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

After a bit of a hiatus, I've had some time to finish this AAR:
1215-1400Z
As my earlier posts indicated, the Soviet Tu-22M strike decimated the USN CVBG and the Italian CHBG.  However, the ITS Garibaldi remained afloat.  The MAKAROV KUG proceeded to close the Garabalidi and at 1245 sank it with SS-N-14s in the surface-to-surface mode. 


This left the remaments of the USN CVBG, consisting of several frigates, a Suprance, and a CG as well as both of the auxilliaries afloat. With the Italian CHBG destroyed, the VICTOR and ALPHA SSNs are directed to make a high speed run to intercept the USN battlegroup.  The FOXTROT SS sank the frigate USS Edward McDonnell at 1253, but then had to dive deep to avoid the counterattacking SH-2 helos.  However, the long- absent CHARLIE II finally established radio contact at 1255, not to coordinate an missile attack with the  two JULLIET SSGs, but to announce it had fired its SS-N-9s-all of them-at the USS EDWARD MCDONNELL.  Overwhelmed, the MCDONNELL was hit and rapidly sank. 
Since a coordinated strike with the JULLIETS was now impossible, I had both of them surface and launch their SHADDOCK missiles at SAVANNAH, BUTTE, SPRUANCE, MISSISIPPI, with a coordinated Time on Top. (Image 11).  The CHARLIE II was then ordered to go deep and proceed to intercept the USN ships and engage with torpedos.

Image 11. SS-N-3 attack


Unfortunately, I forgot about the F-14s. The AIM-54 missile was designed not only to shoot down bombers, but was also designed to engage large, relatively slow missiles like the SHADDOCK.  The F-14s in the area engaged the incoming missiles, and shot down most of them before they reached the USN ships, with the USS MISSISIPPI accounting for the remainder.  In retrospect, I should have waited another hour, after the F-14s had BINGO'd to Italy. 

Meanwhile, at 1358, the FOXTROT attacked and sank the USS SPRUANCE with a torpedo.  At 1602, either the FOXTROT or the CHARLIE II engaged and sank the USS Savannah with multiple torpedoes, and hit the USS BUTTE with one.  However, SH-2s then swarmed the area and located and sank the CHARLIE II.
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#25
Red Tide Scenario 3 "Unwanted Visitors"
Mission and Analysis:
In this scenario, I'm playing as the commander of NATO Standing Naval Force Atlantic (STANAVFORLANT). My  mission is to
"detect and destroy Soviet Units heading for the GIUK Gap."  I interpret this to mean that  Soviet naval units are not to penetrate the GIUK gap into the Atlantic.

Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace:


Environment:
   Area of Operations (AO): The AO is the subsurface, surface, and air region as shown in Figure 1. The AO does not include the territory of Sweden, Finland, or the USSR. 
   The Area of Interest (AI): The AI is the subsurface, surface, and air region bounded located located outside this area.

Figure 1-Area of Operations and Axis of Advance (AOA)



Significant Characteristics of the Battlespace Environment: The Area of Operations is geographically large, resulting in 1-2 hour long transit times for MPA. Water Depths outside the immediate coastal environment range from approximately 900 feet in the Iceland-Greenland straits to over 10,000 feet in the Greenland Sea.

Oceanography
North of 70° latitude the water is isothermal (ie, no layer).  A weak layer between approximately -131 to -240 feet  begins south of 70°latitude, gradually strengthening and deeping moving south.  Convergence Zones (CZs) average 21-42-63-84 nm ( ±5%) in the AOR.


Weather: The Sea State is 3. Surface temperature is 7° C throughout the AOR. Moderate middle cloud cover from 7-16,000 feet with moderate rain predicted for the duration of the operation.   

The weather should have only moderate effect on expected ASW operations, with the primary effect being a minor reduction in acoustic detection range due to the sea state. 

Land Dimension: The ASW airbase and radars in Norway are geographically close to the USSR, making them vulnerable to being struck by air and/or SSM strikes.  In contrast, the P-3C base at NAS Keflavik is outside the strike range of any Soviet aircraft in the scenario.  Sweden and Finland are "No Fly Zones" for both NATO and the Warsaw Pact.  This will help channelize Soviet aircraft flights over the North Cape.

Maritime Dimension:
Choke Points: See Figure 1.  There are three major choke points that may affect operations in the AI.  Naval vessels transiting from the Greenland Sea into the North Atlantic must take one of two avenues of approach (AOA): the Iceland-Greenland Gap (AOA 1), or the Iceland-Faroes Gap (AOA 2).  Ships transiting from the Norwegian Sea have two possible AOAs to the North Atlantic: The Iceland-Faroes gap, (AOA 2) or the Faroes-Shetland gap (AOA 3). 


Air Dimension: The major factors impacting air operations are the distance between bases and the expected operating areas.  Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) from NAS Keflavik and Andoya AB must transit approximately 300nm to reach their expected patrol areas. (Figure 2)  These transit times will reduce on-station time to approximately 6 hours. 

The long distances from Soviet airbase to the operating area and the lack of AEW aircraft will make it difficult, but not impossible for Soviet fighters to effectively operate in the AOR outside of Norwegian airspace.

Figure 2-Transit Distances (AOA)

   
Space, electromagnetic and cyberspace dimensions:
Space: Soviet ELINT satellites are expected to transit the AOR ten or more times per day, significantly impacting the ability of NATO forces to emit radars without detection.  Imaging satellites are expected multiple times per day in the AOR. There are no Radar Ocean Reconnaissance Satellites (RORSAT) in the scenario, minimizing the Soviet ability to target ships at sea that remain in EMCON A. 

NATO has no satellite reconnaissance capability in the scenario. 

Electromagnetic: Expected air radar ranges are shown in Figure 3.  Both NATO and USSR aircraft operating at altitude over Norway and the Kola Peninsula will likely be detected by NATO and Warsaw Pact forces.  NATO enjoys superiority in radar coverage in the maritime regions of the AOR near Iceland.  However, there is no coverage of the AOR outside of approximately 200 nm of Iceland, Norway and the Faroes Islands.  There are no NATO AWACs in the AOR,  so there are significant gaps in NATO air radar coverage in the mid- Atlantic north of the Arctic Circle.  There is no known USSR air radar coverage of the AOR. 

HF and UHF communications are expected to be unaffected throughout the region.

Figure 3-Radar Coverage (AOA)


Acoustic:   NATO has excellent acoustic coverage throughout the AOR through the SOSUS network, and should receive good cueing on most Soviet submarines.
Cyberspace: N/A

Time Dimension: For scenario purposes, 18 hours is allotted to achieve the victory conditions. 

Political and Demographic Dimension: Sweden and Finland are "No Fly Zones" for both NATO and the Warsaw Pact.  This will help channelize Soviet aircraft flights over the North Cape. No other political effects are expected in this scenario.

Battlespace Effects on Courses of Action (COA)

   NATO: The large area and 18 hour time limit the utility of MPA barrier operations.  With less than two full squadrons of MPA, there are insufficient forces to cover such a large geographical area using barrier operations north of the GIUK gap.  The significant NATO advantage in the acoustic detection using the SOSUS network allows for cuing of MPA on specific targets north of the GIUK gap.  Surface barrier operations in the GIUK gap are likely to be more productive, especially with the expected CZs.  However, such operations are vulnerable to submarines leaking through the GIUK gap and reaching the North Atlantic SLOCs to the south.
   USSR: The large geographical area and remoteness from USSR airbases means that there will be little A/A threat to NATO MPA.  NATO acoustic dominance also indicates that Soviet submarines will have to rely on superior numbers to saturate NATO ASW coverage and penetrate south of the GIUK gap.  Soviet forces will also have difficulty in locating the NATO surface units and must transit through Norwegian air defenses before they can detect and attack NATO surface units.

"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#26
IPB (Continued)
Evaluate the Enemy

Armed Forces
Relative Combat Power: The USSR and NATO forces are listed in Table 1 below.  According to the OPTASK ASW, at least eight submarines including SSK and SSN, as well as five (5) DDGs

Table 2 USSR and NATO Force Comparison


USSR Force Capabilities
The ASUW  power of the USSR forces lies largely with the surface fleet and the ASCM equipped BADGER strike aircraft.  Although formidable, the submarine force has no missile capability, requiring them to close to torpedo range and potentially risking attack from MPA or shipborne helicopters. 

USSR Force Location and Disposition
At  scenario start, there is no indication of location of Soviet assets in the AOR.  All Soviet airbases are in the Kola Peninsula.

USSR Force Capabilities
The ASUW  power of the USSR forces lies largely with the surface fleet and the ASCM equipped BADGER strike aircraft.  Although formidable, the submarine force has no missile capability, requiring them to close to torpedo range and potentially risking attack from MPA or shipborne helicopters. 

USSR Force Location and Disposition
At  scenario start, there is no indication of location of Soviet assets in the AOR.  All Soviet airbases are in the Kola Peninsula.


USSR Force Capabilities and Vulnerabilities
The chief capability of the Soviet forces in this scenario are the stealth of the submarine force and the firepower and range of the  ASCM and SSMs of the  Soveremenny DDG. However, absent targeting info, these units will lack the ability to strike NATO surface units. While the Soviet satellite capability is significant, these satellites are all ELINT-types, so they can be neutralized by NATO  remaining in EMCON.  Soviet long range reconnaissance assets must transit through Norwegian air defenses, where they can be attrited before they can conduct any reconnaissance. However, the embarked helos onboard the Udaloy and Sovremenny DDGs are equipped with the long range MUSHROOM search radar, and so they can provide OTH cuing and targeting for both the Soviet SAG and AS-4 equipped BADGER aircraft.  Because of this, targeting the Udaloy and Soveremenny and Badger J recon aircraft is a priority.


USSR Objective

The Soviet forces are estimated to have one of two objectives: 1) the penetration of the GIUK gap by one or more submarines to threaten the Atlantic SLOCs or 2) the destruction of significant number of NATO surface units to assist the penetration of the GIUK gap to follow on Soviet submarines.

"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Tripoli

#27
NATO OOB

Task Unit 603.01.01 [SAG Alpha]
•   HNLMS Jan Van Brakel
•   BNS Wielingen
•   USS Richard E. Byrd
Task Unit 603.01.02 [SAG Bravo]
•   HMS Brilliant
•   HNoMS Stavanger
Task Unit 603.01.03 [SAG Charlie]
•   FGS Hamburg
•   HMCS Skeena
Task Unit 603.01.04 [UNREP Group]
•   NRP Comandante Roberto Ivens
•   FGS Spessart
NAS Keflavik
•   VP-26 - P-3C Orion [8]
•   351st ARS - KC-135A Stratotanker [4]
•   57th FIS - F-4E Phantom II [18]
Bodo
•   331 Sqn - F-16A Falcon [14]
Andoya
•   333 Sqn - P-3 B Orion [3]
Banak
•   338 Sqn - F-16B Falcon [6]
•   336 Sqn - F-5 Tiger II [12]

My plan is to set up a barrier using the P-3Cs 1 CZ (about 30nm) from the surface task forces.  This will hopefully give me contact up to 30-60 nm on any submarine approaching the surface ships, well before they enter into torpedo ranges. This barrier will cover AOA 1 and half of AOA 2.  I will have to rely on SOSUS cuing for coverage of AOA 3, as there are no ships in that area.  The USN P-3s have an excellent APS-115 radar, so I will also use them to do SSC and identify potential threats to the STAFORLANT units.  The Norwegian F-16 will have priority targets any Soviet BADGER aircraft to prevent them from conducting recon in the Atlantic.  EMCON for STAFORLANT ships is ALPHA, all other land based radars are DELTA.

I have a CAP barrier placed approximately 150 nm down the threat axis from the NATO ships, with a tanker refueling box mid-way between the CAPSTA and the NATO ships.  From here, the F-4Es should be able to intercept any reconnaissance or ASCM aircraft before they are able to detect the NATO SAGs.  Because of range and limited number of F-4s and I won't have CAP aircraft in the CAPSTAs until after BADGERs are confirmed to have leaked out of the Norwegian North Cape air defenses.

Aside from prosecuting any unknown subsurface contacts, the priority NATO targets will be the Sovremeny and Udaloy DDGs, as their OTH targeting and SS-N-22 missiles are a significant threat to the surface ships.  Because the SS-N-22 largely outranges most of the ASUW systems on the NATO destroyers, HARPOON-equipped P-3s will be used to attrite these high priority targets.


"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln

Con

Excellent
Are your Icelandic sea tractors positioned?

Tripoli

Con-I'm not sure it will be that easy in this scenario.  The problem for me is to prevent the Soviets from getting any targeting on my ships, as they are all DDGs with minimal air defense capability.  If the Badgers get off an AS-4 strike, the NATO ships are toast.  Technologically speaking, 1985 was just about when the west was fielding enough technologically superior systems (along with the strategy and doctrine to extract the maximum capability of the systems) to begin to overcome Soviet advantages in numbers.  This scenario "feels" to me to be pretty closely balanced.  We'll see how it goes as I play through it.  ;)
"Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?" -Abraham Lincoln