broncepulido

File Name: Iran-Israel 2010, Survival of Israel ? File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 29 Aug 2010 File Category: Middle East Note: In this scenario, to avoid spoilers, it is compulsory to play the Israeli/Blue side a few times, and only after play the Iranian/Red side. This scenario also wants to be a study about the feasibility of a strike erasing the future nuclear capabilities of Iran. My intention in this scenario was also to reproduce the Israel and Iran OOB in 2010. Some months after the political and tactical semi-failure of the Mavi Marmara affair doctored by the IHH, a supposed Turkish Islamic charity, the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedom and Humanitarian Relief (May 31, 2010), a new Israeli coalition Government, leaded by the moderate Premier Shlomo Ben-Ami, ex- Foreign Affairs Minister and former Ambassador in Spain, very influenced by his pair of mysterious Spanish counsellors (Code-named Hello Kitty and SpongeBob SquarePants), is impelled by the Western Powers to actuate as a scapegoat and to stop the Iranian military nuclear program, doing the mission the Western Powers are afraid to do because his multiple political implications. The strike must be realised before the imminent Iranian deployment of the new and powerful S-300/SA-10 SAMs, complement of the previous deployed long-range SA-5 Gammon. Only credible and political admissible action is a conventional attack with Precision Guided Munitions, a limited and surgical strike without collateral damages will be also the only political acceptable Israeli option gullible for the mass-media. The Heyl HaAvir and the Heyl HaYam are only five days to obtain the victory, before the US and other countries will be forced reluctantly to stop the strikes because the usual pressure of unoccupied demostrators worldwide the week-end after the first strike. And the only possible income of the battle is the Total Victory, with the annihilation of at least all the designated targets: Bushehr comprising his nuclear reactor (ZPa) the Nuke Sites 1 (YSb), 2 (YRb) and 3 (YQb), the Terror Camps 1 (YDa), 2 (YCa) and 3 (YBa), and the TBM Site (YFb) (first you must to localize some of those targets). Is compulsory for Israel to no lose more than 60 planes, to avoid a propagandistic victory by Iran. Also, as a side diversion, the Israeli player must resolve the question of a undetermined number of apparent merchant ships with the manifested intention of repeat the facts of the first Gaza flotilla, supposedly waiting in front the Israeli coast, and a few armed blockade-runners. But in this time, if open hostilities with Iran are opened, the supposed civilian ships can be freely sunken. You can expect also a imminent surface-to-surface missile attack after the breakout of the hostilities. The pro-Iranian faction Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria can also provide some support to the Iranian side. The air corridors between Israel and Iran are guaranteed (for both contenders) by the disengagement of the conflict by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and mostly Iraq, a sort of terra nullius (also, after the withdraw of the US forces, lefting only a embrionary air force in Iraq). Enrique Mas, August 2010 Click here to download this file

Yeess ... I saw it in the Media-Markt leaflets and looks very impresive. It's selling in those shops in Spain from this week, but I never mind purchase an iPod or similar to fly this quadricopter ....

Working on the Israel-Iran scenario, I think we need a fixed or mobile generic ESM installation, similar to that depicted in the WWII database (representing in the WWII period the HF/DF Huff Duff stations), but now representing passive detection systems (And also other generic ELINT/SIGINT ground installations), as the Ukranian Kolchuga and others: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolchuga_passive_sensor

Very interesting subject ....

I think the entry 2108 Fishing Vessel is similar, enough for scenario figuration.

More ship names in Wikipedia (not for now in the DataBase ): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_054A_frigate The art in sinodefense is slightly outdated: http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/ty...jiangkai-ii.asp

Ok for option 2 for me.

Absolutely unknown previouly for me and it looks interesting. Thanks a lot. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/662...power-the-state

Those splendid photos remembers me about the fine site of HMCS Haida, very detailed and very interesting: http://hmcshaida.ca/ And with these two important links about radar and sonar, many times readed by me, and with interesting data: http://hmcshaida.ca/radar.html specially this one: http://jproc.ca/sari/

It can provide us with almost superior fun than the A400M or CVF programs ....

More about MH-60R/S, as conclusion for proposed modifications on the DB (original post, redacted some hours ago, lost in a PC reboot !) based on http://www.lockheedmartin.com/paris/MH-60RS-PAS09.pdf and other sources): - Radar APS-147 only on MH-60R, no radar in MH-60S. - ESM (ALQ-210) only on MH-60R (the big square boxes both sides of the nose and rear fuselage of MH-60R)(Blip enhance also probably only on MH-60R). - But RWR (APR-39) presente in both variants. - ALE-47 chaff/flare and ALQ-144 DIRCM present in both variants. - MAD deleted in MH-60R (No mention of MAD in the brochure, and http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...raft/sh-60r.htm "The MAD gear will be deleted". Also, MAD was deleted in the definitive P-8 Poseidon design, because SAM-equipped submarines determinates the use of Stand-Off ASW weapons, as Longshot HAAWC)(MH-60S neither, it not have ASW tasks). - 25 sonobuoys only in MH-60R (page 28). - Hellfire missile in both variants (probably not Penguins, not mentionated in the brochure). - 4xASW torpedoes in MH-60R? (page 16)

Now for a little time at home, with a good screen. Yes, in the brochure http://www.sikorsky.com/StaticFiles/Sikors...WK_Brochure.pdf - I see provision for Hellfires and photos, but no mention to Penguins. - And clearly, MH-60S has not radar. Also, I've confirmed in my own notes: HSM- Squadrons complement, in dotation for the CVN and her escort ships (12 helos in the CVN, rest mostly on escorts): 11xMH-60R+ 8xMH-60S

And also some minor evidences but continuous in time of Hezbollah penetrating in the region from some years ago (old and dubtious news reports, but also mentionated from a anti-terrorism seminar in Granada in 2006, after that, very limitated news from a limitated press freedom in Venezuela): http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1773483/posts More sources in Spanish language: http://www.elrevolucionario.org/rev.php?articulo38 http://brechner.typepad.com/jose_brechner/...ica-latina.html http://noti.hebreos.net/enlinea/2008/03/23/2620/ http://www.ceiuc.cl/index.php?opc=154&id=277

I think MH-60S is basicallly a transpor/assault/VERTREP/CSAR/MCM variant, to replace CH-46 Sea Knight. And it has not radar. Photographic evidence: http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/mh_60s/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_SH-60_Seahawk Looking for data with a bad internet conecction and a very reflective screen (al fresco with gin-tonic) I find this confuse table and comments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_...Master_Plan.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unite...ombat_Squadrons http://www.sikorsky.com/StaticFiles/Sikors...WK_Brochure.pdf (not mention of radar neither missiles, some photos confusing, with MH-60S and MH-60R). http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...craft/ch-60.htm http://www.sikorsky.com/Products/Product+D...0001382000a____ . From my own tables, without referenced sources, but based in some historical carrier complements (sources: various magazines): Previous complement of CVN HS- Squadrons: 6xSH-60F+2xHH-60H Also, from some years ago, the dotation of the present and future HSM- Squadrons, in dotation for the CVN and her escort ships (sources: also historical carrier wings published in various magazines: 11xMH-60R+8xMH-60S (late I will constate it at home).

Very great effort, thank you very much

Unbeliable and improbable for me. Also, a Kirov probably is a violation of the Lanchester's Square Law, hehehe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanchester's_laws

Yes, very impressive images on the TV video I saw ...

Yes, but I'm thinking in that issue from yesterday, and more time ago. I'm sure the latest dipping sonars (and sonabuoys, as SQQ-77) are convergenze zone capables, and we must reflect it in the databases. More later, now I'm going to my workplace About the Convergence Zone capability of SSQ-77 VLAD: http://www.sonobuoytechsystems.com/pdfs/Q77C2-2-10.pdf I assume the contemporary dipping sonars are also CZ capables, but I don't find none reference

Yes, but I'm thinking in that issue from yesterday, and more time ago. I'm sure the latest dipping sonars (and sonabuoys, as SQQ-77) are convergenze zone capables, and we must reflect it in the databases. More later, now I'm going to my workplace

Yes, it's not a good name for me, not match very much to a transport plane, perhaps for a very hypotetical gunship variant ... this strange name not sembles a good omen. I like more some descriptive name as Heracles (Greek name of Hercules, hehehe, and also for the Handley Page H.P.42 Heracles), Loadmaster, Eurocarrier, Kangaroo, Marsupiale II (as the Savoia-Marchetti SM.82), Gigant II (as the Me-323), Elephant or Olifant (yes, I known is the name of a South African variant of the MBT Centurion) or similar. Also, grizzly it's not a easy or popular word in Europe (at least in Spain, there's not a spanish equivalent word to Grizzly and Grizzly is not of easy pronunciation in spanish, and in Spain are other bear species, Eurasian Brown Bear/Oso Pardo Iberico/Ursus Arctos Pyrenaicus/). And I see the taxonomic name of Grizzly is .... Ursus Arctos Horribilis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly_Bear http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly_Man http://www.faunaiberica.org/?page=oso-pardo-iberico

I also say Ouch ! and Reouch ! because the propose of killing the Tornadoes ! In short, a future defenceless UK.

Yeah, thanks to everybody, but I afraid the World Cup victory can't resolve the spanish identity question. And in Spain, we habitually EAT the octopus http://www.jamieoliver.com/foodwise/article-view.php?id=1433

I think Kcdusk mean a small ship is harder to detect than a big ship. And yes, as in the real world, a small inflatable boat without electronic emissions is a very small target, almost indetectable by electronic surveillance methods (for the radar is a very small target and for passive ESM theorically undetectable, it has not electronic emissions, perhaps can be detectable the electronic emissions of the spark-plug or the engine at very short range), visually and IR/electroptically it's also a very hard target (it's very small and it's between the waves), his acoustic signature is also small (and it can have a electric/noise reducted engine or not engine at all) and in the other extreme, a big warship, as a CV, CG, DD, FF (stealth considerations aside) has a big electronic (also with the radars and communications inactive), visually/IR/electroptic and acoustic signature, and it's habitually far more easily detected.

I've the memory of saw a platform ship in the USN Proceedings magazine but I'm not sure, some years ago, as in: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hea..._submarine.jpeg Another similar picture: http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2...sian_submarines