ArmA 2 Tactics: The Definitive Guide by Dslyecxi

This gentleman Dslyecxi is just amazing. In addition to his previous guide for ArmA, now he has a guide for ArmA2.


Thanks again Dslyecxi for an amazing job. I'm looking forward to apply all the stuff from your guide into the game.

My hat goes off to you, sir.

Cheers,

Unscratched Itches of June

The month of June is coming to an end and I could not complete many of the things I had planned.

• I have an un-opened copy of IL-2: 1946 (birthday present).
  

I played the original IL-2 (plus Forgotten Battles) quite a bit in the past but now that I'm a grown up who can afford a HOTAS, pedals and TrackIR, I want to revisit this great flight simulator series

• Battle Group Commander: Episode One.
  

My initial forays into commanding British forces have been a disaster. This is one of the things I like from ProSim war games: if you are lousy, they really punish you hard.

• DCS Black Shark.
  

I want to try out the weapons delivery tactics I wrote about a few days ago. Yep, I have been delivering advice without trying it beforehand. Writing is cheap, folks.

• ArmA 2.
  

The copy I ordered from NWS Online Gaming Store it's in the mail right now. No rush here, even if a copy of ArmA2 would drop from the sky right into my hands at this precise moment, I wouldn't have had the time to install it anyway.

• Combat Mission Shock Force: Marines Module.
  

This one I promised to get back into when my disappointment over the suicidal computer-controlled soldiers washes off. To put me in the mood, a couple of days ago I visited the official Battlefront forums to see what's up. It's business as usual over there, nobody would acknowledge there is a problem with the TacAI of this game. Only few people still make the majority of posts there: developers, beta-testers and those who want to be beta-testers.

• War gaming the break-out from Normandy during 1944.
  

Does it happen to you with certain historical battles that despite a lot of media exposure, they just don't lit that fire in your belly that make you go an try to war game them? Normandy was one of those battles for me. After reading "Tank Tactics" everything changed for me and now I'm in for some serious war gaming. Game chosen already: "Anglo-German War 1939-1945" by Schwerpunkt Games. Look at this beauty:


So many games, so little time ...

Cheers,

Are World Wars a thing of the past?

This weekend I was playing one of these wonderful Panzer Campaigns war games when I was struck (yet again) by the sheer scope of WWII in the Eastern front. Granted I was playing a tiny scenario of the Minsk 44 war game, not the greatest showdown of men and material compared to other battles in the Soviet Union. Still I was there in command of the 3rd and 48th Armies (1st Belorussian Front), and using air support from the 16th Air Army. At my command: 32590 men 1256 guns 737 vehicles and 330 planes. I say it again, this is not the biggest battle of military history. But I couldn't bring myself to think about what would be in real life to have all these resources at my disposal.



Nowadays, they speak about the so-called three block wars, low intensity conflicts and small wars. These types of conflicts appear to have been particularly frequent in the recent past ten years.

Are big wars a thing of the past?

How big is the average war, anyway?

Professional staticians prefer to speak about the frequency distribution of the values observed rather than about averages only. Everybody has heard of the bell-shaped curve of the archetypal Gaussian normal distribution (see the image at right). Is a curve where the x-axis indicates the value measured and the y-axis indicates how frequent that value was found in a population. The average is the value in the x-axis where the curve has a peak and is the most typical value found in a population.




What the frequency distribution of the sizes of wars looks like?



Back in 1960, a very smart fellow named Richardson took casualties data from wars on record and plotted them in a way similar than the one shown above. Number of casualties in the x-axis and frequency of the wars having x-casualties in the y-axis.
[Please note the word "similar". There is some mathematical geeky tricks behind the type of plot Richardson made, unfortunately these tricks are beyond the scope of this blog.]
Richardson didn't find a normal distribution for the size of wars (see the graphic at the right, taken from "Modeling the Size of Wars" by Lars-Erik Cederman). The data showed lots of small wars, fewer large ones and just two of cataclysmic size (WWII and WWI). In other words, he found that the size of wars was inversely proportional to their frequency. Also, his plot shows no peak, which means that there is not a typical size for wars.

The type of distribution shown above are so-called "power-law distributions" because the frequency decays following a power law. Power law distributions are typical of systems that self-organize into a critical state where a tiny fluctuation can trigger either an event of tremendous magnitude or just a smaller, almost non detectable one. The friction between tectonic plates is a good example of these "self-organized at a critical state" systems. The tectonic plates collide with each other, releasing energy in the form of earthquakes. The intensity of earthquakes show exactly a power law distribution.

Scientists like Cederman, have been arguing that warfare is one of those self-organized at a critical state systems. The analogy of the tectonic plates and the release of energy in the form of earthquakes is more than appealing. It also leads to the unsettling conclusion that, once the pieces are all set, there may be nothing to stop a world war.

It was 11 A.M. on a fine summer morning in Sarajevo, June 28 1914, when the driver of an automobile carrying two passengers made a wrong turn. The car was not supposed to leave the main street, and yet it did, pulling up into a narrow passageway with no escape. It was an unremarkable mistake, easy enough to make in the crowded, dusty streets. But this mistake, made on this day and by this driver, would disrupt hundreds of millions of lives, and alter the course of world history.

Mark Buchanan in "Ubiquity"

So, to answer the question in the title of this entry: there is no way to tell if humankind will endure another world war. We should expect frequent small wars, that's for sure. But we should never underestimate the power of a chauffeur's mistake ...

Cheers,

"A Gap in the Screen", A New Scenario for Steel Beasts ProPE

This is the same scenario I used for my "hunter-killer platoon" after action report.

The description of this scenario follows.

A US Cav Sq is executing a screen mission in the Iraqi desert. Around 5 AM, the Sq Commander became aware of a 4 km-wide gap in the Sq's screen line. A quick inspection of the gap was attempted and some Iraqi vehicles were destroyed, but it is evident there are enemy vehicles west of the Sq's intended screen line. 3 BMPs and at least 4 T-72s were seen hastily retreating east. Time is now 6:20 and your Cav Plt is tasked with clearing the marked sector of enemy armored vehicles and re-establish the screen line no later than 8:10 AM.


Expected enemy resistance is probably a mechanized infantry Co(-), likely reinforced with at least 4 T-72s. Your Plt is organized in two "hunter-killer" teams (each one consisting in 2 M3 CFVs and 1 M1 MBT) plus a 2 M3 CFV team. Units located north and south of your sector continue with their screen mission. Watch your fires, we don't any blue-on-blue incidents. The Sq's aerial component is grounded until meteorological conditions improve. No indirect fires allowed due to the close position of the other Plts north and south of your sector. Good luck,

You can download the scenario at the "Real and Simulated Wars Companion Website".

Cheers,

DCS Black Shark Tactics Primer (Part 3)

The attack

This entry relies heavily in material taken from this web page. Images are used without authorization but without monetary gain. Please comment if you need them removed.

Several forms of attack are described below. You will have to choose among those based in the following considerations:

• The mission objective (area objective, groups of units, individual units, etc)
• The firepower and maneuver opportunities available to the enemy
• Terrain
• Climate
• Fire support available (number of helicopters in your flight, indirect artillery fire, etc)
• Time available to complete the mission
• Collateral damage to civilians

Attack from the horizontal flight

Once you have determined the area where you want to attack (usually without knowing the exact position of the targets) you climb keeping forward speed until you reach the minimum altitude that allows you to detect the enemy. As soon as you detect the enemy, you stop climbing and continue the horizontal flight trying to get your selected weapon in range. After firing the selected weapon, you break right or left and simultaneously drop altitude so you can better use the terrain to mask your return in the opposite direction of the attack.

The good

• You can use a great variety of weapons with this form of attack
• The time you spent above the minimum altitude is relatively small
• Can be used under unfavorable climatological conditions, like low ceiling
• You can use non-guided munitions
• (Very little piloting skills needed!)

The bad

• Short time available to detect and destroy enemy units
• There is always a chance to be detected and engaged by enemy anti-air defenses while you fly at altitudes above the minimum

Attack from the dive

This type of attack can be used against area or individual targets. You can use un-guided munitions or the cannon in this type of attack.
You start flying at minimum altitude and maximum speed. Around 6 km from the target, you climb abruptly up to an altitude such as you can descend on a dive with your nose pointing directly to the targets. This altitude is generally higher than the minimal altitude needed to detect the targets. You then dive towards the targets, firing your weapons. You then quickly break and return towards the opposite direction of the attack.

The good

• Better chances that you will detect the targets because of the high altitude used during the approach
• Better chances of hitting targets with non-guided rockets
• (Adrenaline rush!)

The bad

• You will be flying higher during the approach and enemy anti-aircraft systems can detect and engage you
• Impossible to use under low ceiling conditions
• You need to keep an eye on airspeed and rotor rpm

Attack from the hover

You start from a position where your hovering helicopter is covered by terrain and bob up or pop sideways to acquire the targets. These movements must be conducted in a way that quickly allows you to return to the covered position in case the enemy detects and/or engages you.

The good

• Ideal for ambushing the enemy
• If you are flying with wingmen, you can distribute targets with the other members of the flight more easily
• (Allows the virtual pilot to sip beer and eat pizza during the attack)

The bad

• Ideal for the enemy ambushing you
• Almost impossible to use non-guided rockets
• Difficult to implement for flights of more than two helicopters (it's difficult to find a terrain feature big enough to cover 3 or more helicopters)
• Risk of brown-out and/or impairment of optical systems performance
• (Increased risk of beer-spattered keyboard and cheese-stuccoed monitor monitor if the enemy is waiting for you right behind that bloody hill)

Attack from the climb

This form of attack can be used only with rockets or bombs. This type of attack should be considered an exception rather than a norm.
You start a climb with horizontal speed with the nose of your helicopter at a positive angle. At certain distance form the target, you launch your rockets or bombs in a way that they fly in an arc. You then reverse your flight trajectory and simultaneously dive towards the safety of terrain cover.

The good

• This form of attack increases the range of rockets and bombs
• You keep more distance from the target
• Can be used even when climate conditions are such that visually acquiring targets is difficult
• (If you hit something of value, you will have eternal bragging rights)

The bad

• Low precision
• Munitions impact on a wide area
• Watch out for not accidently letting your rockets and bombs on friendly troops

Cheers,

Theatre of War 2: Africa 1943, Review at Out of Eight

Another great review by James Allen.

His latest review of "Theatre of War 2: Africa 1943" is up at his site "Out of Eight PC Game Reviews".

Theatre of War 2 is a game that improves nothing from the original and actually turns out worse.

Theatre of War was one of many games I wanted to try sometime, but I'm afraid it's off the list permanently.

Moving on.

Cheers,

Eurofighter simulator for the Italian Air Force

According to the latest issue of Training and Simulation Journal, the Italian Air Force has received its first Eurofighter training simulator.

Amenities include replica of the aircraft cockpit, motion and sensor simulator systems, a synthetic visualization system with 13 projection channels illuminating a spherical dome with a 360 degree field of view in daylight plus forward-looking infra-red and night vision goggle scenarios.

Yeah, very cool ... but I bet you get extremely low FPS near cities ... :)

Picture from Alenia Aeronautica, likely not the simulator delivered to the Italian Air Force. Used without authorization but without monetary gain.

Ok, back to our HOTAS ... :(

Cheers,

ArmA 2, Shipping Now within the US

ArmA 2 boxes are being shipped around the US!

• ArmA 2 at GoGamer.com, shipping now. $49.90
  

• ArmA 2 at NWS Online Gaming Store, starts shipping tomorrow. $39.99

And if you don't want to wait for the mailman, there is off course ArmA2 at Steam, available June 26th.

Cheers,

UPDATE: The price of ArmA 2 from NWS Online Gaming Store has increased up to $39.99

DCS Black Shark: Tactics Primer

The "Tactics Primer" series has been a very popular one.

I have consolidated it for a more convenient read and it can be found at the "Real and Simulated Wars-Companion Website".

Please follow this link to read it.


More stuff regarding attack helicopter tactics is coming soon. Make sure to check it out!

Cheers,

An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread

The AAR that I started here (split in several parts), is now consolidated in the
"Real and Simulated Wars-Companion Website".

Please follow this link to the entire AAR.

Cheers,

A Companion Website for the Real and Simulated Wars Blog

This blog had an unprecedented amount of visitors during the past two months. Thank you so much for visiting!

There are several topics in this blog that have been more popular. Unfortunately, due to the format constrains of blogs, they have to be spread in several posts. This forces the reader to go back and forth for each part of the topic. For example, the DCS Black Shark Tactics Primer: written in several entries, the entries disappear from the most recent list. It's a mess.

I think those popular topics are better off in a more friendly format, like a small website.


So, during the next few months I will be experiment with a companion website for this blog. In this companion website you can read these topics without the hassle of navigating through this blog.

Presenting, the "Real and Simulated Wars-Companion Website".

It's small, experimental and graphically unpretentious. You will have to excuse the lack of flashy stuff there.

I hope you like it and please comment if you have suggestions. I really appreciate your feedback.

Cheers,

America's Army 3: Overwhelmed Servers, Underwhelmed Newbie

America's Army 3 has been released yesterday.

I downloaded and installed it late at night yesterday. Then I got to register an account and create a soldier character. All this data gets sent to a server somewhere, I think it's called an authentication server. Then I went into training and afterward lost all my achievements , I don't know why.

Although I couldn't get past two training sessions, I like it and it looks like the most fun lies ahead.

Graphically, the game is appealing and runs at decent frame rates in my aging system. Funny enough, entering my data the interface was a lag-fest. After I quit the game, it took like half a minute for my mouse to respond again. They say the servers were overwhelmed by traffic last night. Maybe this game communicates with those servers a tad too much.

I'm afraid I will leave this one for the future.

Cheers,

Combat Mission Shock Force: British Module Featured at "Rock, Paper, Shotgun"

The guys at "Rock, Paper, Shotgun" have published an after action report of "Combat Mission Shock Force: British Module".

I like the guys of RPS. They write very concise and full of humor articles. This after action report was no exception.

If the RPS guys got a review copy, does this mean that the module is near release?

Going through the article, I remembered one of the things I didn't like about Combat Mission Shock Force: scenarios are almost always a cake walk. Look how well the author of the AAR did. Sure, he got some men down, but have you seen the Syrian casualties? Is not only the abysmal casualty figures, is also about the silly ways virtual soldiers get killed. Like walking right into a kill zone, with the corpses of their comrades in plain sight.

I wouldn't know where to point regarding which is the critical thing missing or wrongly modeled in CMSF. Maybe is a combination of several things.

I am under the impression that the grogs waiting for the new CMx2 Normandy game are in for some utter disappointment.

Cheers,

Horse and Musket: Volume I, Two Articles at Wargamer.com

Well, if these two articles don't get your 18th century wargaming juices flowing, nothing will ...

William Trotter, prolific writer, historian and wargamer, has written two wonderful pieces for Wargamer.com:

Historical Article: The Seven Years War

After Action Review: Horse and Musket Vol I

Cheers,

Horse and Musket: Volume I Released

This may be the best computer war game out there for the age of Frederick the Great.
I have very fond memories playing the previous version, "The Prussian War Machine".

A new revamped war game by Boku Strategy Games, is now available from Matrix Games.

Cheers,

DCS Black Shark, Patch Delayed Until August

In this thread at the official DCS Black Shark forums, Matt Wagner has stated that the much waited-for patch will be released around August.

From that thread:

Eagle Dynamics Update – 15 June 2009
It’s been a little over a month since the last update, so I thought it time to bring you all up to speed:
1- DCS: Black Shark Update/Patch. The update/patch is still in work but many more of the training tracks are broken due to update/patch changes than we first expected. Moving forward with DCS: A-10C Warthog, it is unlikely we will continue using the track file system for training missions! Between this and a couple of high-priority, time-sensitive tasks that have come up, the update/patch will probably not be released until August 2009. We understand that this is disappointing news to some, but believe me when I say that we want to release the update/patch even more than any of you.
2- DCS: Black Shark Printed Manual. Regarding North American distribution, the manuals have arrived at the distributer’s warehouse and will be sent to both GoGamer.com and Amazon.com. We apologize for the delay on this.
3- DCS: Black Shark Localization. Our localization manager and the dedicated Spanish translation team are working very hard on finalizing the Spanish version and are now at the release candidate stage.
4- DCS: A-10C Warthog. Not much to report here other than progress is good and it we will go into alpha testing after the Black Shark patch is released. Probably starting in August we’ll be discussing this project in more detail and I will start the Producer Notes soon after. We appreciate the PM beta tester application, but please note that we are not accepting beta tester applications at this time.
5- Lock On: Flaming Cliffs. As mentioned in the last update, we are working on a further evolution of this product line. However, until the software is essentially done, we will not be discussing this in any detail. Sorry.
6- 3rd Party Tools. As some of you may have noticed a Tool Wiki is available here: http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/All_about_land and forum discussion here: http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=89 In the near future we will be adding an additional 18 documents regarding terrain construction (kudos to Hawg11). Later in the year we will be adding additional plug-ins and instructional documents to create new aircraft.
Matt Wagner
Producer, TFC/Eagle Dynamics

There is one update that will be available sooner than August and that is a new version of the Georgian Oil War campaign. Again, Matt Wagner in the same thread as above:

Given the unfortunate delay in getting the 1.0.1 patch out, the one item I could released early is an updated version of the included Georgia Oil War campaign. This version includes many adjustments based on user feedback.
Primary changes:
- Various identified scripting errors fixed
- Player killed point penalty removed
- Cold start on all missions that do not have fixed timing issues
- Vista warning removed
- Mission titles based on mission type removed to avoid confusion
- All offensive missions now are rated between 51 and 100 to provide more random mission assignment due to players always trying to max score at 100
- Force on force missions now start player at 50 pts.
- Radar SAMs in third chapter removed
- Recon zones increased to 3,000 meters
- AD systems at route points have even lower random variable settings
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.c...oducts&lang=en

Please follow this link to the new Georgian Oil War campaign (v1.1).

This patch better be worth the wait ... Just kidding.

I've just browsed the official forums and there are some disgruntled virtual pilots. Not many.

Waiting ... waiting ...


Cheers,

An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 5)

6:55, Time to move the two M3 CFVs from team 2-A (north flank) out as "hunters".

I want to find out where the enemy tanks are before moving forward the already mauled team 3-A (south flank).

The two M3 CFVs from team 2-A leave the M1 tank behind and move cautiously in separate directions. All those trooper skills will come in handy right now. One M3 CFV (vehicle 2/2-A) moves some 500 meters south and finds no trace of the enemy. The other M3 CFV (vehicle 4/2-A) moves west. At 7:12, vehicle 4/2-A finds two Iraqi T-72s some 1.2 km south of its position. We finally found where the enemy armor is.

Vehicle 4/2-A finds the enemy.Please click the image for an expanded view.

Having accomplish its task (find the enemy and report) I should have pulled out this "hunter" out of harms way. I was in the commander's seat of this vehicle at this point and I have to tell you, the view shown in the previous screenshot chilled my spine. When the spotting of enemy armor happened I had this M3 CFV in an un-covered position, with a ridgeline behind me.

Not the best of places to find out enemy armor with an M3 CFV. The view from vehicle 4/2-A when the enemy armor was spotted. The enemy tanks are somewhere far in the background.Please click the image for an expanded view.

I threw smoke in front and panicked. I could have pulled out moving to my right but I didn't have the guts to leave the safety of the smoke curtain. As usually I couldn't remember about the smoke generator. I was not going to retreat my M3 by moving backwards and cresting the small ridge behind. Sequentially showing the top and then the belly of the vehicle to a couple of enemy tanks is not a good idea.

The it became obvious that the two tanks haven't seen my M3 CFV, so I engaged both tanks with TOWs. Two enemy tanks destroyed. So much for "hunter", this M3 CFV just became a "killer".

Situation at 7:12. We found enemy armor ... and killed it.Please click the image for an expanded view.

A view of the two Iraqi T-72s killed with TOWs.Please click the image for an expanded view.

I bugged out from the area and returned back to the safety of the hills near the M1 tank.

We found and killed two tanks already. The other enemy tanks should be nearby but cannot be spotted from our northern flank team. It's time to move forward team 3-A (south flank).

To be continued ...

P/S: I am sorry the story is trickling down so slowly. Flooded with stuff both at the office and at home.

Cheers,

US Army Command & General Staff College Wargames at the Origins Convention

In this forum thread at Wargamer.com, Dr. James Sterrett from CGSC confirms he will be holding staff war games at the Origins game fair.

Scheduled war games are Flashpoint Germany (Matrix Games), TacOps (Battlefront) and Battles from the Bulge (Panther Games).

On a side note, the mighty David Glantz is scheduled to lecture during the game fair.

I want to attend to this fair, but I'm afraid I spent too much of my leave with job interviews lately.

Cheers,

An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Team in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 4)

Around 6:51, all teams are at the edge of the palm trees, scanning west before moving on.

An artillery barrage falls over team 4-A (center group, 2 M3 CFVs). Team 4-A pulls back to safety un-harmed. The enemy has seen us. There must be some infantry OPs somewhere.

Team 4-A pulls back to avoid the artillery fire.

With the certainty that the enemy has seen us, I order everybody to wait for a couple of minutes, and scan the terrain west. No victors out there.

I am a bit scared of letting both teams 2-A and 3-A to start moving west. I choose team 2-A (north flank) as the one to move on first because its avenue of infiltration/penetration is closer to the limit of our sector. If something nasty happens during their approach, they can move north to safety relatively fast.

Team 2-A moves up

Team 2-A advances northwest through a small valley. Formation column, with the tank up front. Because the terrain now is a bit more closed, I want to make sure that if contact is to happen during the march, a tank is the first thing the enemy faces

Another artillery barrage, now on team 3-A (southern flank), produces the first loss. An M3 CFV falls prey to the fire from the sky. This is not a good start.

Team 3-A suffers the first loss.

Fortunately, team 2-A (northern flank) advances unopposed.

Another view of the advance of team 2-A

It’s now 6:55 and the time of deploying the “hunters” of team 2-A has come.

Situation at 6:55. Note team 2-A's advance.

To be continued ...

Cheers,

An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 3)

The Execution

A side note: I played this scenario jumping from one vehicle to another. This may not be of the liking of simulation purists out there, but I wanted the whole hunter-killer experience for this report.

From 6:30 to 6:49

All teams move forward. Teams 2-A and 3-A, move in a spread out “vee” formation, with two M3 CFVs forward and an M1 tank behind. With the new mixed units feature of v2.146, it was just a couple of mouse clicks to have the M3s and the M1 moving as a formation. I wish it would be an option to spread the formation even more, to have the tank 300 meters behind the M3 CFVs.

Passing through the wreck of an Iraqi recon vehicle. Click on the image for an expanded view.

We scan the terrain ahead, but no victors are found. We cross the only place of our sector where there is some green vegetation.

Situation at 6:49 AM. Bug report: teams 2-A and 3-A show as a single tank icon in the AAR section of SB ProPE.Click on the image for an expanded view.

Team 2-A emerges from the palms in a "vee" hunter-killer formation.Click on the image for an expanded view.

To be continued ...

Cheers,

An An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 2)

The Plan

We are deep in the desert. Right in front of us there is a small valley, oddly scattered with palm trees. West of that valley, the hills we have to clear. Once we get inside this hilly terrain, long range engagements (in which we have such an awesome edge) will be impossible. Whatever happens in the hills, it will be a knife-fight. It's early in the morning and a moderate sandstorm has limited the visibility to 1 km.

Based on the light resistance we found in the last hours and the lack of prepared enemy defenses, the enemy forces are likely conducting a mobile security mission. One hour ago, our Sqn command group has destroyed two PCs and one tank (see reference points in the map). At least 4 T-72s and 5 BMPs were seen hastily moving west.

Our task is to clear the enemy from the sector indicated in the map and restore the screen line.

Forces available for this mission are a US Cav Plt (6 M3 CFV, 2 M1 MBT) which I organized as a Hunter-Killer Plt (see previous post). The Squadron's aerial component is grounded until the climate conditions improve. We have no indirect fire support available for this mission.

My scheme of maneuver is, sequentially:
1) Clear the valley with the whole Hunter-Killer (HK) Plt
2) Infiltrate or force a penetration of the hilly terrain via small valleys/low terrain at the north and southern extremes of the sector with HK teams 2A and 3A
3) Teams 2A and 3A conduct mutually supported HK missions to find and destroy the enemy forces. Team 4A (2 M3 CFVs) stays back in the small valley, alerts of any enemy movement in the west part of the sector and stays ready to reinforce HK operations of teams 2A and 3A

H-K and HK: Hunter-Killer tactics; click the image for an expanded view

The infiltration/penetration of the hilly terrain of 3A HK team (southern flank) could have been made a bit more down south, near the southern edge of the sector. I opted for a small low terrain entrance a bit north than that because I wanted to make sure that team 3A could support team 2A.

Coming up next: the execution

Cheers,

An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 1)

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern. (You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread.) Heinz Guderian
Meaning that you should concentrate your Panzers for one mighty push in one direction and not distribute them over a large area. From WikiQuotes.

The action described below is from a custom-made Steel Beasts ProPE scenario featuring a US Cavalry Plt tasked with filling a gap in a screen line.

This scenario is loosely based in the actions of the 2nd Plt, A Troop, 1-4 US Cavalry near objective Norfolk during the Gulf War. During the early hours of 27 Feb 1991, 1-4 US Cav was conducting a screen mission for 1 ID. The S3 of the unit, Major John Burdan became aware that A and B Troops have been inadvertently moving away from each other while moving to establish the screen line. Thus, a gap in the screen line was generated. The 1st Squadron commander (LTC Robert Wilson) decided to inspect the screen line personally, taking along one M3 and an M113. This command group found a dug-in Iraqi T-72 and quickly dispatched it. Soon it became evident that BMPs and T-72s were behind the 1st Squadron's screen line. Lacking the firepower needed to clear this enemy group, the 2nd Plt of A Troop (2LT Adrian Lowndes) was called in to clear the enemy positions and to re-establish de screen line. More details can be found at "The Road to Safwan", by Bourque and Burdan (pages 151 to 153).

Please keep in mind "loosely based". This scenario is not an historical recreation. Over time, I profusively edited the scenario and kept getting rid of the many difficulties the Troopers of 1-4 US Cav have encountered in real-life. Navigation in an almost featurless desert, with few GPS units, with 1/500,000 maps and at night. How they did it, it escapes my comprehension. To make it up for my scenario's numerous excesses, I situated the action during a moderate sandstorm (low visibility), with no air support and no indirect fires availble for blue. I made the gap in the screen almost 4 km wide. I also reinforced the Iraqis with two plts of T-72s and three plt(-) of BMPs, all deployed in depth with infantry-manned OPs up front. I also gave the Iraqis random start positions and two crude plans of armored counter-attack which are triggered based in the reports by the infantry OPs.

The main purpose of editing and playing this scenario was to learn how to use hunter-killer teams in a hasty attack. M3/M1 hunter-killer teams have been widely used by US Cavalry formations during both Iraq wars. For this scenario, I have an US Cav Plt composed of 6 M3 CFVs and 2 M1 MBTs. I organized this Plt as described in an article that appeared in the Armor magazine, back in 1993.

The Hunter-Killer Cavalry Platoon, as described in Armor magazine. (Click the image for an expanded view)

Without further ado, the mission.

The tactical situation. (Click on the image for an expanded view)

The blue units at the north and south extremes of the map, are part of the squadron's screen line and they are out of my control. The gap between both of them is where enemy presence is suspected. The units is at the eastern extreme of the map are part of my Plt. You will have excuse me in that each of them show Plt symbols and nomenclature. They are all just part of the same US Cav Plt. Units 3-A and 2-A have a tank symbol but they are actually composed of 1 M1 MBT and 2 M3 CFVs. This is the first time I use the new mixed units feature of v2.146! :)

The task is to execute a "clear" tactical mission and re-establish the screen line (dotted arrows located at the western edge). The "clear" tactical mission is ussualy executed after very careful planning and is supported with multiple assets. Clearly not the case for this scenario, but I'm claiming METTTC considerations. :)

To be continued ...

Cheers,

The "Tactics 101" Series at Armchair General

For all of us looking for quality reading material about military tactics, Armchair General has been offering the "Tactics 101" series since 2006.

These articles cover a lot of tactical mileage and are written by two professional soldiers. This articles consolidate a lot of information spread across several US Army and US Marine Corps doctrinal publications.

Armchair General should consider putting all these articles together, print them and sell them as a stand-alone supplement. It would be a pity if this material gets lost in some website transition or archiving.

Cheers,

"Tank Tactics, from Normandy to Lorraine", by Roman Jarymowycz

Just finished reading this book.

"Tank Tactics, from Normandy to Lorraine", by Roman Jarymowycz is a wonderful mix of scholastic treatise on armor doctrine and engaging battlefront stories and anecdotes.

This book is about the evolution of armor doctrine among the US and Canadian forces, from the end of WWI to the trying months after the WWII Normandy landings.

This is a must read for anybody interested in armored warfare. The first chapters are devoted to the post-WWI years, and all the confusion the tank brought into military doctrine. How were tanks to be used grand-tactically, as a breaktrhough ram, as an exploitation weapon or as a pursuit one? The soul-searching of the US Cavalry with their tank vs horse debate follows, with a bit less of detail as in other books by Jarymowycz but nonetheless very informative. The meat and potatoes of the book is the analysis of Operations Goodwood, Cobra, Totalize and Tractable. The author makes great emphasis in the good and bad of the doctrines of British, Canadian, US, German and (altough very briefly) Soviet forces. Every operation is put under the microscope and analyzed from the armored warfare doctrinal point of view. I would dare to say that this is the best operational analysis of the Normandy breakthrough I ever read.

One word of caution: the title "Tank Tactics" is a bit off. The book makes emphasis in the grand-tactical and operational use of armor in WWII. There are a few tactical vignettes here and there. But don't expect to see too much small units tactics here.

On a side note: This book has been available from Lynne-Rienner Publishers for a long time. Now Stackpole Books prints and sells it at a lower price. Kudos Stackpole for getting us this wonderful scholarly treatise at such a knockout price.

This book has given me an itch for some WWII Normandy war-gaming ...




Do you recognize this war game?


HPS's Normandy 44








What about this classic?


Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord




I'm off to play these great war games.

Cheers,

America's Army 3, Pre-Loaded at Steam

America's Army 3 is near release. If you have a Steam account, you can download it now and play right away on June 17th. Please follow this link.

The Army creates and distributes America's Army so that young Americans can virtually explore Soldiering in the U.S. Army like Soldiers experience it - as individuals and as members of teams. Through the Game's virtual experiences, young Americans can explore the Army from basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and medic training at Fort Sam Houston, Texas to operations in defense of freedom. Along the way, they can join elite Army units and experience the strength of Army teamwork, values and technology within an engaging environment. The game has become an online phenomenon, consistently ranking among the most popular PC action games played online. The games are rated T for Teen and can be downloaded free from various partners listed on the www.americasarmy.com site. They are also distributed at local Army Recruiting stations, ROTC Detachments and Army events.

In the America's Army game, players are bound by Rules of Engagement (ROE) and grow in experience as they navigate challenges in team-based, multiplayer, force on force operations. In the game, as in the Army, accomplishing missions requires teamwork and adherence to the Army's core values. Through its emphasis on team play, the game demonstrates these values of loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage and makes them integral to success in America's Army.

The Army launched America's Army in July of 2002, and has released major updates to the game every few months. These releases feature new technologies, missions, Army units and occupations. In keeping with the dynamic nature of Soldiering, the America's Army game will continue to expand and will allow players to explore the Army of today, tomorrow and the future. An entirely new version of the game, America's Army 3, will be released in 2009.

From America's Army website

I never played AA, out of concerns about the maturity of the other players. But this time I'm going to give it a whirl.

Does any of you have any experiences to share about AA?

Cheers,

The M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle at the 2009 Joint Services Open House

Boy, so many pictures to share from that event!
Today, the M2 Bradley fighting vehicle.





Cheers,

DCS Black Shark: The Ka-50 model in the Simulation is not Equipped for Conventional Wars

Very shortly after its release, several threads appeared in the official forums asking why the Ka-50 didn't have thermal imaging, radar or even radar detector. The most people were prone to compare the Ka-50 to the AH-64D Apache, with its lavish target acquisition systems.

Because important points at the official DCS forums most of the times get lost in the squelch, the reason of this entry is to state very clearly that the Ka-50 we fly in DCS Black Shark is not intended for deployment in conventional wars.

A beta-tester made it clear at the official forums:

The Ka-50 is intended for low-intensity operations. It is not intended for and will NOT be deployed in an actual war. That is the Mi-28's job.

From a post by GGTharos

Another, beta-tester (this one an actual AH-64 pilot), commented about the lack of RWR and the missions in which the Ka-50 might be deployed.

The mission for which the Ka-50 is intended implies that the adversary will not be advanced enough or have the resources necessary in order to deploy radar-guided air defenses. Because of that, the aircraft is not equipped with any kind of defense against radar-guided threats.
From a post by AlphaOneSix

Black Shark, on who shall we unleash your firepower today?

The mission for which the Ka-50 is intended implies that the adversary willnot be advanced enough or have the resources necessary in order to deploy radar-guided air defenses. Because of that, the aircraft is not equipped with any kind of defense against radar-guided threats.

Based on our virtual flight hours with the DCS Black Shark, we may feel like the Ka-50 model simulated may do more than OK in a conventional war. I'm sure you have busted many enemy tanks in this simulation. We should recognize though that the less than stellar AI ground units are just too happy to walk into our engagement areas and be blown up into oblivion. If the virtual tanks in DCS Black Shark would react a bit more competently, they would just hide in heavy forested or urban areas at the first sign of trouble.

The baptism of fire of the Ka-50 was during the second Chechen War. Please refer to this article.

"Black Sharks" in Chechnya, by Andrey Zinchuk. Military Technology 09/2005

The article is a brief history of the Ka-50/Ka-29 Combat Attack group in Chechnya. The take home lessons from this article are:

• Ka50s used in conjunction with Ka-29s that provide target data

• Ka50 used in conjunction with Ka-29s in a low intensity conflict (enemy didn't have radar guided SAMs or other conventional anti-aircraft weaponry)

• Ka-50 excelled at maneuverability in highly mountainous regions

• Enemy targets included parking sites, rebel camps, ammo depots, field fortifications, shelters, trenches, etc.

• The Ka-50 is extremely reliable mechanically.

Cheers,

HPS Simulations, 3 New Wargames Out!

Good news from HPS Simulations, 3 new titles are out!
Please follow the links below for more details.
Screens are directly from HPS's website and used without authorization but without monetary gain. If this is a problem please comment below.

• Alexandrian Wars

• War in the Southern Front

• Dien Bien Phu

Cheers,

USMC to Open Military Academies Across the US

This morning, the Army Times published an article about the US Marine Corps leading a movement to open military academies across the country and how they are talking to civilian education district leaders to combine efforts to do so.

The Marine Corps is wooing public school districts across the country, expanding a network of military academies that has grown steadily despite criticism that it’s a recruiting ploy.

The US Marine Corps leading some innovation. Nothing new here, move on. Sometimes it appears that the USMC are they guys with the bigger fire in their feet when it comes to attitudes of change. I'm not surprised, but kudos anyway.

And then, off course, the backlash.

In DeKalb County, which includes part of Atlanta, protests by parents and threats of lawsuits began almost as soon as the school board announced last year that it planned to open a Marine Corps high school. The district wanted to open it this fall, but the approval process in Washington has delayed that. The district hopes to open the school in fall 2010.

Critics like Mike Hearington, a 56-year-old Vietnam War veteran whose son attends Shamrock Middle School in DeKalb County, say the schools are breeding grounds for the military.

“To pursue children like they are is criminal in my mind,” Hearington said.

Some degree of controversy is always good. Good debate about something new has to be a given.
But what worries me is that the the detractors are using language that reflects something beyond the mere fear of some day seeing our sons go into harms way.

"Breeding grounds for the military"? This sounds like something sinister will come out from the proposed academies. Like potential recruits. The horror!

“To pursue children like they are is criminal in my mind ...”. We indoctrinate our children in lots of things way before they can make rational decisions by their own. None of these indoctrinations are considered "criminal". Thus, if indoctrination per se is not criminal, is the word "criminal" used here implying that eventually becoming recruits and later waging the wars of our country is somehow "criminal"?

In his book "The Culture of War", van Creveld wrote:

... in today's self-styled "advanced" countries, for the culture of war to be held in such high esteem is rare. Soldiers, war gamers, collectors of militaria, and even military historians know the score. At best, their culture is seen as a quaint leftover from a previous, presumably less rational, less utilitarian, and less humane past. At worst, it is denied, put aside, ignored, ridiculed, or denounced as childish "warmongering".

The dangers of embracing opposition to anything military are only to be known when our enemies are too close to the gates of our cities.

Cheers,

Point of Attack 2 (HPS Simulations): The Ultimate War Simulation

Point of Attack 2 (PoA2) is a simulation of modern warfare by Scott Hamilton that was made for the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research. It is a turn-based, tactical level simulation featuring regular armies (US, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria) and irregular forces.

The level of detail of PoA2 is very deep. The screen-shot above shows a Combat Phase Report window (you will have to click the screenshot to be able to read), where every move and fire is recorded. Taking into account that this simulation is used by the US Air Force, the algorithms used to solve fire and movement must be really top-notch.

One could spend a lot of time trying to summarize all the gadgets and goodies this simulation has. Yet today I want to show you something that I have never seen in other off-the shelf simulation.
Take a look at the screenshot below (again, you will have to click the screenshot to be able to read).


The window on top shows tabs for all type of staff officers. The "Commo" (communications tab), has a detailed summary of the communication status of every unit. Yes, the simulation keeps track of communications sent back and forward, and if the comms network is saturated, the messages start to fall within the cracks. The highlighted unit in the screenshot (1st AP Section) could not send its SITREP (situation report) and as a result of that, the 1st AP Section position shown in the map will not be accurate. This is called "friendly fog of war", something in the lines of "you don't know where your forces are unless they have an effective communications means with you".

Before I end this entry, a very important clarification: PoA2 is not for everybody. This is not a "beers and pretzel" game. Indeed, I don't even think this is a game in the entertainment sense of the word. I would label PoA2 as an analytical tool to simulate warfare at a very realistic level.

Cheers,

2009 Joint Services Open House: Assorted Images (Part 2)

Some more images from the event.

The cockpit of an F/A18

This close-up of the cockpit didn't work out very well ...

Awesome bird ...

The F/A 18 from where you can admire it at all its splendor

The HUD of a USMC's Super-Cobra attack helicopter

Next year I promise I will get a better camera! :)

Cheers,