Battle Report: Britain vs Italy 1941 ('Naval Thunder' Rule Set)

This Naval Wargame is a scenario that could have happened in the 1940s, in the Mediterranean. It is a duel between an older & slower British Nelson-class battleship and a brand new Italian battleship of the Litttorio-class. Both ships are accompanied by a light cruiser. Wargame Rules: Naval Thunder Battleship Row. In August 2024 I played a slightly similar duel (also solo) between both battleships, under Victory @ Sea Rules. 

The participants

HMS Rodney and HMS Nelson were the first British battleships built after the signing of the 1922 Washington Naval Disarmament Treaty. While that Treaty precluded new construction of battleships, both the USA and Japan were already building battleships carrying 16-inch guns. Britain was therefor allowed these 2 ships to provide balance, although the ships had to stay within the new displacement limit of 35.000 ton. To keep within these limits they had a radical new design concentrating all main armament forward (to concentrate armored protection of this) and have boiler and engine rooms much further astern as ‘conventional’ battleships. Although an unusual profile, both ships were the most powerful battleships of their time. The camouflaged model is painted as HMS Nelson in 1942-’43. Both ships have served extensively in the Mediterranean during WW2. 
HMS Nelson is accompanied by a 1930s Leander-class light cruiser, like HMS Ajax or HMS Achilles (1939 Battle of the river Plate) or HMS Orion (participated in several amphibious landings in Italy and France). The cruiser is armed with 8 x 6-inch guns and painted as HMS Ajax in the common 1940 livery (without camouflage).

The Italian fast battleships of the Littorio-class were designed & build after the expiry of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty. Italy didn’t want to participate in the following limiting Naval Treaties of London (1930 and 1936). The design of the ships was supposed to be an answer to the new class of French battleships under construction. Both countries wanted to dominate the Mediterranean. Two of the 4 intended units of the Italian class were completed just before Italy entered WW2 in June 1940. The ships had 3 turrets with each 3 x 15-inch guns, 4 turrets with each 3 x 6-inch secondary armament and lots of 90 mm AA-guns grouped around the funnels. The model is painted in the common 1941 ‘double fishbone’ camouflage scheme (including the air recognition markings on her foredeck).
The battleship is accompanied by a fast 1930s Italian light cruiser of the Condottieri-class (8 x 6-inch guns). This is represented by a model of the light cruiser RN Atillio Regolo, although during the wargame I used the stats for RN Duca d’Aosta (to keep it in balance). RN Atillio Regolo is painted in her 1942 ‘Pappagallo’ (Parrot) camouflage, which only lasted for a couple of months… 
Britain has 759 + 105 = 864 points; Italy: 733 + 103 = 836 points.

Tactical situation:
It is 1941. Both Italian ships are en-route to the Aegean Sea, to support the German/Italian attack on Greece. British intelligence has got knowledge of this and the Royal Navy has dispatched HMS Nelson and a Leander-class light cruiser from their convoy duties (to Malta) to intercept both ships. Both British ships are radar equipped. The Italians rely on visual fire control means.. No air support is available.

Set Up:
Rules: Naval Thunder Battleship Row (& ‘Bitter Rivals’ extension). I didn’t use any optional Rules. The Rules don’t roll for ‘initiative’; manoeuvres and gun battles are supposed to happen simultaneously. 1:3000 scale ships (NAVWAR). Seamat: 6 x 4 ft. Distances in inch. Starting positions: 38 inches apart. There is no specific detection phase and not much indication on the distance scale in use. Following the suggestions within the Rules, the ships can open fire from turn 1. A big difference compared the Naval Wargame Rules for post-WW2 engagements: finding the enemy and building a ‘recognized maritime picture’ is a key feature of those Games. 

Turn 1
HMS Nelson (blue flag) and her accompanying cruiser HMS Ajax sailed at speed ‘5’ towards the expected position of the enemy. At the horizon smoke was detected. Both Italian ships sailed in a line-of-bearing on an easterly course with speed ‘6’. The British radar found the targets quickly and determined their course & speed. This was valuable input for the analog fire control system, which came forward with suggested bearing and elevation of the 16-inch main battery of HMS Nelson. Visually it was clear that an Italian light cruiser was guarding a new battleship of the ‘Littorio’-class.

Although close to the Italian battleship (red flag), the light cruiser was not obscuring the target and wasn’t making smoke to hide her. HMS Nelson opened fire with her 3 main turrets at medium range. 9 x 16-inch shells of 900 kg each screamed through the air, resulting in a lucky 7 hits on the surprised battleship! 4 shells penetrated the Italian armor, resulting in flooding, penetration of the aft main 15-inch turret and penetration of both port-side secondary 6-inch armament. When those British shells were fired, RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ saw the flashes and clouds at the horizon, turned her visual fire control sensors towards the threat and determined the distance with the optical rangefinder. The speed of the British was guessed.

The Italian fire control system came forward with a firing solution and all 9 x 15-inch guns opened fire towards HMS Nelson at medium range. Nine shells of 885 kg. flew over the nearby light cruiser RN ‘Duca d’Aosta’ towards the British. This first salvo resulted in 3 hits at HMS Nelson and 6 splashes. Two (twin) 6-inch turrets at port side were damaged and fire broke out. The fire was quickly extinguished by the battle-hardened crew. RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ was not so lucky; although the flooding was ‘minor’ her crew couldn’t contain it.
During the cruiser step of the shooting phase, both cruisers did shoot at each other. HMS Ajax used her radar to determine the firing solution for her 4 (twin) 6-inch turrets and 8 shells of 50 kg. were fired at long range (28 inches) towards the Italian cruiser. All missed. The same happened to the Italian cruiser: all 8 shells of 6-inch missed HMS Ajax.
At the end of turn 1, RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ had taken quite a lot of damage: her aft 15-inch main turret was out of action (white square counter) together with her complete port side of secondary 6-inch armament. The minor flooding (water droplet) was still not contained and the resulting damage rating was 150-60-2 = 88. HMS Nelson faired a little better, because her fire was extinguished although she had lost 66% of her 6-inch secondary armament at port side. Her damage rating was 141-20-1 = 120.

Turn 2
All ships increased to max. speed while the cruisers maneuvered to close the distance towards their respective enemies. So RN ‘Duca d’Aosta’ raced with a speed of ‘9’ towards HMS Nelson and HMS Ajax tried to intercept RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ at max speed.
HMS Nelson opened fire for a second time at RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’, at a range of 25 inches (medium range). 5 hits of which 2 were penetrating her armor. Another main turret was penetrated, together with additional flooding (which wasn’t stopped by the Italian crew - again). The remaining port 6-inch (twin) turret of HMS Nelson fired at the fast closing RN ‘Duca d’Aosta’ light cruiser at medium range (16 inches) but didn’t hit her. RN ‘Duca d’Aosta’ was equipped with 2 x triple 533mm torpedotubes and a danger for HMS Nelson.
Italian battleship RN Vittorio Veneto returned fire towards HMS Nelson: 2 penetrating hits, taking out the remaining port 6-inch turret and one of the starboard 6-inch turrets. Both Italian (triple) 6-inch turrets at port side were out of order and couldn’t engage the closing ‘Leander’-class cruiser…
During the cruiser step of the shooting phase, the Italian light cruiser returned fire towards HMS Nelson at 16 inches distance. She scored 3 hits (and 5 splashes) but couldn’t penetrate the substantial armor of the battleship. Given the torpedo-threat coming from the Italian light cruiser towards HMS Nelson, the ‘Leander’-class light cruiser fired at 16 inches (medium range) with her 8 x 6-inch guns at the fast cruiser (speed ‘9’/36 kts). Resulting in 2 hits including a (lucky) critical hit at one of her triple 533mm torpedotubes.

At the end of turn 2, RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ had collected quite a lot of damage: only 1 of her three 15-inch main turrets was still operational; her complete port side of secondary 6-inch armament was out of action. And the flooding was still not contained. The resulting damage rating was 88-37-2 = 49 (1/3 of the original remaining!). Conducting a ‘Command Check, she passed (just). HMS Nelson faired much better, although she had lost all of her 6-inch secondary armament at port side and 33% of her secondary armament at starboard side. Her resulting damage rating was 120-20-3 = 97 (twice that of RN ‘Vittorio Veneto and with 100% main armament available). The Italian light cruiser had some light damage: 33-4 = 29. HMS Ajax had no damage (yet).

Turn 3
While the battleships continued their cours and speed, the cruisers raced towards their intended targets with speeds between 36 and 32 knots.

        While the Italian torpedo threat was closing in fast, HMS Nelson fired her full main battery at RN ‘Duca d’Aosta’ at 9 inch distance (short range). Remarkable only 2 hits, of which one resulted in a 6-inch magazine explosion, which was the end of the light cruiser… While the cruiser went down in a large column of smoke and continuing explosions, HMS Nelson was fired at by the 3 remaining 15-inch guns of RN Vittorio Veneto from a distance of 22 inch (medium range). 1 non-penetrating hit…with little damage. 
During the cruiser step of the shooting phase, the British light cruiser fired at RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ at 15 inches distance. She scored 3 non-penetrating hits.
At the end of turn 3, the tactical situation for the Italians was disastrous. The heavily  damaged RN ‘Vittorio Veneto’ was still up to 2 operational British warships and had no chance to change the situation. Her resulting damage rating was 49-3-2 = 44 (less than 1/3 of the original remaining!) and her flooding was still not contained. After conducting an official ‘Command Check this turn (which she passed as flagship) her admiral decided anyhow to run away, using her higher max. speed than the British ships, in order to repair in an Italian naval base. 
End of game…

Verdict
This was my first ‘Naval Thunder’ ruled Naval Wargame. By doing it, you learn how the rules work. I am convinced I need more practice with these rules, but after a while the calculations will be faster. It is definitely possible to play this as a quick game. As a solo player (and a blogger) I used more time because I had to play both sides, make some pictures and make notes (for this Blog) :)
Looking back to my last time an Italian ‘Littorio’-class battleship was fighting a ‘Nelson’-class battleship (August 2024) I noticed a couple of surprising similarities. First: in both games the Italian battleship lost 2 main 15-inch turrets and lost the duel. Second: in both games the Italian battleship took a lot of damage of those British 16-inch guns (2/3 of her original damage rating), much more than the damage inflicted on the British battleship. However, two games is still not a good sample rate to prove a point…

  

Battle Report 'A Greek Tragedy' (1965; 'Naval Command 2021')

This Naval Wargame is a ‘What if?’ scenario in the 1960s, the decade of Revolutions. It is situated in the Aegean Sea. Political background: Turkey and Greece were firmly under the long shadow of the US and the Western Bloc, yet they contained a militant populace straining towards non-alignment. The Cold War was raging, with events like the Berlin Wall (1961) and the Cuba Crisis (1962). Greece was still battered by her Civil War of 1946-1949 (80.000 dead!). Other issues were the problems around Cyprus and the Greek (and European) protests against US involvement in Vietnam. US concerns were dictated not only by the danger of a split in NATO resulting from a possible Greece-Turkey War, but also by increased Soviet influence in the area and the siding of the Cypriot government with the Non-Aligned Movement. Greece and Turkey were considered the first in a long line of Cold War ‘dominoes’. The US utilized the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan to force them upright, using economic aid and propaganda campaigns to ward off Soviet influence and, when soft power failed, lending tacit support for military rule.
    Soviet Union engaged in several actions that can be interpreted as attempts to influence or interfere with Greece, though these actions were not necessarily direct military interventions. The Soviets were interested in the Eastern Mediterranean region, saw Cyprus as a strategic location in that area and sought to influence the political landscape to their advantage. Therefore it supported the Greek Communist Party, which at times was engaged in internal political struggles in Greece, and the Greek Cypriot communist party, AKEL.  
The polarization and instability of Greek politics in the mid-1960s was a direct result of the Civil War and the deep divide between the leftist and rightist sections of Greek society. A major crisis as a result was the murder of the left-wing politician (Lambrakis) in 1963. The crisis of the ‘Royal Coup’ followed in 1965, together with the "ASPIDA affair", which involved an alleged coup plot by a left-wing group of Greek officers. 

        In this historic political constellation the following ‘What if?’ scenario was used:
The Sovjet High Command deploys a Soviet Naval Taskgroup (TG) for a high profile diplomatic port visit to Athens in order to support the Greek Communist Party. The Soviet TG consist of 2 ‘Sverdlov’-class cruisers (project 68bis), a ‘Don’-class armed auxiliary and 2 ‘Skory’-class destroyers (project 30bis). A couple of major NATO countries fear this port visit can trigger unwanted turmoil in Greece and decide to form a ‘coalition of the willing’, and send a Naval Taskgroup to prevent the Soviets to reach Athens. Ships for this TG are provided by the US, UK, the Netherlands and Germany: 1 x US cruiser USS Galveston, 1 NL Cruiser (‘De Ruyter’) and 1 NL Friesland-class destroyer (HNLMS 'Groningen'), 1 UK Daring-class destroyer and 1 German Hamburg-class destroyer. Highly unlikely in the 1960’s, but these 1950s/1960s warships happened to be in the Eastern part of the Mediterranean.

Set Up:
Rules: Naval Command 2021. 1:3000 scale ships (NAVWAR). Distance scale: 1 inch = 1 nautical mile (nm.). Seamat: 6 x 4 ft. 3 islands: 2 green islands are high elevation (you can’t see through); 1 light blue island is lower and only smaller ships, like destroyers, can sail through the archipelago.
House rules:
1. All FC radars have a radar rating of ‘1’.
2. Number of radar/ESM detections allowed by a ship per turn is based on the radar rating of its search radar (‘2’ allows 2 detections/turn).
3. we did some adaptations in speed for certain destroyers (they all used speed ‘9’).       
Both TG started approx. 65 nm. from each other; the islands were in the middle of the Sea Mat.

Turn 1
NATO has the initiative. Only all-gun cruiser HNLMS 'De Ruyter' is radar active on the NATO side; both 'Skory'-class Soviet destroyers (‘Skory’ & ‘Seryoznyy’) are active on radar as well. The NATO TG proceeds with speed 7, the Soviets with speed 5. Detections on each other are hindered by the islands.

Turn 2
USSR has the initiative. Both TG’s close each other a little more. The British and Dutch all-gun destroyers are getting near the islands. The German all-gun destroyer FGS Hamburg detaches towards the Archipelago. Detections of radar-transmissions or positions of units fail at ranges of 32 nm.

Turn 3

USSR initiative. HMS Daring (D05) activates her search radar when sailing between the islands. The 2 Soviet 'Skory'-class destroyers are the only Soviet units who are active on search radar. The nearest Soviet destroyer (‘Seryoznyy’) detects HMS Daring at 21 nm. HMS Daring detects the Soviet ‘Don’-class auxiliary at 22 nm. The ‘Skory’ detects the Dutch destroyer HNLMS Groningen at 22 nm. FGS Hamburg was unsuccessful in detecting the Soviet radar transmissions between the islands.

Turn 4
NATO initiative. All Soviet ships activate their radars as they realize that NATO warships between the islands are waiting for them. Both Soviet ‘Sverdlov’-class cruisers keep their distance to the NATO threat, but within their 6-inch gun range… FGS 'Hamburg' remains within the Archipelago. Both US and Dutch cruisers pass the islands and both UK and Dutch destroyers try to get closer to the Soviet cruisers, simultaneously defending the NATO cruisers against a possible torpedo attack by both 'Skory'-class destroyers. By now NATO has detected all Soviet ships, either by radar (at 21 nm.) or visually (< 12 nm.). And activate their radars. The Soviets have detected most of the NATO units as well.

    HMS Daring opens fire with her 3 x 4,5 inch (twin) turrets at 6 nm. at the nearest 'Skory'-class destroyer (‘Seryoznyy’ - right side of above photo), resulting in 4 hits. Damage: 2x flood (blue droplet), 1x fire (yellow) and 1 structure (brown wooden stick). The Soviet flagship ‘Sverdlov’ answers the unprovoked attack by a salvo of her 12 x 6-inch guns on the nearest HNLMS 'Groningen' (damage rating: ‘9’) at 18 nm. Nine hits, resulting in 27 damage points. Within seconds she sinks to the bottom! HNLMS de Ruyter tried to revenge the sinking of her companion HNLMS 'Groningen' and opens fire towards both 'Skory'-class destroyers at 11 nm.: her 2 forward 6-inch turrets place 1 hit at ‘Skory’ and her 2 aft 6-inch turrets places 3 additional hits on ‘Seryoznyy’, which sinks due to the total amount of damage. Both NATO cruisers have taken away the threat of imminent torpedo attack, but are still outside range of the Soviet cruisers… The second ‘Sverdlov’-class (‘Dzerzhinsky’) now opens fire at FGS 'Hamburg' at 19 nm. Only 1 hit, but fire breaks out and a lot of structural damage

occurred. The remaining, slightly damaged, ’Skory’-class fires at FGS Hamburg as well with her 2 x (twin) 130 mm guns and places 3 additional hits at 12 nm. FGS Hamburg can’t return fire towards any Soviet attacker as she has only (shorter range) 100 mm guns… Then the flagship USS 'Galvaston' moves in and fires with her forward 6 inch turrets at the ‘Don’-class auxiliary at 18 nm: 3 hits. The damage is extensive: 2x fire, 4x structure (4 x 'structure' = 1 white square). Her speed is limited to ‘1’!     
    During the resulting damage control phase all units on fire (FGS Hamburg, ‘Skory’-class destroyer and ‘Don’-class) managed to extinguish their fires. 

Turn 5
NATO initiative. NATO took a lot of hits in last turn: 1 Dutch destroyer sunk, 1 German destroyer severely damaged and both Soviet cruisers still out of range… Although the Soviets had their setbacks as well: 1 destroyer sunk, 1 slightly damaged and the ‘Don’-class auxiliary almost sunk. The remaining NATO warships tried to close the Soviets: FGS Hamburg crawls forward between the Archipelago and HMS Daring closes towards the ‘Don’-class, while maintaining an intercept course towards one of the Soviet cruisers. The ‘Don’-class tries to crawl back towards her cruisers. Those cruisers manoeuvre very professional: maintaining contact with the enemy but keeping the NATO cruisers just outside range.
The Dutch cruiser ‘De Ruyter’ is forced to finish off the remaining Soviet torpedo threat to the force and has only her 6-inch battery to do it (no secondary guns available). She places 4 hits at point blank range at the ‘Skory’-class destroyer, which sinks immediately. However, the ‘Sverdlov’ 12x 6-inch guns generates 10 devastating hits on USS Galveston in return at a range of 12 nm. which sinks her quickly. To make the situation worse, ‘Sverdlov’ secondary 100 mm armament placed 7 hits on HMS Daring, at a range of 8 nm. (damage: 5 x structure, 2 x fire). HMS Daring is able to return the fire and places 5 hits on the ‘Sverdlov’ (resulting in 4 fires and 1 structure).

The crippled ‘Don’-class is able to fire her 100 mm guns and places 1 additional hit on nearby HMS Daring..(right hand corner). The second ‘Sverdlov’-class (‘Dzerzhinsky') now opens fire at HNLMS ‘De Ruyter’ and sinks her with 5 hits (resulting in 15 damage points, 2 more than her damage rating).

   During the damage control phase HMS Daring is overwhelmed by her fires, gets therefore an additional fire marker and sinks… The ‘Sverdlov’ is unable to contain her multiple fires and gets 1 fire marker extra.

Turn 6
Although most NATO units are sunk, NATO keeps initiative. The heavily damaged destroyer FGS Hamburg turns around and tries to escape at speed ‘4’. Both Soviet cruisers (1 engulfed in flames) follow her outside her 100 mm gun range). 

    The ‘Dzerzhinsky' opens fire with her 9 x 6-inch guns for the last time and finish the German destroyer off…. However, during

the last damage control phase her sister ship ‘Sverdlov’ was still not able to contain the fires and an ammunition explosion did sink her as well. NATO lost their whole TG and the remaining Soviet TG consisted of an operational cruiser ‘Dzerzhinsky’ and a crippled ‘Don’-class auxiliary. Hardly capable of a ‘high profile’ port visit in NATO-country Greece… So the port visit was cancelled, there was no further direct Soviet involvement in Greek politics and in 1967 the Greek Armed Forces executed a coup and Greek Colonels ran the country until 1974…            

Verdict
We had 2 reasons for this scenario: we wanted to test Naval Command 2021 with an all-gun naval battle and I like those 1950s/1960s warships. Initially I thought we had comparable TG’s, but during the game I realized my thinking had a two-fold flaw: I never took into account the secondary guns on the ‘Sverdlov’-class cruisers. HNLMS ‘De Ruyter’ only had much smaller AA guns as secondary armament and the secondary armament of USS Galveston was limited due to the fact that her rear deck was re-arranged for RIM-8 Talos (SAM). My second flaw: I didn’t take into account during the development of the scenario that the Soviets had multiple 533mm (anti ship) torpedo tubes and the western ships hadn’t (those at HMS Daring were removed in 1958). I realized this just before the actual game.

      Can you use Naval Command 2021 for these kind of all-gun engagements? Yes, that is possible but we encountered some flaws in the USSR Fleet List and Rules (some of them we already took care of in this wargame):

1. we noticed that USSR warships were sometimes better rated in the Fleet Lists than more modern western ones… which seems a bit unrealistic. For instance: western 6-inch guns generated 2 damage points, Soviet 6-inch guns 3 damage points. Combine this with the fact that more 6-inch guns are on Soviet ships (vs western ones), that made a huge difference! Also: Some Russian WW2 radars are apparently better than 1950’s Western ones (which is probably not true).
2. the gunnery rules don’t take into account the orientation of the firing ship. So all guns have always been used; even the whole secondary battery (look at 7 hits 100 mm at HMS Daring in Turn 5, while a ‘Sverdlov’ class only has 3 twin 100mm guns at each side…). It is probably wise to limit this in next wargame to all guns of 1 side (‘house rule’).
3. Within the damage rules there is no ‘critical hit’ or ‘crippled’ possibility. So a damaged ship, which is hardly afloat (let say: 1 damage marker left) can apparently still use all her weapons (unless damaged by ‘systems’)…
4. Naval Command rules don’t take into account armour of (ex-) WW2 ships, like ‘Sverdlov’-class cruisers or Dutch ‘de Ruyter’-class cruisers. This is not a big issue, because if you want to play ‘armour’, there are sufficient wargames around who take that into account. Even ‘Shipwreck’ for 1950s warships. 

2nd Campaign Report: 1986 fictional naval battle in the Baltic (Part 3)

General remarks:
Part 3 of our fictional 1986 Baltic Campaign, played at ‘action speed’. See the Feb. & Apr. 2025 entries for Part 1 and 2.

Reminder of General Wargame Rules used:

• House rule: Air miniatures: Helicopters can stay airborne for max. 4 turns; patrol aircraft for 8 turns, fighters active for max. 3 turns (Yak-38 VSTOL only 2 turns) and strike aircraft conduct 1 attack and return directly to base. Each Air miniatures represent 1 aircraft (not a flight of 4).
• Rule Book: Naval Command 2021 Edition. After a lot of discussions last months, we followed the Air Defense rules, including the AD marker rules. 
• Each start of a (following) wargame reflects the end situation of the former wargame, taking into account damage and losses of participants.
• House Rule: units at sea/air may conduct more than 1 detection: either vis., radar, sonar etc. The number of detections within 1 type (radar, sonar, etc.) is equal with their sensor rating related to this type. This provides modern units several advantages.
• House Rule: certain weapons are limited in range (20 mm AA-gun can’t reach the 12 nm. edge of the ‘close range’ band). The most realistic range of weapons is to be used (Source: OSINT or ‘Harpoon V’ data).
• House Rule: use of (air dropped) sonar buoys: they deploy on a line of 10 nm. At both ends 1 sonar buoy, either passive or active (sonar rating: ‘1’). 2 passive successful detections results in: crossfix (successful location of submarine or surface vessel); only 1 passive detection results in 1 bearing of a location, no distance information (1 detection marker).
• House Rule: a Task Group Commander needs to contact a superior to launch on-call strike- or CAP-aircraft from ashore airbases. Before any aircraft deploy, each turn dice has to be rolled (‘7’ or higher: permission granted). On the first turn: 1 dice. If unsuccessful: the following turn: 2 dice. Still no ‘7’: 3 dice, etc. Weaponizing and transit of the aircraft takes 2 turns in addition. 
• Scenario Rule: Use of nuclear weapons is not allowed. Long range nuclear-capable weapons (like Tomahawk, SS-N-12, etc.) is therefore not allowed.
• Scenario rule: ’non-historical’ availability of units: we assumed that USSR carrier ‘Baku’ and both Udaloy DDG’s are fully operational in 1986 (including their SA-N-9 SAM) and that the 3 German Type 143A fast attack craft are equipped already with RIM-166 Rolling Airframe (RAM) close-range SAM. We also assumed that Danish F-16 are equipped with AGM-84 Harpoon’s. 
  

Set up of the game (taking into account results of part 1 & 2):
- USSR Amphibious Taskgroup: Victory: major victory = 2 Battalions Land Forces surviving the naval wargame and at least 2 Mi-8/17 transport helo’s. Minor victory: at least 50% of USSR combatants (carrier, cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine) survives naval wargame.
- NATO Taskgroup: find USSR Amphib. Convoy and stop Amphibious ships. Major victory: at least 50% of larger USSR landing ships (LSD, LST) is destroyed (‘vessel kill’) Minor victory: 40% of larger USSR landing ships is not Amphib. capable anymore (‘mission kill’). Other minor victory (in case of not sinking the USSR Landing Force): 60% of NATO sea- and air forces survives the Naval wargame and can engage the enemy next wargame.
- USSR Taskgroup (TG) consist of 11 Amphibious units (represented by 1 x Ivan Rogov), 1 x ultra-modern ‘Kiev’-class carrier (carrying the transport helos and 12 Yak-38 ‘Forger’), 1 old Sverdlov-class cruiser, 5 destroyer/frigates (1 Udaloy I-class and Krivak II frigate slightly damaged) and 1 ‘Charlie I’-class nuclear submarine (used all her SS-N-7 missiles in part 1). The Taskgroup carries 8 SS-N-22, 4 SS-N-2 and 9 SS-N-14 missiles (old version; only to be used against submarines).
- the remaining NATO Taskgroup (TG) consist of 1 ASW-frigate (modern UK Type 22 Batch 1 class), 1 Dutch AAW-frigate (flagship HNLMS Tromp, with SM-1/MR). Fleet tanker HNLMS Zuiderkruis and badly hit HNLMS Kortenaer returned to port over night. The submarine HNLMS Zwaardvis had been sunk in part 2. On call (ashore): 4 modern Danish F-16 fighter bombers (2 AGM-84 Harpoon each) and Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) support. 3 German Type 143A Fast Attack Craft (FAC; armed with 4 x MM-38 Exocet each) managed to reach the small island in front of the West German coast, near the possible Soviet Landing Zone. Together the 2 NATO Task groups have 8 Harpoon SSM’s left (range: 70 nm.) and 16 MM-38 Exocets (range: 22 nm.).
- a new set of markers is in use, so you can read what their function is. Some ‘old’ markers are also in use: 2 Blue golf Tees: (NATO)sonobuoy line of 10 nm. Blue flag: NATO. Damage tokens: blue water drop (flood), yellow flash (fire), brown sticks: structural damage, white square: system damage. Orientation of photo's: the beach is in the South; most photos are looking East.

- we made a quick reference sheet of the rules (cut and past of relevant tables out of the Rules PDF), an Aircraft Management Sheet (to keep track of aircraft deployments) and my mate Edzard made new markers. 

Tactical situation at the beginning of Turn 1 (Part 3):
The Soviet Task Group continued south towards the West German Coast. 3 Ka-25/27 ASW helicopters are deployed around the Task Group, together with a Be-12 waterline MPA. The Soviet nuclear ‘Charlie I’-class submarine has gone ‘deep’ and has positioned itself halfway between the 2 trailing NATO frigates and the Soviet Task group. Both Udaloy I-class ASW destroyers had probably still 60% available of their capable SA-N-9 point-defense VLS systems. The slightly damaged Udaloy I DDG (2 structural damage markers; speed: -2) and Krivak II FFG (3 structural damage markers; speed: -3) were still mission capable and not slower than the Amphibious Convoy.
The 2 NATO frigates deployed 1 ‘Lynx’ ASW helicopter and were supported by a Dutch Lockheed ‘Neptune’ MPA. Distance towards the Soviet Taskgroup: approx. 60 nm. During the night they had followed the Soviet Amphibious Task Group at safe distance (outside SS-N-22 range). 3 German Type 143A Fast Attack Craft (FAC; armed with 4 x MM-38 Exocet each) managed to reach the small island north of the West German coast, near the possible Soviet Landing Zone. Soviet units are all radar active. All NATO units as well, exempt the UK Type 22 frigate and the 3 Type 143A FAC’s. Both NATO surface combatants have manually reloaded (at sea) their close range SAM-systems; HNLMS ‘Tromp’ has 31 SM-1/MR (70 %) remaining. Both have an operational ‘Lynx’.

Turn 1 (NATO initiative): during the night NATO lost (sonar)contact on the USSR ‘Charlie I’ submarine. A Submarine Patrol Zone (Chapter 9) is established (centre is visualized by red flag). USSR Task Group approaches the intended Landing Zone at 47 nm. The 3 German FAC’s (FGS Gepard, Wiesel & Puma) pass the eastern side of the island. The Lockheed ‘Neptune’ deploys sonobuoys, south of the 2 NATO frigates, trying to localize the USSR submarine. Because this submarine is deep & silent running, none of the NATO ASW assets was able to detect her at intermediate range. However, the ‘Neptune’ was able to detect the (old) Sverdlov-class cruiser and HNLMS ‘Tromp’ detects the Be-12 waterplane. The NATO Taskgroup is also detected: the ‘Charlie I’ submarine detects the sonar transmissions of ‘Tromp’, a Ka-27 helo also detects ‘Tromp’ (by radar) and the nearest ‘Krivak’ frigate detects ‘Tromp’ by ESM. The ‘Neptune’ is detected by the Sovremenny DDG. Based on his detections, commander of the NATO task group liked to order an air attack on the Sverdlov-class cruiser (flagship of the USSR Amphibious Group?). No NATO combat actions this turn, as only 8 RGM-84 Harpoon SSM’s are in range. USSR is out of range (nuclear capable SS-N-12’s are not allowed).

Turn 2 (USSR initiative): NATO rolled for air strike: unsuccessful.    
USSR Convoy closes the coast up to 42 nm. Most USSR combatants turn towards the HNLMS ‘Tromp’ in order to improve the defense of the seaward flank of the USSR convoy. The USSR admiral wants to extinguish this NATO threat before the actual landing. The ‘Charlie’ class submarine deploys within her Submarine Patrol Zone a little more than 12 nm. west of ‘Tromp’ (the 30 nm Patrol zone is now removed). Because the submarine is still ‘deep’ & silent running, no NATO assets (Lynx helo, sonobuoys, ship-borne sonar) are able to detect her! The 3 German FAC’s use max. speed to get round the island and stay close to land to get closer to the USSR Task Group. Several USSR units try to detect the 3 small ships but are unable to succeed. The ‘Neptune’ MPA got an ESM-bearing on the ‘Baku’ carrier. In theory, if ‘Tromp’ would have fired at this precise moment 8 RGM-84 Harpoon SSM’s towards the ‘Baku’ carrier, non of the capable ‘Udaloy’-class DDG’s would be in the right position to help defending the carrier. However, as players we saw this opportunity, but we decided that the NATO Commander hadn’t the same situational awareness as we had (because he lacked too much active detections to realize this chance). So no combat this turn.

Turn 3 (NATO initiative): NATO rolled with 2 dice for air strike: unsuccessful… The Russian rotated their Yak-38 ‘Forger’ CAP-aircraft. During the Navigation Phase Russian combatants made good their AAW-screen around the Amphibious Convoy. Both NATO frigates and the ‘Neptune’ MPA proceed towards this screen. Still no NATO sonar detections on the closing USSR ‘Charlie I’ class submarine…

The NATO MPA detected the ‘Ivan Rogov’ Landing Ship Dock. The NATO Commander gets a better picture on the USSR convoy! USSR is still ‘in the dark’ with regard to the developing German FAC-threat.. No combat phase: the USSR units are (just) out of range; the NATO units wait for the planned air-attack…

Turn 4 (NATO initiative): NATO gets the approval for an F-16 air-strike! The British Type 22 ASW-frigate activates her radars and sonar, given the current tactical situation. The ‘Neptune’ MPA closes in on the Russian combatants. The Russian fleet is now split: their amphibious convoy, protected by the ‘Sverdlov’-class cruiser and ‘Baku’ carrier closes the coast at 33 nm. and starting to prepare for the landing. The other USSR combatants focus mainly on both NATO frigates, supported by the ‘Neptune’ MPA. Both frigates take a more southern course, to keep some distance from the Russian combatants. During the Detection Phase the 3 German Type 143A FAC’s are suddenly visually detected by an USSR Ka-27 helo. The Russian Admiral is surprised by this new fast moving threat.

In the meantime…. the ‘Charlie I’ submarine moves in for the kill. She has changed depth (NATO is still not able to localize her!). During the Combat Phase she fires 4 wire guided torpedoes at max. range (bearing only launch). One heavy torpedo hits HNLMS Tromp, resulting in 2 x flood & 2 x structure. While her crew is fighting the damage, ‘Tromp’ fires in retaliation 3 RGM-84 Harpoons at the old Mod ‘Kashin’-class DDG and 5 at the ‘Sovremenny’-class DDG.

The SA-N-1 SAM-system of Mod Kashin has no capability against the 3 sea skimming Harpoon’s, but the ship is rescued by the nearby ‘Krivak’ class frigate and the capable SA-N-9 system of an ‘Udaloy’-class DDG.

The 5 sea skimming Harpoons were not countered by the reasonable AD-systems of the targeted ‘Sovremenny’-class DDG (2 x single-rail SA-N-7, 130 mm gun, etc.) partly due to bad dice. If we followed our House Rule with realistic AD-ranges for SAM’s, no other USSR vessel could help the ‘Sovremenny’…However, this house rule triggered discussions, so we adapted this temporarily on the spot: for close range SAM-systems we assumed they can reach the full 12 nm. (according to Naval Command 2021 rules) but not the gun/CIWS-systems; therefor we still use OSINT realistic data. With this adaptation the nearby Russian combatants (‘Udaloy’-class DDG’s at 7,5 nm. and 10 nm. range) were able to splash 4 out of 5 RGM-84 Harpoons. One ‘Harpoon’ hit the ‘Sovremenny’, resulting in: 1 fire, 1 flood and 1 structure. 
In retaliation the ‘Sovremenny’ fired 3 SS-N-22’s on the torpedoed

HNLMS Tromp and 5 on the British Type 22 frigate! I was surprised that according to the rules SM-1/MR doesn’t have a capability against sea skimming SS-N-22’s, so 2 out of 3 SS-N-22 missiles got

through the close range AD capabilities of ‘Tromp’. With some luck the Type 22 GWS Seawolf SAM-system managed to splash 1 SS-N-22 destined for ‘Tromp’. ‘Tromp’ is being hit by 1 SS-N-22, resulting in adding ‘3 x structure’ to her torpedo damage….Her damage rating is only 10.
The British Type 22 ASW-frigate defended herself bravely but 3 of the 5 SS-N-22’s hits her… resulting in 9 initial damage markers (5 x fire, 3 x structure and 1 flood). Her damage rating is only 10…
On the east flank of the USSR screen the shaken Mod Kashin fired 2 salvo’s of 2 SS-N-2 Styx missiles at the 2 nearest recently detected German FAC’s, who closed the Russians with a speed of almost 40 kts. With the very modern ‘RAM’ SAM-system and use of their 76 mm gun the 2 ships managed to take out 3 of these rather old missiles, but 1 hit FGS Gepard, resulting in 3 damage markers (fire, flood and structure) on a damage rating of only 4… I was surprised that the defense rating of this slow, large and low flying SS-N-2 missile (’12’) in the Fleet List is higher than sea skimming and much smaller MM-38 Exocet (’11’) or RGM-84 ‘Harpoon’ (’11’). That doesn’t feel right…
Anyhow, up to the Damage Control Phase. Damage report HNLMS ‘Tromp’ (rating: ’10’): 2 x flood, 5 x structure. Damage control resolves 1 flood. The ongoing flooding results in extra 1 system damage marker. Result (70% damage?): max speed: 1, negative effect on sensors and flight deck.
Damage report Type 22 (rating ’10’): 1 x flood, 5 x fire, 3 x structure. Damage control resolves 2 fires but the ongoing flood and ongoing 3 fires results in 1 extra ‘structure’ and 1 extra ‘fire’, so the ship still has 90% damage: max speed: 3, no flight deck and (own assessment) an imminent threat of an exploding fuel bunker or ammunition magazine.
Damage report FGS Gepard (rating ‘4’): flood, fire & structure. Damage control resolves the fire but the ongoing flood results in a total of 2 x flood. So this 75% damage results in a speed limitation. I was surprised the rules don’t point towards a limitation in weapon systems… so I assume all 4 MM-38 Exocets are still available (especially because the fire is out)?
Damage report ‘Sovremenny’ (rating ’11’): flood, fire and structure. Damage control resolved the fire but the ongoing flood results in an extra ‘Systems’ damage marker. Result (27% damage): max speed: 6, negative effect on sensors & flight deck.

At the end of this turn the deployed NATO Lynx helo had to land on her mothership (after 4 turns). However non of the NATO frigates were able to receive her, given their damage status, so she flew towards the nearest German island and made an precaution landing there. The 3 deployed Russian Ka-25/27 helo’s had also problems finding a landing spot (after 4 turns) as the flight deck of ‘Baku’ was busy with the rotation of another Yak-38 CAP-flight, together with the preparation of 6 Mi-8 transport helo’s on deck for the upcoming amphibious landing. Of the Russian combatants only 1 undamaged ‘Udaloy’ was able to take 1 Ka-27 onboard. The slightly damaged ‘Udaloy’ and the recently damaged ‘Sovremenny’ had their flight decks damaged; the slightly damaged ‘Krivak’ didn’t have a flight deck; only the Mod Kashin could receive a Ka-25 helo (but has no hangar so could only refuel her, not re-arm). The third helo found a spot on the ‘Baku’, as the flight deck of the ‘Ivan Rogov’ was full with ‘amphibious stuff’.
Turn 5 (USSR initiative): the Russian Admiral was quite pleased with his combatants: they had taken out both NATO frigates and damaged 1 Fast Attack Craft while the USSR landing Force didn’t take any hits. He didn’t have any time to celebrate, because all 3 FAC’s were still afloat and at least 2 of them had no damage at all. During the navigation phase, FGS 'Wiesel' and 'Puma' turned towards the less defended Amphibious Convoy, while the damaged FGS 'Gepard' steered towards the nearby Mod Kashin (which didn’t have any SS-N-2 missiles left). The Russian combatants (now all out of anti-ship SSM’s) tried to close the gap, in order to fire with their guns on those FAC’s. Some of them have a speed limitation due to structural damage (‘Sovremenny’, ‘Krivak’, 1 x ‘Udaloy’). Although the Russians didn’t close the gap (yet), during the Combat Phase the German Commander of the 3 FAC's decided to take out as much Russian Air-Defence capable ships as possible to prepare for the upcoming NATO Air-strike…

So the damaged FGS 'Gepard' & FGS 'Puma' fired 4 sea skimming MM-38 Exocet each at respectively the damaged ‘Sovremenny’ and the ‘Mod Kashin’. The ‘Sovremenny’ and nearby ‘Udaloy’ managed to take out 4 MM-38 and another (?) ‘Udaloy’ defended the ‘Mod Kashin’ (as she has very little capability against sea skimmers). Unfortunately, with the AD calculations we forgot to take into account the actual recent ‘systems’ damage of the ‘Sovremenny’… On the other hand, the ‘Mod Kashin’ forgot to use her SA-N-1 SAM-system in a surface-to-surface role against the incoming FAC’s (Chapter 20.3 of Rules). Anyhow, the Russian AD screen was able to defend against 8 Exocets.
Damage control Phase: HNLMS ‘Tromp’ was overwhelmed with the damage but the ongoing flood didn’t result in additional damage.. The Type 22 frigate managed to resolve the extra fire, but the remaining fires resulted in 1 extra fire. Her ongoing flood didn’t result in additional damage.. The ‘Sovremenny’ managed to resolve her only flood. 
Turn 6 (NATO initiative): (after 2 turns preparation & transit) 4 x Danish F-16 appeared above the German island. The Russian combatants still tried to close the gap with the FAC’s. During the combat Phase FGS Wiesel fires the last 4 MM-38 Exocet (sea skimming) at the nearest ‘Udaloy’-class DDG. With her 2 single-rail SA-N-7 launchers the damaged ‘Sovremenny’ splashes 2 of them (we forgot to take into account her diminished AD capabilities: ‘-1’ on her AD-radar). The targeted ‘Udaloy’ took out the remaining 2 Exocets. However, those ships have now

some AD-markers… In return the ‘Sovremenny’ fired with its twin 130 mm main gun at the nearest FGS 'Puma', resulting in 1 structural damage marker (25% damage). The 4 F-16’s fired 8 air-launched AGM-84 Harpoons at the Amphibious Convoy around the Landing Ship Dock ‘Ivan Rogov’, at a range of 60 nm. Position provided by Lockheed ‘Neptune’ MPA, confirmed by their F-16 ground-attack radar. The nearby ‘Sverdlov'-class cruiser is no match for the very modern Harpoons.. Only the SA-N-9 SAM's of the 'Baku' carrier are able to open fire at the 8 sea skimming missiles. Three are plashed but 5 are hitting the convoy (5 x 3 = 15 damage points). We assumed that at least the ‘Ivan Rogov’ (damage rating: 13) is sunk, but it might be
that an additional convoy ship nearby is also hit by 1 or more Harpoons? But we didn’t lay out the whole convoy on the table… Assuming NATO only took out 1 Landing Ship Dock (LSD), the damage is 1 Battalion (equipment, men, etc.).

Who met Victory conditions?
During the campaign NATO couldn’t delay or prevent the USSR Amphibious Landing. At the end probably 1 Soviet Battalion was badly hit (sinking of the ‘Ivan Rogov’ LSD), but 2 USSR Battalions were not destroyed, most of their Landing Ships are not hit and the ‘Baku’ carrier is fully operational. Naval Gunfire Support by the cruiser and the ‘Sovremenny’ is also still possible. So we consider this is a Major Victory for the USSR. At a high cost to NATO: 1 submarine sunk, 2 ASW frigates beyond repair (HNLMS Kortenaer & Type 22), HNLMS Tromp beyond repair and 2 German FAC’s damaged. The damage to the Russian Fleet is much smaller. However, the fleet is slightly damaged and will struggle to sail back to Kaliningrad or Sint Petersburg. Their stock on AD missiles is probably below 40%, they are below 30% on ASW-weapons and they rely on the ‘Baku’-carrier as one of the remaining flight decks for ASW-helo’s. They are completely empty on anti-ship missiles…

What did we learn?

• Our recent spreadsheets on units, weapons and our aircraft management administration works and makes the game a little faster (vs. searching in the Rules or Fleet Lists). 
• Our very recent ‘Quick Reference Sheet’ for the equations regarding sonar/radar detections, use of Air Defense, Torpedoes and anti-ship missiles, Damage, etc. speeded up the last game (6 turns in 1 day!).
• We adapted some of our (house) rules, like more detail to dipping sonar/sonobuoy (sonar rating ‘1’ for older aircraft (until 1980s) and ‘2’ for modern aircraft/equipment (like: Nimrod, P-8 Poseidon, NH-90, maybe Ka-27 and P-3C?). And: if an MPA leaves the game without a proper hand-over to the next MPA, her sonobuoys are no use anymore. Sonobuoys can last at least 6-8 turns. And the actual range limitations to close range AD systems (based on OSINT) are only to be applied to gun/CIWS systems and not to SAM’s….
• Regarding official Naval Command Rules: I found the reference to ‘flights’ in Chapter 24 ‘Air Operations’ not so realistic. To my professional knowledge a CAP is mostly 2 fighters (and not four, like a ‘flight’). Especially if you want to maintain a CAP 24/7 above your head; that takes a lot of airframes to accomplish. Other issue: we missed a realistic speed for ‘intercept’ missions of fighters against other aircraft. The highest speed in the table ‘aircraft speed’ of chapter 14 ‘Navigation Phase’ is 60 cm/turn, but that is for Fixed wing AEW/MPA. A fighter is faster… So we made this 100 cm, otherwise a Nimrod (jet) or AWACS (jet) could keep their distance to a fighter by flying away?
• Throughout Naval Command 2021 the Russian Navy on average seems to be presented with better equipment than comparable Western units. AD radar ratings in the Fleet Lists of 1980s Sovremenny’s and 1990s Udaloy’s I consider ‘pretty high’. The defense rating of 1970s SS-N-2 ‘Styx’ I consider not very realistic (compared to western missiles), etc. But sometimes it is the other way around: the 4th ‘Kiev’-class carrier (‘Baku’, later renamed into ‘Gorshkov’) didn’t get better radar ratings than her older, less capable siblings.  
• I finally did understand the Air defense method of Naval Command 2021 (Chapter 19). I am not really fond of it, because some rules I don’t consider realistic but every time when I make this remark I have to tell myself: I am playing a game, not a simulation!
• Any wishes? Yes, I would like to investigate more detailed rules on naval mine warfare…
• And…. with so many ships who are limited to close range Air Defence, together with our house rule that at least guns/CIWS use actual firing ranges (based on OSINT), we ran into the challenge that most of this point-defense AD systems had a range < 4-5 cm. (smaller than the actual length of a 1:3000 scale frigate/destroyer….). If units want to help each other, they must sail exactly side-to-side, otherwise their short AD range is not sufficient. Which is visually not recommended. You could get rid of the House rule (so they can reach 12 nm.) or maybe try to work with a bigger table and use distances in inches vs cm. (we will try that next time!). Otherwise..... Point defense is exactly that: you can’t defend others than yourself…
  
  
  

2nd Campaign Report: 1986 fictional Naval Battle in the Baltic (Part 2)

General remarks:

Part 2 of our fictional 1986 Baltic Campaign, played at ‘action speed’ (ahum). See the Feb 2025 entry for Part 1 (which ended with a ‘cliffhanger’).

Reminder of General Wargame Rules used:

- Ships: 1:3000 scale; can stay active ’24/7’.
- Air miniatures: 1:600/1:700 scale. Helicopters can stay airborne for max. 4 turns; patrol aircraft for 8 turns, fighters active for max. 3 turns (Yak-38 VSTOL only 2 turns) and strike aircraft conduct 1 attack and return directly to base.
- Rule Book maritime wargames: Naval Command 2021 Edition. 
- Each start of a (following) wargame reflects the end situation of the former wargame, taking into account damage and losses of participants. The start situation can be adapted by certain rules/rules of engagement, which might require a dice roll.
- House Rule: units at sea/air may conduct more than 1 detection: either vis., radar, sonar etc. The number of detections within 1 type (radar, sonar, etc.) is equal with their sensor rating related to this type. This provides modern units several advantages.
- House Rule: certain Air Defense weapons are limited in range (20 mm AA-gun can’t reach the 12 nm. edge of the ‘close range’ band). The most realistic range of weapons is to be used (Source: OSINT or ‘Harpoon’ data).
- House Rule: use of (air dropped) sonar buoys: they deploy on a line of 10 nm. At both ends 1 sonar buoy, either passive or active. 2 passive successful detections results in: crossfix (successful location of submarine or surface vessel); only 1 passive detection results in 1 bearing of a location, no distance information (1 detection marker).
- Use of nuclear weapons is not allowed. Long range nuclear-capable weapons (like Tomahawk, SS-N-12, etc.) is therefore not allowed.

Reminder of set up of the game:
- 4 x 6 ft. sea mat horizontal orientation east-west; southern West-German beach starts in south west corner.
- USSR Amphibious Taskgroup: Victory: major victory = 2 Battalions Land Forces surviving the naval wargame and at least 2 Mi-8/17 transport helo’s. Minor victory: at least 50% of USSR combatants (carrier, cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine) survives naval wargame.
- NATO Taskgroup: find USSR Amphib. Convoy and stop Amphibious ships. Major victory: at least 50% of larger USSR landing ships (LSD, LST) is destroyed (‘vessel kill’) Minor victory: 40% of larger USSR landing ships is not Amphib. capable anymore (‘mission kill’). Other minor victory (in case of not sinking the USSR Landing Force): 60% of NATO sea- and air forces survives the Naval wargame and can engage the enemy next wargame.
- USSR Taskgroup (TG) consist of 11 Amphibious units (represented by 1 x Ivan Rogov), 1 x ultra-modern ‘Kiev’-class carrier (carrying the transport helos and 12 Yak-38 ‘Forger’), 1 old Sverdlov-class cruiser, 5 destroyer/frigates (1 Udaloy I-class slightly damaged) and 1 ‘Charlie I’-class nuclear submarine (used all her SS-N-7 missiles). On call (ashore): 4 Su-24 ‘Fencer’ bombers, 2 Mig-29 fighters (CAP) and Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) support. The Taskgroup carries 8 SS-N-22 and 20 SS-N-14 missiles (no reloads).
- NATO Taskgroup (TG) consist of 2 ASW-frigates (a badly hurt HNLMS Kortenaer-class & 1 modern UK Type 22 Batch 1 class), 1 Dutch AAW-frigate (HNLMS Tromp, with SM-1MR) accompanied by HNLMS Zuiderkruis fleet tanker (represented by HNLMS Amsterdam). The submarine HNLMS Zwaardvis (represented by HNLMS Walrus) is in direct support. On call (ashore): 4 UK ‘Buccaneer’ bombers, 4 modern Danish F-16 fighters (CAP) and Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) support. Task group has 8 Harpoon SSM’s left (range: 70 nm.) and 4 MM-38 Exocet (range: 22 nm.).
- 1 Oil Rig and 2 merchant vessels are in the area. All 3 use navigation radars.
- interpretation of photo’s: green acrylic radarscreen tokens: unit is detected by active radar; Blue radarscreen token: unit is passively detected (ESM). A ‘Shark’ counter: submarine is detected by active sonar; 2 Blue golf Tees: (NATO)sonobuoy line of 10 nm. Green token ‘activated’: ‘radar on’. Red flag: either USSR submarine patrol zone or USSR flagship. Blue flag: NATO. Damage tokens: blue water drop (flood), yellow flash (fire), brown sticks: structural damage, white square: system damage.

Reminder of Turn 1 (NATO initiative): NATO TG deployed ‘Atlantic’ MPA and 1 ‘Lynx’ helo in front of TG. USSR deployed Be-12 waterplane MPA and 1 Ka-27 ‘Helix’ helo (both radar active) in front of USSR TG. Very limited amount of Russian ship radars was active, to prevent early detection by NATO.

During the detection phase a lot of ships and aircraft tried to detect each other; either active or passive. Took a lot of time to make the calculations. USSR had better luck with the dice as NATO… Result: USSR Admiral assumed a probable NATO TG coming towards him. There was no combat phase.
Reminder of Turn 2 (NATO kept initiative): USSR Admiral assumed worst case scenario (NATO had probably detected the Amphibious TG) and deployed 2 Yak-38 from the ‘Kiev’-class on CAP-duty. And ordered a Su-24 strike and additional MIG-29 CAP from a DDR airfield. The German ‘Atlantic’ MPA had a radar detection of one of the USSR ‘Udaloy’-class in the East, but was unable to detect the larger ‘Sverdlov’-class cruiser. HNLMS ‘Tromp’ detected the Russian Be-12 MPA radar transmissions at 65 nm. The Dutch Rear Admiral got convinced that a Soviet TG of unknown size was at sea…
The Russian ‘Charlie I’-class submarine (deep) detected the NATO Taskgroup. The Soviet Admiral got a better picture of the incoming NATO TG. However, he was still out of range with his missiles and the requested Su-24 ‘Fencer’ airstrike had not arrived yet. The NATO TG had not yet detected the USSR Amphibious ships or the major combatants (aircraft carrier or cruiser, which would point out to something substantial).
Reminder of Turn 3 (USSR initiative): HNLMS ‘Tromp’ (flagship & AAW Commander of NATO TG) activated her AD-radar, convinced that the NATO TG had been detected. The Dutch rear-admiral ordered a Buccaneer-strike and F-16 CAP. The Russian TG also activated more radars, but not the ‘Kiev’-class carrier, at the rear of the convoy. The ‘Charlie I’ class SSGN rose to shallow depth and fired 2 salvo’s of 4 SS-N-7 at 30 nm. against respectively HNLMS Kortenaer and the UK Type 22 frigate. The SS-N-7 salvo against the UK Type 22 was engaged by 1 SM-1MR (miss), 3 NSSM SAM’s from HNLMS Tromp and 1 very modern Seawolf SAM from the Type 22. The defence against the second SS-N-7 salvo (against HNLMS Kortenaer) went not so smooth. HNLMS Tromp took out 1 SS-N-7 (with SM-1MR) but HNLMS Kortenaer was unable to take out the 3 remaining SS-N-7’s (3 NSSM’s spent). For some reason the Goalkeeper CIWS had a malfunction… The nearby Type 22 Batch 1 frigate was unable to help with her forward Seawolf launcher. The hit of the large SS-N-7 (500 kg explosives!) at the Dutch frigate resulted in (initially) 3 flooding markers. 
While the Dutch crew were trying to limit the damage, the rear-admiral ordered HNLMS Kortenaer to engage the known surface threat (‘use the RGM-84 Harpoons or lose them’). So 8 Harpoons were rapidly fired towards the nearest ‘Udaloy I’-class destroyer at approx. 70 nm.… The sea skimming SSM’s were visually detected by the Be-12 MPA and 1 Ka-27, but were no match for old Russian SAM-systems of Kashin-class destroyer and Krivak II ASW-frigate. Most incoming Harpoons were splashed by the brand new SA-N-9 rotary VLS of the modern Udaloy’s, as the SA-N-9 of the ‘Baku’ (the most modern ‘Kiev’-class) were just out of range. Only one Harpoon (200 kg of explosives) did hit the ‘Udaloy’, resulting in (initially) 1 ‘flood’ damage marker and 2 ‘structure’ damage marker.
During this turn the Dutch submarine HNLMS Zwaardvis was not detected by the old Be-12 waterplane, but by a combination of new Ka-27 ASW-helo (active dipping sonar) and 1 of the new Udeloy I ASW-destroyers (active sonar).
End of Part 1 (Feb 2025): both submarines detected (Dutch submarine about to be attacked by SS-N-14); air strikes ordered on both sides; a cliff hanger!
The ASW frigate HNLMS Kortenaer had a ‘mission’ kill (couldn’t conduct the mission anymore), 0% of her RGM-84 Harpoons left, helikopter deck destroyed, speed limit, 1 ‘systems’ damage marker, 3 NATO Sea Sparrows (NSSM, out of 8) needed manual reloading (takes 2 hours). HNLMS Tromp fully operational, although 3 NSSM cells needed manual reloading (2 hours). 38 SM-1MR still available. The British Type 22 was fully operational, needed just 1 manual Seawolf reloading (11 missiles still ready-use).
The USSR task group has used all of its SS-N-7 sub-launched missiles (but the nuclear sub had still torpedoes) and the damage to 1 of the ‘Udaloy’ ASW-destroyers was limited: heli deck destroyed and a small speed limit. Both Udaloy I-class ASW destroyers had probably still 70-80% available of their capable SA-N-9 point-defense VLS systems; the ‘Sovremenny’ destroyer was fully operational (with 100% load of SS-N-22 and SA-N-7 missiles) as well as the ‘Sverdlov’-class cruiser and ‘Kiev’-class aircraft carrier.  

Preparations for Part 2: in order to speed up game play, we developed several spreadsheets with data (taken from the Fleet List of USSR, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark & UK) of the used ships, aircraft and weapons in this game. At the beginning of Part 2 we realized - with the more than 20 ships and more than 10 aircraft we used - we needed a similar system to keep track on aircraft: which ships/airfields carried aircraft? How long takes refuel (2 turns)? When a ship is sunk, which organic aircraft is destroyed as well?, etc. So we had an additional spreadsheet with the horizontal axis as a time line (turn 1, turn 2, etc) and the vertical axis the ships/airfield (and their type of embarked aircraft). In this way, we could ‘manage’ our air fleets and we were able to plan the relieve of CAP-aircraft, ASW-helo’s and keep track of ordered air strikes…

Although I didn’t fully appreciate the use of AD-markers, I studied it again and thought I finally understood the method. In Part 2 I would stick to the method of AD markers! Recent comments on this BLOG (Apr '25) made us aware that we misinterpreted the rather restrictive Rules...
In Part 2 we continued to use the more realistic engagement parameters of AD systems. Although we allowed the use of the 4th (and more capable) ‘Kiev’-class carrier, although we knew she was commissioned after 1986. 

Final part of run 3. The still outstanding action of run 3 was the expected Russian SS-N-14 ASW-missile attack on the submerged HNLMS Zwaardvis. The slightly damaged ‘Udaloy I’ fired 6 SS-N-14 and the ‘Krivak II’ frigate fired 2 SS-N-14 at a range of 27 nm. Torpedo defense by the submarine defeated 2 torpedo’s, but one of the combined salvo finally hit… Following the rules, dice were rolled for damage (a lot!) and the chance for forced surfacing of the submarine. Result: a crippled Dutch submarine on the surface, surrounded by 1 Be-12 waterplane and 1 Ka-27 which couldn’t attack her anymore (no anti-surface weapons).

Turn 4 (USSR initiative): the ordered MIG-29 aircraft (2 airframes) closed the Russian Taskgroup for CAP (combat air patrol). The deployed 2 Yak-38 ’Forger’ (as CAP) are relieved by another pair. Ordered NATO and USSR airstrikes are still preparing on their airfields.

The ‘Charlie I’ submarine goes deep and sails slowly (‘silent running’). Both the Lynx ASW helo and the sonobuoy barrier (guarded by the ‘Atlantic’ MPA) loose contact and don’t regain it. The Lynx helo, after 4 turns, lands on HNLMS Zuiderkruis for refuel (as her mothership HNLMS Kortenaer has a damaged heli deck). The Type 22 frigate deploys her Lynx as a relieve. Partly because of consistent possible torpedo threat (by the submarine), the NATO Task group steers more to the south; also to keep distance to the possible USSR Landing Force (which is still undetected by NATO, despite multiple detection attempts by NATO MPA and helo’s!). 
Both Task Group commanders decide not to have a combat phase: the Russian commander decide to close the surfaced & damaged HNLMS Zwaardvis submarine by surface units, to finish her off by gunfire. Although the theoretically range of the Mk 48 torpedoes of HNLMS Zwaardvis is 24 nm., it was decided that this is the range of the ‘ADCAP’ variant (which was not carried during the 1980s on this class). Therefor the realistic range of a Mk 48 shot at the incoming Russian warships was rated as aprox. 12 nm. The NATO Task Group commander has only 50% left of his RGM-84 Harpoon missile inventory and wanted to uses them against the (still undetected) landing ships and/or (undetected) carrier. The 4 MM-38 Exocet of the UK Type 22 frigate didn’t have the range to reach any Russian target during this turn…

Turn 5 (NATO initiative): the 2 Russian MIG-29 are retasked from ‘CAP’ to ‘intercept’ and start intercepting the NATO MPA (‘Atlantic’) in the vicinity of the USSR ‘Charlie I’ submarine. Surprisingly, the Russian Be-12 comes nearer this location as well. The old waterplane keeps radarcontact on the NATO Task Group and keeps an eye on the NATO attempts te find the (deep) ‘Charlie I’.

Both passing MIG-29’s are detected by the AD radar of HNLMS Tromp. To defend the 'Atlantic', she opens fire at medium range with SM-1MR and destroys 1 MIG-29. She tries to hit the second MIG-29 as well with Standard Missile, but the progressive result of the use of AD-markers makes it impossible to hit it…(5 SM-1/MR missiles spent for 1 hit; 33 missiles remaining). The remaining MIG-29 engages the Brequet Atlantic, who can only try to evade… Two fired AA-10 air-to-air missiles miss (bad dice) and the MPA leaves the scene and returns to base (according to rules: ‘scared away’). While the MPA runs for safety, her 2 sonobuoy ‘barriers’ loose their value…
HNLMS Zwaardvis is attacked by 1 SS-N-14 (from the fast closing 'Krivak II'), despite her small silhouet at the surface. Damage: 2 additional ‘flood’ damage markers and 1 ‘fire’. She fires 2 Mk 48

torpedoes at this ship, resulting in 1 hit (3 damage markers). During the damage control phase HNLMS Zwaardvis manages to put out the fire but the progressive damage results in (total) 2 x structural damage & 4 x ‘flood’. At the time we didn’t realized this, but according to the rules ‘4 x flood’ results in capsizing/ship destroyed! Giving the damage she got since turn 3 and her limited damage survivability rating, its is fair to take her out of the game (with hind sight). Only 6 persons could escape the sinking submarine; 60 men perished in the sea…Survivors were picked up by the Russian ‘Krivak II’ frigate and the passing merchantmen (from the north). The torpedoed ‘Krivak II’ managed to repair 2 ‘flood’ damage markers.

Turn 6 (NATO initiative): 2 Danish F-16’s (each armed with Sparrow/Sidewinder) close the NATO Task Group from the north, as CAP. The German ‘Atlantic’ MPA and the Russian MIG-29 left the game. 4 British ‘Buccaneer’ anti-ship bombers left their German airfield and are heading for sea (low level, from the south). 4 Russian Su-24 ‘Fencer’ bombers left their DDR airfield and are heading for the Russian Task Group (from the east). The NATO Task Group commander is ‘handicapped’: he has no detection on the Russian Landing Force, he lost his long range sensors (the MPA, her sonobuoys and the submarine) to detect them and he is still hunted by a Russian nuclear submarine and shadowed by a Russian Be-12 MPA. His Russian adversary has probably a better picture of the situation? 

The Lynx helo of HNLMS ‘Tromp’ is airborne to fill the gap of the fleeing MPA. The Russian ‘Charlie I’ nuclear sub speeds up in the direction of the NATO Taskgroup. Still undetected by both Lynx helo’s, below the thermocline. The Russian Task Group commander ‘rotates’ after 4 turns his ASW helicopters as well. In the meantime 1 Lynx helo tries to radar detect the Russian Landing Force (unsuccessful); the other tries to detect the deep Charlie I by active dipping sonar (unsuccessful). Both sides are unable to conduct combat operations this turn. During the damage control phase HNLMS Kortenaer (with 3 x ‘flood’ damage markers) remains close to capsizing…

Turn 7 (USSR initiative): a British ‘Nimrod’ MPA joins both NATO ‘Lynx’ helicopters, as a relieve of the German MPA. The Danish F-16 CAP joins the NATO Task Group. However, 4 Su-24 ‘Fencer’ overfly the Russian Taskgroup at low height and prepare their attack, supported by radar updates from the Be-12 waterplane. Almost simultaneously 4 British ‘Buccaneers’ come in from the south, flying low towards the few known Russian surface combatants, searching with their radar for the Russian Landing Force. During the navigation phase the NATO Taskgroup splits somehow: HNLMS ‘Kortenaer’ ‘protects’ the fleet tanker HNLMS ‘Zuiderkruis’ (or is it the other way around?) and both operational NATO frigates turns towards the enemy. They change positions: the Type 22 upthreat (with her short range Seawolf SAM) and HNLMS Tromp behind her (so she can use her SM-1/MR and NATO Sea Sparrow to defend herself as well as the Type 22).

During the detection phase the ‘Nimrod’ MPA is unable to detect the Russian Landing Force and is therefor unable to support the ‘Buccaneers’ in their targeting. However the Buccaneers are designed for this autonomous task and are able to detect a few ships of the Landing Force and the ‘Kiev’-class carrier themselves, within range of their sea skimming ‘Sea Eagle’ missiles, and outside the reach of the Russian Yak-38 CAP. The Buccanneers are unable to datalink (not fitted) their findings towards the MPA or the Taskgroup. 

As the USSR has initiative, they attack first: 4 Su-24 bombers at low height fire 8 AS-17 ‘Krypton’ missiles towards the NATO flagship HNLMS ‘Tromp’. The NATO CAP was not used. At first sight they were out of range, but following the rules (24 cm patrol zone + 20 cm Sparrow range = 44 cm.), I forgot to check if their 4 Sparrow missiles were able to engage the AS-17’s?… Anyhow, the AAW Cdr onboard ‘Tromp’ has to make quick decisions! At medium range HNLMS Tromp fires 2 SM-1/MR sequentially, using 2 separate SPG-51C fire channels, resulting in 2 splashed AS-17’s. With 2 AD markers at close range ‘Tromp’ fires NATO Sea Sparrow (NSSM) and 12 cm. guns against the remaining AS-17’s. 1 more AS-17 is splashed (by NSSM). With 3 AD-markers ‘Tromp’ misses at close range the 4th AS-17!  The Type 22 opens fire at close range: splashes 4

x AS-17 with a combination of its very modern Seawolf SAM (11 missiles ready-use) and old fashioned 30 mm guns. The remaining AS-17 misses…. Both NATO frigates have 4 AD-markers assigned to their ships…for the duration of this turn.

The Buccaneers fire each 2 Sea Eagles towards the Russian Landing Force. As those missiles are sea skimming, old Soviet SAM systems are unable to fire at them. Because the Bucaneers were unable to datalink the position of the Landing Force to the NATO Taskgroup, their attack couldn’t be supported by a simultaneous launch of 8 Harpoons from ‘Tromp’. The southern, damaged ‘Udaloy I’ destroyer fires 9 SA-N-9 missiles sequentially from her VLS-system and splashes 5 ‘Sea Eagles’. The northernly ‘Udaloy I’ fired 6 SA-N-9 SAM’s sequentially with no hits (combination of bad dice and AD-markers). Both very capable units couldn’t continue their defense as the progressive amount of AD-markers prohibited this. The ‘Kiev’-class carrier ‘Baku’ splashed 2 ‘Sea Eagles’ with her SA-N-9 and 1 ‘Sea Eagle’ misses. No hits on the Landing Force!

Both airborne attack formations return to their bases in West- and East-Germany for beer and medals. And both players went for dinner and called it a day…

End of Part 2: NATO lost 1 submarine (‘unit kill’) and 1 ASW frigate (‘mission kill’). 1 fleet tanker and 2 operational frigates can still engage the enemy, although the frigates need time to reload their close-range SAM’s: HNLMS ‘Tromp’ has 31 remaining SM-1/MR SAM available (70% of magazine; reloading only possible in harbour) and has to reload 5 NSSM SAM’s (63% of her Mk 29 trainable launcher). The good news is Dutch frigates has always 1 full reload for Mk 29 NSSM-launcher onboard, which can be conducted at sea. And HNLMS ‘Zuiderkruis’ replenishment ship could possibly carry spare NSSM as well? HNLMS ’Tromp’ has still 8 RGM-84 Harpoon and 1 Lynx helo. The British Type 22 has to reload 5 Seawolf SAM (42% of 2 trainable GWS 25 launchers). Seawolf (a smaller/lighter missile as NSSM) reloading at sea is possible as well. It is understood that Type 22 frigates have more than 1 reload onboard. The Type 22 has an operational ‘Lynx’ and 4 x MM-38 ‘Exocet’. HNLMS Zuiderkruis (AOR) is fully operational and carries 2 ‘Lynx’ helo’s (one of herself and 1 from ‘Kortenaer’). NATO scored no hits on the Russian Landing Forces, but is still in the game. With 2 operations frigates (out of 3) and 1 tanker/supply ship you might say this is a (very) small victory for NATO.

So far the Russian Landing Force has not been hit and their advance towards their intended Landing Zone was without any delay, resulting in a major victory for Russia! Only 1 MIG-29 fighter was destroyed and 2 ships have been slightly damaged: an ‘Udaloy I’ ASW-destroyer and an older ‘Krivak II’ ASW-frigate. A possible problem can become the weapon expenditure: 45% of the available SS-N-14 ASW missiles have been used and there are no reloads within this fleet/mission. The expenditure of the capable SA-N-9 SAM is: 17 missiles by the slightly damaged ‘Udaloy I’ (53% of VLS magazine of 32), 6 missiles by the Northern ‘Udaloy I’ (20% of VLS magazine) and 4 missiles by carrier ‘Baku’ (2% of VLS magazine of 192). It is assumed that these 170 kg. & 3 m. long missiles are not reloadable at sea into their VLS-cells. The good news is that most Russian combatants are still fully operational, like the carrier, cruiser and several older escorts. The Naval Gunfire role (to be executed by ‘Sverdlov’-class cruiser and ‘Sovremenny’ destroyer) during the intended amphibious landing is also fully functional.

What did we learn/verdict?

- Our spreadsheets on units, weapons and our aircraft management administration worked and made the game a little faster (vs. searching in the Rules or Fleet Lists). Astonishing that we never saw an aircraft management sheet for naval wargaming so far… it might also be useful for management of spotting planes onboard battleships/cruisers (WW2).
- We still need a ‘Quick Reference Sheet’ for the equations regarding sonar/radar detections, use of Air Defense, Torpedoes and anti-ship missiles, Damage , etc. That would speed up the game. We played 4 turns in approx. 4,5 hrs.
- We discovered some (house) rules needed more detail. The (missing) sonar modifier for dipping sonar/sonobuoy is now ‘1’ for older aircraft (until 1980s) and ‘2’ for modern aircraft/equipment (like: Nimrod, P-8 Poseidon, NH-90, maybe Ka-27 and P-3C?). And we decided that if an MPA leaves the game without a proper hand-over to the next MPA, her sonobuoys are no use anymore. Sonobuoys can last at least 6-8 turns (?).
- Regarding official 'Naval Command' Rules: I found the reference to ‘flights’ in Chapter 24 ‘Air Operations’ not so realistic. To my knowledge a CAP is mostly 2 fighters (not four, like a ‘flight’). Especially if you want to maintain a CAP 24/7 above your head; that takes a lot of airframes to accomplish. Other: we missed a realistic speed for ‘intercept’ missions of fighters against other aircraft. The highest speed in the table ‘aircraft speed’ of chapter 14 ‘Navigation Phase’ is 60 cm/turn, but that is for Fixed wing AEW/MPA. A fighter is faster… So we made this 100 cm, otherwise a Nimrod (jet) or AWACS (jet) could keep their distance to a fighter by flying away? 
- I thought I finally managed to understand the Air defense method of Naval Command 2021 (Chapter 19). I got confused by the word ‘total Air Defense Modifier’ in combination with the assignment of AD-markers. I never fully understood if an AD-marker was assigned to a specific Air Defense weaponsystem (like SM-1/MR or Seawolf) or the whole ship. The examples of para 19.5 could be more clear: if it was stated that for every range band you add up the AD modifiers of the AD-systems which can engage the threat in that specific range band, it would be more easy for me to understand. For HNLMS ‘Tromp’: engagement at medium range (only SM-1/MR, so only 1 specific AD Modifier for that range band at that target height). But at close range, you add up the AD modifiers for SM-1/MR, NATO Sea Sparrow, 12 cm. gun and CIWS for close range… This add-up compensates (to a certain level) the progressive negative use of AD markers. However I still don’t like the system. To make things worse, the recent comments (on Facebook) made me finally aware that the Naval Command 2021 Rules restrict you to engage each incoming target only once per AD range band. Initially I was surprised/annoyed with (turn 5) ‘Tromp’ had great difficulty firing at the 2nd MIG-29 with SM-1/MR when in range. Two SPG-51C firing channels, 40 missiles ready-use available, 8-10 seconds reload time on the single-arm Mk 13 launcher.. Why the negative penalty (- 1 AD-marker) each launch? However, I am apparently not allowed to fire more than once at that 2nd MIG-29, as it stayed in the same range band (passing aircraft)!

- Remaining question? What will we do in part 3 of this campaign? Actual amphibious landing, while the 2 remaining operational NATO frigates try to interfere?