CV32

Thanks, guys. The adjustments to aircraft carrier capacity will begin to be seen in the next iteration(s) of the DB(s). It may be a bit of a creeping effort, as I will be making adjustments cautiously (given that we cannot go backward).

Details emerge of Israeli air strikes on Syria (Flight Global)

A book review for Larry's new novel "Shattered Trident", released today. Fresh Meat: Shattered Trident by Larry Bond, a review by Kate Lincoln

Yep, another good tactic in the toolbox.

Syria's Uncertain Air Defense Capabilities (CSIS)

Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013 (pdf)

Annual DoD Report Claims Steady Chinese Military Expansion (DefenseNews)

US Carrier Launch Pushed Back 4 Months (DefenseNews)

We're probably going to end up spending as much to refurbish the ex British Upholders and put them into effective service (as if), as we would have if we had simply acquired new-build nukes (Los Angeles, Trafalgar or Amethyste, iirc) back in the mid 1980s when they were considered.

Adm. Sir Max Horton and Western Approaches Command: Turning the tide in the Battle of the Atlantic (Defense Media Network)

Ditto. Says the HTC One and Nexus 7 user.

You should in most every scenario have a good idea of the most likely avenues of approach. Even if you might be attacked by sea based airpower, geography will help. And your AEW&C assets also typically have ESM, so having them aloft can quickly narrow down the possibilities. In every case, putting up layered (and more plentiful) BARCAP is preferable to losing precious AEW&C or having your airfield smacked. At least the BARCAP can fight back. They will appear in the SE as installations (bases) under Intl entries as 'airfield secret' and can be created as 'AD Fixed' in the Installations annex of the PE.

Pentagon Struggles To Pin Down F-35 Ops Cost (Aviation Week)

So you need to take measures to keep them from getting close, by moving back your AEW&C coverage behind your ground based air defense, and/or putting up more BARCAP between your airfield/AEW&C and the enemy. That's the point, isn't it, not only keeping your AEW&C alive but keeping it functional and useful. Stealthy attackers aren't invisible - they just have an edge that you need to take measures against. The tools are there for a scenario writer to take a stab at it. Hidden airfields and stealthy platforms. But if you need to 'game the game' to stay alive, either the scenario is unbalanced or you're "doing it wrong". It sucks that it is so unreliable, because your 32 bit machine is purpose built for the SE. A really intuitive AI in a game like this is a lofty objective, but one we would all like to see. As for multiplayer, the real barrier might be matching available players to available time.

You're assuming that there aren't other enemy aircraft enroute, ready and willing to shoot down your next AEW&C aircraft as it comes up. Or that there isn't a strike already bearing down on your airfield which will destroy your wasted AEW&C asset that you just landed. If you've let enemy aircraft get so close to your AEW&C aircraft (and your airfield) that you have to escape by landing, then you're already hurting.

Philip Hammond Unsure About F-35 Order (Sky News)

LOL, "less than ideal" is putting it mildly. This methodology might best be described as "how to keep your AEW assets on the ground and useless to you".

Sounds like our play is very much alike, Grumble.

It would be fairly atypical to have aircraft assigned to the center (or main body) zone of an airfield's formation. Otherwise, attacking an enemy airfield from a direction other than where its defenders are located is fairly elementary stuff.

Agreed, Brains. Australia's so called "folly" in acquiring new submarines pales in comparison to that of Canada.

After nearly a year long hiatus, a new version of the official Harpoon Commander's Edition (HCE) Database (HCDB-130505) is now available. Get the new DB in the Downloads section. New additions (or overhauls of existing entries) include: Installations: Dammam - Saudi Arabia Doha - Qatar Taif AB - Saudi Arabia Aircraft: AH-64E Guardian - USA Lynx Mk 88A - Germany MQ-4C Triton - USA Wildcat HMA.1 - UK Ships/MLUs: Buyan-M (21631) FFL - Russia Grigorovich (1135.6) FFG - Russia Jiangdao Type 056 FFL - China Teg (1135.6) FFG - India Type 903 AOR - China Submarines: Borey II (955A) SSBN - Russia Kilo (877EKM/86) SS - Algeria Kilo (877EKM/12) SS - Algeria Kilo II (636M) SS - Algeria Sindhughosh (99) SS - India Type 095 SSN - China

Australias Submarine Folly (The Diplomat, Flashpoints blog) Link to the Australian Defence White Paper 2013.

Pirate Threat Grows Worse off West Africa (DefenseNews)

Could New SSBN Program Sink U.S. Navy? (The Diplomat, Flashpoints blog)

Heron, Reaper and Hermes 900 Compete for Canadas Arctic mission (Defense Update)