From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Tue May 12 12:31:25 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram8) id AA03459; Tue, 12 May 92 12:31:25 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 May 92 12:31:25 -0700 Message-Id: <9205121931.AA03459@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #1 (msgs 1-8) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 12 May 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 1 Topics: (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Various postmaster@manadon (3) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (4) PBEM jon@netlabs.com (5) Re: Torpedo Return Fire tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (6) AGM-137 and INF deichman@cisco.nosc.mil (7) Re: Black Sea Fleet tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (8) General Questions raggy@dcs.warwick.ac.uk "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 11 May 1992 16:37:24 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (1) Editorial Message-Id: New members added since last issue: bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (Unknown) This should be the first (mostly) RFC 1153 issue. The format I use differs from the standard's REQUIREMENTS in that messages do not retain original To, CC, Message-ID and Keyword headers. The To header is almost always the same (ie "cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu"). I will institute an synthetic message ID based on CZ message numbering. I am not too concerned with keeping CC and Keyword headers. I don't think these changes will prevent burst programs from working, as all the examples in the RFC document itself only have Date, From and Subject headers. As far as SUGGESTED formats in RFC 1153, CZ differs on the following points. Volumes are not based on calendar years. Preamble format is different. I think editorial comments should be separate messages so that they can be referenced directly. Any Summary header is generated by me and is not from the original message. The trailer does not include volume and issue information. If any of these violations of the letter and spirit of RFC 1153 seem bad to you, please send your comments to cz-request. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 May 92 12:55 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) Subject: (2) Various Message-ID: Is there any way of in flight refuelling using IBM Harpoon? Some of the aircraftcan have loadings designated as tanker, but nothing I've tried seems to work to get them to transfer fuel to a joining group. There should be a lot more interest in Harpoon in the UK now - there has been a large advertising campaign and lots of (favourable - naturally) reviews. I'm still having problems with the strategy map and the Indian Ocean BS. Aden in particular seems to be in a different position as an icon from where it is when ships need to go there. This is most evident in the last of the battleset scenarios, where I haven't yet been able to win as blue. Even though all the tankers are intact and are in the "right" place and all his ships, bases and subs have been destroyed -- it still ends up a draw.. It appears to be that the position boxes for the tanker end positions are in a different place, as far as the computer is concerned, to where they appear to be on the strategic display. That scenario also produces surface ships attacking me from about 30 miles inland, along the East coast, north of Aden. Finally, I've been setting up submarine patrols to include regular small loops in the path - to clear the baffles and, hopefully, give the submarine a better chance of finding something coming up behind. Is this a waste of time? I haven't been able to correlate detection efficiency with relative bearing at all - the subs seem to be able to detect things behind them as well as things in front.I've also been givng the subs deep high speed runs followed by intermediate creep phases, in the hope of better covering a search area. Oh to be able to control both sides for a while just to see what is, or isn't effective! I've tried using scenedit to set up subs with certain known trajectories, but they will, presumably, come off that course if they find something to attack.... Keith Wain ------------------------------ Date: Mon 4 May 1992 17:57:52 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (3) Recent Naval Developments Message-Id: Here is a quick review of selected USN programs based on information from the May 1992 USNI Proceedings. The last new production Intruder was delivered on 3 Feb 92, though upgrades and remanufactures will continue. After the A-12 was cancelled, the Navy started the AX development effort. The AX has an Initial Operational Capability (IOC) scheduled for the year 2005. This is several years after the original A-12 IOC. Some A-6s may have to last until 2015, which may be a dubious proposition. Some don't believe 2005 is a realistic date anyway. As a result, the fleet may eventually be short on attack aircraft (unless the planned number of carriers falls below 12). To make up some of the shortfall, a new Hornet variant (F/A-18E/F) is being developed. The E/F version was also originally advertised as an Outer Air Battle aircraft to back up the F-14, but that is not likely given the Advanced Air to Air Missile (AAAM) cancellation. The other option was to make "Quickstrike" upgrades to the Tomcat to allow attack missions. That proposal was rejected and Quickstrike is specifically excluded from F-14 development funding. After a long drawn out battle, Tomcat production came to an end. The last new production F-14 will be delivered May 1992. The last remanufacture will be delivered in fiscal year 1993 (FY93). Final counts will be: 55 F-14D, 69 F-14B (formerly F-14A+) and 404 F-14A. Development continues for life extension and upgrades (except Quickstrike). The Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF), which was to be the F-14 successor, has been reduced to basically "observer" status in the Air Force ATF program. Exactly what happens when the F-14 force wears out is not clear now. Marine purchases of the Harrier ended last year. Last year's order of 27 were for the AV-8B+. Those will be the only "plus" version aircraft (except for foriegn orders) unless other versions are upgraded. The Navy is looking into the feasibility of advanced STOVL aircraft. The V-22A tiltrotor lives on due to congressional support despite DoD attempts to kill it. Marines would like to use the V-22A to replace the CH-46 Sea Knight. The Advanced Tactical Support (ATS) aircraft program to develop a single airframe to replace the E-2, S-3 and EA-6 has been cancelled. Exactly what is supposed to happen when many of the support aircraft wear out before the year 2010 is not clear now. E-2C orders have ended one year early, though upgrades and life extension are planned. Viking upgrades to the S-3B version continue with a planned final total of 119. The Battle Group Passive Horizon Extension System (BGPHES) ES-3A is to become operational this year. Studies are underway to evaluate the usefulness of airships for support roles. The P-7A was cancelled. The Navy is now looking at a new P-3 variant called the "Orion II". Production of the Fixed Distribution System (FDS) was cancelled. The FDS was to be a SOSUS successor. The Navy will start work on the Advanced Deployable System (ADS) which will have both shallow and deep water capability. This is the second year of orders of Seahawks with Penguin capability. Plans call for a total of 166 Penguin capable SH-60Bs including retrofits. FY92 is the last purchase of the AGM-119B Penguins for a total of 106 missiles. Alternatives are being considered for the future. A number of Air Force and Navy programs have been combined. The Navy's Advanced Interdiction Weapon System (AIWS) is now under the Joint Standoff Weapon System (JSOWS) program. The AIWS is supposed to replace Walleye, Maverick, laser-guided bombs and Skipper. Last year the TI/LTV design for the AIWS was picked. The Advanced Bomb Family (ABF) program is now under the Air Force led Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) program. The ABF is supposed to replace the standard Mk82, Mk83, Mk84 series of bombs. The Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) is now coming on line. A total of 72 were delivered in calendar year 91 (CY91) (7 were "tested" in Desert Storm). After the announced withdrawal of tactical nukes from USN ships, orders for 32 TLAM-Ns were changed to conventional versions. It is unlikely that there will be further TLAM-N orders. No new orders of the Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) were made this year. However, the system will become operational this year with deliveries from previous orders. Proposals have been made to adapt the SM-2 to theatre missile defense. The Advanced Air to Air Missile (AAAM) was cancelled. It was supposed to be the replacement for the Phoenix missile. It was to be small enough to be carried by the Hornet. The AIM-9M+ Sidewinder program has been folded into the joint AIM-9X program. I am not sure what happened to the AIM-9R. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 May 92 16:36:51 PDT From: jon@netlabs.com (Jonathan Biggar) Subject: (4) PBEM Message-Id: Is anyone out there interested in playing GDW Harpoon via Email? I am a novice at the game, but I sure would like to try. Jon Biggar jon@netlabs.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon 4 May 1992 17:58:10 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (5) Re: Torpedo Return Fire Message-Id: This thread (started in CZ v9 msg 31) has basically been settled. I would just like to throw in an "authoritative" answer. The Harpoon BattleBook (p. 193) essentially says this: Question: What conditions trigger a "torpedo counterfire"? Answer: This happens when a torpedo is detected down a bearing from which there has been no submarine contact and the enemy submarine is possibly within the range of the torpedo to be counterfired. The computer side will always attempt torpedo counterfire. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 May 1992 13:36 PDT From: deichman@cisco.nosc.mil (Shane Deichman) Subject: (6) AGM-137 and INF Message-Id: I noticed that in the description of the Tri-Service Standoff Attack Missile (AGM-137 TSSAM) [CZ V9,#7, "SITREP 11 Data" -- article (52)], it is mentioned that the TSSAM is a stealth cruise missile which can be launched from either a variety of air platforms or from the MLRS in a ground-launched mode. How does this latter ability agree with the INF Treaty between Moscow and D.C., in which ground-launched cruise missiles and intermediate range ballistic missiles were removed with a "zero-zero" option (i.e., no existing missiles could be kept, and no new missiles can be developed). -shane @----------------------------------------------------------------@ |NCCOSC RDT&E Division, Code 412 (619) 553-2767/FAX -6288 | |San Diego, CA 92152-5000 deichman@cisco.nosc.mil | @----------------------------------------------------------------@ ------------------------------ Date: Mon 4 May 1992 17:58:37 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (7) Re: Black Sea Fleet Message-Id: In CZ v9 msg 33, junio@tori.twinsun.com (Junio Hamano) asks about the composition of the Black Sea Fleet. I consulted "Combat Fleets of the World 1990/91" and "Guide to the Soviet Navy, 5th ed." and tried to reconcile the two. Beyond the units officially assigned to the Black Sea Fleet, it is possible a few recently completed units from Ukraine shipyards but meant for other fleets are also in the area. 2 Juliet SSG (possibly being retired) 20 conventional attack submarines total of the following classes: Kilo Tango (possibly being retired) Foxtrot (possibly being retired) Wiskey (probably being retired) 2 Moskova CHG (all of them) 1 Slava CG 4 Kara CG used to have 1 Kynda CG, which was retired 1 Provornyy DDG (only one) 8 Kashin DDG maybe some Mod Kashin DDG 6 Krivak I, II FFG 1 Koni FF (only one, to train foreign crews) maybe some Riga FF (probably being retired) 1 Dergach FFL (only one) 31 FFLs total of the following classes: Grisha I, II, III, IV, V Petya I, II, III Mirka I, II (all are in Black and Baltic Fleets) Parchim II some Muravey (all are in Black and Baltic Fleets) other small combatants 5 Alligator LST 3 Ropucha LST 6 Polnochny or MP-4 LST 1 Berazina AFS (only one) other auxiliaries Aircraft 15 Recon 14 Electronic Warfare 75 Bombers 5 Tankers 25 Fixed-Wing ASW 100 Helicopters -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 92 15:02:36 BST From: raggy@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Paul Bravey) Subject: (8) General Questions Message-Id: All sorts of questions so here goes.... 1) Has anybody got the errata for updating the miniatures harpoon from 3.0 to 3.1 typed in to save the hassle and time of sending an envelope on an umpteen thousand mile round trip? I've got the new data annexe and I've got all the errata posted to this mailing list. 2) Are surface to air missiles just too accurate? The first big game that I ran was a large affair consisting of a Nimitz battlegroup - we weren't too bothered with the accuracy of the ship mix, against a russian ASuW force containing the Kalinin and a Slava class CG. Using the carrier loadout given in one of the scenarios in the scenario booklet the first wave of planes were blown apart with very little damage done to the ships. The only missiles that got through were the very fast HARMs. 3) Leading on from the last question: are airbursts just too effective? At least they were when you could get fire results from them I don't know if they still are. Otherwise a single big 200 point damage russian ARM will take out a 1500 odd point carrier! 4) One oddity noticed was that most of the British ships with Sea Dart officially can't use them since they haven't got height-finding radars! The same thing seems to occur with some older russian vessels so can anybody put any light on that? 5) How does a ballistic device travel when dropped from an aircraft? By this I mean how long does it stay at different altitudes? 6) With sonar, can something be detected in a CZ at any depth or just above the layer? 7) How often do you actually get close enough to actually bother about putting miniatures on a board? In the few scenarios I've played the actual surface combatants have never gone over the visual horizon with any visual aquisition being done by helicopters. 8) Has anybody got a nice program to work out angles and distances between objects after being given the courses and speeds to save me writing one. (In theory at least I'm meant to be revising for my finals but there you go :-) Paul -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Paul Bravey | When was the last time you said I + + raggy@uk.ac.warwick.dcs | was forgetful? + ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest **************** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Tue May 19 14:22:28 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram8) id AA01602; Tue, 19 May 92 14:22:28 -0700 Date: Tue, 19 May 92 14:22:28 -0700 Message-Id: <9205192122.AA01602@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #2 (msgs 9-14) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 19 May 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 2 Topics: (9) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (10) Russian Carriers pasb11@bvc.edu (11) NACV: Ambush tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (12) Re: Various gsnow@clark.edu (13) Re: FFG-7 and SLQ-32 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (14) IBM 1.21 Memory Errors anderson@navo.navy.mil "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 19 May 1992 13:39:46 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (9) Editorial Message-Id: Members added since last time: anderson@prowler.navo.navy.mil (Douglas T. Anderson) gt7805b@prism.gatech.edu (Edwin Million) asme@cory.berkeley.edu (Brandon Muramatsu) msp@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Mark Purcell) Have any of those PBEM games gotten off the ground? Any after action reports? Anyone know when the next edition of the print game will be out? I am about to compile a new comprehensive errata. Unless, of course, a new edition is about to come out. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 17:06 CDT From: pasb11@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman) Subject: (10) Russian Carriers Message-Id: The following is an article from the sci.military newsgroup. It was compiled by strickj@jacobs.cs.orst.edu (Jesse Stricker). Mr. Stricker credits Steve Schultz as the source of 95% of the material with contributions from Frank Crary, Felix Finch and Tom Zarzecki. Mr. Stricker's comments are prefaced by "JS>". RUSSIAN AIRCRAFT CARRIERS MOSKVA Class Moskva Leningrad These two helicopter carriers were built by the Black Sea Shipyard, Nikolayev, (South) (No.444). The Moskva was laid down 1962, launched 1964, and completed July 1967. Leningrad was laid down 1964, launched 1966, and completed 1968. Both are assigned to Red Banner Black Sea Fleet. Displacement: 15,500 tons standard, 19,200 tons full load Length: 587 ft. 2 in. (179 m) waterline, 623 ft. 2 in. (190 m) overall Beam: 85 ft. 3 in. (26 m); Extreme width: 111 ft. 10 in. (34.1 m) Draft: 27 ft. 11 in. (8.5 m) Propulsion: 2 steam turbines;100,000 shp; 2 shafts Boilers: 4 turbopressure type Speed: 30 knots Range: 4,500 n. miles at 29 knots, 14,000 n. miles at 12 knots Complement: approx. 850 ( including air group) Helicopters: 14 Kamov Ka-25 Hormone Missiles: 2 twin SA-N-3 Goblet anti-air launchers, 44 reloads Guns: 4 57-mm/70-cal. AA (2 twin) ASW Weapons: 1 twin SUW-N-1 missiles launcher, 2 RBU-6000 rocket launchers Radars: 3 Don-2 (navigation), 2 Head Lights (fire control), 1 Head Net-C (3-D air search), 2 Muff Cob (fire control), 1 Top Sail (3-D air search) Sonars: Moose Jaw LF hull mounted, Mare Tail MF varible depth EW systems: 8 Bell series, 8 Slide Globe, 2 Top Hat These are combined cruisers/helicopter carriers. They were developed to counter Western strategic missile submarines. but that was aborted. They are based in the Red Banner Black Sea Fleet, and periodically deploy to the Mediterranean. They have also operated in the Atlantic, and the Leningrad in the Northwest Indian Ocean. Moskva was the trails ship for the Yakovlev Yak-38 Forger. They have not gone through any upgrades. Class: There were additional ones probably planned, Western intelligence suggests as many as 12. Classification: PKR, Protivolodochnyy Kreyser, Anti-Subamrine Cruiser. Design: First carriers completed. Forward is the cruiser, aft the air operations. The superstructure is "stepped" forward to accomodate the radars and launchers, ana has a smooth after face. A small hangar is located between the stack uptakes. There are two elevators. The flight deck is 282 ft. X 112 ft. (86 m X 34 m). The stern is cut away for VDS and boat stowage. This class introduced the SA-N-3 Goblet, and Top Sail and Head Light radars. Electronics: Hull mounted sonar dome is retractable. Names: Country's two traditional capital cities. Operational: The Moskvas flight deck was modified in the early '70's for the VSTOL Forger program. She has since reverted to the original configuration. They always trim down at the bow abot 3 ft. (1 m) while at sea; they have poor seakeeping abilities. Torpedoes: Two five-tube 21-in. rotating torpedo banks were fitted, just aft of the accomodation ladders, but were removed in the mid-'70's. Both have had little modernization, and at least 5 other ships carried these names. UPDATE: The Leningrad was withdrawn and scrapped in late 1991. The Moskva is for sale. JS> We'd call this a CHG. Probably carries a complement of 14 Ka-25 "Hormone" helicopters for ASW work. Shows how old it is, as the Ka-25 is really only used for AEW work now. KIEV Class JS> Kiev Launched July 1975 Minsk Launched February 1978 Novorossiysk Launched August 1982 40,500 tons displacement fully loaded 899 feet overall length Classification: The Kiev was originally classified a heavy anti-submarine cruiser, TPK, Tyazholyi Protivolodchyi Kreyser, and then as a large, bolshoi, TPK. However, by 1980 it was being referred to as a TAK, Takticheskoye Avianosnyy Kreyser, a tactical aircraft carrying cruiser. Design: There is an angled flight deck, with a large island on the starboard side. The angled deck is about 4.5 degrees to port from the centerline. No catapults or arresting wires were fitted. The entire bow area, which would be the catapults on U.S. carriers, is where almost all armament is located. Some areas of the flight deck are covered with blast-resistant (refractory) tile. There are two small elevators for aircraft, one alongside the island, the other immediately aft. They are approx. 63 ft. X 34 ft. (19.2 m X 10.37 m) and 60 ft. 8 in. X 15 ft. 5 in. (18.5 m X 4.7 m), respectively. Ther are also three or four weapons elevators that serivce the flight deck, one forward of the forward-most aircraft elevator, anr two or three aft of the island on the starboard side. On some ships, the two aft-most may have been combined. There is also a dolly-rail system connecting the elevators on the flight deck. The hull design has a large underwater bow "bulb", and boat stowage is in the after part of the hull. The aft of the ship has a freeboard of about 42 ft. 6 in. (13 m). There is an opening on the Kiev's stern counter for a VDS, Variable Depth Sonar, and a reinforced panel to deflect exhaust blast of aircraft immediately astern while the hover changing from conventional to vertical landing configuration. Active fin stabilizers are fitted. The Novoroiysk has several minor differences than the others. The flight deck is wider, and an enlarged parking area aft, as well as a series of three plate fairings on the port side of the fortcastle and a series of triangular shields aft, probably to reduce turbulence over the flight deck while steaming into the wind at high speed. Electronics: The island also features besides the Top Knot spherical dome, a smaller Bob Tail radiosextant antenna, a Vee Bar long-range HF antennas, and a Puch Bowl satellite antenna. Missiles: The Kiev and the Kynda cruisers are the only ships that have reloads for surface-to-surface missiles. They are stowed below deck in a magazine. Originally, the Novoroiyssk went to sea with plates covering the SA-N-9 launchers, and no Cross Sword radar, but were fitted later. Names: Major Soviet cities. NATO assigned the name Kurile to this class until the name was known, and has been changed for reporting purposes. Sonar: The first two have Moose Jaw LF and Bull Horn MF hull mounted, and Mare Tail VDS. The Novroiyssk has Horse Jaw LF, and Horse Tail VDS. UPDATE: All ships are supposedly for sale. The Minsk is thought not operational, as it's turbines were recently stripped. JS> Probably carried 12 Yak-38 VSTOL "Forger" planes, and anywhere from 14-21 (reports vary) Ka-25 or Ka-27 "Helix" helicopters. The Yak-38 is not that great an air-to-air combatant, so it has been suggested that it would be used for surface strikes. MODIFIED KIEV Class Admiral Gorshkov The ship was built at Black Sea Shipyard, Nikolayev, (South) (No.444). It was laid down December 1988, launched 17 April 1982, and completed June 1988. Displacement: 38,000 tons standard, 45,000 tons full load Length: 818 ft. 4 in. (249.5 m) waterline, 895 ft. 5 in. (273 m) overall Beam: 107 ft. 3 in. (32.7 m) Extreme width: 173 ft. 10 in. (53 m) Draft: 41 ft. (12.5 m) Propulsion: 4 steam turbines; 200,000 shp; 4 shafts Boilers: 8 turbopressure type Speed: 32 knots Range: 4,000 n. miles at 30 knots, 13,500 n. miles at 18 knots Complement: approx. 1,600 including air group Aircraft: 30, 12 or 13 Yakovlev Yak-38 Forger 14 to 17 Kamov Ka-25 Hormone/Ka-27 Helix helicopters Missiles: 24 SA-N-9 anti-air vertical launchers, with 192 refills 12 SS-N-12 anti-ship launch tubes (1 quad, 1 octuple) Guns: 2 100-mm DP/70-cal AA (2 single) 8 30-mm/65-cal. CIWS Gatling guns (8 multibarrel) ASW Weapons: 2 modified RBU-6000 rocket launchers Radars: 4 Bass Tilt (fire control), 4 Cross Sword (fire control), 1 Kite Screech (fire control), 3 Palm Frond (navigation), 1 Plate Steer (3-D air search), 4 Sky Watch (multi-purpose) 2 Strut Pair (air/surface search), 1 Trap Door-C (fire control) Sonars: Horse Jaw low-frequency hull mounted (bistatic) Horse Tail medium-frequency varible depth EW Systems: 4 Bell series, 4 Bell Thump, 2 Cage Pot, 8 Foot Ball, 8 Wine Flask Communications: Big Ball This fourth Kiev-class carrier was extensively modified with upgraded weapons and electronics. Communictaions: TACAN, also 2 Punch Bowl Missiles: The SA-N-9 launchers are arranged in four groups, of six vertical launchers; two on the forecastle, two other amidships, one on the starboard aft side of the island, the other port. Names: Western intelligence thought it was originally going to be named for the city Kharkov, but was named Baku. She was re-named in 1990 for the CinC from 1956-1985. Operations: Entered Mediterranean in June 1988; was assigned to Red Banner Northern Fleet in December 1988. UPDATE: She remains in Russian waters, and is thought to be for sale. ADMIRAL KUSNETSOV Class Admiral Kuznetsov Varyag The Kuznetsov was laid down January 1983, launched 5 December 1985, and completed November 1989. The Varyag was laid down 10 December 1985, launched 4 December 1988, and was scheduled to be completed 1992-1993. Displacement: approx. 65,000 tons full load Length: approx. 921 ft. 8 in. (281 m) waterline, approx. 997 ft overall Flight deck width: 230 ft. Extreme width: 239 ft. 5 in. (73 m) Beam: approx. 125 ft. Draft: Approx. 36 ft. (11 m) Propulsion: 4 steam turbines; 200,000 shp; 4 shafts Boilers: 8 turbopressure type Speed: approx. 30+ knots Aircraft: Mikoyan and Gurevich MiG-29K Fulcrum Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot Su-27K Flanker Kamov Ka-27 Helix helicopters Missiles: 12 SS-N-19 Shipwreck anti-ship launchers and missiles 24 SA-N-9 anti-air vertical launchers, within flight deck, 192 reloads 8 combined 30-mm gun/SA-N-11 type anti-air launchers (CADS) Guns: 6 30-mm/65 cal. CIWS (multi-barrel) ASW weapons: 2 modified RBU-6000 rocket launchers Radars: 4 Cross Sword (fire control), 3 Palm Frond (navigation), 1 Plate Steer (3-D air search), 4 Sky Watch (multi-purpose), 2 Strut Pair (air search) Sonars: low-frequency hull mounted Communications: Big Ball satellite antennas, mounted on Cake Stand housing (TACAN) These are the largest warships ever built by the U.S.S.R, and the largest other than U.S. Navy Nimitz-class CVNs. Western intelligence satellites, probably U.S. observed preperations in late 1979. This probably means that they were authorized under the five-year economic-defense plan begun in 1976. The carriers were constructed in the same dock as the Kiev-class, but were enlarged after the completion of the fourth, and last Kiev. The lead ship coincided with the end of the 1986-1990 five-year economic plan. The lead ships' commissioning ceremony probably coincided with the retirement of Admiral Gorshkov as CinC of the Navy. Aircraft: The carriers don't appear to have tie-down devices on the flight deck, as U.S. carriers. This means that only the amount of aircraft able to be fitted in the hangar can be embarked. Classification: The ships were described and used by Admiral Chernavin as an aircraft carrier. However, it was immediately clarified as an "aircraft carrying cruiser": or AK, Avionosfnyy Kreyser. It seems that the change came about because of it's operation, and the way it would move to the area. It would have to pass through the Turkish Straits, and the Montreaux Convention of 1936 specifically forbidden this, so they were able to permit it by this change. Design: They are essentially a larger Kiev-class, a conventional carrier design which the Kiev is not as well as as the lack of a fixed waepons battery on the bow. The angled flight deck is 5 1/2 degrees to the centerline with a ski ramp forward with an angle of about 12 degrees; future ships may have catapults for fixed-wing aircraft. Arresting gear is fitted with four cross-deck pendants. They can only therefore operate VTOL and STOL craft. Two deck-edge elevators are located on the starboard side, forward and aft of the island structure; one centerline elevator may also be fitted. The large island has a large funnel for the combined-system power plant; Sky Watch phased-array radar antennas on all sides, which is surrounded by the larger, circular TACAN (TACtical Aircraft Navigation) device known as Cake Stand. Electronics: Big Ball satellite antennas for satellite communication, and Punch Bowl antennas for targeting anti-ship missiles. Engineering: It was originally estimated by Western intelligence that it would have CONAS (COmbined Nuclear And Steam) power plant. This was changed in late 1988 to a conventional plant. Missiles: The ship has 16 vertical-launch tubes for the SS-N-19 Shipwreck anti-ship missiles recessed in the ski-ramp. It has large steel doors to protect it from aircraft, and vice virsa, while firing. The missiles are also carried in Kirov-class cruisers and Oscar-class submarines. The Combined Air Defense System (CADS), in the Western intelligence designation for a mount combining two 30-mm Gatling guns and launchers for 8 SA-N-11 short-range missiles. They were originally observed on the Kirov-class cruiser Kalinin. Names: In 1984, German sources predicted the lead ship would be named Sovetskiy Soyuz (Soviet Union); in 1985, U.S. Navy Intelligence predicted the name Kremlin. The lead ship was instead named Leonid Brezhnev on 18 November 1982, eight days after the death of General Sectretary Brezhnev, but later that month was renamed Tbilisi to honor the capital of the Georgian SSR. In 1990, it was renamed Admiral of the Fleet od the Soviet Union Kuznetsov to honor the CinC of the Navy from 1939-1947, and agian from 1951-1956. The other ship was named Riga for the capital of Latvia SSR, but was renamed Varyag (Norseman) a traditional name of Soviet warships that was previously carried by a Kynda-class cruiser. UPDATE: The Admiral Kuznetsov is in the middle of a power struggle between Russia and Ukraine, following the break-up of the U.S.S.R. It's fate is unknown, and it was last known to be riding at anchor at Severmorsk on the Kola Peninsula, Russia. It may be in vain for either party, however, as the Russian Ministry of Defense has put it on a long list of major surface warships for sale to the highest bidder. The list was noted released in January. The Varyag is 60% complete, but is now for sale to anyone. If not sold, it will go to the breakers. It would cost $522 million in U.S. dollars to complete. Both ships are valued at $3.5 billion U.S. dollars. JS> I'm told the Varyag is being broke up as we speak. These carriers would pack an air wing of 12-18 Su-27B "Flanker B" and what looks like a choice between the same number of MiG-29B "Fulcrum B" for task force air defense, the same number of Su-25B "Frogfoot B" for strike capability, or, later, the new VSTOL plane, the Yak-41 "Freestyle". This is a rework of the Yak-38, built for air-to-air use. I believe the the prototype crashed and the product was abandoned. Tack on 12 Ka-27 and 4 Ka-24. I'm told that Jane's Defense Weekly had a feature on a Soviet carrier-based AWACS plane, to be used on the A. Kusnetsov and Ul'yanovsk class. This bears thinking. In the words of Frank Crary, a contributor to this mess, Russian carriers seem to be built to provide "aircover for a task force and local air superiority" UL'YANOVSK Class Ul'yanovsk Unamed Ul'yanovsk is being built at Black Sea Shipyard, Nikolayev, (south.) The second is also planned to build there. Ul'yanovsk was laid down December 1988, was scheduled to launch in 1991, and completed 1995-1996. The other is planned for completion in 2000. Displacement: approx. 75,000 tons full load Length: approx. 1,049 ft. 6 in. (320 m) overall Propulsion: CONAS:steam turbines; 250-300,000 shp; 4 shafts Reactors: 4 pressurized water Boilers: 4 Speed: 30+ knots Aircraft: approx. 45-65 Notes: The ship is essentially a larger Admiral Kuznetsov-class. It has the CONAS propulsion system, a double version of the plant in Kirov-class battle cruiser. Ul'yanovsk is the birthplace of V.I. Lenin. UPDATE: It has been reported that the Ul'yanovsk was 40% complete, but after the events in August, the fleet was re-evaluated. She is reported to be being broken-up, with the metal sold as scrap. There is no evidence that the reactors were delivered. They are rumored to have been sent to an emergency civilian power program. The unamed but planned carrier has been probably cancelled. JS> This vessel, the Soviet's first real try at a Western-style supercarrier is being scrapped. Not much was ever known about it. Four were requisitioned, three planned, two started, and only the Ul'yanovsk got far along enough to scrap. There you have it. 2 Moskva CHG, one still exists. 3 Kiev CV/CG, 2 for sale. 1 modified Kiev, scrapped. 2 A. Kusnetsov CV, one fought over between Russia and the Ukraine, one scrapped. 1 Ul'yanovsk, scrapped. Not much left of the Great White Fleet. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 24 Mar 1992 10:26:05 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (11) NACV: Ambush Message-Id: I recently played "NACV - Ambush: Soviet Attack on a NATO Carrier Group" on the Macintosh, trying both sides. I offer these observations. I got Mac version 1.01 to crash twice, though I can't repeat the circumstances. Still, this is much more reliable than version 1.0 which crashed all the time. It seems to me, the Formation Editor does not work to well with large groups. If you try to setup larger zones on the carrier group, the inner zones become tiny. It's very difficult to manipulate units in those tiny zones. I had to resort to temporarily changing zone sizes to handle units in the inner zones. I am sure people can suggest with all kinds of NEW capability to add to the formation editor. One thing which would help the CURRENT design would be to have a zoom for zones other than the main body. It also seems to me that the malfunction rate is too high, especially for the Soviets. It seemed to me that time compression increased the malfunction rate beyond the linear ratio of time compression. At one point, the Soviets had no working 650mm tubes, no working sub launched cruise missles and only half of the subs had working 533mm tubes. Apparently, malfunction in the computer game is not related to actual use of the system, nor does it happen to anything but weapons systems. At the rate illustrated in the game, the US would only have wait a week for all Soviet subs to break everything. The exception, of course, were the Soviet aircraft which never suffered any problems on some 60 aircraft. Now, I don't bother to turn the malfunction option on. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 10:49:19 -0700 From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow) Subject: (12) Re: Various Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 2, postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) said: >Is there any way of in flight refuelling using IBM Harpoon? Some of the >aircraft can have loadings designated as tanker, but nothing I've tried seems >to work to get them to transfer fuel to a joining group. Nope, In-Flight refueling isn't implemented in the current versions of the computer Harpoons out there.....maybe in the Gold edition later on though. >Finally, I've been setting up submarine patrols to include regular small loops >in the path - to clear the baffles and, hopefully, give the submarine a better >chance of finding something coming up behind. Is this a waste of time? Yeah, its a waste of time (unless it gives you something to do :-). Computer Harpoon doesn't take into account the baffles on a submarine. Gary P.S. BTW, I uploaded about 50 Mac Harpoon Scenarios to the Harpoon FTP site of hilbert.math.ksu.edu, with more to come. I also uploaded a scenario converter, that will convert IBM Harpoon Scenario files to Mac Harpoon Scenario Files. Just thought I would let you all know, for those of you that never seem to get enough of Harpoon. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 4 May 1992 17:57:35 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (13) Re: FFG-7 and SLQ-32 Message-Id: In CZ v9 msg 29, Brad Eacker (beacker@mips.com) writes: >I was reading thru the March, 1992 USNI Proceedings when I came across a >reference to a set of FFG-7s that have been upgraded with a new ECM system that >the add labeled SLQ-32. Does anyone know the particular set of platforms (9 I >believe) that these have been added to and what the characteristics would be in >relation to using them in a game of Harpoon? SLQ-32(V)1 radar warning only SLQ-32(V)2 as (V)1 but greater coverage SLQ-32(V)3 as (V)2 but with added jammer/deception SLQ-32(V)4 as (V)3 with special modifications for carrier use SLQ-32(V)5 as (V)2 but with "Sidekick" jammer Originally, many ships were only to have (V)1 or (V)2. Later, the USN decided to upgrade many ships. For example, the Spruance DDs started with (V)2 but will all eventually have (V)3. The Perry FFGs originally had (V)2 version. Eventually, all should be upgraded to the (V)5 version. The "Sidekick" jammer was developed originally for the Taiwan navy. It is similar to the (V)3 jammer but cheaper and lower power. Harpoon basically lumps all ships together as far as ECM is concerned. This group evaluation is built in the Ph for simplicity. This is hard to argue with because it is so hard to come by any reasonable performance numbers on EW stuff. Some exceptions have been made. "South Atlantic War" had an optional rule (+10% Ph) to penalize civilian ships which have no ECM capability. Personally, I use three categories: High Capability (normal Ph), Lower Capability (+5% Ph) and No Capability (+10% Ph). Lower Capability might be older equipment or missing some capbility (like no jammer or chaff/flare launcher). If you want a wider range, maybe you can go from -10% to +10% Ph modifications. In general, you don't want to go upto +15% because the best weapons in the game are at 85% already and there should always be a chance to miss. Likewise, there should always be a chance to hit. The worse surface Ph for a guided weapon is 20%, so Ph mods should not go down to -20%. (Remember there are other possible negative mods too!) -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 92 08:25:20 CDT From: anderson@navo.navy.mil (Douglas T. Anderson) Subject: (14) IBM 1.21 Memory Errors Message-Id: Having recently discovered 'cz' and the scenario archive at 'math.ksu.edu' rushed and downloaded the scenarios on the archive and tried to play them on my PC. (2 Meg, 386, 90 Meg disk, 1.2 and 1.4 floppies, EGA monitor, running MS/DOS 5.0) You can imagine my suprise when after attempting to load ANY of the GIUK or NACV scenarios I would run out of memory. Well, after reading all of the Archived CZ volumes (I had a slow day at work :~) ). I called 360 and got a copy of Harpoon 1.21 and the MEDC battle set. I ordered these using my plastic on Friday PM, and received them in Snail Mail on Monday. Pretty good turn around for both 360, and the USNail. 360 charged me $5.00 for the 1.21 upgrade and $27 (If memory serves) for MEDC. Last night I loaded Harpoon 1.21, MEDC, and re-arranged my battle sets so IOPG was the first in the directory structure. Low and behold I can load and play the archived scenarios, at least those I attempted last night. Some observations: 1) It may be my imagination but it seems to be marginally faster then 1.1 (the version I was running before) 2) When jumping strait to DISPLAY (via Alt-D) and then exiting, I get a really goofed up screen, looks like the exit didn't entirely clean up the screen before displaying the platform menu. Returning to the scenario cleans everything up. 3) When setting a course for a battle group that was station keeping, The course remained on the chart after I returned to the main screen. This, I guess, could be an enhancement. 4) Some trivia, the GIUK battle set I had with 1.1 was NOT the same size as the one delivered with 1.21 (the GUIK.RES file was smaller by some 100 bytes or so, similar size difference for the GIUKEGA.RES file). 5) The MEDC floppies (3.5 in) I got said Med Sea on them, and the label said they contained NACV.RES, NACVEGA.RES, etc. When reading the floppies they had the correct files. (MEDC.RES, MEDCEGA.RES, etc.) All in all, even though I only got to look at 1.21 for an hour or so last night I think it was a good investment of $5, if only for the additional staff commands. One other thing, the first thing I did with 1.21 is load GIUK scenario #1 and check free memory. It showed the same amount of memory free, that 1.1 did (190k free) This leads me to believe my re-arrangement of the battle sets is what stopped the memory errors. Douglas T Anderson Site Manager - POPS Program All opinions expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not reflect the opinions of Grumman Data Systems, the US Navy or any one else, unless they want them to. ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest **************** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Tue May 26 16:40:26 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram8) id AA05060; Tue, 26 May 92 16:40:26 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 92 16:40:26 -0700 Message-Id: <9205262340.AA05060@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #3 (msgs 15-24) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 26 May 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 3 Topics: (15) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (16) Computer v1.3 qxn102@uriacc.bitnet (17) Re: AGM-137 and INF tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (18) PC NACV bob.gahl@ebay.sun.com (19) Archive Mail Server zen%hophead@canrem.com (20) Group Course pasb11@bvc.edu (21) Active Torpedo Defense avk@elecard.tomsk.su (22) HARPUSNI.ZIP a760@dmt03.mcc.virginia.edu (23) GDW Harpoon avk@elecard.tomsk.su (24) Editor & GIUK Bug hrz090@de0hrz1a.bitnet "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 26 May 1992 15:32:40 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (15) Editorial Message-Id: New members added since last issue: craig@ukpr.uky.edu (Craig Brunson) darrenc@cpqhou.se.hou.compaq.com (Darren Cepulis) betel@camelot.bradley.edu (Robert Crawford) etlgecs@etmsun.ericsson.se (Grahame Curtis) radsb@minyos.xx.rmit.edu.au (David Green) avk@elecard.tomsk.su (Alexander V. Krutikov) oddt@stud.cs.uit.no (Odd Terje Lundboe) gt7994a@prism.gatech.edu (Sean P. Ormond) riiali@kannel.lut.fi (Pekka Riiali) dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Daniel L. Schneider) tilden@nuhepl.phys.nwu.edu (Robert Tilden) I recently got a call from Carl Norman of 360. Judging from the messages below others probably have talked to him recently too. The next issue of the Harpon Users' Group C3I is at the printers. Here's the latest on the computer game: * The Harpoon development team and environment has been greatly improved. * IBM v1.21 is out. Mac and Amiga will skip this version and go directly to 1.3. * IBM Version 1.3 is hopefully coming in July for $15 (but see below). This version has plenty of bug fixes and new features, including: new sonar model air mission aborts base repair torpedo search patterns better computer handling of air missions * Harpoon Designer Series BattleSet Enhancer should be out at the same time as v1.3 for $49.95. Essentially, this product gives you a new HDS battleset of 12 scenarios and new platforms for every one you already have. (HDS extracts some info from existing battlesets to build the new ones.) If you have all 4 current battlesets, you will end up with 48 new scenarios. It 124 page manual is included. Tentatively, the plan is to include v1.3 for free. * Harpoon II is to be a total rewrite with lots of new stuff. It's at least 18 months away. The lead battleset for Harpoon II will be the Western Pacific. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 92 18:12:58 EDT From: qxn102%uriacc.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Armando Heredia) Subject: (16) Computer v1.3 Message-Id: I called Three-Sixty's Customer Service Number the other day with a question regarding how to upgrade to Harpoon v.1.2 and the support person mentioned that v.1.3 is coming out this summer. This new version is a different game from the other versions. Whereas 1.2 is a maintenance upgrade from 1.1, 1.3 has entirely new features and game play, with most of the changes being taken from client input, so I guess that person from 360 subscribed to this list has been listening to our inputs/gripes! :) Some of the new gameplay features include better sonar performance modeling and ASW attacks on subs whose position is not exactly fixed. Three-Sixty still has the 286 platform in mind as the minimum hardware needed for the game. So all you 286 owners who can't afford to upgrade yet, (like me) rest easy. Expected release date for this version is around the end of June - early July. Registered Haproon users will receive mail notices fairly soon. Apparently it will cost around $15 or so. Armando J. Heredia | ********************************** Academic Computer Center | "A willing foe, and sea room..." University of Rhode Island | - U.S. Navy Wardroom Saying Kingston R.I. 02881 U.S.A. | "Let's party. I'm on point." Int: QXN102@uriacc.uri.edu | - Anonymous Bit: QXN102@uriacc.bitnet | ********************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed 13 May 1992 09:27:44 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (17) Re: AGM-137 and INF Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 6, deichman@cisco.nosc.mil (Shane Deichman) asks if the AGM-137 TSSAM would be restricted by the INF treaty. According to the May 1992 issue of the USNI Proceedings, the TSSAM has a range less than 325 nm. Apparently having a range under this threshold removes it from INF considerations. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 92 15:23:12 PDT From: bob.gahl@ebay.sun.com (Robert Gahl) Subject: (18) PC NACV Message-Id: I noted with interest that someone else (Dave Dreyer) was having the same problem I am having with NACV on a PC, but I never saw a response to his query. His problem in CZ V8 #7 was: >I've purchased the challenger pak for pc's, and have not been able to run any >of the NACV scenarios. I can run them, but I have absolutely no loadout for >any of my aircraft, and my ships have no weapons. The version I'm running is >1.21. What can I do to run these scenarios? I've talked with someone else who >has had similar problems... I'm lost as to how to fix it. Can someone please enlighten me as to what I've done wrong or what I can do to fix this? I do not experience this problem on the Mac. --- Bob Gahl |ARPA/INTERNET: bob.gahl@EBay.Sun.COM SE - Sun Microsystems Federal |UUCP: ...[about anywhere]!sun!bgahl "Sometimes you're the windshield. Sometimes you're the bug." Mark Knopfler ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1992 20:04:51 -0400 From: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena) Subject: (19) Archive Mail Server Message-Id: Hi, A couple of things. I called 360 late last week and they stated a new version of Harpoon for the PC would be available by mid July. Second thing is there an archive site that is mailable? Thanks Nick zen%hophead@canrem.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1992 19:58 CDT From: pasb11@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman) Subject: (20) Group Course Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 14, anderson@navo.navy.mil (Douglas T. Anderson) writes: > 3) When setting a course for a battle group that was station keeping, The > course remained on the chart after I returned to the main screen. This, I > guess, could be an enhancement. That actually is a built in feature. You can toggle from no-course displayed, highlighted-course displayed or all-course displayed by pressing Alt-T. SF bvc ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 92 14:21:08 +0700 (TSK) From: avk@elecard.tomsk.su (Alexander Krutikov) Subject: (21) Active Torpedo Defense Message-Id: I've heard that it possible to counterfire torpedoes. How can I "shoot down" incoming torpedoes? (i.e. by RBU or another torpedo)? Is it handled automatically? [Admin Note: There is no way to do this in the current computer game. It's not even clear if it is possible to do this in the real world. The counterfire is against the enemy submarine, not his torpedo. Note that adjustments for decoys are already taken into account.] Thanx in advance. -- Alexander V. Krutikov, Internet: avk@elecard.tomsk.su Elecard Ltd., FIDO: None (yet) Tomsk, Russia. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 92 11:59:56 EST From: a760@dmt03.mcc.virginia.edu (Kirby Stiening) Subject: (22) HARPUSNI.ZIP Message-Id: There is a file at math.ksu.edu available for ftp named HARPUSNI.ZIP which includes a US Naval Institute Battleset. Never having hear of this battleset before, I wonder if it is a legitimate post and, if so, what resources are available for the scenarios. Does anyone have information about the file? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 May 92 14:17:32 +0700 (TSK) From: avk@elecard.tomsk.su (Alexander Krutikov) Subject: (23) GDW Harpoon Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 4, jon@netlabs.com (Jonathan Biggar) writes: > Is anyone out there interested in playing GDW Harpoon via Email? I am > a novice at the game, but I sure would like to try. What is GDW? And I am interested to play Harpoon via Email but how? It will be probably great to play Human vs. Human. (esp. Russ. vs. Amer. :-))! [Admin Note: GDW = Game Designers' Workshop. That is the company which publishes a miniatures wargame version of Harpoon.] -- Alexander V. Krutikov, Internet: avk@elecard.tomsk.su Elecard Ltd., FIDO: None (yet) Tomsk, Russia. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 May 92 13:52:44 MEZ From: hrz090%de0hrz1a.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Dr. Martin Erdelen) Subject: (24) Editor & GIUK Bug Message-Id: Hi, here's a possibly well-known & boring question - please bear with a newcomer (both to Harpoon and CZ). The problem: I own Harpoon, version 1.16b (including the GIUK battleset) - bought it quite some time ago and have not yet come round to using it much; besides, versions sold in Germany tend to lag quite a bit behind what's new in the US :-( ). I have now also acquired the Scenario Editor (vers. 1.01) and the MEDC battle- set. All is well with the latter two, but alas! the Editor doesn't quite cooperate with the (1.16b) GIUK battleset. It is not a complete disaster, though. The screen in general, esp. the "World" and the UNIT windows look alright, and the menus more or less work, up to a point. However, the GROUP window is messed up: instead of the coastlines there's just a more or less random pattern of black pixels. Also, the on-screen "direction key tab" is displaced right into the GROUP window (partially covered by the group title bar) - or missing altogether. As I said, the menu functions are still there, but I have also seen my machine hang up at some point. (No good anyway without a GROUP window...) At first, I suspected a memory size problem, so I did all the recommended stuff such as clearing out all TSR's etc. I even booted DOS 5.0 which gave me 623,200 Byte as "largest executable program size" - surely this must be sufficient? Didn't help, though. So the big question again: Is it a bug, is it a feature, is it a version incompatibility (not mentioned on the box - I had a *good* look before buying!), or am I overlooking something? All hints very welcome. Thanks in advance. Martin Dr. Martin Erdelen EARN/BITNET: HRZ090@DE0HRZ1A.BITNET -Computing Centre- Internet: erdelen at hrz.uni-essen.de University of Essen Tel.: +49 201 183-2998 Schuetzenbahn 70 FAX: +49 201 183-3960 D-4300 Essen 1 Binary: . .-. -.. . .-.. . -- Germany ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest **************** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Thu Jun 4 15:30:11 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram8) id AA26036; Thu, 4 Jun 92 15:30:11 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 92 15:30:11 -0700 Message-Id: <9206042230.AA26036@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #4 (msgs 25-30) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 4 June 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Topics: (25) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (26) NACV Solutions lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (27) Re: HARPUSNI.ZIP mgjblok@cs.vu.nl (28) German MIG-29s chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (29) Should I Buy It? jfriday@marie.stat.uga.edu (30) Various wendling@mosaic.uncc.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 4 Jun 1992 15:10:10 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (25) Editorial Message-Id: New members added since last issue: hrz090%de0hrz1a.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Martin Erdelen) hwh@cci.dk (Helge W. Hess) dwh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David W. Hunnicutt) rick@vee.lrz-muenchen.de (Henrik Klagges) jco@bbn.com (John Orthoefer) pep7513@tm0006.lerc.nasa.gov (Phil Paulsen) p38448n@puukko.hut.fi (Timo Saarto) jfriday@marie.stat.uga.edu (Paul Stacy) wendling@mosaic.uncc.edu (Philippe Wendling) CZ membership is over 300 now. Some subscribers are actually local redistributions. The break down of mail domain names is as follows. US domains: Non-US domains: bitnet 2 at 1 nl 5 com 86 au 7 no 2 edu 136 ca 13 se 5 gov 13 de 3 su 1 mil 7 dk 4 uk 5 net 1 fi 3 org 5 il 1 us 3 is 1 -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 May 92 19:46:07 MDT From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (26) NACV Solutions Message-Id: In CZ vol 10 msg 18, bob.gahl@ebay.sun.com (Robert Gahl) writes about problems loading scenarios from NACV and someone else's similar experience: > His problem in CZ V8 #7 was: > >I've purchased the challenger pak for pc's, and have not been able to run any > >of the NACV scenarios. I can run them, but I have absolutely no loadout for > >any of my aircraft, and my ships have no weapons. The version I'm running is > >1.21. What can I do to run these scenarios? I've talked with someone else who > >has had similar problems... > > I'm lost as to how to fix it. Can someone please enlighten me as to > what I've done wrong or what I can do to fix this? I do not experience > this problem on the Mac. First off, I do not know what causes this, but it happened to me too. What I did as a temporary workaround is to load whatever NACV scenario you want to play into the Editor, then change the loadout on one of the plane/helo platforms. Save the scenario. Reload the scenario. In my case, all the aircraft had their loadouts. Of course, you'll have to reload that one you changed. . . . ask 360 about it, and they might be able to give you a better fix. Hope this helps! -- Mark R. Lam InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu Colorado State University lam@lamar.colostate.edu Fort Collins, Colorado ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 92 8:28:22 MET DST From: mgjblok@cs.vu.nl (Maurice Blok) Subject: (27) Re: HARPUSNI.ZIP Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 22, a760@dmt03.mcc.virginia.edu (Kirby Stiening) asks: >There is a file at math.ksu.edu available for ftp named HARPUSNI.ZIP which >includes a US Naval Institute Battleset. Never having hear of this battleset >before, I wonder if it is a legitimate post and, if so, what resources are >available for the scenarios. Does anyone have information about the file? I downloaded the scenario from a local BBS. And after checking for any copyright messages I uploaded it to the harpoon scenario site. I also mailed some people about the upload and nobody complained. This file is just a small Battleset with 5 scenarios. It needs GIUK to run. It a nice addition to your harpoon set. Later! /-------\ /-------------------------------\ |04:23am| | Let's hit the sack!.....Naaah | \-------/ /-------------------------------/ ____ / / # /---\ ------ ---/ # |o | Maurice Blok | # <__ | Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam ---\____# \___/ ------ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 May 92 12:18:56 MEZ From: chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Kai Hortmann) Subject: (28) German MIG-29s Message-Id: The Federal Republic of Germany has left an European project to build a new fighter, the "Jaeger 90". Instead the Federal Bureau of Finance has advised the Ministry of Defence to buy MIG-29 from Russia. There are currently several MIG-29 in the German forces that came from the East German army (NVA). Experts have found that the MIG-29 not only has all of the advantages the Jaeger 90 should have, it's also much cheaper. Too bad there are no German forces in any Harpoon Battleset, else you might suddenly detect a German plane group consisting of MIG-29s. :) Times change and the GIUK and NACV scenarios are becoming obsolete. I prefer to see Harpoon as a game, not a simulation. <* Kai Hortmann - University of Konstanz - Germany *> <* chbrin5@dknkurz1.bitnet or chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de *> ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 May 92 0:03:27 EDT From: jfriday@marie.stat.uga.edu (Paul Stacy) Subject: (29) Should I Buy It? Message-Id: Hello. My name is Paul Stacy. I'm a student in Buffalo, New York (I have an account here in Georgia.) I am a military buff and like military games. I've been looking into getting Harpoon, but would like some more information on the game before getting it. I've been talking to someone in Canada that is looking to sell his (GIUK, NACV, AND MEDC disks), but I'm not too familar with the game. I've seen the Challenger Pack at Electronics Boutique, but the $60 price tag (plus $30 more for scenario disk 4) is a bit steep for me for a program I've never seen used. I've heard some negative commentary from USENET's sci.military about it's "truthfulness", but I can live with some fictionalization. I've also heard people talk about how addicted they were to the game and how they liked it so much. I have a VIP200 (IBM 386 clone) with VGA color monitor and at least 640K memory (I should have set it up myself.) I don't have a mouse (which I hear I Need) and do have DOS 3.3. After describing it to a friend he thinks I have 1Meg and another agreed with him. Anyway, I"m trying to find out if this program is something I would like to get. I'm getting the impression that this game is not quite somethings along the lines of "sit at the periscope and fire at targets" like a game such as SILENT SERVICE is I once had. The only screens I've seen were world maps, though I seem to remember seeing once a picture of a sub's "situation display", a periscope searching the area, and a description next to the scope of a Kirov-class cruiser. I might call this person in Canada in a day or two, but I would like to be as informed about it as I can be (it wouldn't be hard to increase my current knowledge of the game.) I"m also looking to see if anyone in the Western New York area has a copy they would be willing to sell (a lot closer to me than Alberta is!) I guess I'm just looking for whatever anyone can tell me about the game. If there are any readers in Erie county, New York that would be willing to leave their phone number with me that I could call about it I would be most appreciative. Time is quite important for this potential purchase so I would appreciate it if you could write as soon as possible. Thank you for your time and thoughts on the game. Paul "Joe Friday" Stacy (not net.police) Buffalo State College, New York STACY54@SNYBUFVA.BITNET (Buffalo State College VAX) JUST THE jfriday@marie.stat.uga.edu (Univ. of Georgia, Athens UNIX) "VAX", MA'AM! Disclaimer: This isn't the opinion of the school, police, Chief of Detective Staff Brown, Planet Spaceball, Starfleet Command, or the Pentagon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jun 92 18:31:21 EDT From: wendling@mosaic.uncc.edu (Philippe Wendling) Subject: (30) Various Message-Id: 1/ Recently, I bought the H.C.P., which includes the Harpoon Scenario Editor. I was surprised about the release: v1.0. Is it the latest one before new v1.3 ? [Admin Note: I believe version 1.3 refers to the Harpoon program itself, not the Scenario Editor program.] 2/ Is any way to design a path of an air strike with the Scenario Editor? (the attack command provides only direct bearing to the target and I would like to make multiple bearings attack) 3/ Does anyone play Harpoon (print or computer) in UNCC ? ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest **************** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Jun 19 14:23:52 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.07pram8) id AA27327; Fri, 19 Jun 92 14:23:52 -0700 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 92 14:23:52 -0700 Message-Id: <9206192123.AA27327@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #5 (msgs 31-39) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 19 June 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 5 Topics: (31) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (32) Various randy@ms.uky.edu (33) Membership Tops 300 caw@miroc.chi.il.us (34) Amiga Editor Bugs a.bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk (35) New Data Annex In '93 birmingh@fnalnf.fnal.gov (36) Read any Good Books? todd.klaus@honeywell.com (37) NACV Problem Experience paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu (38) Latest Versions todd.klaus@honeywell.com (39) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 19 Jun 1992 13:39:16 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (31) Editorial Message-Id: New members added since last issue: ka3ovk!albers@cts.com (Jon Albers) a.bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk (Arnaud Bouis) breshear@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (William J. Breshears) brewton@severn.enet.dec.com (Steve Brewton) brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org (Richard Brock) randy_buckland@ncsu.edu (Randy Buckland) acoles@syma.susx.ac.uk (Alastair Coles) pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu (Patrick Golden) gulcu@disun42.epfl.ch (Ceki Gulcu) hewitt%motral@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com (Ian Hewitt) roskimmeld@crf.cuis.edu (David Kimmel) todd.klaus@esu36.cfsat.honeywell.com (Todd Klaus) cvadsaav@csupomona.edu (Lord Krieg) jlarke@umich.edu (Jason Larke) ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau) goranw@docs.uu.se (Goran Wall) s905066@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell) lou@hobbes.xilinx.com (Lou Sanchez-Chopitea) dstreiff@hbs.harvard.edu (S. David Streiff) jstuart@telotech.com (Jeff Stuart) sullivan@erim.org (Richard Sullivan) paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu (Paul Wang) wright@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Ted Wright) Larry Bond's new WWII ship miniatures game "Murderer's Row" will be published by Clash of Arms, at least according to CoA's latest newsletter. The word from Carl Norman of Three-Sixty is that the USNI scenario set should NOT be distributed or put on bulletin boards. This is illegal and IMHO people ought not to do anything which undermines their deal with the USNI or their decision not to use copy protection. Carl also mentioned that Harpoon 1.3 is going into Beta next week. The Harpoon Designer Series is going Alpha today. If you want to be a Beta tester for either, send e-mail to Carl at 76711.240@compuserve.com and state your name, US Mail address and computer type. PC versions will be tested before Mac or Amiga. You ought to do this even if you have Beta tested before, as the whole Beta testing program is being completely revamped. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 00:23:52 EDT From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) Subject: (32) Various Message-Id: Comment: slightly edited Here's a few Harpoon questions: In the real world, jets have horrible ranges flying low. Does the altitude that a plane flies in Harpoon change the range? How about speed? I beat the computer all the time. What's the hardest large scenario, and which side? I like the VANI battleset. The scenarios are fun. I like the battleset format. It's much easier to load from a battleset than from a *.sc file. Can anyone package some of the other scenarios as battlesets? I bet lots of people would appreciate it. -Thanks -Randy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 01:54:59 CDT From: caw@miroc.chi.il.us (Christopher A. Wichura) Subject: (33) Membership Tops 300 Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 25, cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu writes: >CZ membership is over 300 now. Some subscribers are actually local >redistributions. The break down of mail domain names is as follows. Hmmm. Are people up for trying to create something like rec.games.harpoon then? I seem to remember this was not a popular idea because it was felt there weren't enough people interested in it. Comments, anyone? (A good question would be how many people have easy access to mail but not reliable news feeds? For me, it'd be a lot easier if it was news as I get a fair amount of mail...) -=> CAW Christopher A. Wichura Multitasking. Just DO it. caw@miroc.chi.il.us (my amiga) ...the Amiga way... u12401@uicvm.uic.edu (school account) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 10:51:00 BST From: a.bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk Subject: (34) Amiga Editor Bugs Message-Id: Hello, this is my first message to this list. I bought the Harpoon Scenario Editor v1.1 for my Amiga, but there is a big bug. I can make my scenarios properly according to the manual, but when I want to load the saved scenario files from the HARPOON game, it simply refuses to recognize the files and load them. So my editor is simply useless and I am very upset. I have written to the game company but got no answer after 7 months. Has anyone experienced the same problems on their Scenario Editor ? Arnaud A.Bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 92 23:25:00 GMT From: birmingh@fnalnf.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham) Subject: (35) New Data Annex In '93 Message-Id: Comments: slightly edited I just ordered a copy of the 90-91 Data Annex for Harpoon to go with the (old) copy of Harpoon I just bought. Anyway, the lady on the phone told me that the 1992 Data Annex is due out sometime early next year. Thought you'd like to know. -- Phillip J. Birmingham birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Jun 92 08:05:36 -0600 From: klaus%eccx.dnet@esu36.cfsat.honeywell.com Subject: (36) Read any Good Books? Message-Id: I became interested in Harpoon and naval warfare in general after reading Clancy's "Hunt for Red October" and "Red Storm Rising". Good books on air and sea tactics and scenarios (fiction) are hard to come by if you don't know what you're looking for. Everybody has their favorite authors or titles and I'm soliciting some suggestions on what's good... Thanks! Todd.Klaus@esu36.cfsat.Honeywell.COM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 22:17:01 -0700 From: paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu (Paul Wang) Subject: (37) NACV Problem Experience Message-Id: I had the same problem with the aircraft loadout in the NACV Battleset when I purchased the Challenger Pak. What I did was to call Harpoon at their technical support number and tell them about the problem and they send me a replacement disk free of charge within a week. Paul Wang paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu paulwang@soda.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Jun 92 06:43:48 -0600 From: klaus%eccx.dnet@esu36.cfsat.honeywell.com Subject: (38) Latest Versions Message-Id: Could someone please post the latest versions of everything (computer & paper) for newcomers like myself? Thanks! Todd.Klaus@esu36.cfsat.Honeywell.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu 18 Jun 1992 13:38:02 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (39) Recent Naval Developments Message-Id: The various cuts in USN forces combined with the current shipbuilding program will produce quite a different fleet by the year 2000. The June 1992 USNI Proceedings had the following table in it. Projected Active USN Surface Fleet Strength Fiscal Year Class 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 ----------------------------- FF-1052 46 42 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FFG-7 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 DD-963 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 DDG-2/37 22 11 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 DDG-51 0 1 2 4 8 13 17 21 26 30 DDG-993 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 CG-47 16 20 24 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 other CG/CGN 27 27 27 27 26 25 25 25 22 20 BB-61 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - excludes NRF and Innovative Naval Reserve Concept >From FY91 to FY00, surface fleet combatants (minus CV/CVNs) goes from 186 to 148. By the year 2000 the fleet will start to look top-heavy, with more cruisers than frigates! Also, nearly 40% will be Aegis equipped. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest **************** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Sat Jun 27 16:46:59 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.07pram8) id AA03016; Sat, 27 Jun 92 16:46:59 -0700 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 16:46:59 -0700 Message-Id: <9206272346.AA03016@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ Digest v10 #6 (msgs 40-53) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 27 June 1992 Volume: 10 Issue: 6 Topics: (40) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (41) USNI Scenarios & Newsgroup stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (42) Re: Read any Good Books? tcomeau@stsci.edu (43) Re: Various lcline@agora.rain.com (44) USNI Battleset qxn102@uriacc.uri.edu (45) Re: Various lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (46) NACV: South Crossing s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (47) Re: Membership Tops 300 gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (48) More NACV: South Crossing s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (49) Files Gone from Hilbert ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (50) OS/2 Compatability zen%hophead@canrem.com (51) Data Anex & Computer Game ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (52) Volume 10 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (53) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat 27 Jun 1992 16:25:26 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (40) Editorial Message-Id: New members added since last issue: dag@netcom.com (David Gewirtz) davido@maggie.pen.tek.com (David H. Olson) mrtaylor@access.digex.com (Mark Taylor) dctam@eos.ncsu.edu (Unknown) kordash@linus.mitre.org (Unknown) A few opinions are trickling in on whether to switch to a newsgroup. I would be interested in hearing from anybody with an opinion on the subject. However, to prevent the digest from being overwhelmed, please send further comment to the administrative address. Readers will want to take note of message 49 below which has some bad news. Hopefully, this is just a temporary state of affairs. This wraps up this volume, so the usual index and guidelines appear at the end. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Jun 92 00:05:42 EDT From: stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (James Stricherz) Subject: (41) USNI Scenarios & Newsgroup Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 31, cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) writes: > The word from Carl Norman of Three-Sixty is that the USNI scenario set should > NOT be distributed or put on bulletin boards. This is illegal and IMHO people > ought not to do anything which undermines their deal with the USNI ... Which causes me to "huh??". Agreement? What agreement? Is this something I should be aware of? [Mod Note: 360 sells Harpoon to USNI members with some extra scenarios included. My understanding is (Carl please correct me if I am wrong) that these scenarios are only available in the USNI version.] > Carl also mentioned that Harpoon 1.3 is going into Beta next week. The Harpoon > Designer Series is going Alpha today. If you want to be a Beta tester for Yaaaaaaaaa! Designer Series? Is this something I should be aware of? Oh, and how is the Western Pacific battleset coming? [Mod Note: You will want to look at CZ v10 msg 15 for mention of the "Harpoon Designer Series BattleSet Enhancer". Western Pacific won't come out until v2.0.] In CZ v10 msg 32, caw@miroc.chi.il.us (Christopher A. Wichura) writes: >Are people up for trying to create something like rec.games.harpoon then? If there isn't enuff demand, how about alt.games.harpoon? James ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1992 15:55 EST From: tcomeau@stsci.edu (Tom Comeau) Subject: (42) Re: Read any Good Books? Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 36, klaus%eccx.dnet@esu36.cfsat.honeywell.com asks if anyone has read any good books lately. "Red Phoenix" and "Vortex", both by Larry Bond, are excellent sources for scenarios and general thoughts on tactics. "Red Phoenix", in particular, has several interesting sub v. surface group engagements in truly awful sonar conditions. Besides, they're both good reading. Oddly, I find that refighting "old" engagements with new systems is both enjoyable and enlightening. Pick an engagement from WWII or Korea, or the Falklands or better yet one of innumerable crises the USN has managed to avoid. Now refight it with the ships in the fleet today. (Imagine, for example, that the quarantine of Cuba had been run by an armed merchant, or one of the merchants had a Foxtrot or two in company. Now try it again with one or two Yak-38s on the merchie and an Akula in company ... .) For non-fiction, start with what I have found to be an excellent outline of the history of naval warfare: "The Price of Admiralty" John Keegan, Penguin Books, 1988. I highly recommend a book written for the professional Surface Warfare Officer, but with the 'armchair admiral' and the youthful wargamer in mind: "Fleet Tactics" Capt. Wayne P. Huges, USN, Ret., Naval Institute Press, 1986. For a pretty complete overview of the naval side of WWII: "The Longest Battle: The War at Sea, 1939-45" Richard Hough, Morrow & Co., 1986. An excellent account of the Falklands Campaign, including the political side, but with the military side written by a chap that went along: "The Battle for the Falklands" Max Hastings and Simon Jenkins, W.W.Norton & Co., 1983. Finally, a good reference (and at ~$45, considerably cheaper than Jane's) for who has what is: "The Military Balance" yearbooks. The International Institute for Strategic Studies, Brassey's . Published in the US and Canada by Macmillan. The 1991-92 version included the Desert Shield/Storm Coalition order of battle. The compositions of US Carrier Battle Groups was particularly interesting. tc> - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Comeau | tcomeau@stsci.edu (Internet) Senior System Manager, ops support | tcomeau@stsci (BITNet) Space Telescope Science Institute | (410) 516-6563 (Ma ^G) 3700 San Martin Drive | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Jun 92 22:28:10 PDT From: lcline@agora.rain.com (Larry Cline) Subject: (43) Re: Various Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 32, randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) writes: > In the real world, jets have horrible ranges flying low. Does the altitude > that a plane flies in Harpoon change the range? How about speed? It seems to only make a difference with propellor driven aircraft, such as P-3 Orions, which will go 403mph at high altitude and 389mph (?) at all others. Some jet aircraft will go faster at military and afterburner settings at low altitude than at high or medium. I have noticed this on the PC (1.1) and Amiga (1.1) versions of Harpoon. > I beat the computer all the time. What's the hardest large scenario, and which > side? The small scenarios or with 2nd line equipment are tougher to win. In CZ v10 msg 34, a.bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk writes: > I bought the Harpoon Scenario Editor v1.1 for my Amiga, but there is a big > bug. I can make my scenarios properly according to the manual, but when I want > to load the saved scenario files from the HARPOON game, it simply refuses to > recognize the files and load them. So my editor is simply useless and I am > very upset. Are you using to load the scenarios after starting a scenario from the appropriate battleset? I have not had this problem in with my Amiga Scenario Editor. - -- Larry Cline lcline@agora.rain.com C_________ Industrial Graphics ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 16:24:56 EDT From: qxn102%uriacc.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Armando Heredia) Subject: (44) USNI Battleset Message-Id: Just a quick question, and the answer might be obvious, but where can I legally obtain/purchase a copy of the USNI battleset? If anyone has any reviews, please send to me via personal e-mail, they will be appreciated. [Mod Note: I don't think the USNI battleset is available separately from Harpoon sold through USNI. (Carl please correct me if I am wrong.)] Armando J. Heredia | ********************************** Academic Computer Center | "A willing foe, and sea room..." University of Rhode Island | - U.S. Navy Wardroom Saying Kingston R.I. 02881 U.S.A. | "Let's party. I'm on point." Int: QXN102@uriacc.uri.edu | - Anonymous Bit: QXN102@uriacc.bitnet | ********************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 11:08:53 MDT From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (45) Re: Various Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 32, randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) writes: >In the real world, jets have horrible ranges flying low. Does the altitude that >a plane flies in Harpoon change the range? How about speed? I don't have the latest C3I issue from the HUG in front of me, but I do believe that the new PC version (1.3) will address this. But, we still have to wait until Harpoon II before inflight refuelling will be added. >I beat the computer all the time. What's the hardest large scenario, and which >side? I don't know about the largest, hardest scenario, but the hardest scenario for me is Rapier in GIUK. The new C3I newsletter has a couple of articles dealing with this scenario with a lot of suggestions on how to beat the computer. I have yet to try them, but the authors make it sound like it is doeable. (Anybody try them yet?) >I like the VANI battleset. The scenarios are fun. I like the battleset format. >It's much easier to load from a battleset than from a *.sc file. Can anyone >package some of the other scenarios as battlesets? I bet lots of people would >appreciate it. Are you referring to the USNI BattleSet? If you are, Ted addressed this in the last CZ. I don't think that there's any way to compact a group of scenarios into a BattleSet unless you work for 360. However, another change that should be coming in version 1.3 is the ability to load a scenario from the BattleSet selection screen (ie no Alt-F1 sequence anymore.) In other words, loading a scenario will be faster than loading a BattleSet. BTW, speaking of the USNI, how does one become a member? Do you have to be in the Navy? How much does it cost? Thanks! - -- Mark R. Lam InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu Colorado State University lam@lamar.colostate.edu Fort Collins, Colorado ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 9:53:25 EST From: s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell) Subject: (46) NACV: South Crossing Message-Id: Comment: slightly edited I use computer HARPOON, IBM v1.2, and would like to know if anyone has managed to keep the Clemenceau alive in the NACV battleset, scenario 7. This is the high speed convoy to Portsmouth, where the French and Spanish have had to help out in the ASW role. I must admit that between the Backfires and the Victors, I am hard pressed to keep any of the French forces afloat! It does not seem to matter whether I retain radar on or not... The Cassard-class ship manages to shoot down some missiles with Standard SAM (my Suffren with Masurca did not have a chance ... it was dodging Type 65 torp's, and so was a little slow to "wake up"), but the other ships do not seem to have very useful point defenses. And of course the French carrier "fighter" aircraft are really only useful against recon. or unescorted bombers ... when they can find them. Also, has anyone noticed the amount of errors in this scenario? I have found two - and so should everyone else ... the convoy is to Portsmouth, so why is its path set only as far as Rota in Spain? And an Arapaho class with 3 Vikings and 2 Fencers?! Anyhow, all comments appreciated. Oh, one other thing: is the French "projected" nuclear carrier available in the MEDC (or is it the Pacific) battleset equipped with any better aircraft? Gavin Rewell s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 10:10:59 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: (47) Re: Membership Tops 300 Message-Id: In CZ v10 msg 33, caw@miroc.chi.il.us (Christopher A. Wichura) writes: >Hmmm. Are people up for trying to create something like rec.games.harpoon >then? I seem to remember this was not a popular idea because it was felt there >weren't enough people interested in it. Comments, anyone? (A good question >would be how many people have easy access to mail but not reliable news feeds? >For me, it'd be a lot easier if it was news as I get a fair amount of mail ...) I'm all for it ... I think an actual full newsgroup would make it easier to open dialogs, and continue discussions, I say WE GO FOR IT!!! Gary - --- UUCP: clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/694-3276 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, WA ARPANet: clark!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: clark.edu!pro-freedom!gsnow | Vancouver Apple/Mac Users Group ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 9:55:16 EST From: s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell) Subject: (48) More NACV: South Crossing Message-Id: Comment: slightly edited Following on from my last correspondence to CZ, I would like to make some additional comments. I played the scenario again, this time as the USSR. I found that: * Russian airpower is invincible, so long as you use it properly. I decimated both the French and Spanish task forces, and the Portugese base at Santa Maria with only a couple of Bear-Ds and one or two Backfire MPs going down... * Someone in a past issue stated how useless subs can be. I tend to agree, as apart from the success from the air, the subs were just found and sunk by everyone ... . Like one of the Victor IIs, which was struck by two torps in direct succession, and I did not even pick them up on passive sonar (at creep speed and deep). * The NATO air defenses fired back! Funny that, because when I played as NATO, most of the French and Spanish ships just sat and died ... the Standard SAM-equipped ships were the only real active defenders. This time, everyone got in on the act, and so my AS-6 and AS-4 missiles were met by a storm (sic) of SM1MR, Masurca, Crotale and Crotale EDIR ... shame it did not work. * I killed a Seawolf! Picked it up as a CZ contact from a Victor III, and vectored 2 May ASW planes I had in the area. Dropped a few sonobuoys and got a good quality contact ... 2 torps launched and one hit. Scratch one US$2B sub! Funny that, as the torps are really poor: 50% hit and 45 DP, while the Seawolf has 130 DP and mega abilities ... you figure it out? (I suppose it might have been a critical hit.) Gavin Rewell s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 23:28:15 CDT From: ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau) Subject: (49) Files Gone from Hilbert Message-Id: I just tried ftp'ing to hilbert.math.ksu.edu and found, to my dismay that ALL the Harpoon files are gone. The reason stated that 'some goof uploaded a copy-writed file' and '360 complained'. Now I agree with 360 complaining about uploading of copy-writed files, but why should all of the user made scenarios have to be removed. In that case, why sell the scenario editor at all? Isn't that the reason that they sold the scenario editor, to let the public design their own scenarios? - -- Gene Moreau |"Hold up a one iron and walk, even God can't hit University of Manitoba | a one iron." Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada | - Once struck golfer, Lee Trevino, on how not ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca | to get struck by lightning. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 13:24:46 -0400 From: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena) Subject: (50) OS/2 Compatability Message-Id: Is anybody using OS/2 with Harpoon? Does it work? Does it work well? Will future version of Harpoon support it? Inquiring minds need to know Nick ***************************************************************************** I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles! zen%hophead@canrem.com ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 92 14:11:22 CDT From: ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau) Subject: (51) Data Anex & Computer Game Message-Id: I own both Computer Harpoon(Macintosh) and the Harpoon(GDW). Is the info in the Data Annex the same as used by Computer Harpoon. I wish to know so that I can use it while playing on my computer instead of having to go into the platform display all the time. - -- Gene Moreau |"Hold up a one iron and walk, even God can't hit University of Manitoba | a one iron." Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada | - Once struck golfer, Lee Trevino, on how not ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca | to get struck by lightning. ------------------------------ Date: Sat 27 Jun 1992 16:01:09 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (52) Volume 10 Index Message-Id: Volume Issue Date Messages Author - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 1 12 May 1992 (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Various postmaster@manadon (3) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (4) PBEM jon@netlabs.com (5) Re: Torpedo Return Fire tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (6) AGM-137 and INF deichman@cisco.nosc.mil (7) Re: Black Sea Fleet tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (8) General Questions raggy@dcs.warwick.ac.uk 2 19 May 1992 (9) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (10) Russian Carriers pasb11@bvc.edu (11) NACV: Ambush tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (12) Re: Various gsnow@clark.edu (13) Re: FFG-7 and SLQ-32 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (14) IBM 1.21 Memory Errors anderson@navo.navy.mil 3 26 May 1992 (15) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (16) Computer v1.3 qxn102@uriacc.bitnet (17) Re: AGM-137 and INF tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (18) PC NACV bob.gahl@ebay.sun.com (19) Archive Mail Server zen%hophead@canrem.com (20) Group Course pasb11@bvc.edu (21) Active Torpedo Defense avk@elecard.tomsk.su (22) HARPUSNI.ZIP a760@dmt03.mcc.virginia.edu (23) GDW Harpoon avk@elecard.tomsk.su (24) Editor & GIUK Bug hrz090@de0hrz1a.bitnet 4 4 June 1992 (25) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (26) NACV Solutions lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (27) Re: HARPUSNI.ZIP mgjblok@cs.vu.nl (28) German MIG-29s chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (29) Should I Buy It? jfriday@marie.stat.uga.edu (30) Various wendling@mosaic.uncc.edu 5 19 June 1992 (31) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (32) Various randy@ms.uky.edu (33) Membership Tops 300 caw@miroc.chi.il.us (34) Amiga Editor Bugs a.bouis@sysa.salford.ac.uk (35) New Data Annex In '93 birmingh@fnalnf.fnal.gov (36) Read any Good Books? todd.klaus@honeywell.com (37) NACV Problem Experience paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu (38) Latest Versions todd.klaus@honeywell.com (39) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 6 27 June 1992 (40) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (41) USNI Scenarios & Newsgroup stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (42) Re: Read any Good Books? tcomeau@stsci.edu (43) Re: Various lcline@agora.rain.com (44) USNI Battleset qxn102@uriacc.uri.edu (45) Re: Various lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (46) NACV: South Crossing s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (47) Re: Membership Tops 300 gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (48) More NACV: South Crossing s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (49) Files Gone from Hilbert ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (50) OS/2 Compatability zen%hophead@canrem.com (51) Data Anex & Computer Game ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (52) Volume 10 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (53) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat 27 Jun 1992 16:25:22 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (53) CZ Guidelines Message-Id: Guidelines for The Convergence Zone Last Update: 11 May 1992 Author: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim - CZ Moderator) Welcome to The Convergence Zone! Goal "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. The Harpoon products include Harpoon, Captain's Edition Harpoon, Computer Harpoon, Harpoon SITREP, and various supplements for the print and computer versions. Naval topics are discussed in so far as they are related to the game or provide useful background. The goal of CZ is interesting discussions and material and just plain fun. Submissions Messages for submission to the mailing list should be sent to "cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu". CZ is published in digest form. Volumes 10 and higher are in RFC 1153 compatible format. Earlier volumes are in an incompatible format. All messages are subject to possible rejection or editing by the moderator. Rejection should be pretty rare and only occurs if the subject of a message is wholly inappropriate or if the message is offensive. (Please keep flames to a minimum!) Editing should be pretty rare also. Reasons for editing include (but are not necessarily limited to) extreme length, obvious errors and really bad formatting. Any editing will be noted. Please double check your submissions for errors and try to stay within 80 characters per line. Administration Administrative requests should be sent to "cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu". Once in a while, the moderator has to do real work, so please be patient. If several people on the same machine receive the CZ, please try to organize a local redistribution. When you signup, I will send you back issues from the current volume. Previous volumes are available from the archives. Archives After each volume is complete, it along with an index is placed on "sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca" (129.100.100.12) for access by anonymous FTP. Please be polite and don't FTP from 08:00 to 18:00 US Eastern time during a workday. The CZ archive volumes appear under the "pub/cz" directory in compressed format. The volumes are named v1.Z, v2.Z, etc. The index files are named i1.Z, i2.Z, etc. A few other items appear under separate names. The complete list is in the file "INDEX". There is also an independent scenario archive run by kxb@math.ksu.edu (Karl R. Buck) on ftp.math.ksu.edu (129.130.6.1) which allows anonymous FTP. The details are on that site in the file "pub/harpoon/00readme". Please be polite and FTP during off peak hours. ------------------------------ End of CZ Digest ****************