Operation Neptune Spear

[Wing_Z]

The operation to get Bin Laden would've taken some very careful planning and delivery.
I wondered if it could be duplicated in FS9.
The first bit works OK logistically, but returning to the carrier presents a few difficulties due to range limitations: 320nm for a Blackhawk, 400nm for Chinook.
The stealth versions of these don't have refuelling probes either...
What thoughts?
Please keep the discussion to the operation itself, I don't want to get closed down because of political bickering.

The Hot part might've gone like this:

 

[Tom Clayton]

If the range numbers don't add up, then it's likely that there was a land-based waypoint somewhere. There was so much secrecy around that mission that we may never know all of the details.

 

[wombat666]

"Please keep the discussion to the operation itself, I don't want to get closed down because of political bickering."

And that is a very wise observation.
Good thinking Wing_Z.

 

[Wing_Z]

If the range numbers don't add up, then it's likely that there was a land-based waypoint somewhere...

The strike itself would use maybe the full range of a Blackhawk, so no problem.
Jalalabad - Kandahar works OK, and you could top up there.
But that leaves maybe 500nm to the carrier.
A crewman aboard CVN-70 speaks of "helicopters landing" so no fixed-wing transfer.
I suppose they could've switched to a helo with a probe, and refuelled just short of the Pakistan border.
Long day, maybe 10 hours in the air.

 

[Matt Wynn]

stealth versions of both choppers are called the MH-47 and MH-60G, both can be fitted rith RF Probes....alternatively you could've used the MH-60G with pylon tanks, so shoot a boom and drogue for fuel and do it without having to land anywhere except in the designated LZ, Chinook can be fitted with cabin length 'extended range' tanks also...

either way a great op, great teamwork and a great outcome... :salute:

 

[Desert Rat]

FSX has just had the compound scenery released, would be nice if we had it to.

Jamie

 

[Wing_Z]

Yes I've just nipped over to the FSX forum and seen the item.
Wonder how hard it might be to convert to FS9?
Interesting in that thread they also thought the southern approach via the lake to be a good one.
If it's THAT obvious, I may try another way in!

I'm pretty sure too, that air assets were kept to a minimum to make this work.
You'd need an orbiting jammer, but that's about it.
In my sim, the RQ-170 or something approaching it, will be the weapon of choice.

Smoothie, thanks for that thought - I suspect a transfer might've taken pace, from a stealth model to a probe-equipped one?
For the hot part of the mission, you would want maximum stealth.
I wonder too, how much inter-service co-ordination there was (other than CIA)?
Keeping it in-house might've been the preferred option.

 

[Desert Rat]

In my sim, the RQ-170 or something approaching it, will be the weapon of choice.

Do we have one?

 

[MIKE JG]

stealth versions of both choppers are called the MH-47 and MH-60G.........

This is the MH-47: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/aircraft-pictures/BoeingMH-47Glarge.jpg

This is the MH-60G: http://files.air-attack.com/MIL/mh60/mh60_header.jpg

Not even close to being "stealthy".

Just keeping the discussion factual.

 

[Wing_Z]

This is the MH-47: ...Not even close to being "stealthy"...

Good point, actually something that has all those whirly bits flying about is going to have some difficulty being stealthy.
Still, presumably the radar signature is somewhat reduced with the mods they made.
Question remains: is a RF probe a stealth liability you'd rather leave home?
Maybe, maybe not...perhaps leave it on and so you don't have to put down anywhere with cargo you'd rather not show anywhere.

Do we have one?

Not as such...but a lick of paint on Kaz Ito's X-45 is going to do it for me...

 

[Matt Wynn]

well depends what you call stealth... theres Noise, Visual appearance... radar signature... the MH-60's are fitted with bladed that are 'bent' at the tips to eliminate more noise... as for the 'nooks... yeah they're noisy and would have to hold while initial team secured the immediate LZ...

 

[Ascua02]

I think I will agree with Tom.
Going stealth can also be done flying low, but that is murder for the mileage, on the other hand, pre-positioning a couple of refuelling stops, makes things easier, as long as they are discreet (relatively easy somewhere secluded or even isolated, ther is not that much fuel necessary, relatively speaking).
So, say one stop at Jalalabad and another at Kandahar (at or near). Departure from Bagram (cruise level), top up at Jalalabad, low level mission and back to Jalalabad (to avoid Pakistan as much as possible), refuel and flight at cruise level to Kandahar and from there straight to Carl Vinson (either going low again from the Pakistan Border or camouflaged as a routine supply flight).
If you want to keep it cute use stealth choppers from Bagram-Jalalabad-target-Jalalabad-Bagram. Normal Choppers would transport fuel to Jalalabad and wait for the troops, then pick them up and fly them to Vinson. The stealth ones can go back empty to Bagram. :isadizzy::isadizzy:

Rather complicated. I don't know... other opinions??

 

[Wing_Z]

KISS

...Departure from Bagram (cruise level), top up at Jalalabad, low level mission and back to Jalalabad (to avoid Pakistan as much as possible), refuel and flight at cruise level to Kandahar and from there straight to Carl Vinson (either going low again from the Pakistan Border or camouflaged as a routine supply flight)...

That should do the job, "cute" leads to complications. There would definitely have been a return stop planned at Jalalabad, for fuel and possible casualty offload. Kandahar - Vinson would require one air-air refuel possibly.

Here's the Top Cover (where are those Flying Saucer people now??):

Just a half hour to station.
A midnight launch would get into position 30 minutes ahead of time, creating a 1-hour window for ops. Allow 30 minutes final loiter, back within 3 hours.
No problem, there.

Now, for the helo ride I want to edit the FP inserting waypoints as per second screenshot at the start of this thread.
Does one have to create fictitious airports for these, or what?

[flightplan]
AppVersion=9.1.40901
title=OAJL to OPT1
description=OAJL, OPT1
type=VFR
routetype=0
cruising_altitude=11500
departure_id=OAJL, N34* 23.51', E70* 30.11', +001814.00
departure_position=31
destination_id=OPT1, N34* 10.09', E73* 14.31', +000000.00
departure_name=Jalalabad
destination_name=Bin Ladens
waypoint.0=, OAJL, , OAJL, A, N34* 23.51', E70* 30.11', +001814.00,
waypoint.1=, OPTA, , OPTA, A, N33* 59.10', E72* 36.70', +001114.00,
waypoint.2
waypoint.3
waypoint.4
waypoint.5=, OPT1, , OPT1, A, N34* 10.09', E73* 14.31', +000000.00,

 

[Ascua02]

Agreed for the in flight refuelling on to the Vinson but that would already be in a "cold" area, again supply flight camo

Saludos

 

[Wing_Z]

The more you think about it, the more likely it is that a further JSOC asset would've been deployed.
One that employs electro-optical sighting, immune to conventional jamming

and can lay down significant covering fire from a safe distance

or blow a hole in a wall if required...perhaps even destroy a damaged helicopter on leaving

Good insurance to have one there, in case the SEALS had to fight their way out.
On the subject of stealth: I think Pakistan might've turned a blind eye to stuff flying in from the west, as they've always done (flew in under the radar...I think not).
Noise suppression would've been important though, so as not to alert the target.
Thus, "quiet" helos, but not radar-stealthy. And no worries about orbiting one of these at a distance

 

[Matt Wynn]

reports suggest the night of the raid the western radar chain was unmanned, if that is the case radar stealth would not be needed, the MH-47's could have flown in with a tech crew, established a FARP for the MH-60's to refuel then bugged out taking empties back with them.... it's a possibility thats for sure SF have done this method a few times in the past with great success. another possibility is as outlined in them images except with 1 change, see the dogleg in the flight path is designed to more accurately fly timing, say you flew it minus the dogleg for timing, say you flew it right up and over the Tarbela dam and over Kachhi flying slightly north east up that inlet you'd be between 2 hills for a short while..... it'd take time off ingress and egress plus would save you some fuel....

 

[dandog]

They did make a ground stop before proceeding to the ship. Definately remember hearing in a report. They took photos on Bin at a hangar before moving on. Do not remember the way point that was mentioned.

 

[Wing_Z]

To the Simulation:

The 101st had been practising this mission at Bagram, so I think it's fair to take the first leg of the mission from there to Jalalabad, perhaps at dusk on Sunday 1 May.
Just on 70nm, a hop of half an hour, enough to shake down the systems, and wait for the weather window at OAJL.

Jordan Moore's Blackhawk 101st repaint by Kirk Sunley.
It also has a SAR panel upgrade by Ray Brower with radar, autpilot and autohover, all essential to the mission.
And especially, a radar altimeter for nap-of-the-earth flying.
All at Hovercontrol
Chinook by Tom Woods and Mark Adams

 

[Wing_Z]

Ingress

Take off from Jalalabad at midnight on Sunday 1 May will put us on target at 01:00 Monday, with a 30 minute slot scheduled there

 

[Stinger]

After reading this thread, i've found someone with some interesting insight on the mission .
My backround is 25 yrs AF Spec Ops pararescue and from what i've read in this articles the guy is spot on.
Just his opinion, not mine but he's real close to getting it right

http://cencio4.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/operation-neptunes-spear/