The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 1

Table of Contents

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP is edited by Larry Bond and is published by the Admiralty Trilogy Group (www.admiraltytrilogy.com). Harpoon is a registered trademark of Larry Bond and Chris Carlson. The Admiralty Trilogy is a registered Trademark of Larry Bond, Chris Carlson, Ed Kettler, and Michael Harris. Thanks to Jay Wissmann for his excellent proofreading services. ©2008, 2015 The Admiralty Trilogy Group.

FeaturesA Naval Perspective on Nuclear Weapons Effects 2Attacking Offshore Oil Platforms 3Radar Countermeasures for the Wargamer 5Standing Orders 6Hard Times for the Royal Navy 7Aegis and US Missile Systems 8The Dawn of Missile Warfare 10Ship Fuel Capacities (for Logistics Article on page 50) 14Tomahawk Loadouts for US Ships 17Soviet Aircraft Tactics 18Submarine Propulsors 29The Other Navy 30U.S. Navy Composite Warfare Doctrine 40The Tactical Air-Launched Decoy 42Royal Navy Traditional Toasts 43Changes in the Soviet Navy 44Russian Revelations 47Photo: The Collapse of the Red Navy 47Keep Your Eyes on the Dragon 48Uncertain Weapon 48Submarine Communications 49Logistics 50

ScenariosMediterranean Melee 7Halifax Convoy 20Red War 24Fast Convoy 35The Last Exocet 46

Kitbash CornerPart 1 and Krivak III 15Part 2 and Nanuchka II 23Updating Long Beach 28Canadian TRUMP conversion 34Converting Kirov to Frunze 38Upgrading Atlantic Conveyor For Harrier Operations 43Chilean Latorre and Blanco Encaldo 45Kitbash Corner 2006 53

Book ReviewsThe Boats of Cherbourg 21The Royal Navy and the Falklands War 26Falklands the Air War 26MiG – A History of the Design Bureau 26Encyclopedia of Aircraft Armament 26U.S. Nuclear Weapons: the Secret History 26Fighter Aircraft 39F-86 Sabre 39The Art of Wargaming 39Squadron in Action Series 39One Hundred Days 41Antisubmarine Warfare 42The Soviet Navy: Strengths and Liabilities 42Sub vs. Sub 47

Cover: An EA-18G Growler flies over the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Mc-Campbell (DDG 85)

U.S. Navy

Editorial(from the first issue)

by Larry Bond

I will be brief. This isn’t a large publication. So much is happening with Harpoon and related projects that I have decided (with some urging) to publish a newsletter. It has three goals: First, to keep players and others informed on the various products in development by GDW and others for the Harpoon gaming system. This includes supplements, miniatures releases, computer games, and possibly other products. Second, to provide readers with new rules or expansion of existing rules, new data on weapons, sensors and platforms, and scenarios that they can play. Third, to serve as a way for the players to exchange information and make their own contributions to the game system. I have always depended on the players who write to me to keep me honest and to send me some useful insights about modern naval warfare. I get several letters a week, and answer them all. I try to keep up with a bulletin board on GEnie (Scorpia’s Bulletin Board, category 3, topic 17). I also hold seminars at conventions to put the word out and see what people are interested in. I hope you find the information useful and interesting. I want to hear from players. I need scenarios, rules questions, articles on tactics, and anything else you think needs to be shared. The only way this publication will grow beyond a quarterly eight-pager is if I get enough material. We will work to keep costs down, and quality up. This is not designed to be a moneymaker, but to get information out to people about a rapidly changing topic and game that describes it.

BT

Introduction

by Larry Bond

The Harpoon SITREP was published quarterly between January 1989 to January 1994. Each issue provided a mix of scenarios, articles on naval warfare and technology, and statistics on weapons systems. All this was designed to support the very active Harpoon miniatures gaming community, and was supported by them. Most of the bylines in each issue were of players who wanted to share a new idea, or their expertise, about a part of the game. With the demise of Game Designer’s Workshop, the issues are long out of print, but demand for back issues has been steady. After four editions of Harpoon and twelve years, a lot of the articles are dated, but there is still a lot of good information - general pieces on naval warfare, book reviews, and scenarios. This book gathers together the best of those issues between two covers. While a few of the articles have been updated, most are untouched. We’ve limited changes to replacing or improving graphics, using current statistics, and removing any inconsistencies with current rules. These are peripheral issues and in no case was the content of the article changed. It speaks to the quality of their work that the authors were able to make such a durable and useful contribution to the game and each other.

BT

The Naval SITREP is edited by Larry Bond and is published biannually by the Admiralty Trilogy Group (AdmiraltyTrilogy.com). Price per digital issue is $3.00 US. Article contributions should be sent to AdTrGroup@aol.com. Include name, postal address, and phone number.The Admiralty Trilogy is a registered trademark of Larry

Bond, Chris Carlson, Ed Kettler, and Mike Harris. Harpoon is a registered trademark of Larry Bond and Chris Carlson. Command at Sea is a registered trademark of Larry Bond, Chris Carlson, and Ed Kettler. Fear God & Dread Nought is a registered trademark of Larry Bond, Chris Carlson, Ed Kettler, and Mike Harris.

Sam

ple

file

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 2

A Naval Perspective on Nuclear Weapons Effects(Issue 1, July 89)

By Greg Lyle

The effects of nuclear weapons are well understood. Tests have been conducted in many environments, with yields varying from sub-kiloton to multi-megaton. In many ways, a nuclear explosion is similar to a conventional (chemical) detonation. Both result in a rapid release of energy. This increases the heat and kinetic energy of the materials present which are converted into hot, compressed gases (surrounded by a pressure wave) and highly energetic fragments. The energy level and amount of radiated energy depends on the temperature of the compressed gases. The major difference is that chemical detonation energy is converted primarily to kinetic energy, with a little thermal energy and no radiation. A nuclear detonation, on the other hand, creates thermal energy, radiation and kinetic energy. There are many factors which determine what effects and to what degree these effects influence people and equipment. These include weapon yield, surrounding medium, height/depth of burst, weather, and distance from burst point. For example, in a low altitude nuclear explosion 50% of the energy is released as blast/shock, 35% as thermal radiation, 5% as initial nuclear radiation and 10% as residual nuclear radiation. A “surface" burst is a nuclear explosion in which the fireball touches the water’s surface. Significant effects include blast/shock, thermal, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP). Moderate effects include gamma rays and neutrons. Other effects include base surge, debris and propagation interference for satellite links (blackout). X-ray effects are negligible. A “subsurface” burst is a nuclear explosion beneath the surface of the water. Significant effects include residual radiation and blast/shock. Other effects, depending on depth of burst, may include water waves, plume, base surge and disruption of acoustic systems (blueout). X-ray, gamma ray, neutron, thermal and EMP effects are negligible.

The only test of a nuclear ASROC, from USS Agerholm (DD-826): Operation Dominic, Swordfish test at Christmas Island on 11 May 1962.

U.S. Navy

Shock travels long distances in water and can cause significant damage to submarines and surface vessels. For deep underwater bursts, additional shock waves may be generated due to expansion and contraction of the fireball. Surface and bottom reflections also influence shock effects. This depends on the yield, distance from the burst, water conditions, and bottom type. Ships inside the kill radius suffer catastrophic damage (sinking, capsizing, crushing). Outside the kill radius, shock can: a. impair seaworthiness: flooding, topside damage, girder strength loss, personnel injury. b. impair mobility: propulsion, steering, and ship control equipment damage. c. impair mission execution: reduce ability to communicate, acquire targets, fire weapons, launch/recover aircraft. d. cause “blueout”: the disruption of underwater acoustic systems because of reverberations, i.e.. echoes, noise, signal distortion. For example: In a 50 kiloton surface burst, the static overpressure ranges from seven pounds per square inch (PSI) at .8 nm to three PSI at 1.3 nm. The hardening of ship systems to withstand this factor alone is not enough.

Vessels are still vulnerable to the effects of dynamic overpressure or high velocity winds which can reach 190 knots at seven PSI and 95 knots at three PSI ranges. While a ship may seem sturdy, antennas can be snapped, sights obscured, external gear stripped, modern electrical systems and computers upset. Missile and aircraft vulnerability is very dependent on vehicle type and orientation to the blast. EMP and blackout effects, although intense, would be brief and limited to a 5.4 nm range. Reverberations affecting sonar systems, however, could be severe, traveling over 50 nm and lasting hours, depending on the acoustic environment. You do not have to be a nuclear physicist to understand the effects and damage that can be caused by a nuclear explosion. The dominant effect is blast and shock; the best protection is distance from burst! Greg Lyle is a nuclear weapons effects analyst. This article was cleared with the Department of Defense. Greg also provided the photo of USS Agerholm.

BT

Sam

ple

file

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 3

Attacking Offshore Oil Platforms(Issue 1, July 89)

by Patrick Hreachmack & Adam NewsomKampfgruppe Indianapolis

Kampfgruppe Indianapolis and its sister organization, Kampfgruppe Cleveland, have developed these rules and are providing them for use by other gamers. At this time, they are not part of the official Harpoon game system.

-Larry Bond

The Situation On a Western European-owned oil platform in the North Sea, oil workers are going about their routine jobs. Suddenly, a worker notices a bright flash of orange flame only a few hundred yards away. As he watches, the next production platform in the surrounding cluster of platforms explodes into a massive fireball of flying debris. Within the flare of flame, several small high speed craft are seen darting about. The critical but vulnerable oil platforms are under attack! NATO’s vital oil production has been disrupted.

Platform Types a) Rigid Structures: Platforms mounted on legs which are set in the ocean bottom. The “classic” style of platform. b) Floating Platforms: Platforms mounted on a pair of submerged pontoons or buoyancy chambers. Used only in very deep waters. Not used in the Persian Gulf or other areas having 200 feet of water or less. c) “Sea Island”: Man-made artificial islands built on land fill. Used in shallow waters as central pumping stations and for temporary storage of bulk oil prior to loading on supertankers. All types of platforms are treated as unarmored except where noted.

Platform Weaponry Some platforms have been armed. Most weapons seem to be automatic weapons up to 20mm. Additionally, hand-held weaponry has been used, including RPG-type rocket launchers. While appearing massive, oil platforms are not designed to mount major weapon systems. In addition to a strong foundation, these systems need large amounts of power.

Attacks Gun and missile systems use surface percent hit tables with a +20% modifier. Aircraft attacks should be made as if against vessels, with non-moving target modifiers. Only torpedoes can hit the buoyancy chambers. Treat them as large submerged targets. For critical hit calculations, point values do not decrease as they would for ships. However, total accumulated damage points do matter to determine the point at which the platform is destroyed beyond use or repair. Only targets having buoyancy chambers may capsize or sink. Sea islands and rigid platforms never sink. Use the fire-fighting rules in Section 7.3.2.1.4

Example An oil platform in the Persian Gulf was found to be serving as a base for Iranian Revolutionary Guard attacks on neutral shipping. The Adams-class DDG Berkley and the O.H. Perry-class frigate Lewis Puller were assigned to neutralize it.

USS Berkley was selected because of its surface gunnery capabilities with its two 5"/54-cal Mk42 mounts. While Berkley concentrated on the target, Lewis Puller provided area security. The target was a rigid four-level platform, worth 75 points. After several radioed and visual warnings, gunnery was opened at three mile range, well outside that of any hand-held defensive weapons expected. In fact, several RPG type rockets were fired from the platform, all falling short of the US ships. The fight was very one-sided. After a few salvoes of 5-inch fire were pumped into the target, several fires were seen to break out. (Hits #3, 4, 6, or 7 will cause damage and/or fire.) Continued hits were seen to wreck cranes, engineering equipment, and platform structure. The engagement lasted four tactical turns. With a total accumulation of 55 damage points and fires raging out of control on the platform, the American vessels departed, mission accomplished.

BT

Sam

ple

file

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 4

Oil Rig Damage Point Values

Small Medium Large Very Large# levels 1-3 4-5 6+ N/ARigid 50 75 100 --Floating 60 85 110 --Sea Island 100 150 225 300

The size of rigid or floating platforms is based on the number of working levels, other than any water level docking facilities. Two or more production platforms connected by bridges are treated as separate targets. Production towers add 40 points per tower.

Oil Rig Critical Hit TablesGun & Missile Attack

DieRoll Damage 1 Helo deck or cranes: 1-5 = hit on helo deck. 6-10 = Crane destroyed.2 Engineering/equipment destroyed.3 Structure damage & fire starts.4 Structure damage & fire starts.5 Structure or crew quarters: 1-5 = structure weakened. 6-10 = crew living quarters demolished.6 Structure damage & fire starts. Any vessels alongside must check for damage or fire.7 Structure damage & fire starts. Any vessels alongside must check for damage or fire.8 If platform, pipe/equipment storage wrecked. If sea island, ship alongside is hit.9 If platform, control station destroyed. If sea island ship alongside is hit.10 Production tower or connecting bridge destroyed.

Notes: a) Connecting bridges need be hit only once per bridge to be destroyed. Nearest bridge to attacker is hit first. No points accumulate. b) Determine size of fires with D10 die roll as per rules. c) Any weapons mounts may be hit on #2. Max of eight (8) weapons mounts of all types per platform. Defender determines the number of mounts and assigns a consecutive number to each mount. Add 2 to the total. Die roll for which mount is hit. A 9 or 10 hits engineering equipment. (Example: A platform has four weapons mounts. A die roll of 1-4 will destroy the assigned weapon mount. A 5 or 6 will hit engineering equipment.) d) When 25% of the platform’s point value is exceeded, and the flight deck is hit, the flight deck is no longer operational.

Torpedo Attack vs Buoyancy Chambers

DieRoll Broadside Rake1 Fore end section flooding Left end flooding2 Fore end section flooding Left end flooding3 Fore mid section flooding Left end flooding4 Fore mid section flooding Left end flooding5 Mid section flooding Left end flooding6 Mid section flooding Right end flooding7 Aft mid section flooding Right end flooding8 Aft mid section flooding Right end flooding9 Aft end section flooding Right end flooding10 Aft end section flooding Right end flooding

Notes: a) For rake (end on) shots, only the end sections may be hit. A raking shot is considered to be any shot within 15 degrees either side of an imaginary line drawn length-wise down the center of the buoyancy chambers. Left and right is from the attacker point of view. Reduce to hit probability by 75% to simulate a very small target profile. b) Buoyancy chamber damage sections are; fore end, fore-middle, middle, aft-middle, and aft. Defender must indicate fore and aft for all buoyancy chamber equipped platforms prior to start of game. Only buoyancy chamber equipped platforms have a fore & aft. c) Buoyancy chambers have 50 damage points each, at 10 points per section. Loss of 30% of any chamber will cause list to that side. Loss of 50% will cause severe list. Loss is excess of 60% will cause the platform to capsize and sink. d) Chambers have a “light” armor rating. e) Passive acoustic torpedoes will be able to home in on buoyancy chambers due to machinery located within the chamber (e.g.., pumps & motors).

Sam

ple

file

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 5

Radar Countermeasures for the Wargamer(Issue 2, October 89)

by Bruce Spaulding

Radar is an invaluable tool that allows a military commander to detect aircraft, missiles, ships, and even ground vehicles beyond visual ranges. It was so successful at its job that countermeasures were devised almost as soon as radar was introduced. Chaff (its WW II codename was “Window”) was an early and effective radar countermeasure used by the Allies against the German air defenses in WW II. Today, radar countermeasures fall into four general classes: avoiding radar coverage, jamming radars with unwanted signals, physically attacking the radar site, and making your own units less visible to radar (stealth). None of these methods is a panacea, but each is valuable. If used together they can remove your opponents eyes. Jamming itself can be split into several subclasses: active noise jamming, active deception jamming, and passive jamming. All of these classes, however, work on some form of the same process: the introduction of noise into the radar receiver. Just as radio can be degraded by noise (e.g., thunderstorms or car ignitions), so also can radar be affected. Deception jamming is very dependent on the particular technique being utilized and upon the susceptibility of the radar being jammed. An older radar will be less resistant to deception jamming than a new one. Modern phased array radars are very hard to deceive. One example of deception jamming is blip enhancement, described in Harpoon.

Deception jamming is designed to present the operator with a false picture. Noise jamming is overt, and drowns out the real echoes in a mass of electronic radiation. Deception jamming is covert. The best deception jamming is never detected as such, at least until it’s too late. This article is concerned with noise jamming, since Harpoon already covers the other techniques. Noise jamming simply radiates electronic noise at the radars. The receiver is listening for a faint echo of a real target, and it must suddenly distinguish this real echo from a lot of other similar signals. It’s like trying to talk at a rock concert. Figure 1 shows this principle. On the left, the echo stands out clearly against a low level of background noise. On the right, the shaded area is a jamming signal that raises the background noise level so high that the echo cannot be distinguished from the noise. Noise jamming can be used in standoff mode, where powerful dedicated jamming aircraft stay out of weapons range and use their jammers to screen other aircraft or missiles. It can also be used in self-protection mode, where a combat plane carries smaller, less powerful noise jammers that protect only that aircraft. The defensive jammers used for self-protection are already covered in the remarks section for specific planes in Annex B. In Harpoon terms, only the dedicated jamming aircraft, such as the EA-6B or Badger J, matter. These aircraft have the following effects: Dedicated jamming aircraft have an effective range equal to the radar horizon.

Search radars and fire control radars are affected differently, and the effect on each is described below. Noise jamming makes a “strobe” appear on the radar display. This is a narrow, bright wedge shape which prevents anything within that sector from being seen by the operator. In other words, if another aircraft lies within two degrees of a line of bearing between the jammer and the radar, the radar cannot detect it. This is called main-lobe jamming. For example, if a radar is jammed, it cannot see anything on either side of the jammer within two degrees of arc, or four degrees total. Another radar, located at a different angle, might be able to see the screened aircraft. See Figure 2. The strobe will also give a bearing from the affected radar(s) to the jammer. All ESM receivers within ESM range (110% of the radar horizon) will also get a passive bearing on the jammer. The range of any radar jammed by these aircraft is halved in the forward hemisphere. This is called side-lobe jamming. Its range against a large target is reduced to 50% of its original range. If the reduced range still exceeds the distance to the target in question, then the target can still be seen. Radar-guided weapons are degraded within the jammer’s radius of effect. For example, the Badger J reduces radar-guided weapons accuracy by -10% within 30 nm. For the EA-6B it is -10% within 15 nm. The radius and percentage reduction is listed in Annex B in the remarks section. Jamming does not affect ARMs nor does it affect missiles with a home-on-jam (HOJ) mode, like the AIM-54 Phoenix. Any aircraft with self-protection jamming (SPJ) will have it listed in the remarks section of Annex B. The SPJ will create weaker strobes on radar screens, but these will not cover other aircraft. They will reveal the aircraft's direction to all affected radars and ESM receivers. For complex geometric reasons, radars eventually win out over the jammers as the distance between the radar and a screened contact decreases. Basically, the strength of the echo from the screened target gets stronger than the jamming signal as it closes. This is called burn-through, and happens at 10% of maximum radar range for self-protection jamming and 20% of

Sam

ple

file

The Best of GDW’s Harpoon SITREP

Page 6

maximum radar range for aircraft screened by standoff jammers. The coverage of a radar affected by noise jamming is shown in Figure 3. The most effective jamming is in the main lobe, on a direct line between the jammer and the victim radar. There is some reduction in a

180° arc, called side-lobe jamming, and no reduction in the rear hemisphere for most radars. Bruce is a physicist and works for a major electronics manufacturer.

BT

Standing Orders(Issue 17 October 93)

Standing orders are not only an integral part of naval command, but a great way to speed game play. By having both sides issue standing orders, the players can plot movement over long periods of time and quickly bring their forces together. Standing orders are orders which remain in effect until canceled or expired. Every captain issues Standing Night Orders to the Officer of the Deck before he retires for the evening. (“Eternal vigilance is the price of safety.”) A good admiral will issue standing orders before a battle, telling his captains what he plans to do. For example, one side on barrier patrol might issue the following standing orders: “Ships will patrol a 20 nm track running NW/SE at 15 knots until they detect an enemy. All sensors are passive.” The other side could order, “Ships will steam in two columns on course 090° at 20 knots, zigzagging 30° to either side of base course every 20 minutes. Continue movement until 0900. Air search radars will radiate once during each 10 minute-period (random interval), all other sensors passive.” The orders could be much more complicated, including both aircraft and ships, laying out search or attack plans. By writing out these orders, the players are forced to think through their plan of battle. They can consider all the elements: Where will they most likely encounter the enemy? What should they do with their aircraft? Is there a submarine threat? What course should they follow? Have they considered the effects of the environment on movement and detection? Independently written, the players can then cooperate in plotting their forces’ movement, seeing where and how their units encounter each others. This information can then be used to set up the battle. Alternatively, the orders can be turned over to a referee, who interprets and executes them, reporting back to the appropriate commander about detections. If there are several players on one side, and one has been appointed commander, he should issue standing orders to cover what they will do in case of attack, how they maneuver, and accomplish their mission. A little prior planning will improve both the speed of play and the quality of the game.

BT

Sam

ple

file