pmaidhof

Tony, where are you time zone-wize, I think that you are one hour earlier than me as I looked up St Paul MN on an online calculator? Also what is your earliest and latest start time for Saturday's festivities. You, Sir, are the key.

Two more possibles...one Europe, the other north America. Won't know until day of. We'll start small with the capability to add forces.

And then there were four, well, almost four. One additional player committed, call only went out this morning to the TacOps' list, so should be more. How many remains to be seen.

Rangers-Penguins, Goalie - Rangers Rangers cannot take any senseless penalties, Penguins' powerplay is too effective. Penguins defense not as good as Devils, Ranger snipers need to step up and score early and often.

Noted Let's see who if any other contributors/lurkers fess up and join. BTW, one can even observe the CPX without actually participating. You do need TacOps to do so however.

Gentlemen, While this is a Harpoon/Naval Warfare site, over time my persistent efforst to promote TacOps has finally gained some traction. Are any of you interested in a Command Post Exercise? This can be conducted one of two ways, the preferred method is everyone has TacOps and it is run as a network game, hosted by me, and communications done by use of mIRC or similiar client. Should the majority of you be intererested, but not have TacOps, and unable to download it for about $25 US, we could go the old route which is only the umpire needs TacOps, the rest of you would need the mIRC connection and a print out of the map that will be used. A player then gives his orders/intent to the umpire who then inputs the orders, runs the turn and then reports back with Sitreps, Spotreps, and colorful commentary. I have a scenario and custom map complete. Tony has indicated a desire to have it run this weekend, i.e. Saturday. Please let me know if there is interest to take command of a virtual battalion and employ it in conjunction with other Harpoon and TacOps fans. Please indicate if you have TacOps, and an IRC capability. TacOps Patch to TacOp v4.0.6 AH mIRC dot com S/F, Pete

The Montreal-Boston game was interesting to watch, as long as you weren't a Bruin fan. Regarding the Capitals - Flyers game, aside from a Ranger playoff win, there's not much better than a Flyer playoff loss then perhaps an NY "Icelander" playoff loss, but then again how often does that happen anymore (make the playoff's that is).

Well there's always the (North) Stars...or is that still a sore subject?

Well, at least we'll get to see a hard-fought Game 7.

Regarding the Brodeur-Avery love-hate relationship - huh, no handshake last night. From February 2007, keep in mind it's a Devils broadcast Doc Emerick and Glenn "Chico" Resch.

Say good night Devils..."Good Night Devils."

From the for what it's worth file... Sean Avery antics rate in the big picture Thursday, April 17th 2008, 8:37 PM McIsaac/Getty Sean Avery can only help NHL in ratings game. The same question has exited the mouths of inquiring minds for countless years: When is the National Hockey League going to to consistently generate TV ratings higher than those produced by the Emergency Broadcast System? Don't expect any answers here. Far greater minds, employed for the express purpose of extricating the NHL from the ratings toilet, are working to figure all this out. Still, in a snapshot kind of way, there comes evidence of a difference-making factor, albeit one Gary Bettman & Co. cannot mass produce and probably don't like. Hockey, mostly because fighting is part of the game, has always had freak-show appeal. But judging by hockey's anemic TV ratings, guys pounding on each other has never really corraled and held casual fans, the key element in determining whether a sport is going to get higher ratings than a Billy Mays HandySwitch infomercial. Live sporting events were the original reality TV. Yet "reality" was confined to what's happening on a playing field. What would happen if a team had a particular player whose personality was aligned with the "stars" of current reality TV programs? A player whose life, publicly played out, became a viable and entertaining subplot to the game he plays. Enter Sean Avery. The gossip columns often reveal what Celebrahoney he's dating. He landed on the front page of the Daily News (Mark Messier was the last hockey player to be seen there, when he retired) when his name and cell phone number showed up in the records of Maison de L'Amour, a "midrange" prostitution service. When Avery is talking - which he isn't right now - he does not hold back an opinion. (When asked why he had not signed a new Rangers contract, he said: "It's the moo-lah, doo-lah.") Even when Avery's in Greta Garbo mode he still "speaks" his mind. Like the other day, when he flipped off a Ch.4 camera. In the arena, not only is Avery a major irritant to the opposition, but a creative one. That "faceguarding" maneuver on Martin Brodeur inspired hours of sports talk. Much of it from talkies who are allergic to ice. Avery created a buzz. That's good for the sport, especially in this town where, for the masses and media decision-makers, hockey is not even a blip on the radar. Avery can play. Nonetheless, there's always an undercurrent about his teammates not liking him because he's a distraction. That's part of his mystique, too. All this stuff, capped off by his stick-waving antics with Brodeur, has people outside of hockey's hard-core fan base tuning in just to see what Avery might do next. The attention Avery has drawn can't hurt from a ratings standpoint. (The Rangers' playoff ratings are up over last year's first round.) (Page 2 of 2) "In a perverse sort of way, Avery is good for TV ratings," said Neil Smith, the former Rangers GM who presided over the team when it won the Stanley Cup and was a legit ratings magnet. "But I'm sure if somebody stood in front of the goalie and pulled his pants down that would attract attention, too." This is why, when they discuss their ratings problem and strategies to deal with it, NHL suits are not likely proposing any marketing campaigns featuring Avery. Smith described the NHL's culture as "pretty conservative." He said it is populated by "rule followers." That's why stars such as Pittsburgh's Sidney Crosby or Washington's Alexander Ovechkin are designated standard-bearers. "Avery is an oddity. He really is," said Smith, who is working as an analyst for Versus during the playoffs. "He's been this way, way back to when he played junior hockey. This is not an act. He's done outrageous things and said outrageous things his entire career." While not being as freaky or distracting, Avery is reminiscent of another sports "oddity" - Dennis Rodman. While David Stern did not make The Worm the centerpiece of any NBA marketing campaigns, the commissioner did not discourage any local marketing of Rodman. A giant Rodman billboard in Chicago, where the color of his hair regularly changed (on the billboard, too), still comes to mind. Rodman contributed to five NBA title teams (twice with Detroit, three times with Chicago). If the Rangers go deep into the playoffs, even win the Stanley Cup, Avery's "reputation" will be further magnified and enhanced. Glen Sather, or any other GM for that matter, will not be factoring Avery's quirky marquee value into the equation determining what a team is willing to pay him. His contract expires at the end of the season. Avery is looking for $4.2 million per year. The Rangers are offering $2.5 million per. Smith believes Avery is going to get big money somewhere. "When he gets that money, when he gets that contract, expectations will change. That's when everything will change," Smith said. "Now, Avery is still a novelty." Absolutely made for TV. braissman@nydailynews.com NY Daily News here

He's an agitator....but he's my agitator.

Washington Times April 17, 2008 Pg. 1 Taiwan Strait Tension Cools Off China issued warning to U.S. By Bill Gertz, The Washington Times The United States sent three aircraft carrier strike groups to waters around Taiwan after China told U.S. officials last year there was high risk of a military incident after Taiwan's March 22 presidential election, according to Pentagon and military officials. One strike group has been redeployed to the Persian Gulf since the failure of an election-day referendum strongly opposed by Beijing, but two groups remain near the island, the officials said. The Chinese warning, described in a March 31 Pentagon report to Congress, said the danger period would continue until the inauguration of the new Taiwan government next month. Chinese Embassy Press Counselor Wang Baodong said last night that his government thinks the situation in the Taiwan Strait is "a bit more relaxed" since the defeat of the referendum, which Beijing saw as a step toward independence. "But we still think that the situation is very sensitive and complicated," he said. Mr. Wang declined to comment on the deployment of the three aircraft carrier strike groups, led by the USS Kitty Hawk, the USS Nimitz and the USS Abraham Lincoln. The American military officials said U.S. fears had been heightened shortly before the election, in which a pro-independence party's presidential candidate was defeated, because U.S. intelligence agencies determined that Chinese mobile short-range missile units within range of Taiwan had been moved to a heightened alert status. The activity was interpreted as a signal that China might try to intimidate the Taiwan government and people with missile test firings, as occurred before their 1996 presidential election, or in the worst case, an actual attack. China has between 900 and 1,000 missiles deployed within range of the island that Beijing considers a breakaway province. The Chinese warning was described in an 11-page report on U.S.-China military exchanges sent to Congress two weeks ago from Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England. Chinese officials described the Taiwan Strait situation as "increasingly dangerous" during one such military exchange in 2007, the report said. "Chinese officials assessed as 'high,' the risk of an 'incident' occurring during the time between the March 2008 election and the May 2008 Taiwan presidential inauguration, and called on the United States to make more direct and open statements opposing the referendum [on United Nations membership] at higher levels than the United States has previously issued," the report said. The referendum asked whether the island's government should seek to join the United Nations under the name Taiwan, instead of its formal name the Republic of China, a move Beijing regarded as a step toward formal independence. The vote failed to approve the measure. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said the concerns about Chinese military activity in the Strait were mainly focused on the referendum. "We were taking appropriate precautions leading up to the vote last month in Taiwan," Mr. Morrell said. "We are pleased that since then tensions have diminished considerably, but they will remain, albeit at a much lower level, until the inauguration." The large display of naval firepower has gone largely unnoticed in the U.S. press, but state-run Chinese news media have called the carrier deployments saber rattling. The Kitty Hawk strike group is deployed to waters northeast of Taiwan and the Nimitz strike group is in the region southeast of the island, according to defense officials. The Lincoln and its escort warships currently are near Singapore on the way to the Persian Gulf. A Pacific Command spokesman had no comment, but noted that Adm. Timothy Keating, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, addressed the Taiwan Strait tension during House Armed Services Committee testimony March 12. Adm. Keating said he hoped the referendum would fail because "if it passes, China will likely take some significant umbrage at the passage and their response is unpredictable." "We are prepared for various alternatives at the Pacific Command, military options," Adm. Keating said. "We have forces that are positioning in anticipation of potential activity. I do not foresee it happening, but the Chinese have made it clear to us that they view this referendum with some concern. Should it pass, their response is unpredictable and it could potentially include a military option." Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the report to Congress raises questions on why the Pentagon wants to increase military exchanges with the People's Liberation Army. "Is there still a 'high' risk of an 'incident,' or PLA attack against Taiwan leading up to the May 20 presidential inauguration? If there is, then why is the administration planning a 68 percent increase in U.S. military contacts with the PLA?" Mr. Fisher said. The report on military exchanges made no mention of China's refusal to allow the Kitty Hawk to make a scheduled port call in Hong Kong for Thanksgiving Day, or its earlier refusal to permit two U.S. warships to seek shelter from a storm in Hong Kong. The report said China canceled eight scheduled exchanges to protest U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, but concluded that exchanges last year showed "positive momentum."

Navy asserts LCS set for summer delivery By Christopher P. Cavas - Staff writer Posted : Thursday Apr 17, 2008 9:01:01 EDT The Navy’s first Littoral Combat Ship remains on track for delivery this summer, service and shipbuilder officials said, belying a blogger’s claim that the ship will be a year late. “We’re on track for trials beginning in May. We’re on track for a summer 2008 delivery,” said Diana Massing, a spokeswoman for Lockheed Martin. “LCS 1 starts builder’s trials next month and is scheduled to deliver in August 2008,” declared Lt. Cmdr. John Schofield, a Navy spokesman. The statements contradict a claim by Internet blogger Tim Colton that the Freedom (LCS 1) “will now probably not be delivered before the spring of 2009, if then and if ever.” Colton referred to “a mass gathering of incompetent people” this week at Marinette, Wis., where the ship is under construction by Marinette Marine. The ship, Colton said, suffers from “endless test failures, mostly involving this simple ship’s ludicrously complicated engineering plant.” The Freedom has a new power plant layout featuring two Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines and two Fairbanks Morse Colt-Pielstick diesels. This is the first MT30 gas turbine installation for the Navy, which has previously relied on General Electric LM2500 gas turbines to power its warships. Massing declined to comment on any specific issues with the power plant tests. “We’re methodically testing this power plant because it is unique,” Massing said. “Because we’re still in a competition, I can’t discuss specific issues.” Lockheed, she declared, remains “confident in our propulsion plant. We’re confident in our ship and excited to get out to trials in the spring.” The Freedom is about 82 percent complete, Allison Stiller, the Navy’s top shipbuilding official, told the Senate on April 8. “She’ll go to builders’ trials here in May.” General Dynamics, Lockheed’s competitor in the LCS program, also is moving ahead with its ship, the Independence (LCS 2). Stiller said the ship is about 68 percent complete, and Austal USA, the ship’s builder, is planning to put the Independence in the water next Saturday at its Mobile, Ala., shipyard. Delivery is expected in December, Stiller said. The LCS program has suffered from severe cost overruns, concurrent design-and-build scheduling and overoptimistic cost estimates and scheduling. The Navy plans to compare the Freedom and Independence and choose a common design in 2010. A total of 55 LCS ships are planned. Find Navy Time article here.

Rangers up 3-1 in the series now that Game 4 just ended 5-3. Very physical game. Refs seemed to miss a lot but I guess with all the bodies flying around, they are bound to miss something. Rule of the rest of the season, "there are worse things than putting it on goal"

Will try and avoid this tonight, Game 4 at MSG. A change from years past is that I now have access to the channel formerly known as the Outdoor Life Network, now known as "versus" which still is a messed up name. What marketing guru came up with this, and it unintentional mental linkage to a religious channel.

Line of Departure Reiview of HCE by Jim Werbaneth.

He's an agitator....but he's my agitator.

I was thinking of re-establishing the previous year's thread. How bout my Rangers. Up 2-1 on the Devils. Hope the whole Sean Avery - NHL's "let's make up a new rule interpretation" does not prove to be a series shifting event.

That makes sense, i.e. no firing on the move. Though when playing against Red 120mm SP mortars in solitaire, they seemed to have that ability. Is there a direct fire option? I also have questions about 'splitting' company markers into their component units. Is there any way to do so without disgorging infantry squads from their respective vehicles? Let me check when I get home, I believe that there is an OPFOR SP Mortar variant which is an "automatic" motar, that may be the one that you faced earlier. About breaking down company markers without disgorging troops, that one bug-a-boo in TacOps. For example, having a Mechanized Infantry Company, I find that one must not only split into mech platoons, but I must split the rifle company marker down into three platoons, and more often then not I have to then break down the MG, SAM, and AGL sections in order to fit everyone who came out of a vehicle to have a seat going forward. It is possible, just not readily apparent on the first go around. It has been a long time user request to be able to join non-like markers into a total unit marker, the Red regimental reconnaissance company had two platoon markers one BMP and BRDM, they should be working in concert.

But it builds character. Movement orders to the SP mortars are most likely overtaken by fire mission. I recall them firing at the cyclic-rate throughout the battle. I will conduct some tests using Bernards set up and some TRP attacks and see what transpires. Who knows what a 220mm MLR ICM strike or two would have done to the defenders. Not knowing the the finer points of TacOps fire support only comes through execution. No fault of your own. I'm sure that won't occur again.

Glad you enjoyed it. Hope to do something again in the coming weeks. Although artillery against a moving target is often folly, Supporting Arms, Supporting Arms Supporting Arms. Blue only had four LAV-AT, and eight HMMWV TOW mounts. Blue was not moving them around too much. Both of these guys are highly susceptible to indirect fire of any type. The problem here was two-fold, IMO, (1) spotting the launchers and (2) getting rounds on them.

Attack on Rommerbach The basis of this scenario is the Tactical Decision Game #98-10, written by Major John F. Schmitt, USMCR, and published in the October 1998 Marine Corps Gazette. http://www.mca-marines.org http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/PDF/9810.pdf This battalion level scenario was thought to lend itself to a two-person network game as the host/umpire is required to coordinate the entry of one side’s forces, and “feed” information to the other side in way to shape the battle along the original intent of the “What do you do now Colonel?” Tactical Decision Game. It could be described as more of a kriegsspiel type of scenario, how will one side react, than a knock-down drag-out battle royale. TacOps v4.0.6[AH] Map981c – currently unreleased, my interpretation of the graphic found withinTDG#98-10. In an effort to avoid wide open plains, and ending up in a a massive ATGM-fest, I over-compensated and coded all E0 as Rough1, towns as Rough2, all E1 as Rough3, and all woods as Rough4. As it turned out, the road net became “the” high speed avenue of advance” and if it could be blocked, Red would have virtually no chance of achieving its objective. Blue: Bernard Cousin Red: Brad Leyte Host: Pete Maidhof Observers: Tony Eischens, “Brains”, Matt “Rattler” Olmer Preferences will be: Arty Smoke defeats Thermals - Checked No Vehicle smoke grenades defeat thermals - Checked Yes All OPFOR Tanks have thermals - Checked No All OPFOR ATGMs have thermal sights - Checked No Improved OPFOR warheads - Checked No Firing Units are always spotted - Checked No No enemy OOB Reports - Checked yes Max Normal Vis: 2000 Max Thermal Vis: 2500 Blue Orders: Orientation: Six weeks ago, the country of Red attacked it neighbor, a former province of Red, quickly advancing throughout the countryside. Host Nation requested emergency assistance from the United States. The US quickly dispatched a Marine Expeditionary Brigade. Upon the Brigade's arrival, it combined with the Host Nation's forces. Two weeks ago, the combined US/Host Nation forces launched a counter attack which has push the Red Forces back on the border. The Main Supply Route toward the border is Highway 7. The border is 30km northwest of the town of Jennau. Situation: You are a Lieutenant Colonel commanding a task force of roughly battalion strength that includes 2 US Marine light armored reconnaissance (LAR) companies, Alpha and Bravo each with a section of anti-tank variants; a TOW section; and 2 host-nation Marine companies, one company of M60 tanks, the other company of mechanized infantry in AAV-7’s. The host-nation Marines are reasonably well trained and can generally be relied upon to accomplish basic tasks with a reasonable amount of supervision. The terrain is rolling farmland punctuated by small villages and wooded areas. Enemy forces have invaded the host nation from the Northwest. The Combined Marine Forces (CMEF), of which your task force is a part, are advancing generally northwest along Highway 7, clearing the area of enemy forces in order to restore the border. Your task force has been ordered to break off from the Highway 7 axis and advance south-southwest from Jennau through Ostglossen and Glossen, to Rommerbach and Schilte to clear any enemy forces in zone. Intel indicates that as of 48 hours ago an enemy reinforced mechanized company was reported in Schilte, while Rommerbach appeared to be unoccupied save for periodic mechanized patrols. You have a battery of artillery in direct support. Cobras and fixed wing close air support will be based on priority. You have moved out with Alpha in the lead, followed by mech, tanks, TOWs, and Bravo in the rear. Your lead company has reached the outskirts of Glossen without any enemy contact. You intend to order Alpha to move on Rommerbach while you continue with the HN mech company, the HN tank company, the TOWs, and Bravo toward the enemy confirmed in Schilte. You have instructed your Operations Officer to establish your forward Combat Operations Center in Glossen and your XO to bring up the Main COC from Jennau to Glossen. In order to “set the stage”, I had prepared a number of messages from Higher HQ to feed to the Blue CO; one announcing an unexpected, major coordinated attack 15-20km NW of the actual map, along Highway 7, a second urgent message ordering Blufor to defend the overall force’s left flank and MSR by seizing both Rommerbach and Schilte. Red Orders: Orientation: You are the commander of 2nd Mechanized Rifle Battalion. Six weeks ago RED invaded the renegade province of Blue. During the initial advance, Red forces pushed Blue forces back, inflicting heavy losses. Blue requested help from the United States, which dispatched a Marine Expeditionary Brigade. US forces quickly flowed into the country and soon joined forces with BluFor to create a combined force. The reinforced Blue forces was able to halt our forces and then began an offensive of their own. Red has permitted this advance, slowly giving ground, planning to have the Blue forces overextend themselves, and that is when we will strike. The terrain is rolling farmland punctuated by small villages and wooded areas. Regimental Order Situation: The Main RedFor has launched its attack on BluFor. A significant engagement is occurring 15-20km NW of Jennau along Highway 7. Highway 7 is the enemy's Main Supply Route (MSR). Our regiment is detached from the Main RedFor, and is getting into positions roughly along a line of Rommerbach-Schilte. Your battalion (2nd) is approximately 5km west of Rommerbach (off-map). 1st Battalion is currently screening the regiment's front. Of note to you is that there is a 1st Bn mechanized company, in prepared positions, in Schilte, and that we have had periodic mechanized patrols through Rommerbach, which shows no sign of the enemy. Be prepared to conduct a flanking attack in order to seize Jennau and block traffic Highway 7. Expect enemy reconnaissance forces with a mission of protecting the their MSR. Friendly: Higher: Attack and clear enemy in zone. Adjacent: Your flanks are open. Supporting: There is 1x Battery of 152mm artillery, and 1x of 220mm MLR. Mission: O/O Regiment will attack and seize Regimental Objective 1. Intent: It is the Regimental Commander's intent to quickly and violently seize RO1 in order to prevent enemy movement along Highway 7, effectiely isolating those enemy forces to the northwest. Tasks: 1st Battalion (notional): Prepare for and along passage of lines for both 2nd & 3rd bn's. Be Prepared To detach the mech company in Schilte to 2nd Bn. 2nd Battalion: O/O conduct mechanized attack along the line Rommerbach-Jennau. You are the main effort and have priority of fires. You have 3rd Battalion on your right. Your left flank is open. 3rd Battalion: (notional) O/O conduct mechanized attack. Coordinating Instructions: Regimental Objective 1 = Jennau REDFOR Task Organization 2nd Mechanized Rifle Battalion: 1x Mechanized Rifle Battalion (BMP-2) reinforced with 1x T-72M Company. You can place 3x Artillery Target Reference Points before the start. What happened: Blue’s lead element began just east of Glossen. Red has opcon of a mechanized infantry company dug-in in Schilte, and the Regimental Reconnaissance Company entering from the west edge along the road to Rommerbach. After a quick review of the map, Bernard correctly identified Glossen as being the key terrain, and decided killing enemy from that position achieved his mission of protecting the force’s left flank, despite not seizing either Rommerbach or Schilte. Brad’s recon advanced, exchanged some fire with Bernard’s lead elements and then skirted north of Rommerbach and attempted to go cross country across the northern part of the map to interdict Highway 7. Both Higher HQ messages urged Bernard to push beyond Glossen to no avail. Brad also sortied out of Schilte in an attempt to draw him out. Seeing how the engagement was going to play out, Brad’s main body arrived on map along the road to Rommerbach and he attempted to force Glossen. The combination of my limited visibility decision, a moving force vs a stationary force in the restrictive terrain, resulted in the virtual decimation of RedFor. In retrospect, it appears that, rightfully so, the stationary force should be at that significant advantage. Red was reinforced with an additional battery of 220mm MLR and was given access, by pin, to his air support. Blue was offered, but declined any additional support expressing his understanding of the main forces plight. Lessons Learned: Canned scenarios such as this one may not be the best example of a free-play scenario. Much effort went to set the conditions that may have made this a “fairer” fight for Red. Terrain and visibility were set way too restrictive. All my fault. Network Hosting Questions: What actions by a Host/Umpire, in between turns, will result in a sitrep being required to be sent to the players? Is there a way for a Host/Umpire to send a sitrep without overwriting a players orders/waypoints? Observations: It turned out that RedFor CO, a relatively new TacOps player, did not have a complete understanding of the use of his three artillery target reference points. Time and again, his artillery and MLR strikes were “so close but…” It is my belief that had the artillery support at the hand of RedFor been effectively employed, or if perhaps St. Barbara had smiled more often, it could have severely degraded BluFor which was then concentrated in and around Glossen. As it was, BluFor’s artillery and TOW’s tore through ReDfor’s BMP-2’s. At one point RedFor CO asked rhetorically if his BMP-2’s were made of paper-machet. In the end, Bernard had selected the key terrain and held on for the ride. Brad also aware that victory would be along the road net and through Glossen went in head first. Thanks to all of the participants. Sorry for such a simplistic scenario. It had initially appeared to be worthy. Hopefully the players and/or observers can add from their perspectives.

NICE I've been telling you guys this for years now.