Glen Service Rating

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: sprior

You know a game is deep when you can have a discussion thread about 4 planes.

Only 4 of the buggars?

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: sprior

You know a game is deep when you can have a discussion thread about 4 planes.

Only 4 of the buggars?

guess not but considering the numbers of total aircraft on the map it´s a very small number of course. But we´re probably speaking about a couple of dozen in total.

[ny59giants]

I set them on 100% training for Recon. I want the pilot to know the difference between a CV and a whale. [:D]

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: sprior

You know a game is deep when you can have a discussion thread about 4 planes.

Only 4 of the buggars?

guess not but considering the numbers of total aircraft on the map it´s a very small number of course. But we´re probably speaking about a couple of dozen in total.

Yeah, but you know that those 2 dozen Glens doing the naval search mission is a major game breaker. [8|]

[dwg]

ORIGINAL: spence
If it was such a great idea to fly airplanes off of submarines why is it that the whole concept pretty much faded into the dustbin of history in every other nation in the world (and has not been revived)?

While I agree with your general point, it's not really accurate to say it hasn't been revived. Raytheon demonstrated a submerged launch UAV in 2008 under the ONR and Submarine Force's Submarine Over the Horizon Organic Capabilities (Sothoc) programme, while DARPA and LockMart's Skunkworks are working on the Cormorant Multi-Purpose UAV, which will not only have submerged launch capability, but submerged recovery and reuse (submerged recovery was demonstrated in 2006).

And of course the Japanese implementations were small beer compared to the 60s era concepts from the USN, starting with ONR sponsoring Ed Heinemann to develop the Douglas Model 640 for launch from Halibut's Regulus hangar, while the F11F actually was trial fitted in Grayback's Regulus hangar. Meanwhile Boeing and BuAer looked at the AN-1 and AN-2 SSVNs carrying 8 VTOL fighters with fuel and ordnance for at least 10 missions per aircraft.

It's an idea with obvious uses, but one that's very difficult to implement in practice and until submerged launch and recovery is implemented, one that fatally compromises the submarine's primary asset, stealth.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: witpqs




Only 4 of the buggars?

guess not but considering the numbers of total aircraft on the map it´s a very small number of course. But we´re probably speaking about a couple of dozen in total.

Yeah, but you know that those 2 dozen Glens doing the naval search mission is a major game breaker. [8|]

I wouldn´t call it a game breaker (things like the bug about units not taking replacements are game breakers), I just don´t want to call it realistic or better say, possible in real life.

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: castor troy





guess not but considering the numbers of total aircraft on the map it´s a very small number of course. But we´re probably speaking about a couple of dozen in total.

Yeah, but you know that those 2 dozen Glens doing the naval search mission is a major game breaker. [8|]

I wouldn´t call it a game breaker (things like the bug about units not taking replacements are game breakers), I just don´t want to call it realistic or better say, possible in real life.

I think Shark's "rolling eyes" smiley was intended to indicate sarcasm in this case. [;)]

[castor troy]

yeah, probably. Just trying not to piss off someone as this is the usual outcome these days.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Shark7




Yeah, but you know that those 2 dozen Glens doing the naval search mission is a major game breaker. [8|]

I wouldn´t call it a game breaker (things like the bug about units not taking replacements are game breakers), I just don´t want to call it realistic or better say, possible in real life.

I think Shark's "rolling eyes" smiley was intended to indicate sarcasm in this case. [;)]

Yep, it was apparently a poorly executed attempt at sarcasm.