pmaidhof

Is there a new url for mythweavers? I'm pretty certain they were transitioning to a new server...or is it just a short period of time they are to be off line?

Well fast forward to the end of Turn 16 last night. After linking up the western and eastern elements south of the Caspian, Scott's Soviets have finshed their consolidation as far south as Esfahan(A2732) and have apparently begun to focus on a massed, slow, movement through the mountains of Strat Hex G-06 toward the two cities, Ahvez and Abadan. It is here that much of what is left of Mark's Iranian army is setting into a defense. As the Americans go, CV-68 is conducting a painstakingly slow movement north on the Strategic map escorting the various LHA, amphib's, and transp's carrying the "heavy" forces of 24th Mechanized Division. The teeth of Soviet naval forces in the Indian Ocean have been eliminated. Once CV-68 links up with CV-65, mine sweeping in the straits will begin in earnest. Threat of Backfires is still a serious concern. Back on the operational maps, the US and Iran have begun to establish a logistics net from from Konark toward Kerman and Bushehr.

We continued last night (December 19, 2009) though Turn 8. The Soviets are tightening the noose on Tehran. I'll leave it to Mark to elaborate the Iranian ground situation. The US effort consisted of numerous special forces operations. We are agreed that it takes quite the effort to keep it all straight...and legal. After realizing a error in placing US forces in Oman (Strat K-09), probably due to starting Scenario 1 last time, the US started to shuttle forces into Bushehr from K-09 and the supplehead at Diego Garcia. A concerted effort to target the Soviet logistical network in Iran was less than satisfactory. The Eisenhower CVBG arrived, decisions need to be made on how best to employ it without suffering the same fate as Kittyhawk at the hands of Scott's backfires. The Soviet Air Defense Table sure is nasty.

Yes, happen to me more than I'd like to admit Or there are situations where the answer is mockingly right in front of me and I cannot "find" it. I'll have to take a look and hopefully respond later.

I'm willing to double, or triple up on NATO.

I'm sure a more definite answer will be forthcoming, but they are very similar, definitely related. Will be even moreso when the unification project is complete.

mythweavers still problematic to me...for the past few days

Perhaps the government does not speak for all of the people, wait a sec, that could be here.

I'd now call it intermittent connections with mythweavers for the past 24-36 hours. I have however, made the best of mine time when connected. I fear it be troublesome for some, in particular the quieter members of Team NATO.

I guess it is their, not your former shipmates - the cafe, twisted perspective.

It is my understanding that Trondheim is still unmanned. Silent Hunter will have to confirm. On that note, having trouble again logging on to Mythweavers for about the past 2hrs.

I was having a problem getting to the site most of yesterday afternoon...in the US. I got on late last night and again this morning. Must have been a hiccup.

Here is interesting fodder for scenario designers. I do not believe that it has been posted previously. A Question of Balance Pete

A very Merry Christmas to all you harpoon folks. Pete

If interested in my prior attempt, look back into 2006 in the scenario design folder under the title "AAR - Kola with a Twist Vol 1".

Yeah, but it just seems like they and their neighbors simply avoid the (past) issue instead of addressing it. They have 50 something years now of acting according to their constitution. But the fact remains that they do now have a handful of multiple thousand ton ships capable of launching rotory wing, and possibly fixed wing aircraft. Calling them destroyers or cruisers does not change their layout, loadout, or true capabilities. Eitherway, our discussion will not change their or their neighbors outlook. Happy holidays.

Well, yeah, except that a lot of the locals would object to the break with the whole "self-defense" paradigm ... Yeah, I do realize it is a constitutional issue for them, but I personally believe it is time for them to call a spade a spade.

'Through-Deck Cruisers' then, perhaps? How about them cutting to the chase and naming them CVH or Amphibious Assault Ship.

Thanks Broncepulido, Although my French is limited to about Combien du Pain, the pictures, particularly the comparison photos are great. As they say speak a thousand words. They sure don't look like destroyers to me.

Issue #37 arrived today. Just in time to rebuild some more harpoon interest prior to the upcoming MBX. Includes gaming the Iranian air defense. It vaguely reminds me of my attempt to tweak the Kola flow chart a number of years ago, but obviously greater thought, effort and research went into this. Wished for an update on Harpoon and how it is developing in line with the Trilogy harmonization process.

If you don't get any takers, some of us can double up. The NATO ships appear pretty straight forward.

The past couple of nights read about Mobile Sea Base Hercules, stationed about 25nm from Iran's Farsi Island. The converted civilian barge housed had MH-6 and AH-6 helos from the Armys TF-160 and Navy Mk III Patrol Boats. In October 1987, after a few days of surveillance a night battle was in the vicinity of a lighted navigational aid known as Middle Shoals Buoy that it was deduced the Iranians were using as an Initial Point or attack position for movement toward the MSB. During the battle two boston whaler type boats and a Boghammer were sunk. A later chapter discussed the Silkworm attack on the re-flagged Sea Isle City from Iranian held Faw Peninsula. The tanker had been left off with three other tankers off of Kuwait City by the USN escort force. A number of crewmen of Sea Isle City were injured. The US response, Operation Nimble Archer was to destroy the Iranian Rashadat oil platform complex. A Surface Action Group, SAG A comprised of USS Kidd (DDG-993), USS Hoel (DDG-13), USS Leftwich (DD-984), and USS John Young (DD-973). It was supported by USS William H. Standly (CG-32) providing air defense and USS Thatch (FFG-43) with embarked SEALS. As I earlier mentioned an interesting read.

I'm officially in. Tony...you a deputy umpire?

Look like all three players have agreed in principle to accept an "assumed" Random Polictical Event to allow for basing rights at that United Arab Emirates port. UAE forces will not activate in defense of any foreign forces at that port/airbase facility. Looking forward to more table time on Friday. Pete

Count me in...I just have to register there over at "dream weavers"...or whatever that site was again.