The Viggen and its important anti-ship role - a case study - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-16-2017, 04:40 AM   #11
BloodBane611
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1
Default

Nice research Farks, thanks for sharing!
BloodBane611 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2017, 05:31 PM   #12
Pikey
Senior Member
 
Pikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Reading, UK (GMT)
Posts: 2,946
Default

The Viggen Anti ship role is a pre Soviet breakup tactic that invariably over 40 years was a deterrent defence system that, by design, aimed to dissuade the Soviet Union from going to Norway via Sweden. On paper, since it was never an attractive attack, Sweden in some ways was a very interesting neutral neighbour that gave a large contribution during the cold war.

The only years we (DCS) are really interested in are pre AJS 91 era and post Lansen, the weapon is consistent though, the Rb04. For DCS it's hard to simulate due to the gap in the AAW screen which for the early part of the plans was quite Kashin led with it's Naval SA-3. Instead we have some Grisha's and the like with SA-8 which is a shorter range missile so you never really get the idea of an early contest. For the later mid 80's on it becomes a different contest completely, a very nasty variety of longer range missiles. I think people possibly tested these in sandbox with Rb04 and you can see this is a scary numbers game which gives rise to the 25% losses argument. What is harder to estimate even is the fighter screens, ECM and ECCM and battle underneath at the time. It would surely be an absolutely chaotic affair. I tried this in CMANO as a sim and it was barely possible to make a prediction on the outcome. Cheifly if the AAW screen went down in the first wave, the LST's would be eaten alive overnight.

It IS possible for the Viggen numbers on paper to disable the fighter screen. You only have to see the randomness of the testing and look at the swarm tactics to understand its a numbers and timing game. I think no plan that the Soviets could put forth made a landing a very good idea, and in the waves that came I'd hazard the outcome for an 80's scenario to be at a very costly excercise, which the Soviets had different plans for at various times, including bypassing Sweden completely and not dragging it into the war. The effect of tactical nukes firther complcates the randomness of the outcome. And we have the small submarine game, coastal defences and all the secrecy and deception which would probably play a larger role in the outcome.

Then this was the first layer in a multi layered game, one small cog. We move onto the GIUK gap, Norway, the USA and the Northern fleets and UK involvement. Arguably the land contest would be ahead at this point for the Soviets, shipping being an easier target.

Whilst it's an interesting game to theorise on, I've only come to understand that the death and destruction and utter waste of these scenarios are gladly the topic on simulation boards and not the subject of tombstones.
__________________
“Six better fuses and we would have lost.”
Pikey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2017, 12:23 AM   #13
Andy1966
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Delaware, usa
Posts: 318
Default

How can I get Oscar Blue's skin/insignia? ...Snoopy is just too cool.

very good write up!! A full on E1 raid would be epic! Have Viggen Will fly
Andy1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 03:32 PM   #14
Mule
Member
 
Mule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 538
Default

Brilliant stuff and so interesting. Many thanks.
Mule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2017, 05:10 PM   #15
renhanxue
Member
 
renhanxue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikey View Post
I'd hazard the outcome for an 80's scenario to be at a very costly excercise
The generally accepted conclusion in hindsight seems to be that except maybe at the very tail end of the Cold War (later half of the 1980's), as long as E1 was at least mostly operational, a naval invasion was simply too risky to attempt. To make it work, there would need to be a preparatory phase first with extensive bombing (possibly nuclear) of E1's bases, and that would take some time. But dragging the situation out like that wasn't a bad use of E1 either; it'd give the army and the navy time to mobilize and prepare defenses (mine fields, etc), and it'd allow the fighter squadrons and ADA to take some small bites out of the Soviet strike assets as well, leaving less for later.
renhanxue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2017, 11:14 PM   #16
AdurianJ
Member
 
AdurianJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 133
Default

But in the later part of the 80's the navy picked up the slack as it had numerous RBS15 armed missile FAC's and smaller Patrol boats armed with Penguin missiles.
AdurianJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2017, 09:29 PM   #17
unipus
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 30
Default

Wow, thanks for this. A very informative and interesting thread. In terms of performing these missions with absolute radio silence... the thought makes me grimace! In DCS -- well, it would be very impressive indeed. I suspect it would take a level of skill on par with, oh, I dunno... several professionally trained pilots?
unipus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2017, 11:51 PM   #18
terence44
Member
 
terence44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: France, Great West - Nantes.
Posts: 877
Default

Thank you very much of assets share this information more than interesting !
__________________
http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic104172_5.gif
terence44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.