broncepulido

Ohhh, yes, I see, Star Trek VI: The Voyage Home, I almost not remembered it, hehehe

From my informed guesses and personal notes, For both ship classes: - All the no-nuclear ASROC were equipped with Mk 46 variants from 1966 (replacing Mk 44). As the Mk 46 Mod 2 was introduced in 1971 and the Mk 46 Mod 5 NEARTIP about 1979-1984, more probably both were equipped with ASROC with Mk 46 Mod 2, the same for the triple ASW TT. For the Adams: - RIM-66B SM-1MR Block V (1969), the next variant is apparently RIM-66E-1 SM-1MR Block VI (1983). - Also RGM-84A Harpoon (1977) in the GLMS launcher, the next variant is the RGM-84C Harpoon (1982). About the CG-23 USS Halsey: - Very probably the SM-1ER RIM-67A Block V (1969), the next variant was apparently the SM-2ER RIM-67B Block I (1981) (As per Conway's, all ships in the class have received SM-2ER capability by 1985, the first ship so equipped was CG-19 USS Worden, as consequence as earlier 1981, probably in this date the Halsey was not equipped with SM-2ER). I suppose that would be the date for introduction of RGM-84A Harpoon (1977) and Phalanx, but navsource it's not accesible today. More ideas if we can find some detail (I doub it): www.navsource.org not available on this moment. http://navysite.de/cg/cg23.htm http://www.halseycg2..._halsey_091.htm

Too many surprises from the Chinese this year ...

The Final Countdown?

Ask, Silent Hunter, please!

Oh, yes, I discovered the NASAMS only a while later, but I can imagine they are a higher concentration of older systems Also, when I want to mark an "I like this" about the Brad's answer, I obtain this error message "You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day" As consequence, I'm a very optimistic person

I like very much the bad movies, the others are too standard for my vicious mind

I will be too busy the next days, but very interesting scenario of one of my preferred time periods (Only caveat: the Sea Eagle was in service only from 1985).

Thinking about the Tu-22M3M, perhaps codenamed Backfire-D (it's not 100% clear): - Basically is a Tu-22M3 Backfire-C with improved systems for precision navigation/strike partially based in the capability to use GLONASS (Russian/Soviet system analog to NAVSTAR/GPS). Forget about the FLIR, was my erroneous stimate. - 30 planes to be upgraded to 2020, the first delivered in February 2012 (as stated in the September issue of Air International and other sources). Current Russian inventory of Backfire are now (2012) probably this: http://www.russiadefence.net/t820p45-fate-of-tu-22m3-engine-production-discontinued In the same forum more data about the Tu-22M3M conversion and her weapons. The new weapons will be probably: - Kh-32, a development of Kh-22 (AS-4 Kitchen) with new seeker and improved targeting capabilities: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-22 http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Strategic-Weapon-Systems/Kh-32-Russian-Federation.html - Kh-31/AS-17 Krypton. - Kh-101/Kh-555/AS-15 Kent. - Kh-38: http://www.russiadefence.net/t820p45-fate-of-tu-22m3-engine-production-discontinued http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/513/537/ - KAB-500S GLONASS (GPS) guided bombs: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/KAB-500S Also scarce data in these sites: http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2012/2/3/770/ http://www.deagel.com/Long-Range-Attack-Aircraft/Tu-22M3M_a000322002.aspx http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120131/171049406.html (probably linked to the original press release). http://warsonline.info/images/stories/news/12/08aug/tehno/tu-22m3m/ (images of "Red 37" the first upgraded plane)

Missile Threat is a very fine site. But a great number of missile data are very elusive, many times I use as resource comparatives between the Russian and German (very well organized data about Russian/Soviet weapons systems)Wikipedias, mostly about doubts about variant types performances, and other sources as the sometimes chaotic but very extensive and deep researched Encyclopedia Astronautica www.astronautix.com Also this pair of sites about nuclear weapons and missiles: Nuclear Weapon Archive (not updated from 2007, a pity): http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/Allbombs.html http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/ Strategic Air Command.com: http://www.strategic-air-command.com/

Thanks to the hint and aid-memoire of Mack, very probably the movie is Reptilicus (1961): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056405/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilicus http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Reptilicus http://godzilla.wikia.com/wiki/Reptilicus (mention about the use of depth charges against Reptilicus).

In Portugal the last days without sources for the next four days, at least, but I remember now in the last Air International: Tu-22M3M Backfire-D, I think with FLIR and new smart bombs. IOC february 2012, more in the nest days, I hope ...

On holidays and lazy: perhaps something about a Sea Serpent?

A) The Suez Canal: I suspect it's not now as important as pre-1967. After 1967 were developed very large tanker not Suez canal capable, and the World is now more dependent of them as of the pre-1967 size tankers. C) I'm not aware of the real state of the question in Cyprus, but I suspect that's also another current reality in a matter of days, if the case for Turkey is a must. D, E, F) I'dont see Turkey and Egypt as allies, the alliances between islamic and/or arabic states are little stable in time and space, and also, I suppose a historic rivalry between Turkey and Egypt, because the centuries of occupation of Egypt by the Ottoman Empire. And, as sayed, the Islamic revolution is now instaured in the governments of Egypt and Turkey, trying to blow-out the previous laicity of both States.

Only a partial answer, because I'm testing the new forum: both in Egypt and Turkey are now Islamic revolutions, with islamic parties in both governments. 10 is probably the answer for the first question for the 2016 situation.

A long time ago we have a dream, thanks for keep the dream alive Neil Armstrong.

They are people for everything, this guy makes impressive model torpedoes : http://www.pt-boat.com/torpedo/torpedo.html

Great !!! (I will be on holidays from the monday three weeks or so, with limited internet connexion, )

The "later in the day" considerations (I'm going to work now, and I'dont know when I will return today, also, I'm almost "inspired"). ONE: ASW and sonar (I think we should reserve the term "sonar" only for active SONAR or ASDIC) and hydrophones: - The midget submarines are BLIND only with periscope (as the other subs, I tested it some years ago in Harpoon Gold). - The surface warships are uncapable of detect incoming torpedoes with only active sonar, an hydrophone can represent also a torpedo lookout. - As consequence of the first two points, the game is unplayable. - If we add a simple hydrophone the situation awareness changes radically, and the midget sub adquires targets consistently at eight nautical miles. - Also, the surface warships detects, evade torpedoes and ideally counterattack the subs. - Historically we can assume all the subs and surface warships are equipped with passive hydrophones from WWOne (The original crude hydrophones are very simple and cheap instruments). That's my personal opinion, and of course can be challenged. - In this concrete case, and for other reads I think can be representative of other situations we can assume all the American warships present in the action are equipped with some hydrophone type, I've employed JK because it's the simpler and older in the WWIIDB (We can read the narrative about sonar contacts with warships teorically without sonar in this concrete action, not diferenced as active or passive, here: http://www.ww2pacific.com/japsubs.html , as example: ).- Ever the Japanese midget submarines were equipped with hydrophones. The problem, historically, is the acoustic equipment of old submarines is very rarely mentioned on books about this matter. In this concrete case we can think the Type A were without hydrophones, but it was not the case. Its an issue elude by very diverse authors, but in this concrete case is clearly mentioned as equipped with "In addition to the periscope the Ko-Hyoteki was equipped with an Echo sounder (as the author says, a compromise to the operation discretion) and a primitive non-directional Hydrophone" in the book Midget Submarines of the Second World War by Paul Kemp, Chatham Publishing/Caxton Editions 1999, page 69 and sucessive and in concrete page 74, it's a data hard to find because the book structure). - I assume this crude hydrophone has not CZ capability and shorter range than the "Midget Hydropone" for German midgets present in the DB, and I also employed the JK for the Japanese midgets,and the situation and game changes radically ... if not, I'm sure after port penetration, the subs sees nothing, ever the stopped battleships in the interior port - The same for other submarines, the I-400 has not sonar or hydrophones in the books, ever in a monographic book about the I-400 ! It can't be the actual case .... TWO: ASW and the game representation of depth charges: - We can use successfully the depth charges in bearing only attacks, in this scenario with the Catalinas mainly. - In my personal DBs I'v reduced the PH of depth charges from 15% to 1% to 3%, and succesfully also. - I'm in retard, more later ...

Thanks for your feedback and the beautiful map! I was thinking also in the other raids of the minisubs (I'm not sure if they running semisubmerged in combat, but at Pearl Harbor entrance, as in the Cavite map of HCE, with only 12 meters deep, It was probably the case, if not the USS Ward cant shot historically at the minisub. I've read a lot about the case this week but they're not a lot wrote about the minisub attack, and discrepancies in the submerged speed of the minisub, between 19 and 24 knots). As in other cases (as Western Sahara) I dont built a map to avoid complications in the game charge for newbies. Also, as the WWII is nowadays limited in extension and some ASW details, I dont need a full historical map when I've not full historical ships As I say, it's only an essay to test the DB limitations about WWII and WWI, I've some ideas and experiences on it, after in the day I will comment it with more time ...

File Name: Pearl Harbor Midget Submarine Action, Day of Infamy File Submitter: broncepulido File Submitted: 22 Aug 2012 File Category: WestPac Midget Submarine Action in the Pearl Harbor Attack. This scenario is designed to be played from the Japanese/Red side, or the American/Blue side, but is better to play first the Japanese side. The Day of Infamy 7 December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor is almost only remembered by the Japanese carrier-based air attack, but a very controversial, analysed and with few results midget submarine attack was in course a few hours earlier, and it was near to denial the surprise to the main Japanese attack. Later midget submarine actions against Sidney, Madagascar and other places were also a failure, and they were as consequence redeployed as last stance coastal defence. In fact, the first shots and victory in the Pacific War was those of the DD-139 USS Ward (here represented by USS Kane) against one of the Japanese mini-submarines, sinking she. This scenario is an essay to force the limits of the GE and the DB, and of probably impossible victory for the Red/Japanese player (Some hints: one solution can be to slown down the game to 10 or 30 seconds compression and reset the height to periscope deep each time the submarine surfaces, it's possible to penetrate the port and get again periscope depth in the interior bay). As Hawaii is not present in the WestPac map, I used the wider Cavite Bay in representation of Pearl Harbor. Also, I've replaced some few ship classes or configurations with other of similar characteristics. Enrique Mas, August 2012. Picture credit: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY -- NAVAL HISTORY AND HERITAGE COMMAND http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-forn...apsh-h/ha19.htm Updated 23 August 2012: modified course of groups AES and AIS to avoid going aground. Click here to download this file

Between the future weapons Perseus, to replace Harpoon, Exocet, Storm Shadow and perhaps Apache/Scalp: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVS401_Perseus

At least a Type 997 Artisan 3D radar (HF/SS, also navigation and surface targeting): http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-R...ed-Kingdom.html http://www.deagel.com/news/BAE-Systems-ART...n000004787.aspx http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_021...e%3Da0iw07j6c_4 24xForward VLS cells counted, probably for at least Sea Ceptor CAAMM(M) (probably 4xCell): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Anti-Air_Modular_Missile Unidentified forward CIWS. Forget it !!! I see after my half-research all the provisional details are in the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_26_frigate

At least she's beautiful