broncepulido

I think many times the Command at Sea tables can be wrong, a lot of cases perhaps confusing radius of action with total airborne range (because that the SAC tables are very informative, and detailing the fuel use as "5 minutes taxi" or "20 minutes at máximum efficiency cruise", or similar descriptions). But also we must remember that's in ideal cases, but I think they are more close to the reality than ththe other tables (as detail the F-84F case, if not, the Thunderstreak never can hit Luxor, the same in other cases, yesterday I saw the Skywarrior ranges are the half of the reflected in the SAC tables, because that my idea sometimes can be confuse radius of action with total mission range). About the less-than-ideal cases, this can be a counter-example, also reflected in the gold data mine of Alternate Wars: http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/Letter_From_GA_ANG_on_Performance_of_F-105G,_3_September_1981.pdf

Apparently was the complete (very small and with tug! ) CVBG!!! (I think only clearly named on this almost marginal media): http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/jan/mod-clarification-sought-russian-naval-visit CV Admiral Kutznesov DD Admiral Levchenko (Udaloy-class) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_destroyer_Admiral_Levchenko LST SDK-91/Olenegorsky Gornyak (Ropucha I-class). I see the Russians are employing his landing ships as general purpose vessels, probably are reliable and cheap to opérate. Other support ships: Seagoing rescue tug Nikolai Chiker (Project 5757-class): http://www.russian-ships.info/eng/rescue/project_5757.htm AO Sergei Osipov (Boris Chilikin-class): http://www.russian-ships.info/eng/support/project_1559.htm AO Kama (Kaliningradets-class) : http://russian-ships.info/eng/support/project_ref675.htm don't confuse she with this old one (Luza-class), decommisioned 1995: http://russian-ships.info/eng/support/project_1541.htm

I think I will get not time the next months to learn to play and design scenarios in CMANO ...

Against a not yet identified Russian "crusier". And remember, HMS Defender has not anti-ship misiles, neither UK maritime patrol aircrafts or aircraft launched anti-ship missiles (only can use perhaps Alarm, Brimstone and LGBs): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

The apparently state-owned Chinese media critics to J-15 are probably a smoke curtain: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130928/DEFREG/309280009/ and other details in the article ...

A blog centered on North Korean military hardware, mostly AFVs and SP artillery, but worth of a visit: http://koreadprk.tumblr.com/

The ship entry 2604 Leander 1A (1973-1987) has the Helicopter pad aft, but lacks Runway and Plane cap=0.

My best season Greetings for all the Old Pooners community, and also the new Commanders??? community!!!

I think it was cited sometimes, but I'm not sure. A website with radar basics and details of many concrete radar types, WWII, Cold War and present times: http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/karte405.en.html

The 2D AS air defence Long Track (P-40/1S12)(1963+) radar range should be 202 nm, not 81: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-40_radar

The 2D AS air defence Long Track (P-40/1S12)(1963+) radar range should be 202 nm, not 81: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-40_radar

A very interesting site full of action photos, particularlly that's of Eddie Miller: http://uss-rangerguy.com/uss_ranger_cva_61.htm

French aircraft carriers: Clemenceau, Foch, Arromanches, Dixmude, Bois Belleau,La Fayette (but most of the carried aircraft types are present on the DB!). Arromanches and internal links: http://www.netmarine.net/bat/porteavi/arromanc/index.htm

Very interesting.

I was thinking at first, after the title, in the Velenko's MiG-25P defected to Japan!

If you perouse between the russian-ships.info entries, you will see a lot of ships are commisioned all the years between 21 and 31 December, and also a lot of them just on 31 December!!! I think it should be a case of political targets achieving or similar, also, I suspect by the same reason a lot of them probably are commisioned unfinished!!! (remember too the CVN-77 case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_George_H.W._Bush_(CVN-77)#Commissioning )

Against as is usually reported, the Essex-class carriers converted in LPH, USS Boxer LPH-4, USS Valley Forge LPH-8 and USS Princeton LPH-5, get only a máximum speed of 25 knots (not 33 knots), as four of the eight boilers were removed, and the power falled from 150000 shp to 75000 shp, as stated in Norman Friedman's "US Aircraft Carriers, an Illustrated Design History", USNI 1983, page 369, or here: http://www.navsource.org/archives/10/11/1104.htm (the navysource page reports 33 knots speed, BUT cites only 75000 shp, and that motivated me to research about the issue).

Those coastal raids of the German battlecruisers (and CR Blucher)are ever very good fodder for scenario design, culminating on the Dogger Bank encounter (other less known Dogger Bank battles other years ...): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dogger_Bank_(1915)

Russia is getting shape again ...

As the article show, I see more common points between F-35 and F-111 than between F-35 and F-4.

I only play the 2003 series scenarios.

Aside the now-almost-famous RQ-170 and RQ-180, the humble Chinese PL-5E AAM, at least employed as standard small AAM in the Pakistani JF-17, as per Air Forces Monthly December 2013. Also, in the same article about JF-17 his usual AA loadout are 2xPL-5E, 2xSD-10, and 2x1000 l DT + 2x 800 l DT, or 3x800 l DT. Employ as AShM the C802A (no Exocet), Chinese LT-2, LT-6 and LS-6 laser or GPS guided bombs, and the Brazilian MAR-1, as anti-radar missile!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAR-1

Oh, now the LCS will be really a combat asset?

McDonnell F2H Banshee variants (at this momento only present in the Cold War DB a Canadian variant, whoemployed 2xAIM-9B SideWinder from 1958, and this weapon can be implemented): F2H-2 Banshee (1949-1956): USN, 364 build, no radar. F2H-2B Banshee (1951-1956): USN, only 27 build, no radar, for nuclear strike with Mk7 or Mk8 atomic bombs. F2H-2N Banshee (1950-1956): USN, only 14 build, APS-19 radar. The F2H-2N Banshee was the first single seat carrier-based jet night fighter of the US Navy, forerunner of the ulterior all-weather fighters. 25 inches nose extension. 12 units in service in the VC-4 squadron. Not a must. F2H-2P Banshee (1950-1960): USN. 89 build. The F2H-2P Banshee was the photographic reconnaissance derivative, with 6 cameras in a three feet heated nose extension. Very successful because his high flying performances (but near ten per cent slower than standard F2H-2), extensively used in the Korean War. F2H-3/F-2C Banshee (1952-1958): USN, 250 build (including 39 exported to Canada), in-flight refuelling added (not in the Canadian ones), APQ-41 radar. The F2H-3/F-2C Banshee was an all-weather variant with APQ-41 radar, 4x20mm M3 guns changed to 4x20mm Mk12 guns, 8 feet longer fuselage and more fuel capability. Some with a upper gun deleted and replaced by a in-flight refuelling probe. Some equipped for nuclear strike role. Later (1956?) many equipped with 2xAIM-9B Sidewinder. F2H-4/F-2D Banshee (1953-1959): USN, 150 build, in-flight refuelling added, APQ-37 radar. The F2H-4/F-2D Banshee was an all-weather variant with APQ-37 radar, 4x20mm M3 guns changed to 4x20mm Mk12 guns, 8 feet longer fuselage, more fuel capability, and new jet engines with improved performances and range. Some with a upper gun deleted and replaced by a in-flight refuelling probe. Some equipped for nuclear strike role. Later (1956?) many equipped with 2xAIM-9B Sidewinder. From 1959 to 1961 only in Reserve squadrons.