pmaidhof

Sounds good. Who, what, where. You may have momentarily confused me av8rMongo Paul K. I'll review tonight and forward you my deployments off line.

I was thinking the same thing. !

I pretty certain that you can download v2.7 from www.hpssims.com I have not DA'd for a couple on months now so I don't have an immediate retreat answer for you. I do have an enormous student/user guide that I can dig out over the next few days to see if there is any insightful retreat parameters or other relevent information. I'll post it here.

Either or, doesn't matter to me, but if nobody can decide I'll try the Soviets.

Have High Tide? I do.

Is this still a "go". Should the prospective players concentrate on any particlar High Tide or Harpoon 4.1 procedures or data?

Research begins on new anti-ship missile By Philip Ewing - Staff writer Posted : Monday Jul 13, 2009 6:34:55 EDT Find NavyTimes article here. Even as some Navy commanders quietly worry about the potential threat from foreign anti-ship missiles, fewer American warships have gone to sea in the past decade with anti-ship weapons of their own. But that might change. Surface ships could get a powerful weapon to use against surface targets as part of an experimental program announced in late June — the first new U.S. anti-ship missile in a quarter-century. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research issued a $10 million contract to defense giant Lockheed Martin on June 30 to begin work on a “Long Range Anti-Ship Missile.” If the project moves forward, the Navy could begin buying an advanced, high-speed missile that would ride in cruisers’ and destroyers’ Mk 41 Vertical Launch System tubes. In a statement, DARPA spokeswoman Jan Walker said the goal was to develop a weapon that can think and hunt without much help from its firing ship. Today, the only anti-ship missile in the surface fleet is the RGM-84 Harpoon, carried in X-shaped racks on the sterns of cruisers and early-model destroyers. The Navy withdrew the anti-ship versions of its BGM-109 Tomahawk missiles in 1995, converting them to the land-attack variant now in cruisers’ and destroyers’ VLS tubes. Many of today’s newer destroyers have no Harpoon launchers and, as such, no anti-ship missiles. Instead, if the ship needed to sink an enemy ship at long range, it could launch a helicopter armed with Harpoons, AGM-119 Penguins or AGM-114 Hellfire missiles. Attack jets also can carry anti-ship missiles. U.S. commanders became wary of ship-launched anti-ship missiles in exercises in the 1980s, during which they missed or hit neutral ships about as often as they found their targets, naval weapons expert Norman Friedman said. The weapons suffered from the classic problem of needing good information about their targets. Friedman said he was skeptical about the prospects for DARPA and ONR’s new missile. Although sensors have gotten better in the age of unmanned aerial vehicles and higher-tech satellites, the classic target-finding problem still remains, he said. “There are constant efforts to make hypersonic missiles — you see claims about them — but they don’t seem to go anywhere.” Who has Harpoons? Newly built Navy surface combatants were outfitted with Harpoon anti-ship missiles until 1999, with the commissioning of the destroyer Porter, the last Flight II Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Starting with the first Flight IIA ship, Oscar Austin, the Navy deleted that feature from new destroyers. So that ship through the as-yet-unnamed DDG 115 do not or will not carry Harpoon missiles.

Having been bumped for unrelated reasons, it did cause a re-read...a tense, yet enjoyable scenario with a somewhat plausible result.

Also it is nice that it is considered ordnance so it can be issued to and employed by "any" rifleman.

Jon, I hesitate to commit at the moment as I recently have for PeterG's Kola Strike. I'll have to see how that scheduling plays out. Pete

Well the "Fathers Day Fairy" stopped by on sunday and left a "like-new" copy of Tillman's Sixth Battle. I look forward to delving in but not before I complete Clash of Cavalry, The Battle of Brandy Station, which is just about to explode after a couple of chapters of character and unit development as well as Horse Cavalry 101. I look forward to finally reading Sixth Battle.

Hi Eric, From the above referenced person: "No can do! The Max Loss parameter is losses sustained in a single turn, by the way. Typically, units that lose 30% are considered combat ineffective. DA is quite lenient in that regard." I hope that answers your question. Pete

Hi Eric, It has been a while for me with DA. However I am in contact with someone who uses a derivative of it in his day job and will attempt to get an answer for you. Pete

Could have possibly disassembled a little bit more, it even takes up a lane of the opposing traffic.

Of the top of my head, and you already alluded to as well, approaching at Very Low level to close on an enemy or tartet, along with the inherent dangers as played out by my terrible crash rolls a few scenarios ago. A warship only utilizing a commercial nav radar in order to deceive an enemy ESM efforts for a short period of time, possible enough to get within its weapons effective range. ...

Long Island, New York. Not close enough for a road trip. But, there's always vassal or cyberbox, neither am I completely "fluent" in however.

Hmm... Let's try 1980.

Hi KC, I think that these rules are more conceptual because the player is envisioned as a hugher commander, not the pilot. Specific aerial maneuvers and tactics are not well represented, if at all. That's my take at least. For more "in the weeds" air combat I use the old Air Superiority/Air Strike (Clash of Arms Speed of Heat/Airpower) system. Apparently there is an even more representative game called Birds of Prey which at this point makes my hair hurt whenever I look into it. For more "fun" airbattles I have also toyed with Airwar C21 and Fox Two Reheat on my gaming table. (I also have the old AH Flight Leader up in the attic.)

Peter, I'd give it a try with you and whoever else would like to join. Pete

Sure, we never really finished the last one did we?

First I've heard of this new one. I'll be on the look out for it.

I'm drawing a blank on those.

That doesn't sound surprising to me- as I've mentioned elsewhere, the AIM-54 was designed for bombers, not "Supersonic Sportsplanes". I hear ya...and that was my understanding as well. ...And another thing, where do I get one of those "lunch rolls", I sure am hungry.

Hi Cindel76, Welcome. Hopefully someone close to the unification project will be able to chime with a detailed explanation other than my interpretation which is each of the three era games, Fear God and Dread Not, Command at Sea, and Harpoon, will remain but their respective data will be "unified" across the board, so that the same procedure for determining damage points and resolving combat will be the same for all three eras/titles.

Thank you Brad.