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.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/SOH/Neptune2.jpg

The Hot part might've gone like this:

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/SOH/Neptune1.jpg

[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."
:applause:
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...

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/X45.jpg

[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]

...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??):

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Saucer.jpg

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 :cool:

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
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/AC130Efs92011-05-1122-08-50-14.jpg
and can lay down significant covering fire from a safe distance
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/AC130Efs92011-05-1122-09-27-98.jpg
or blow a hole in a wall if required...perhaps even destroy a damaged helicopter on leaving
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/AC130Efs92011-05-1122-16-40-07.jpg
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

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/AC130Efs92011-05-1122-32-36-50.jpg

[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]

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.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/DepartBagram.jpg

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]

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

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Ingress-1.jpg

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Ingresswords.jpg

[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/

[Wing_Z]

Stinger, it'd be interesting, given your background, to hear your views on some of the guesswork which follows.

And thanks for pointing out the link.
The notion of using an RQ-170 came from there, and in the sim I am pretty much conforming to those ideas of deployment.
One thing mentioned in the commentary there:
It was a CIA-led, JSOC conducted operation.
There's no question Panetta was calling the shots, and indeed the CIA had been assembling the mission for months.
The exercise is remarkable for the amount of inter-service co-ordination it would have required.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/OBLHelos.jpg

You get a sense of it in the sim; the UH-60 model used has a very accurate GPS co-ordinate readout, but on final approach, you feel an urgent need to have someone paint the target.
This would've been provided by the CIA assets on the ground: witnesses describe Pashtu-speaking people with laser-sighted rifles warning them off the site.
So: the Blackhawks go in, dropping the SEALS onto the roofs of buildings in the compound.
There's no intention of them landing.
The Chinooks with their Rangers complement are backup and recovery, and will land in the fields outside.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Touchdown.jpg

Edit: On the way in, I clipped a powerline, and hoped the cable cutters did their job.
Power actually was out on the night in question, but I think that would have been "arranged" on the ground, to give the NVG of the assault force full advantage.
It's all in the details...

[Ian Warren]

Charl , I recall a very similar failed operation in 1981 'Eagle Claw' to grab the US Embassy hostages in Iran , putting a FRB mid point but due to sand storms and mech probs started to fail further with the crash into one off the tankers .. little different but maybe it worked this time :salute:

[Wing_Z]

Hello Ian, thought you might look in here!
Yup...there are two very relevant earlier operations which I am coming to, in the next post...

[Wing_Z]

Before it could drop SEALS onto the roof of a secondary dwelling, one Blackhawk crashed inside the western end of the compound.

This news would have sent a shudder through the command structure of the mission, several of whom were veterans of the failed Iran hostage mission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Claw) in 1980, and the “Blackhawk Down” disaster that was Mogadishu 1993. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mogadishu_(1993))

It is inconceivable that the aircraft simply “lost lift due to an air vortex caused by unexpectedly warm air and the effect of a high wall surrounding the compound” as was put out in subsequent (and conflicting) press statements. The team had practiced this operation on a full-scale mock-up, many times. The effect of walls and upwash had been experienced. The helo probably went down through an Own Goal of some sort, which in the light of the above, is never going to be acknowledged.
It does not matter.

It created a complication, however: personnel on board were now inside the compound, but on the wrong side of gates and walls which separated the house from the rest of the site.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/CrashSite.jpg

In the sim, I flew the backup Blackhawk into position, and hovered for a minute at 45 feet, to simulate deploying the SEALS. It felt like a long time.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/BHhover.jpg

[Wing_Z]

I parked the primary recovery Chinook in a field at the back.
There were reports of a hole being blown in a wall, and it’s reasonable to assume you wouldn’t want to park your helo at the front door. Apart from anything else, the gated access would be fairly secure, and possibly booby-trapped.

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Pickup.jpg


But the team on the downed Blackhawk now had to blow 2 or 3 gates to get out. Or perhaps they waited for the secondary team to clear the buildings, and simply went up over the wall. At times like that, discipline, training, and communication prove their worth – despite the complication of having to destroy the broken helo, the operation went just 8 minutes beyond the allotted 30.

In my sim, I wondered if the Spooky couldn’t have created the hole earlier with a well-placed 40mm round - the easiest way to do this. Perhaps wishful thinking, the proximity to friendly forces may not have allowed it.

Plenty of room on the Chinooks for the team needing a ride, and at 01:40 Monday 2 May we loaded up and headed out.
A more direct route than incoming, but still tracking through the hills rather than over.
Despite being a moonless night, why expose yourself to the skyline and a lucky shot from below…

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/Egress2.jpg

In hindsight, not a bad idea to take care. Later in the week, 80 were killed in a Taleban suicide bombing in Charsadda, near midpoint of the flight path...

It is reported that Pakistani F-16's were scrambled after the raid, but no contact was made with the helo fleet.
There would no doubt have been an AWACS presence in Afghan airspace picking them up, and a quiet word on the right frequency to warn them off.
Right through the mission there was a potential for conflict, from local resistance to fullblown war.
You'd need to assume there were airborne assets in place for every eventuality, on the Afghan side of the fence.

[airattackimages]

For the flight back to CVN-70, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a C-2 flying the body out to the ship. There's been so much misinformation about the raid that any of the details could be incorrect or read into (many already had right out the gate).

[gaucho_59]

"Please keep the discussion to the operation itself, I don't want to get closed down because of political bickering."
:applause:
And that is a very wise observation.
Good thinking Wing_Z.


It so happens I have someone in Kabul (very close relation) who told me the operation started and finished in Bagram... after the operation... they refueled in Bagram and went to the Carl Vinson...

[Wing_Z]

Yes I staged the sim mission out of Bagram, refuelled at Jalalabad.
Coming back, depends on the fuel used, maybe hop straight to Bagram.
If you need to refuel, why not meet at Jalalabad with...the Ospreys.
The Black Hawk and Chinooks would as a matter of course return to Bagram.

All along , i wondered why the V22 was not used.
The answer may be in its servicability, which at present is around 60%.
Not good enough for a time-critical mission, but perhaps for the trip to CVN70.
Ideal, in fact, because it has the range to do it.
And the speed.
The burial at sea was at 09:30 Monday 2 May.
The strike force could not get away (even from Jalalabad), much before 04:00:00.
Not enough time for helos to do the 682nm and refuel en route, but at a cruise of 240kts, easy for an Osprey.

They'd need escorting, Team KBT F/A-18 an obvious choice

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/F18Escort.jpg

It seems pretty obvious to use a Greyhound for the delivery run, but...I felt like a little Osprey!
Also, someone tweeted a comment about "helicopters on deck".
At a stretch then, Vlad Zhyhulskiy's excellent V22, with FD mods by Brian Sharpe, and Rob Barendregt's VTOL gauge:

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h200/CHARL_photos/Flightsim%202/V22Flight.jpg

Mission accomplished.
Flying it in the sim gives some small insight into the kind of problems that can so easily derail an operation like this.
And the resources! This was no small feat - of planning, integration, and balls.
And lots, and lots, of money.

Thanks to all, for not piling in and destroying this (possibly contentious) thread, I had wondered if I'd make it as far as the carrier landing!