Invasion of Iran - USA Ground OOB

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Radu

Good, now that you're fully on the Polemic Express, take it on PM you guys!

And to further bury this digression (thanks a lot rhinobones,would it have hurt you to use the PM facility in the first place?You talk about hurting Colin's feelings, yet you jumped like out of a frying pan on fire when Machiavellian dealings on behalf of Israel were concerned) I'm actually going to post something pertaining to the original subject.

Logistics question : What is the maximum length of a military pontoon bridge? The engineering units of the US 1st Armored div have built a 620m pontoon bridge over the Sava river in December 1995 during the intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina,so that's the longest yet, but what is the limit?

My guess is that it would ultimately depend on the strength of the current. In other words, a pontoon bridge could probably be of infinite length across a stagnant sea -- of lesser length elsewhere.

Anyway, you're obviously thinking of the Danube. For Americans, war largely serves as a pretext for two activities: to engage in orgies of production, and to solve interesting engineering problems. Odds are that if we needed to bridge the Danube, we would bridge the Danube.

[Radu]

Thanks. In the meantime I also came upon a US Field Manual relating to this very subject: river crossings.Seems like a "ribbon" pontoon bridge  si perfectly doable, if logistic-intensive. They were nice enough to include figures as well and from what I can gather, the assault phase would be tricky when considering that the Danube has an average width of 600m+ in its narrowest sections.Apparently resorting to an air assault is recommended in this situation.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Radu

Thanks. In the meantime I also came upon a US Field Manual relating to this very subject: river crossings.Seems like a "ribbon" pontoon bridge  si perfectly doable, if logistic-intensive. They were nice enough to include figures as well and from what I can gather, the assault phase would be tricky when considering that the Danube has an average width of 600m+ in its narrowest sections.Apparently resorting to an air assault is recommended in this situation.

I dunno what the details of the scenario are here, but if crossing the Danube is central to the campaign, we might try to seize the bridges intact -- perhaps as the opening blow in the campaign. Something similar to what Germany did in Holland in 1940. It could make for an interesting scenario if the US player has to decide just what risks to take in his airdrops, and the Romanian player has to allocate forces between delaying the US ground advance and crushing the US airheads.

[Radu]

Hehe...either that or Operation Market Garden.

The Grand Campaign of Close Combat II is still one of my all-timefaves exactly because of this decision making in distributing resources for attack,defence,counterattack.

[Radu]

Ok,here's a question. Why is there such a disparity between modern fighter planes (non-stealth) and modern SAMs?

I mean, even the most modern of SAMs have an anti-air attack of barely 10 while 4th Generation fighters have an air defence of 40+. Isn't that a bit unbalanced? What is the historical precedent or gameplay reason behind this?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Radu

Ok,here's a question. Why is there such a disparity between modern fighter planes (non-stealth) and modern SAMs?

I mean, even the most modern of SAMs have an anti-air attack of barely 10 while 4th Generation fighters have an air defence of 40+. Isn't that a bit unbalanced? What is the historical precedent or gameplay reason behind this?

I'd run a test scenario to see what actually happens. As it is, in non-modern scenarios, AA slaughters aircraft; one has to use the Bio-ed to hack all the AA values.

[Radu]

Well, it looks like it's the other way around in modern times. An entire battery of 6 SA-17s can't even down a lone F-15.That ain't right.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Radu

Well, it looks like it's the other way around in modern times. An entire battery of 6 SA-17s can't even down a lone F-15.That ain't right.

Well, I take it this is an American F-15. Sounds right and proper to me.

Really, AA in TOAW has a problem. The problem is that AA works as much by driving off attacking aircraft and reducing the effectiveness of their bombing as by actually shooting anything down. Until this is effectively modeled, we'll never get a satisfactory simulation of AA. Either it will slaughter attacking air forces, or it will leave them to bomb unimpeded.

I tend to see it like this. Absent effective flak, a hundred aircraft will have x effectiveness. They'll be Stukas working over the Polish army, or the USAF during 'Desert Storm.'

Opposed by some effective flak, the same aircraft might suffer only 1% losses, but their effectiveness will be maybe 50% of x -- or less.

As it is, you can never get the 'right' effect with your SAM's -- no matter what values you pick. Either they will take out a completely unreasonable percentage of the attacking aircraft or they won't impede them enough.

[rhinobones]

Typically parenthetical remarks are provided to add value or expand on the intent of the target phase. Your remark was nothing more that an ugly attempt to express contempt for the U.S. Government.

But now, since you refuse take responsibility for your words, your silence will be your answer. Maybe I’ll think of an appropriate parenthetical remark to embellish the silence.

Game over.

Regards, RhinoBones

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Typically parenthetical remarks are provided to add value or expand on the intent of the target phase. Your remark was nothing more that an ugly attempt to express contempt for the U.S. Government.

But now, since you refuse take responsibility for your words, your silence will be your answer. Maybe I’ll think of an appropriate parenthetical remark to embellish the silence.

Game over.

Regards, RhinoBones

I take complete responsibility for my words. If you want to discuss this further, start a thread.

[Radu]

Rhinobones,why do you insist on sidetracking this topic? Your post is exactly the thing to be included in a PM. I really don't care about what consider "proper etiquette vis-a-vis the powers that be".I really don't. And unless you are trying to attract the attention of the moderators or hoping to enlist me in a "Colin Wright bash-fest" I really don't see any other reason why you insist on going off-topic.

Let me re-iterate : I don't care that you are offended about Colin Wright's comments. Nobody else does either. You're not winning any popularity points by insulting him. I personally consider it immature to drag this argument that seems to get personal out in the open,blatantly veering off-topic

Please, use PMs.

Back on topic. Yeah,you're quite right,Colin. Air warfare, of all things, is hard to pin down to a turn-based system exactly because it is so fluid. I gues I'll just try to focus on getting reasonable outcomes.

[L`zard]

Not to stir the pot, Radu but.....

You may want to get used to these two, LOL, it's an ongoing thing, eh?

Like bad weather, the possibility of any thread getting drenched alwas exists here.........so it goes.

Our 'beloved' demagogues...can neither be controlled or stiffled, but are a fact of life....[:D]

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: L`zard

Not to stir the pot, Radu but.....

You may want to get used to these two, LOL, it's an ongoing thing, eh?

Two? As far as I can recall, I've never initiated a conversation with Rhinobones in my life. Why would I?

[Radu]

ORIGINAL: L`zard

Not to stir the pot, Radu but.....

You may want to get used to these two, LOL, it's an ongoing thing, eh?

Like bad weather, the possibility of any thread getting drenched alwas exists here.........so it goes.

Our 'beloved' demagogues...can neither be controlled or stiffled, but are a fact of life....[:D]

Yeah,but I don't have to like it. Seriously,I'll contact the moderators if this goes on. Like I said, I really don't care how much Rhinobones is offended about Colin's apparent 'disrespect' (as he was accused) for either the US or Israeli govt, that's no excuse to start throwing invectives likes that.

It's not like Colin goaded him. I mean,he didn't praise the 9/11 terrorists or other such sick stuff. Criticism of either govts (or ANY govt for that matter) is perfectly legitimate.

[rhinobones]

Game over.

Regards, RhinoBones