The "Uber" Command: Modern Air/Naval Ops Thread

[Dimitris]

You can get the latest beta from this thread: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3424520

Be sure to read the release notes, and to get the very latest version.

[emsoy]

Yes, modern aircraft are significantly more maintenance-intensive and mission planning & preparation also takes much longer.

USAF's most overtasked airframes during Desert Storm, the F-4Gs, only managed 4 sorties per day during surge ops. Other aircraft such as A-10s and AV-8s managed more sorties and this is reflected in their lower ready times.

WOW!

So - would ANY shortcuts be taken in readiness if there was imminent danger? I'm just thinking, in the window of my Falklands scenario (not mine  :P) that if I send my Harriers up and they head back on bingo fuel and I see a few Mirage IIIs or A-4s heading in - is there anyway at all they would have corners cut in maintenance (in real life) - like not checking everything over (I'm not really sure what happens to an aircraft after a sortie)...so it could just land, load weapons and fuel and off it goes again?

We're planning a 'quick turnaround' option for certain aircraft/loadout combos. Like Israeli attack a/c hot-fueling & re-arming during various wars, A-10s and Marine AV-8Bs doing several CAS sorties in quick succession, Swedish Viggens doing 15-min AAM re-arming, etc.

So the Israeli aircraft could do, say, 2-4 strike sorties with 30 min turnaround time (need to check the sources on the exact number) but would then have to step down for a prolonged period of time for aircraft maintenance and crew rest (say 18-24hrs vice 6hrs).

It should probably be up to the scenario author to enable/disable the quick re-arm option in his scenario. In many cases it would not make sense to have this ability.

How does that sound?

As for cutting corners on maintenance in real life, there are a bunch of 'less obvious' systems that you just do not fly without. Iranians occasionally flew without a working AN/AWG-9s on their F-14s etc, no problem, but not sure you want to step into a combat zone without a working IFF  :o

[jomni]

Yes, modern aircraft are significantly more maintenance-intensive and mission planning & preparation also takes much longer.

USAF's most overtasked airframes during Desert Storm, the F-4Gs, only managed 4 sorties per day during surge ops. Other aircraft such as A-10s and AV-8s managed more sorties and this is reflected in their lower ready times.

WOW!

So - would ANY shortcuts be taken in readiness if there was imminent danger? I'm just thinking, in the window of my Falklands scenario (not mine  :P) that if I send my Harriers up and they head back on bingo fuel and I see a few Mirage IIIs or A-4s heading in - is there anyway at all they would have corners cut in maintenance (in real life) - like not checking everything over (I'm not really sure what happens to an aircraft after a sortie)...so it could just land, load weapons and fuel and off it goes again?

We're planning a 'quick turnaround' option for certain aircraft/loadout combos. Like Israeli attack a/c hot-fueling & re-arming during various wars, A-10s and Marine AV-8Bs doing several CAS sorties in quick succession, Swedish Viggens doing 15-min AAM re-arming, etc.

So the Israeli aircraft could do, say, 2-4 strike sorties with 30 min turnaround time (need to check the sources on the exact number) but would then have to step down for a prolonged period of time for aircraft maintenance and crew rest (say 18-24hrs vice 6hrs).

It should probably be up to the scenario author to enable/disable the quick re-arm option in his scenario. In many cases it would not make sense to have this ability.

How does that sound?

As for cutting corners on maintenance in real life, there are a bunch of 'less obvious' systems that you just do not fly without. Iranians occasionally flew without a working AN/AWG-9s on their F-14s etc, no problem, but not sure you want to step into a combat zone without a working IFF  :o

Sounds good.

[Kushan]

Baloogan Campaign Live now at http://baloogancampaign.com/ and http://www.twitch.tv/baloogancampaign

Awesome stream last night Baloogan. Kept me away from working on my first RSR scenario. If work ever lightens up a little bit I'm going to watch the rest of your videos.

[JudgeDredd]

Yes, modern aircraft are significantly more maintenance-intensive and mission planning & preparation also takes much longer.

USAF's most overtasked airframes during Desert Storm, the F-4Gs, only managed 4 sorties per day during surge ops. Other aircraft such as A-10s and AV-8s managed more sorties and this is reflected in their lower ready times.

WOW!

So - would ANY shortcuts be taken in readiness if there was imminent danger? I'm just thinking, in the window of my Falklands scenario (not mine  :P) that if I send my Harriers up and they head back on bingo fuel and I see a few Mirage IIIs or A-4s heading in - is there anyway at all they would have corners cut in maintenance (in real life) - like not checking everything over (I'm not really sure what happens to an aircraft after a sortie)...so it could just land, load weapons and fuel and off it goes again?

We're planning a 'quick turnaround' option for certain aircraft/loadout combos. Like Israeli attack a/c hot-fueling & re-arming during various wars, A-10s and Marine AV-8Bs doing several CAS sorties in quick succession, Swedish Viggens doing 15-min AAM re-arming, etc.

So the Israeli aircraft could do, say, 2-4 strike sorties with 30 min turnaround time (need to check the sources on the exact number) but would then have to step down for a prolonged period of time for aircraft maintenance and crew rest (say 18-24hrs vice 6hrs).

It should probably be up to the scenario author to enable/disable the quick re-arm option in his scenario. In many cases it would not make sense to have this ability.

How does that sound?

As for cutting corners on maintenance in real life, there are a bunch of 'less obvious' systems that you just do not fly without. Iranians occasionally flew without a working AN/AWG-9s on their F-14s etc, no problem, but not sure you want to step into a combat zone without a working IFF  :o

Sounds great.

Though I would like to see the option available on ALL scenarios...I really don't want to be hampered against incoming bogeys because I've got a stubborn crew chief who wants to test every system before throwing up my Harriers - and if there were inbound bogey's the likelihood is everyone on that ship/airfield, including the pilots, would want to get up in the air as quickly as possible.

As Dimitris said - there should be a chance of failure of a system (when/if you introduce that) or, until then, of the plane crashing...which should escalate probably exponentially each time you choose that option for that airframe.

Just my opinion. As an interim, I'd be happy with having the option to "fast prep" aircraft for a sortie.

[Nefaro]

I was going to suggest that we don't get to see other sides forces because they're a bit of a spoiler - but it's an option - and I'm for options. I can avoid looking if I don't want to see the other sides platforms.

Probably not a good idea since there's no good way to look up some enemy platforms that you've had confirmed in your Orders or have had a previous detection on and lost.  We probably don't want to dig through the full DB to find them.

If it were possible to only add them to the list when first detected, as a special scenario start situation, or when listed in the possible platforms list of the ESM emitter classification window then that would be pretty cool.  But I'm sure we agree there are bigger fish to fry at the moment.  :D

You do know our contact report dialog does do that right?

If there an emitting contact that you don't know much about select the contact report button. Will give you a list of possible contacts.

Yeah, I know the contact report does that.  Was just making sure that those would also be included in any scenario platform browser that may include some fog of war mechanic.  Along with previous contacts detected, of course.  Hypothetical FOW ideas.

[CptHowdy]

playing air tutorial. I keep getting further without the program locking up so I guess that's a good sign!! anyway my sead patrol has 6 planes, they go in but are unable to destroy the sam sites. they RTB(Winchester) like they are supposed to do but when they get back to base they have a 6 hour turnaround time. the scenario itself is only like 4 hours. I also ordered my 12 tomcats to RTB since there were no more air threats. I unassigned from mission. when they got back to base they went into readying status for like 10-20 minutes. why would they do this? there mission was complete. they should stand down and wait for further orders. my land strike aircraft also RTB(Winchester) and they now have 6 hour turnaround times and the mission will be over in 2. I find it odd that the tomcats returned to base and were able to be rearmed in about 15 minutes but my other aircraft have to wait 6 hours. I am using build 438.

  it's a scenario constraint to make the most out of your first strike (no second chances).
Remember not 100% of the squadron is available.  If they were then you can quickly launch a 2nd strike.
Hence the 1/3 rule.

ok great. first strike or bust! the instructions tell me to turn off active radar for my sead patrol so they can approach more stealthily. should this remain passive the whole time or should I make it active once they reach the patrol area?? I had 6 planes with shrikes and 2 sam sites and 1 king radar. they missed horribly. can you even destroy the industrial and missile assembly sites with one pass? I think my bombs destroyed a building or two but not the whole complex. why were the tomcats able to rearm so quickly? is it because they are just air to air and don't need to plan anything?

[Bismarck]

Is there a way to filer for images in the Database Viewer of do I have to go into the folder and use the image sub-folder? Thanks.

Never mind; I got what I needed. I've now successfully completed all tutorials.

[LongBlade]

Hi guys. It's the slow kid in class, again.

First, I'd like to thank everyone for their kindness and understanding in my slowness on the uptake. I think I may have discovered one of the reasons. I think I may have a bug on the right hand menu interface. For some reason I can't see the entire right hand menu for my units. Below is a screenshot.

I've downloaded the 439 beta patch and installed it (as should be evident at the top of the screen). Any thoughts?

[mikeck]

I get that to...usually it's just info left over from an older highlighted unit

[Bismarck]

mikeck is right; your screen shows what's need. To check, select an unit.

[LongBlade]

I get that to...usually it's just info left over from an older highlighted unit

Yes, but don't you assign orders to units from there? I can't ever see the entire menu - at least for planes.

[Bismarck]

No, you assign orders from Unit Orders on the top menu, right-clicking the unit for a drop-down menu or by hot keys.

[LongBlade]

No, you assign orders from Unit Orders on the top menu, right-clicking the unit for a drop-down menu or by hot keys.

I'm really lost. I can order aircraft to take off from the airbase using that menu. I thought I saw Balooga using some of the right hand menu for activity, too.

I dunno. I'll go back and watch again.

[MikeGER]

LB, you play with a windows text magnification setting (or how its called in English) of 125% (like i use also for better reading)

for Command (and some other Matrix titles also, like BftB for example) you must set it back to 100%, unfortunately