As a German that picture is slightly disturbing, because for me the placement of the SAMs shows that they clearly weren’t meant to defend huge parts of Germany.
We were the buffer zone in which the war would have been fought, nothing more.
Without getting too political (I don’t blame the allied nations, and have no bad feelings toward them at all) I doubt they would have hesitated a second to unleash their complete arsenal - including weapons of mass destruction - on our soil if the Soviet Union had really attacked, regardless of the millions of people living in those undefended areas.
And yeah, probably the same thing goes for the Russians, although I have to admit the SAM coverage of the GDR does look better…
Well, the NATO air defense tactic was having a SAM belt (first Hawk, then Patriot) and otherwise relying on fighters for area defense. The US forces have additional SAMs to protect the air bases in their sector, something that the other NATO partners in Germany could not afford. The Hawk belt is actually positiond pretty far forward (considering the expected course of the ground war) and was regarded as a major obstacle for the Soviets, whose penetration was to be a major effort for the VVS in the first day(s). The use of nuclear weapons was planned to breach it (see: Hawk strike).
If one is looking at the Warsaw Pact air defenses and expecting a Desert Storm style campaign to degrade it, one might be wrong. The Desert Storm SEAD success was actually quite a unique situation and could not be expected in Europe. There was only a single wing dedicated to the SEAD mission, the 52th TFW at Spangdahlem Air Base with about 70 F-4G and F-4E (later F-4G and F-16C). This was the complete forward deployed NATO SEAD force in Central Europe. There were no other HARM shooting aircraft, no British ALARM (yet) and no German Tornado ECR (yet). The USA had a second SEAD wing for the Pacific theater and a third SEAD wing in CONUS for worldwide deployment, so some additional airframes might come to Germany. This hand full of F-4G was expected to battle that huge amount of SAMs listed above, just in East Germany alone. Surely a suppression could only be achived temporarly in a limited area in support of key airstrikes, I would assume for F-111 and Tornados attacking high value targets. Gues yourselfe if an A-10 would have ever seen an F-4G in direct support…
What made Desert Storm so special was that the majority of HARMS in the first night was actually shot by the US Navy, where every attatck aircraft was HARM capable. The combination of the USAF and the USN against a SAM system that was multiple times smaller created that overwhelming superiority. But of course against the Soviet Union, the USN was busy elsewhere and would not participate over Central Europe.
Remember there is clearly a difference in doctrines at play. The east has always had an extremely different view on how to achieve air defense, where the air force controls both aircraft and the SAMs, and both are used in coordinating to defend the FEBA. Generally in western nations (certainly the US), the SAMs are the responsibility of the Army, and the aircraft the responsibility of the Air Force. The soviets always invested heavier in SAMs than the west, they had more, and of a higher quality and greater variety.
I guess what I’m getting at here is yes, that HAWK line is anemic, but the entire sky from the FEBA back to Amsterdam is supposed to be back filled with an unholy blob of F-15s, F-16s, F-4Es, F-4Ks F-4Fs and potentially Mirages and Tornado ADVs.
@MBot It is interesting you say the U.S. Navy wouldn’t be involved like they were in the Gulf War. I am not sure to what extent their role would have played, but I remember reading about a 6 week operation “Ocean Safari 87” with the USS Forestal up in the Fjords of Norway. I would think that the US Navy would play a major role in an all out war with the Reds. No doubt Leatherneck Sims has a plan based on this historical deployment. Although, this would be a bit North of the original map I posted. -Woog
What I meant is that the USN would not have been involved in Germany. According the the established US Maritime Strategy, the USN intended to fight Soviet forces aggressively on a global scale, in the Norwegian Sea, the North Pacific, the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean and elsewhere. Even an amphibious landing on Denmark in support of LANDJUT would have been a possibility. But using a very expensive naval aviation like conventional aviation in a land war in Germany would have been a huge waste of resources. Germany was the realm of the United States Air Forces in Europe.
GIUK Gap. In the event of a shooting war in Europe, every available asset would have gone to defend the North Sea, hunt Soviet SSBN’s, and tie up or destroy Russian SSK’s and surface combatants to keep them from launching a nuclear strike, and to keep the sea lanes of the North Atlantic open.
Fulda Gap
MiG-23
MiG-29A
F-104G
F-4F(ish)
Tornado IDS
Yes I know most of this is years off, but the fact that this is now all being worked on, in full fidelity DCS (add the MiG-21 we already have), is amazing.
EDIT: there is a 4th Cold War Luftwaffe jet in the works: Fiat G.91 !
All I’m saying is, as a Study-level DCS module it’s nearly pointless. Make it an AI only or a Flaming Cliffs level and I might be on board with it. Otherwise the development time would be better used for something else. No hate.
I totally get that, and you’re right. It’s not a pragmatic aircraft. It doesn’t fill any niche we have better than the F-4, F-5, MiG-21 or Mirage F1.
I’m terribly biased though, as my grandpa was in intel for a KLu F-104G squadron. Their main task was recon over German hills.
Besides, there’s a certain charm to a difficult impractical aircraft, especially in DCS, where all of its quirks can be simulated. As in, the Hornet can do anything effectively, but objectively worse aircraft can be so much FUN to fly.
I understand why you’re saying that, but disagree with the conclusion. I think it’s a pretty cool bird; Have you ever seen one in person? It’s a freaking rocket with wings as an afterthought. Speaking of which, the wings are nearly razor-sharp along the leading edge. They had to put foam covers over them so the ground crews wouldn’t hurt themselves walking into them. Used extensively by nearly every western AF throughout the cold war, so it’s got quite a historical pedigree.
A2A it’s gonna have an identical loadout and similar(ish) radar as the F-5, two heaters (possibly 4, depending on the variant we get) and a gun. Plus two pylons for A2G bombs/rockets, and one in the centerline for a nuke. It ought to be simple enough systems-wise to learn to fly quickly, and be rewarding to master. Hit and run tactics, one pass haul ***, kinda like the Viggen. I think it’ll be cool.
Not only I saw it- I worked with the pilots of the last Italian squadron flying them.
I agreed already it’s cool- but it’s really less than an F-5 except in speed.
Many of the former Starfighter pilots talking about it were not really keen on the operational side.
Having one in reality, to experience acceleration and speed and reaching the sky in 5 seconds split must be impossible to describe- but stuck on a chair in my room?
I rather have other planes… ()
You make good points, I just hope your prediction regarding monetary return is wrong, for the developer’s sake. I think it would do well on Enigma’s server, for instance, splashing MiG-21s and such. A lot of a module’s success depends on the campaigns that are made for it, without content to play there’s not much to do with a given aircraft except in MP. I’d say the developer needs to get together with talented mission makers and commission some great SP content for it and it would do well. We’ll see, it takes all kinds to make the world go round.
)
