Panzer Grenadier Headquarters - Library: Sword of Israel #50

Panzer Grenadier Battles on November 21st:
Desert Rats #16 - The Panzers Pull Back	Desert Rats #19 - The Panzers Return
Desert Rats #17 - The Tomb Of Sidi Rezegh	Jungle Fighting #7 - Line Of Departure
Desert Rats #18 - A Pibroch's Skirl	South Africa's War #5 - Irish Eyes

PG-HQ Library - Modern War Hall > Scenarios > SwIs050

Errors? Omissions? Report them!

Panzer Grenadier Headquarters Library - select the previous scenario item

Panzer Grenadier Headquarters - select the next scenario item

Sharm el-Shaikh Sword of Israel #50
(Attacker) State of Israel	vs	Arab Republic of Egypt (Defender)

Formations Involved

	Total
Side 1	0
Draw	0
Side 2	0

Overall Rating, 0 votes
5 4 3 2 1 0
Scenario Rank: of

Parent Game	Sword of Israel
Historicity	Alt-History
Date	1967-06-07
Start Time	05:00
Turn Count	24
Visibility	Day
Counters	96
Net Morale	2
Net Initiative	3
Maps	2: 65, 66
Layout Dimensions	86 x 28 cm 34 x 11 in
Play Bounty	226
AAR Bounty	227
Total Plays	0
Total AARs	0

Battle Types
Airfield Control
Amphibious Landing
Inflict Enemy Casualties
Paradrops

Conditions
Anti-infantry Wire
Entrenchments
Naval Bombardment
Randomly-drawn Aircraft
Smoke

Scenario Requirements & Playability
Sword of Israel	Base Game

Introduction
Israeli intelligence estimated that the important Sharm el-Shaikh garrison at the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula had been built up to two stoutly emplaced infantry battalions supported by artillery and antiaircraft batteries, and augmented by an airfield. The garrison guarded the entrance to the Straits of Tiran and the sole Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat, along with several naval vessels including a destroyer. The Israelis planned the attack on the position to kick off with a naval bombardment at 0430, followed by an airborne assault to seize the airfield, then an expansion from the airfield with more airborne and air-landing operations. When a recce aircraft flew over at 0400, it found the site abandoned. But, what if the Egyptians had been ready and waiting? An option the Israelis considered but set aside was a seaborne invasion. Since this is a "what if," and the Egyptians would have prepared to defend against such an attack, this option is also open to the Israeli player.

Introduction

Israeli intelligence estimated that the important Sharm el-Shaikh garrison at the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula had been built up to two stoutly emplaced infantry battalions supported by artillery and antiaircraft batteries, and augmented by an airfield. The garrison guarded the entrance to the Straits of Tiran and the sole Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat, along with several naval vessels including a destroyer. The Israelis planned the attack on the position to kick off with a naval bombardment at 0430, followed by an airborne assault to seize the airfield, then an expansion from the airfield with more airborne and air-landing operations. When a recce aircraft flew over at 0400, it found the site abandoned. But, what if the Egyptians had been ready and waiting? An option the Israelis considered but set aside was a seaborne invasion. Since this is a "what if," and the Egyptians would have prepared to defend against such an attack, this option is also open to the Israeli player.

Conclusion
Each option (Double Airdrop, Airdrop/Airlanding, or Naval Landing) has its risks for the Israeli player. The Egyptian must guard against both. Had the operation actually occurred, I suspect the Israelis would have executed it as successfully as the rest of the operations in this war, but who knows?

Display Relevant AFV Rules

AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle
Vulnerable to results on the Assault Combat Chart (7.25, 7.63, ACC), and may be attacked by Anti-Tank fire (11.2, DFT). Anti-Tank fire only affects the individual unit fired upon (7.62, 11.0). AFV's are activated by tank leaders (3.2, 3.3, 5.42, 6.8). They may also be activated as part of an initial activating stack, but if activated in this way would need a tank leader in order to carry out combat movement. AFV's do not block Direct Fire (10.1). Full-strength AFV's with "armor efficiency" may make two anti-tank (AT) fire attacks per turn (either in their action segment or during opportunity fire) if they have AT fire values of 0 or more (11.2). Each unit with an AT fire value of 2 or more may fire at targets at a distance of between 100% and 150% of its printed AT range. It does so at half its AT fire value. (11.3) Efficient and non-efficient AFV's may conduct two opportunity fires per turn if using direct fire (7.44, 7.64). Units with both Direct and AT Fire values may use either type of fire in the same turn as their opportunity fire, but not both (7.22, 13.0). Units which can take opportunity fire twice per turn do not have to target the same unit both times (13.0). Demoralized AFV's are not required to flee from units that do not have AT fire values (14.3). Place a Wreck marker when an AFV is eliminated in a bridge or town hex (16.3). AFV's do not benefit from Entrenchments (16.42). AFV's may Dig In (16.2). Open-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables, but DO take step losses from X and #X results (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT). If a "2X" or "3X" result is rolled, at least one of the step losses must be taken by an open-top AFV if present. Anti-Aircraft Weapon Carrier: apply a -1 modifier to an air attack if within three hexes of the targeted hex (15.14). APC – Armored Personnel Carrier: These are Combat Units, but stack like Transports. They can transport personnel units or towed units. They are not counted as combat units for the +1 stacking modifier on the Direct Fire and Bombardment Tables (4.4). They may be activated by regular leaders and tank leaders (1.2, 3.34, 4.3, 5.43). They do not provide the +1 Assault bonus (ACC).

AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle

Vulnerable to results on the Assault Combat Chart (7.25, 7.63, ACC), and may be attacked by Anti-Tank fire (11.2, DFT). Anti-Tank fire only affects the individual unit fired upon (7.62, 11.0).
AFV's are activated by tank leaders (3.2, 3.3, 5.42, 6.8). They may also be activated as part of an initial activating stack, but if activated in this way would need a tank leader in order to carry out combat movement.
AFV's do not block Direct Fire (10.1).
Full-strength AFV's with "armor efficiency" may make two anti-tank (AT) fire attacks per turn (either in their action segment or during opportunity fire) if they have AT fire values of 0 or more (11.2).
Each unit with an AT fire value of 2 or more may fire at targets at a distance of between 100% and 150% of its printed AT range. It does so at half its AT fire value. (11.3)
Efficient and non-efficient AFV's may conduct two opportunity fires per turn if using direct fire (7.44, 7.64). Units with both Direct and AT Fire values may use either type of fire in the same turn as their opportunity fire, but not both (7.22, 13.0). Units which can take opportunity fire twice per turn do not have to target the same unit both times (13.0).
Demoralized AFV's are not required to flee from units that do not have AT fire values (14.3).
Place a Wreck marker when an AFV is eliminated in a bridge or town hex (16.3).
AFV's do not benefit from Entrenchments (16.42).
AFV's may Dig In (16.2).
Open-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables, but DO take step losses from X and #X results (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT). If a "2X" or "3X" result is rolled, at least one of the step losses must be taken by an open-top AFV if present.
Anti-Aircraft Weapon Carrier: apply a -1 modifier to an air attack if within three hexes of the targeted hex (15.14).
APC – Armored Personnel Carrier: These are Combat Units, but stack like Transports. They can transport personnel units or towed units. They are not counted as combat units for the +1 stacking modifier on the Direct Fire and Bombardment Tables (4.4). They may be activated by regular leaders and tank leaders (1.2, 3.34, 4.3, 5.43). They do not provide the +1 Assault bonus (ACC).