Special forces & JSTARS

Shutzen · Post by **Shutzen** » Nov 01 2003

Thanks for the addition of the MH birds. I think it adds a little to the game. As for other countries having similar capability... I honestly don't know. I have worked with some other country's SF guys and I have never seen the same capability. Maybe to the level of a MH-60, but certainly not the Pavelow (MH-53). The British may have something along the same lines, but the US is definitely unique with the MH-53 (the technology onboard). You also have to remember, it isn't just the hardware- the Army's 160th SOAR and the Air Force 53 Pilots are the best in the business. The "average Joe" pilot can't fly those things like the Spec Ops pilots do. Nap of the Earth, at night, flying through mountains in Korea with some serious speed... trying to avoid power lines.
Speaking of Nap of the earth flying. If you want to be very realistic, lower the SF unit's combat strength immedietely after insertion due to air sickness. Just kidding. It was bad enough in real life, I don't want to see it in a game too. ha ha. Thanks again.

LORD_BUNGLA · Post by **LORD_BUNGLA** » Nov 04 2003

The russian SF use Mi24 and Mi8/17s for bigger teams.

And if they need to insert a couple of light tanks, then the Mi26.

And the next gen insertion helicopter for the russian SF will be the Ka-60 Kasatka.

http://ice.prohosting.com/wmnet/helicop ... nepage.htm

Post by **Balthagor** » Nov 04 2003

k, I'll double check these entries. I have them all in the list already. Thanks.

Post by **Balthagor** » Nov 04 2003

I just ran into a difficulty with the MH-53. There seem to be two very different units; the MH-53J Pavelow III which isn't really a CH-53 refit, it's actually a CH-3 mod. Then there is the MH-53E Sea Dragon that is a special forces helo mod of the CH-53. Which one where you looking for? I don't have the CH-3 in the list since it is out of service.

dust off · Post by **dust off** » Nov 04 2003

Will medium helocopters be able to lift light artillary forward to support airbourne drop? ie. 105mm guns underslung loads.

And would I be right to presume that we will be able to decide if special forces take control of the hex or not? So that we could decide to protect its location or take key hexes.

madflava13 · Post by **madflava13** » Nov 04 2003

The MH-53 Pave Low is definitely still in service - Its the SF version, with all the nap of the earth and night vision goodies. The Sea Dragon is the mine-sweeping version the navy has. It isn't used in active combat roles otherwise. Here's a website on the various Super Stallion versions: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/h-53.htm

You can see the Pave Low is a CH-53 Super Stallion refit, not a CH-3 Sea King refit...

_________________
"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madflava13 on 2003-11-04 12:19 ]</font>

Post by **Balthagor** » Nov 06 2003

K, I got the MH-53J in the list now. As for Dust offâ€™s question, yes, cargo helicopters are very useful for moving around towed artillery. Some towed anti air can also be moved but they have a tendency to be rather heavy (radar and electronics I guess). Special Forces also fit nicely into many helos and weâ€™ve used this extensively for combat insertions in test games. As for not taking terrain, Iâ€™ve been reviewing this with George and he says it is in our plans to add an advanced order that tells a unit not to take land as it moves. By default, it would capture the territory.

Post by **George Geczy** » Dec 20 2003

I'm resurrecting this old thread as a reply to comments by Shutzen in the Beta section. In particular, I like the idea that helicopters used to insert special forces should have a high stealth value - as in fly at night, close to the earth, etc.

We currently have not implemented it this way, but Shutzen's arguments were convincing - so I think I would now lean towards making helicopters that don't fire a very stealthy, hard-to-spot unit. Something that could actually fly over enemy land and not be seen (but not over enemy units).

This would then allow those secret special-forces insertion missions....

Thoughts?

-- George.

dust off · Post by **dust off** » Dec 21 2003

Would agree for the need to be able to insert spec ops stealthily by helos

Zalen · Post by **Zalen** » Feb 21 2004

I made a somewhat ill-formatted post in the New Units forum group. But I wanted to comment on the Land Warrior or at least the OICWS being implemented somewhere? (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... rint.phtml)

India 51A · Post by **India 51A** » May 12 2004

Apologies for re-introducing this thread, but I had to disagree with Ashberry's comment earlier in the thread :-

"they should be able to sabotage buildings,lower enemy morale,effect supplys and be able to identify enemy units deep behind enemy lines while being invisible to normal enemy units", (it is the emboldened part I disagree with). They are not 'supermen' or people who have magical attributes, but well trained professionals who are susceptible to the same dilemma's and incidents that any other soldiers might come across in an active service scenario. They are, on the whole, just better able to deal with it

Take the SAS for example in the ill fated "Bravo Two Zero" patrol in Desert Storm, they were spotted many times, and had to fight there way out of trouble.

On the more general argument in this thread, my belief is that Special Forces are units like the SAS, SBS, Spetznaz and others from Germany and other countries I can't recall just now. Ranger Battalions, British Royal Marines, Para's etc, are considered 'Elite' forces by most and I have to agree with that.

Just my 2 cents after an enjoyable read of this thread

Ashbery76 · Post by **Ashbery76** » May 14 2004

Of course the S.A.S in real life have messed up a few times, but this is a game, and it needs to be worthwhile to train expensive special forces.Why would you bother wasting resources if they get spotted all the time.

India 51A · Post by **India 51A** » May 14 2004

Hi Ashberry

Yes it is a game and I guess you do need some bang for your buck regarding SAS or any other Special Forces. However, for them to be totally invisible to enemy forces is not really very realistic, but I would think that they could be represented in the game as having more stealth, for instance, than the ordinary grunt, also more heavily armed with special weapons, and having experts in explosives, signals, medical etc. etc. Their expertise in OP work should be recognised also and the fact that they have Sqn's specialising in Mountain Warfare, Jungle Ops and Anti Terrorist Ops too.

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » May 14 2004

Special Forces being more stealthy,better trained and better armed is already respresented in the game.
They are however by no means invisible or invincible so dont fear

Post by **Balthagor** » May 14 2004

The trick to this one is that units such as these have a much higher base stealth rating but their stealth is 1/4 when attacking. So the opponent would see them only when they start attacking and if you can pull them out fast enough you could hit and run successfully.