The Falklands War Senario.

Got an interesting idea about a new scenario design? ...or maybe you just need some help with the Scenario Editor; this is the place!

Moderators: AlexS, Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

The Falklands War Senario.

Postby Gen Alexandra » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:01 am

Ok this is my first attempt at creating a senario from scratch.

I am working this as a bit of a "What If" Senario, which will include some of the more elite Argentinian Units which were, during the war tied up on the Chilean Border and protecting Airbases in the south.

Having completed my OoB for both Armys, I am now a little stuck on how to handle the "EXOCET" problem which the British faced during the campaign.

Anyone got a suggestion or two ???

Then I have to work on a 1km ? Map of the Falklands!!!!.
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Mart » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:41 am

Forgive me giving some form of answer, even though I don't yet own Battelfront! As you only live up the road from me, I thought I'd chip in.

The basic defence against the Exocet, in the Falklands campaign was, as I recall, two basic strategies. The first was to keep the main task force as far east of the Falklands as possible such that the Harriers could still function, whilst trying to keep beyond the fuel range of Argentine Mirages and Skyhawks. I think they were aware of the the danger of the Super-Etendard, but even then, to get close, it would be at the limit of it's range.

The second tactic, given that, at maximum range, locating large radar targets would be the priority for an attacking aircraft, they placed large targets in such a way that it was impossible to easily distinguish a carrier from, say, a large cargo ship. They also placed the other warships in a defensive ring of pickets. Even if they could not prevent a missile attack, they could provide a warning, and were able to "muzz up" the radar picture. Although they did lose one important cargo resource, the system did work against the Exocet. Sadly, the price paid was the loss of the Sheffield.

That may be simplistic. I am sure people can give more comprehensive answers. However, keeping the main task force as far to the east as possible was, as I recall, a major part of the tactics, at least initially.
Hope this may be of some help.
Cheers,
Martin
Mart
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 1:34 am

Postby Gen Alexandra » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:41 am

Mart

Your quite right, the Task Force on Operation Corporate after the HMS Sheffield hit, where kept further east than was the original plan.

The first EXOCET strike was un-expected especially by HMS SHeffield, which was on picket for the carriers.

The Britsh overlooked the possibilty of the Argentinians obtaining drop-tanks for the Super Entandard and being able to re-fuel throught he 2 KC-130 tankers they flew.

But my senario is a bit of a "WHAT IF" and I would like to build into it the "EXOCET" problem for the British. That problem could have been far worse if the French had fullfilled the full order to Argentina and modified all the Super-Entandards to accept the avionics, or the Argentinians where able through Peru to purchase a batch of the one hundred ready to ship to Iraq.

Trouble is I cannott hink of a a way of making the "EXOCET" problem a viable senario option, other than to reduce supply on a day to day basis, like I will do to replicate the Atlantic Conveyor sinking.
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Mart » Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:31 am

You could try making a posting, asking for help, on the "Harpoon Section" on the Matrix forums, as the navy tech-heads might have some idea. The only thing I think might be a problem is that if it really were the case that the danger from Exocets and Super-Etendards was greater (in terms of numbers) then it would have been a HUGE problem. As I recall, the British were aware of the limited Exocet capacity. If the capacity had been higher, and given that they had no real airborne early warning system (how did the planners manage that!) the task force might have had to operate so far east, that it couldn't really have functioned at all. I suppose that the only option would then have been landings with greatly reduced air-cover, and as we know, the landing ships were easy targets. My brother-in-law was on The Sir Galahad, so I have a lot of respect for the Argentinians pilot's tenacity and skill, even despite their fuel problems.

It may be that under these circumstances, the task force would have been unable to undertake it's task.

Again, as I understand it, there is still some uncertainty as to how much electronic intelligence assistance may have been given by the US.

Sorry, but after this, I'm at the limit of my knowledge. Do consider the Matrix Harpoon forum though, as they may have some interesting angles on it.

I suppose that one way round the problem might be to completely give up the idea of the viability of the strategy used, in favour of another. We tend to see it as a naval task force, attempting to recapture the Falklands. I imagine that there may have been variations on this that may have applied more direct pressure on the Argentinian mainland, providing you excluded political considerations.

One thing that does occur to me is that that after the Argentinian carrier could not take advantage of it's carrier Skyhawks, and the Belgrano was sunk, their navy effectively retired to port for the remainder of the conflict. This placed them at a disadvantage which you might be able to balance out against a greater Exocet threat. It would however have escalated the war beyond what was politically feasible.

Sorry, but that's me done.

But very good luck now.

Martin
Mart
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 1:34 am

Postby RedMike » Sun Feb 18, 2007 10:54 am

Cool!

AS I recall there was a Falklands War scenario done in a Run5 issue for the original Battlefront.

Look forward to yours.
RedMike
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 12:20 pm

Postby Robert » Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:43 pm

How about making ships Artillery units on man-made 1 hex wide islands in the sea. Then you could similate the exocet as a (sea-bourne?) counter battery unit that comes and goes like the Naval support in Novorossik.

You could give the exocet sufficient range (via range stats and manipulation of the Argentine's sea-lanes) to hit only the pseudo-naval units in the British fleet and not affect the land battle.
Robert
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:40 pm
Location: Missouri, USA

Postby Noakesy » Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:58 pm

As I recall, the Exocet was also dealt with by seawolf missiles, that were available on certain ships (notably not the Sheffield, or was that one of those situations where they had the equipment but it wasn't 'turned on'?) There were also land based Exocets (didn't one of those fired near to Stanely hit Glasgow/Glamorgan or a ship with a similar name, but just scooted across the decks I believe).

All Argentinian Pilots also had problems operating at the extreme of their range (be that Super Etendards or A4 Skyhawks), with the Pucarra (not sure abotu the spelling on that) being the land based STOL prop planes that had been used as against Argentine dissident groups on the mainland in the previous 10yrs or so. I seem to recall that the British also had problems dealing with the aircraft as the Rapier system didn't work very well in hilly conditions (what we would have done if war had broken out in a hilly district of Europe god only knows!). There was also the issue with the time fuses on the Skyhawks meaning bombs fell through decks without exploding (I'm sure you know most if not all of this, but just mentioning some ideas).

The problem with the sinking of the Atlantic Conveyor was that it held the helicpoters I believe, which posed a bit of a problem meaning that the RM had to yomp across from San Carlos Bay.

This has turned into a bit of a 'brain dump' on "things I can recall of 1982" (other than sitting in my nan's lounge thinking "bloody hell, I'm not going to get called up am I" :roll: , and the memorable line on a TV Comedy of a man jumping out of bed shouting "the falklands, they're only a few miles off of scotland") However, I've got various books and stuff (and a board game that was released via a magazine years ago which might have good OOB stuff in it), so let me know what else you need and I'll see if I can find things?
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Postby Gen Alexandra » Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:41 am

Hi Noakesy

What you say is true, HMS Sheffield was indeed in "Cuppa tea" mode and did not expect any attack, even though it was on picket duty. HMS Glasgow which was the intended target for the locked on Exocet Avionics, managed to turn in time, thus presenting HMS SHeffield with a full on target, which the exocet re-alligned onto, the rest is history.

As for the Rapier Batterys, I was one of those Batterys and I can tell you they preformed quite well, downing a few Skyhawks and a couple of Daggers I believe.

What I am trying to create in my senario, is a "WHAT IF".

"WHAT IF" the Argentinian Forces where able to procure another batch of Exocets which they gave them around 20 units to use, how to show that effect within the game mechanics??

Yes reduce the amount of supply per day from the Task Force, but I would like to give the Argentinian Player a little bit extra in the way of Land Based Exocets, which would be able to fire at the Frigates, which bombarded Stanley.

I want the British Player to think twice about running the sound on a bombardment run.

How to put that into the senario within the game mechanics ???
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Noakesy » Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:08 am

Gen Alexandra wrote:As for the Rapier Batterys, I was one of those Batterys and I can tell you they preformed quite well, downing a few Skyhawks and a couple of Daggers I believe.


:lol: well that's told me, shouldn't believe everything I read obviously :wink: :D
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Postby Robjess » Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:51 pm

The Exocet issue will be easy enough to 'replicate' in the scenario in one form or another. You need to consider the following:

- What impact did the Exocet have on the UK forces? And then look at ways which you represent that in the game.

For example, did it cause delays with supplys to ground units? If do reflect this in the supply values.

Or did it present a psycological disadvantage to UK command, in which case this can also be reflected through supply, or integrity bonus' or some other form.

So, like I said.. focus on the imact the Exocet thread had and what that impact had on the battlefield - when you have an answer to that its easy to factor it into the scenario.

For example, in my scenario that I did for the Falklands I reflected the Political pressure that the UK were under to end the war through high VPs for any UK units destroyed - as any UK soldiers killed cause public outcry - so it was vital that losses were minimised. etc.
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Noakesy » Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:19 pm

How are you getting on with this now Alexandra? Seeing all the press in the last few days reminded me you were working on this? :D
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Postby Gen Alexandra » Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:19 am

To be honest it has fallen a little by the way side.

I have all the OoB and the senario worked out, but I need to add everything into the editor along with the map Robjess was working on.

So I have to say, it is not going to well at present, but if I get the map, then I will start to dedicate some more hours to it.

Been away on holibobs for the past couple of weeks as well, so that has not helped.....
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Noakesy » Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:26 am

Well, clearly we now know your background, if you need input from someone watching the tv 8,000 miles away at the time hoping there was no sign of a call up, just let me know :wink: :lol:

As I say, I had a game given away with a magazine that had a game of the Falklands, but I imagine the map is too broad for your purposes.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Noakesy
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:23 pm
Location: UK

Postby Gen Alexandra » Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:57 am

Update:

Well I have now dedicated some hours to this senario and am part way through the MAP creation (layers etc).

I have designed some counters, but need to ask a question:

The dots and symbols on the unit counter (far right) are they mandatory ?

I can cut/crop some from other units which are for the same type of unit from other BF senarios...if that is the easier option.

I reckon on being finished with the design of counters and maps in late January. The I need ask for someone to help in the senario inputs CRT's, Airstrikes etc.

GA
Image
User avatar
Gen Alexandra
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Silverstone - England

Postby Strax » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:20 pm

Noakesy wrote:


and the memorable line on a TV Comedy of a man jumping out of bed shouting "the falklands, they're only a few miles off of scotland")



The Diary of Adrian Mole...I think. If it wasn't then it was said by the same actor who played Adrians father.
User avatar
Strax
Major
Major
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:37 am
Location: Sussex, England

Next

Return to Battlefront Scenario Design

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron