broncepulido

I think this is the place, but remember, the scenario is more a technology demostrator than a true scenerio

Very interesting, for more than 15 years I've not played/edited Harpoon 2/ANW (tons of bugs, bugs,bugs and a not-friendly too cumbersome interface and platform editor), and now I remember the sides feature was one of the most interesting, but I imagine it's very difficult to implement it on HCE.

French frigate Courbet doing shore bombardment with 100mm gun the 7-8 May night, and destroying a multiple rocket launcher: http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=116145

Scenario played and enjoyed (I yet thinking in how downsizing my forecasted WWIII scenarios greater than 64 kb ) More or less the same outcome: Rubis sunk a lot of Soviet subs (6?), and a Kashin-class DD with SM.39 Exocet, and remains with 3 torpedoes in her tubes. Providence only shot in anger was of 12xcruise missiles against the Soviet base, reducing it to 29% (and destroying an helicopter on the ground!), dodges some ASW torpedoes, but was also unharmed.

In the bin Laden scenario, modified with the FARP present, I was surprised because if they are F-16 Block 52 present and in range, the GE change the Intercept loadout to GP and destroys the FARP

Yes, but if the F-35B is cancelled, we will have light CVH without warplanes !

The French official source of news about French air operations in Libya (that used by meretmarine.com), browsing also information about other French operations and photos: http://www.defense.gouv.fr/operations/autr...ibye/actualites

First big problem: to drop the mines you need to localize and target something, at least in BOL mode, you dont can drop the mines like sonobuoys, a pity. And I'm not sure if the GE permit to fire a weapon with speed=0 to a moving or stationary target, the mine never will catch the target. More later, I'm going to my workplace ...

Can harpoon model shipping mines dropped by plane? I assume yes as mines are just zero speed torpedos (correct?) I think (if correct) we need some new loadouts for A-6, A-7 in HCCW and divefreaks HC_65to80 Dbs (ED. if not already there ). This looks like fun. The mines is a big question. In some personal DBs I've tried with drift mines (launched by ship or submarine) straigth-running torpedoes, with speed=6 knots and range=54 nm with mixed results. I've no thinked previously in air dropped mines with speed=0 (range=9999?), perhaps it's a good idea .... More later.

Here they are http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=116074

I don't known previously Number Four: Fleet Problem IX, 1929, shame on me

This can explain more things .... http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20060479-503543.html

What times: MBT, the Arab-Israeli Wars ... and previously Panzerblitz ... all preludious to the ultimate PC variant Steel Panthers

The consensus seems to be that a MH-60K modified for 'stealth' would necessitate removal of the refueling probe, though demodification or remodification could obviously vary for each and every potential mission. Oh, yes, also that, I've not thinked on it, thanks ...

Only technical and operative considerations in this topic, I hope. It sembles a lot of rumours about the use of a stealty variant of the H-60 Black Hawk: Photos (of the strange helo wreckrage and some corpses): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/20...326&index=0 Bill Sweetman comments: http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=...&id=8112975 Also, developing my little scenario, I don't see very clear this point about helicopter ranges and helicopter loads made public after: http://www.timesleader.com/news/Inside__ls...05-04-2011.html Two full loaded Blackhawk with the team and assault gear and weapons. Perhaps from Bagram (I think the Special Forces helicopters and other aircraft can merge stealthy with the resident 455th Air Expeditionary Wing aircrafts), only some 203 nm to the target house, but in a high and hot environment, i.e., less range for the full loaded helicopters. I think the records were in hard drives or more probably hard drives and complete computers (I can't think in load the helicopters with tons of paper !!!), you can't stand in the house messing in extract the hard drives from complete computers, you must carry the whole computers. More weight for the return trip. The bin Laden's corpse (a big guy), more weight in the overloaded remaining Black Hawk: the 25 members of the assault team (previously in two helicopters) and his weapons and assault gear, the at least 2 members of the breaked-down helicopters, probably complete computers and the bin Laden's corpse (total weight: 30 bodies, assault equipment and some computers). And now, you must fly some 651nm from the house to the coast in a overloaded helicopter, less the fuel expended from the Bagram?-bin Laden's house flight (they are 651 nm from the assaulted house to Karachi in the coast, but that in straight line, and at least 20 nm more from the coast to the USS Carl Vinson, the initial 651 nm over perhaps hostile Pakistani territory, I think it was impossible the provision for an air-to-air refuelling with a KC-130 over a alerted Pakistan). In conclusion, in my viewpoint or the Black Hawk returned to Bagram? and refuelled (more than one time, including air to air for going from Bagram? to the carrier) and flight over Afganistan to the Arabian Sea to the carrier (a very hot and hight flight for helicopters, lesser range), or the Black Hawk with a deep collaboration of the Pakistani government, flight crossing almost all the Pakistani territory in a straight flight from the bin Laden's house to the carrier, refuelling air-to-air or in the ground in Pakistani territory (in my full hypothetical scenario the corpse is ferried to the carrier via C-2A Greyhound, other possibility a CV-22 Osprey). A lot of unanswered or bad answered questions .....

Casually now viewing The Blue Max , RIP

That's the word, ridiculous

Curiously in the original news report the own Russians named the fighter as "Flanker-E", using the Western code-name. I remember when a lot of years ago in the START talks the Russians called the Backfire as "Backfire" to avoid NATO know the real name of the bomber.

Cheers !!!

Don't worry, I keep on paper, tables and parallel and unpublishied DBs all the research I do in all the possible time periods for future merge in futures DBs or future game systems

Interesting site finded researching for the Kill bin Laden scenario, with nice photos, probably tomorrow in the news http://www.bagram.afcent.af.mil/photos/med...?galleryID=6178

File Name: The Killing of bin Laden, 1 May 2011 (Hypothetical). File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 03 May 2011 File Category: IOPG On the 2 May 2011 the World was surprised when US Government Officials informed about the killing the previous day in a daring Special Forces raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, of Osama bin Laden, the founder and leader of the al-Qaeda islamist international terrorist network. The action was excuted mostly by DevGru (Naval Special Warfare Development Group) members, previously the SEAL Team Six and nowadays with other classified name, descended in the house by fast rope and probably in collaboration with other Special Forces/CIA/Intelligence operatives intervention and support. They were flown into Pakistan from Afghanistan by helicopter from the 160th Special Operations Air Regiment (Airborne) Night Stalkers, part of the Joint Special Operations Command, two MH-60 stealthy modified and two MH-47. One MH-60 was lost in the operation because mechanical breakdown. The helicopters probably taked-off from Bagram, Afghanistan, where is based the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing and the Special Forces aircraft can be merged stealthly with the usual resident units. The corpse of Osama bin Laden was buried in the sea the same day by the USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70), with the CVW-17 embarked. Edit 28 november 2012: for the start I was speculating about the bin Laden corpse ferried to CVN-70 in a C-2 Greyhound because range, load and speed reasons, but a Greyhound present in Bagram or other Stan base is too notorious and conspicuous. In the December 2012 issue of Air Forces Monthly is mentioned as widely and unofficially accepted the corpse was ferried in a more discrete V-22, doing the first and unofficial landing of the Osprey type in a carrier. At the moment of the scenario design the data about the operation are scarce, and it's not historically accurate. This scenario only pretends to be a little divertment and a little tribute to the people who ultimately has killed Bin Laden. Change 4 May 2011: 2xMH-53J Pave Low III replaced by 2xCV-22B Osprey (the last MH-53M Pave Low IV were retired in 2008). Change 8 May 2011: Title name changed from Kill to Killing, added 2xMH-47G, added 6xF-22A, added a FARP in the placement of the Tarbela Dam/Ghazi airport, suggested the first day as support for the helicopters flying from Pakistan. Change 12 May 2011: added 2xMH-60 Dark Hawk stealthy modified assault helicopters, added mention to 2xMH-47 included in the operation. Click here to download this file

Check the Italian Tornado IDS in EC2003 ... A very simple tip, other option usable for answer similar questions: - Open the platform editor. - Go to the interested entry (in this case, Weapons>A.S. 34 Kormoran missile). - Click over the downhead arrow in the deployable menu in the Status bar. - And now we can see in a new window on Access the A.S. 34 is installed in the loadouts 55335 (employed by the Tornado IDS IT-MLU, we can also see) and 55373 (employed by the Tornado IDS IT-MLU and the Tornado IDS IT-MLU).

Someone remember if the Sonars Modifiers named Active and Passive in the Platform editor are disabled? If not, what is the effect of the modifiers? The values it sembles can be something as (it's not a exhaustive list, but I think those are the presente values): Passive, low noise: 246, 241 (Seawolf, Ohio, CAPTOR), 251 (Oscar II, Delta IV, Lafayette, Providence, Akula II, Improved Akula, Sierra II), Passive, high noise: 15, 226 (Noisemaker) Active, low noise/reflective size: 246, 251 (Seawolf, CAPTOR, Akula II, Improved Akula, Sierra II) Active, high noise/reflective size: 226 (Noisemaker),