VCDH

The solution, as I see it, is two fold: 1. A fundamental change in the way that military operators think when conducting business. Start acting like a consumer instead of thinking "it's not my money, why should I care?". 2. Vendors need to think of the military as a consumer and not as a license to print money. 3. Make the bureaucratic process more accountable, to the same extent that operators are. 4. Change the Bureaucratic Process to remind them of their job to support the operator as opposed to fighting over rice bowls or themselves. 5. Recruit managers for the bureaucracy that will streamline the process and give them the clout to enforce it. In short, give them a job to fix the system that they so dearly hate. Accomplishing this isn't going to be easy and will probably more than a bit painful. Firing a few people [permanent people with clout, not casual or contract employees] will probably help with the transition. It will also get the point across that times are a'changing. It will also probably never happen. Later D

I see many new exotic flavors of the month. I'll run down this list and add my 2 cents.... 1. Already done, probably, see OBL raid and the tail rotor of the crashed aircraft. 2. Been there and done that. Useful for OOTW and police operations. You can be a policeman or a soldier. 3. Isn't this Future Warrior? 4. Maybe....when we occupy Iran 5. Already done 6. Isn't this the LCS? 7. Can probably agree there. Iridium is a good system but I don't know how capable it is for Video and other 4G kinda stuff 8. I think we need to spend more time on secure datalinks that can't be hijacked. Please see recent RC-170 episode. 9. yeah right....good luck. I'm sure big oil will get right on that. 10. We already have the capability for nuclear launch warning from the fUSSR. How come we can't have stationary geosynchronous reconnaissance satellite? A few things I think the list could use: 1. A high speed [hypersonic] land attack weapons family using a modular family of warheads [including a WMD payload] with a range similar to TLAM. 2. A very long range, conventionally armed ICBM type weapon launched from CONUS with good accuracy and penetration capability to go places where #1 can't. 3. A family of fixed wing, carrier launched aircraft that can provide ASW, ELINT, Tanker, and Special Forces support [in short, an S-3 type aircraft that guys can do HALOs from]. 4. Smaller, and more numerous aircraft carriers to back up the big boats for lower priority conflicts [such as in Africa]. 5. Cheap, long range stealth bombers [to keep the Air Force in business] 6. Real time offboard targeting 7. A variable yield EMP weapon to provide for local, regional, and national scale attacks. 8. New SP artillery [for the Army] 9. A new class of SSKs [yes, that's a K] for the USN. 10. Most importantly, a complete and total overhaul of the procurement process. To include non-US suppliers and remove the priority that US based suppliers get. The idea is to force US suppliers to become more competitive and to move away from the cultural idea that a government contract is a license to print money. This isn't just a US problem either. Later D

IADS is difficult to implement because of the nature of the communications network in H3. It's by no means impossible but to do it in a realistic manner will require using multiple sides and a bit of work. There is a wiki article about it: Centralized Air Defense If you have any questions, please don`t hesitate to ask. Later D

F5 is the hotkey for UnRep. Select the ship you want to refuel/replinish, then hit the weapons button on the screen [the three vertical white missiles] or select F5. The cursor will then change to a crosshair. Double click on the supply ship and the two vessels will intercept each other. Refueling will take place automatically followed by the weapons transfer screen. You will be able to reload directly to either the mounts or the magazines. Be sure to use the buttons at the bottom of the screen. Clicking on the weapon record itself will only transfer one weapon at a time, making transfer a bit cumbersome. Once you're done, hit OK and wait. Weapons transfer at a rate of one per second so if you want to reload 30 bursts to a gun magazine, then it'll take about 30 seconds. Obviously you'll probably want to load up so expect transfers to take a few minutes. This may seem a bit unrealistic but most scenarios will not avail of this feature because they are usually only a few days long at the most. A unit state editor is in the works for implementation at a later date to allow users to alter the fuel and damage state of a unit [we can already do ammunition]. Later D [who returned from holiday at 0100 last night so this post may be a bit baffed....]

There is no set level of agressiveness but you can give the AO limited direction in the orders they have. For the AO to engage a target it must have the target localized [by which I mean it must have located it's exact position], and it must know it's posture [which is automatically given to it]. You can also set the AO to either engage immediately or to close and identify [which means determining the classification of the platform] prior to engagement. Typically the AO will not engage if it can't get a fix on the target. This is usually due to using older equipment [or the player using advanced equipment] or the sensors not being turned on. I usually set all AO units to have their sensors on or intermittant except for ASW ops where passive is the best way to go until the torpedos start to fly. It could also be that you did everything right. Flying under the radar, launching at the right time, effective Iron Hand, etc. Later D

Hi, What you are seeing is a function of the propulsion model that the game uses. IRL, a ship burns more fuel at an exponential rate for a given speed. The amount of fuel the platform has does not change, just the consumption rate of the fuel. It varies by platform type, and engine type. Typically gas turbines are the worst offenders since they are basically a jet engine, which by their nature are very inefficient to begin with. In the HUD and ANW DBs, fuel consumption for ships and subs on diesels are based on their cruise range from a public reference. Subs on batteries are referenced at 5 knots. Aircraft range is based on their cruising speed at their best altitude. Keep in mind that the fuel load given that you see in the game is the time left at that speed and not a range value. So if you decide to throw the hammer down and clip along at 30 kts, then you may only get 50 hours of endurance. However in that time, you'll travel 1500nm. Given the nature of most scenarios, you probably will never have to do that. Later D

Varyag supposedly sailed today for her first sea trials. I say 'supposedly' because I'm not quite convinced that she even has a power plant in her yet. When you get down to it, the article is fairly correct. PACFLT has some time to deal with this threat. They lack numbers and probably the technology [if the size of HHQ-9 is any indication they have quite a ways to go regarding rocket technology] to face an up and ready USN battle group. ASW should be their first priority since the USN has had a number of embarrassing incidents over the last few years. Later D

Whether under her own power or under tow, Varyag left the Port of Dalian according to Xinhua News. A quick search of the various Chinese forums shows an empty bearth where Varyag was supposedly tied up. Visibility was quite poor at the time which assists in a quiet/covert departure. Xinhua reports that the initial trial won't be long and that the vessel will return to complete her 'refit' soon. Hopefully we'll be seeing some periscope photos in the near future, hopefully they'll include the tug. Later D

There are two main reasons why this is happening: 1. There are different settings for different weapons in the DB. An example would be an aircraft that carries HARMs but does not carry some sort of support pod at the same time. What happens is that the missile will lock onto a radar but you don't have a choice as to what that is. An F-16 with a HARM Targeting Pod however, will bring up a list of radars to attack. 2. [and the most likely reason] The seeker on the HARM cannot see the radar you are trying to attack. This is either because the power output of the radar is too low [such as in LPI radars] or [most likely] the altitude of the aircraft that is carrying the HARM is too low and below the radar horizon of the target. In ANW, a passive homing weapon must be able to see the target that it's trying to attack before it can launch [think getting the 'tone' for a Sidewinder AAM]. What this means is that you have to allow the weapon to 'see' the target by increasing your altitude. Of course, this allows more of the bad guys to see you, but what's life without a little fun? Later D

It's not that hard to do in ANW. There is a certain amount of abstractness involved since it's really hard to visualize anything around the horn of Africa to be a 'safe zone'. Usually convoys only travel with one escort so a massed attack would generate some results. Co-ordinating such an attack would be something else. Either way, it may be better to attack in an area less likely to expect it. Later D

There's been a few things going on with me personally lately [promotion at work, house purchase and moving] and this really compounded it to the point that I haven't been doing so hot in the last 24 to 36 hours since I heard he died. He was a gentleman and could discuss anything with anyone. I'm having some real difficulty in accepting that he's gone. All I can say right now is that wherever he is, it's definitely a better place. I'll see you on the other side old friend. D

"The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step...." I doubt that half a dozen Varyag type carriers are going to appear in the next several years. Building carriers is not that hard, nor is getting the experiance. But the time involved is something else. A Navy is a huge investment and a much more visible one compared to the other services. The seat of purpose may be on land but allowing the Red Team to land there is a major epic fail of the navy. It's easier to train 4 guys to operate a tank than it is to teach 400 to operate a destroyer. But the old Royal Navy saying still applies...."It's not defeat we face if the navy is defeated, it's starvation.". In this case from an embargo. China is a net fuel importer and closing that off would lead to a very quick escalation. So what we see here is a nation that wants to protect it's sea line of communication. As a nation that espouses communism we may like to believe that they have more nefarious motives but they aren't carrying that out with this ship..... Later D

I am in Halifax, Nova Scotia for the time being and while I have access to a better description of what you are asking, it is several decks and around 250 feet away from me at the moment.... Simply put, there's a series of scriptable features available for missions that allow the user to specify pretty much anything that he or she wants to do with regards to how platforms conduct their missions. Right down to altitude and speed and actions to take if attacked. There's a wiki page on it but its only got the bare bones of a description. When I get home [i'm up to my eyebrows in regulatory and inspection issues] I should be able to post some more information. Sorry I can't be of more help for now. Later D

This is also how VetRep works in the game. Later D

I think it's important to put things in context here.... 1. Iranian missiles cannot reach CONUS at this time. 2. Iranian missiles CAN reach other nations in South and Central America....some of them are American allies. 3. I don't have Google Earth installed on this computer [yet...stupid gov't permissions...] but IIRC the Panama Canal and Guantanamo Bay are well within range of the current inventory of Iranian missiles. 4. Missile technology isn't all that hard to improve upon....so it's only a matter of time before Iranian missiles have the capability to reach the US. The natural assumption here is to compare this to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Geopolitcally, the response was way out of proportion to the situation at the time [from the Russians stand point, it would be perfectly natural to put missiles in Cuba, there were US missiles in Turkey]. In this case there is no threat [yet]. That being said, why would the Iranian's put a missile site there? The answer is that, to them, there is something to threaten. Since Iran can't realistically threaten the US in a military way then it must be economic. That leaves the Panama Canal. Dropping IRBMs on the Canal would close it very quickly and it may cause the economies of several nations to tip back into recession. The good news is that ATBM systems can be transported fairly quickly to defend these areas. Later D