|
Davin Valkri posted:I'm pretty sure the yellow circle is the surface search range--the sensor package on our particular AEW is listed as "3D Air and Surface Search". Ah, yeah, it's been a few months since I've played. Does the range circle resize itself as you change altitude? I don't remember exactly where it is, but there's definitely a thing to cancel RTB. Maybe you have to right-click on the unit/group?
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:Ah, yeah, it's been a few months since I've played. Does the range circle resize itself as you change altitude? I think it does resize. Weapon ranges certainly do. "U" unassigns a unit from whatever it's doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:In terms of what'd be available in 2019... maybe the F-4s? The US retired its F-111s long ago and I'd be frankly amazed if any of those aircraft ever make it out of the boneyard again. The Australians were the only foreign operators of the Aardvark and they dumped all of theirs in a landfill when they were retired. Realistically, even if they were available, they'd suffer the same disadvantages of the Tornado without the advanced capabilities that it offers. Good to know! So the F-4 would really be the only worthwhile onr of the 3 there. For anti-radar could we use them in a Wild Weasel style configuration or is that too risky? I saw that the Tornados also come in an EWar configuration in addition to their ground attack role. Could that be another point in their favor to try and aquire some? If we want Phantoms and Corsairs then the Greeks seem to have a good supply of both, i wonder if Jack could liquor some of their ministers up to get a good deal out of them for some surplus? For Ewar, it looks like thr USMC retired their Prowler fleet in 2016, if we could snag one or two of those planes would that help plug the capability gap you mentioned? Jusy trying to think ahead, I'd love for our company to have a long term goal of capabilities we need to fill and planes that could help fill it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Was the video too long? Personally, I found your commentary too quiet compared to the game volume. I turned my volume way up to hear your voice, and then planes would take off or LGBs blow up and  .Otherwise it's pretty good. Some tips or things to watch next time: - When we have an escort mission, I'd like to see the friendly forces more intelligently follow our escort. I was growing a little scared when the Chinese J-8s were getting close to the transports, and our Gripens had to go full burner to catch them because they were at the wrong end of the patrol path. You can set the patrol zone's reference points to follow one of the target packages, although I don't know how that works with aircraft taking off and landing, nor do I know an easy way to switch the follow zone from the outbound Hornet flight to the inbound Road Runner flight. - If you're going to want a flight to not RTB Winchester, then it's best to disable the option "RTB when Winchester" for the planes. (This can be set per side, per mission, or per unit.) (Doctrine -> "Weapon State RTB:" -> "No, aircraft do not RTB when weapon state is reached.") - If units are already RTB Winchester, and you want them to stop being RTB, try the following: 1: Set their doctrine (Side, Mission, Group, or Unit) to not be RTB when Winchester 2: Keep pressing "U" to unassign them from everything. This should "unassign" them from their "RTB mission." 3: Re-assign them to the mission. (Remember you can do this with Unit Orders -> Assign to mission) - At 16:23 we got a good enough look at one of the J-8s to classify it. Somehow this changed it from "Hostile bogey" to "Neutral J-8." If the IRIS-T had missed then our Gripens would have ignored it until either you'd manually intervened or it got a free shot off on someone! (Baloogan! This looks like a CMANO bug! A bogey that was classified as hostile due to an exclusion zone was reclassified to neutral when it was classified by NCTR because side China was still neutral.) Mr. Showtime posted:Ah, yeah, it's been a few months since I've played. Does the range circle resize itself as you change altitude? You can even see this in the video at 2:20. As I-SPY gains altitude, the yellow surface search range circle gets bigger to reflect the change in horizon. Psawhn fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Great poo poo. Only request is  but could you spoiler the AAR image? I like watching the video first. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Jimmy4400nav posted:Good to know! So the F-4 would really be the only worthwhile onr of the 3 there. For anti-radar could we use them in a Wild Weasel style configuration or is that too risky? I saw that the Tornados also come in an EWar configuration in addition to their ground attack role. Could that be another point in their favor to try and aquire some? Unless we started tinkering with the loadouts that CMANO has for aircraft, it would be very risky using the Greek or German F-4s in that role, same as with every other option so far, though the Greek A-7s should theoretically be able to launch HARMs as they're A-7Es and the Greek F-4s do use the HARM in their service but not in CMANO. The Tornado ECR is rather rare aircraft, with only 35 built for the Germans and 16 converted for the Italians, and both Germany and Italy intends to keep on operating theirs for some time to come. If we could get them, it would be a point in their favour, but I think it would be rather difficult to do so. The electronic warfare role would be a fairly niche role for us, at least right now. If we were in the future trying to go downtown over Baghdad or something like that, then yes we should be looking into acquiring dedicated electronic warfare aircraft to make such operations easier, but for now it probably isn't a major priority. Right now I'd like us to look into adding GBU-39 capability onto our Gripens if that's possible. A precision glide bomb with over 100km range would be very useful when it comes to eliminating targets with more capable air defence networks than what we are going up against now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 06:15
|
|
|
We can see about getting ECM pods for our Gripens if we need some electronic warfare capability. When it comes to procurement, we should be looking to get our hands on more 4th and 4.5th generation fighters. If we can get more Gripens, great. That'd simplify logistics and training greatly. But there are a lot of F-16s and some F/A-18s out there. They can carry many of the the same munitions as the Gripens, there are lots of ex-military pilots who can fly them, and there are lots of parts out there that we can use. Sk 60s, Hawks and other jet trainer/fighters are great little COIN aircraft for plinking trucks, infantry, and boats. But they'll die like flies against serious air defence and their guns and rocket pods really can't kill heavy targets like the bridges and supply dumps we spotted in this battle. Since we want to give as many goons pilot slots as possible, and that means we're probably going to be buying cheap little jets, let's look for some COIN-type missions that'll let us go after soft targets with our SK 60Bs and other ships. Gripens can fly high cover and can drop precision weapons on harder targets. We should also get our hands on some UH-60 or Mi-17 utility helicopters and some ex-SOF guys to act as a combat search-and-rescue force to grab downed pilots. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
The video was fine, though a bit long because of the you didn't time compress "nothing happening now, but something MIGHT happen" sections, for example, the Savage flight approach to the bridge. Other than that, GG, DSM is the goon of the day, nothing but the best of fermented yak milk for our ace pilot! EDIT: Phantom IIs are beautiful, they actually have chaff that Mig-21bis don't (at least the Baloogan Wiki says they don't), and they can be flown in bomb truck configuration for 12 or more bombs, which is great and something I wanted to do ever since I saw it on Wargame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
True, but we aren't exactly choosers, we are beggars in terms of what is available. Getting what we got from the Swedes was nothing short of miraculous, and we can't count on being that lucky in the future. Most nations that are retiring their F-16s are going to part them out and sell the spares to other nations that still operate the type, same with the F/A-18. There isn't as much demand for F-4 or A-7 parts, and Jimmy and I are thinking about A2G roles, a space where stuff like the Tornado, Corsair and Phantom run rings around the Gripen just because they can carry a lot more than a light fighter and they can carry it further. The Phantoms in particular would also be able to serve as surprisingly capable fighters should we need them to, even if we use them primarily as A2G platforms. They have a variant of the radar in the F/A-18 and AMRAAM capability. Edit: I'd second getting some old Hips for use as our own dedicated CSAR force. Edit 2: The Phantom is a two-seater. We can have named WSOs in the back seat. Quinntan fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:True, but we aren't exactly choosers, we are beggars in terms of what is available. Getting what we got from the Swedes was nothing short of miraculous, and we can't count on being that lucky in the future. I'd disagree with the F-16 assessment. There are, what, twenty-six countries flying F-16s? With Jack's connections, I think we can get our hands on some mid-block F-16s. Hell, if we're feeling fancy, we might be able to get some new airframes from GD down the road once we're more established. This will only happen few months down the line, but it's something I think we should strongly consider going for. If that's not an option, then I'm open to exploring the Phantom option. It's good for goon participation (we can have a goon be a backseater/WSO). They're better at A2A than the A-7s would be. And I do like your idea of loading one up with 12 GBU-12s and going to town on ground targets. If we want Phantoms, the Greeks and Germans are good starting points. But let's also consider the Korean and Japanese angle. They're looking to upgrade their air forces and the old Phantoms might be on the chopping block. Might even be able to get some IDF Kurnass F-4Es.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:I'd disagree with the F-16 assessment. There are, what, twenty-six countries flying F-16s? With Jack's connections, I think we can get our hands on some mid-block F-16s. Hell, if we're feeling fancy, we might be able to get some new airframes from GD down the road once we're more established. Lockheed-Martin bought out the production lines back in 1992, and for the cost of new F-16s, we'd be better off trying to get F-35s. The UAE's Block 60s were outrageously expensive. Even second-hand ones are likely to cost a lot more than the F-4s would, and don't add much in capability. The Japanese Phantom Kais are very limited in their armament, it's basically Sidewinders, Sparrows and an anti-ship missile, no LGB capability, no Mavericks, no bombs at all. The Korean ones are similar to the Greek ones but don't have AMRAAMs and are reliant on Sparrows for their BVR capability. The Israeli ones don't have BVR capability. The German ones are very limited in their A2G capability, but do have AMRAAMs. The Turkish Phantoms don't have BVR, but do have a 200km range cruise missile. Personally, I'd rather the Greek ones out of all of them just for flexibility's sake more than anything else. EDIT: There is another theoretical weapon loadout for the F-4... 
Quinntan fucked around with this message at 08:28 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:The Japanese Phantom Kais are very limited in their armament, it's basically Sidewinders, Sparrows and an anti-ship missile, no LGB capability, no Mavericks, no bombs at all. The Korean ones are similar to the Greek ones but don't have AMRAAMs and are reliant on Sparrows for their BVR capability. The Israeli ones don't have BVR capability. The German ones are very limited in their A2G capability, but do have AMRAAMs. The Turkish Phantoms don't have BVR, but do have a 200km range cruise missile. Personally, I'd rather the Greek ones out of all of them just for flexibility's sake more than anything else. Back of the envelope, what do you think it'd cost to grab Japanese, Korean, Israeli*, Turkish and/or German Phantoms and then retrofit them for our purposes? We'd need to integrate the Paveway-series LGBs, AIM-120 AMRAAMs (or Meteors, to simplify our logistical situation) and possibly some Mavericks. That'll require the addition of a few black boxes, some software upgrades, making sure they can carry MERS and TERs, and some small modifications to the hard-points. *fwiw, the Israeli Kurnass Phantoms has BVR capability with the Sparrow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:Back of the envelope, what do you think it'd cost to grab Japanese, Korean, Israeli*, Turkish and/or German Phantoms and then retrofit them for our purposes? It'd depend on the systems on board. A lot of them (Israeli, South Korean, Japanese, German) are still running with the original 1960s vintage AN/APQ-120 radar and would likely require replacing in order to actually work with newer A2A missiles and certainly would have to be replaced in order to maximise the capabilities of Meteor and AMRAAM. The remaining one, the Turkish one, uses a much newer Israeli EL/M-2032. However, we'd still have to run our own integration tests. Got to wonder though, why not just try to buy the Greek ones off the shelf, they have everything we'd want and the Greeks are hard up for cash. In terms of cost, the program would require multiple test shots at targets in order to ensure that the weapons drop safely off our aircraft and the systems are integrated properly and are accurate. It would be an expensive program. I was using the most recent Kurnass in the CMANO-DB, which doesn't give it Sparrows. I know the Sparrow was with it back in the day, but towards the end the Israelis seemingly left the air-to-air role to their F-15s and F-16s. Quinntan fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:It'd depend on the systems on board. A lot of them (Israeli, South Korean, Japanese, German) are still running with the original 1960s vintage AN/APQ-120 radar and would likely require replacing in order to actually work with newer A2A missiles and certainly would have to be replaced in order to maximise the capabilities of Meteor and AMRAAM. The remaining one, the Turkish one, uses an Israeli EL/M-2032. We'd still have to run our own integration tests. Got to wonder though, why not just try to buy the Greek ones off the shelf, they have everything we'd want and the Greeks are hard up for cash. I agree buying the Greek Phantoms is the easiest thing to do. but as you said, we're the beggars in this situation. If we can't get the Gripens or mid-block F-16s I want and we can't get the Greek Phantoms you'd like, I have an idea. This may be a tad ambitious, but I think we have a business opportunity here. There are hundreds of ex-USAF, USN, and USMC F-4s in boneyards. Not to mention the various soon-to-be-retired F-4 fleets around the world. That's a huge number of airframes (and engines) we could get for low prices. We raise capital and buy up the ones with the fewest flight hours and cycles on them. Meanwhile, we send Jack around to electronics manufacturers and see if we can get a good deal on some modern radars, ECM, etc. If we can get some modern AESA radars, great! But we could also settle for something like the AN/APG-65s that the Greek F-4Es carry. Once that's done, we run a weapons integration program for AMRAAMS, Mavericks, Paveways, etc. Give our Phantoms some serious A2A and A2G capability. We could even do some *ahem* "final testing" on the front lines to prove the systems and demo our product for customers. To make it worthwhile, I'd say we'd need to upgrade anywhere from 40-60 Phantoms. We can keep 15-20 and then sell off the rest to other contractors or air forces. We'd get good Phantoms, we boost our profile, and we can make a pretty tidy profit. *to do all this in-game, Yooper could just hand-wave all of this happening and then just use the modernized Greek F-4Es already in game to simulate our new Phantoms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
The problem with that is there are hardly any F-4s left in the boneyard. The US has expended pretty much all of them as drone targets and are moving on to F-16s now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
Reserve Pilot Thunderlips says: OH YES, BROTHER! He also wants to know what part of the total FY profit we are expected to pay off to shareholders as dividends.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
Reserve Pilot Hellhammer would like to congratulate the lot of you on a job well done and a tidy profit; nicely done actives! ...I suppose it begs the question why the Chinese basically fed those latter two Finbacks to us, but we'll take it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 10:04
|
|
|
I presume it was trying to figure out what exactly happened to the first two, I doubt that the finback has an advanced enough rwr for its pilots to figure out that they were getting locked up by Gripens. For all they knew the Indians were shooting at them with MiG-21s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
Serpentis posted:Reserve Pilot Hellhammer would like to congratulate the lot of you on a job well done and a tidy profit; nicely done actives! J-8I is MiG-21's fat ugly sister, and this way an economical way of disposing of them? Hey, do pilots get paid any sum of all that money we made?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 10:22
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:I presume it was trying to figure out what exactly happened to the first two, I doubt that the finback has an advanced enough rwr for its pilots to figure out that they were getting locked up by Gripens. For all they knew the Indians were shooting at them with MiG-21s. We fired heatseekers, I'm not sure what the radar lock is for those but I'm guessing we don't need one to fire them I am also staying out of Procurement, except for giving a vote for boat I also think we should decide if we're going to have principles, and if so, what they are. I've seen a few posts about always taking the Eco angle, we could also be staunchly anti-rebel if any kind, pro-NATO or pro-UN, become COIN or anti-air specialists, or whatever else, or just go for the highest bidder. From a game angle, I like planning missions with whatever we're given, and the challenges that ensue. I am not so much in favour of people 'pre-running' missions as a test scenario, but I understand that many players will be thinking along the lines of '13.5cm rocket, great - but what does that actualy mean' since I doubt most players have the same knowledge of what our pilots would about what that sort of ordnance is capable of. Personally I think it's more fun to learn the hard way when our arsecheeks aren't on the line in reality, just in pixel space, but I know others will disagree with that stance and it's not one where I'd dig my heels in. I second the thing about no spoilers in the AAR image, but realistically I'm gonna watch either way. Finally, good job Bacarruda, that was a good mission with a very favourable outcome. Yooper, I'll try to make sure my next plan is in a format similar to his
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
Nice job, a perfect result. One thing I think is a bit lacking in this game is that you can't (AFAIK) intercept a bogey and try to force them out of your airspace without shooting them down. Not that shooting those J-8s down was the wrong choice in this instance; they were definitely unhealthily interested in our transports. Some tactics/technology talk: Since we have an AWACS bird, we can launch our CAP without them having to use their own radar, which is nice since it gives us an element of surprise in an engagement. However, I perused the database, and it says that while our S 100 has Link-16 datalink capability, our Gripens don't. Does anyone know what impact that has in the game? E: autocorrect VKing fucked around with this message at 12:11 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
I think we should be pro-UN, pro-bombing poo poo to dust with our bombtrucks, avoiding contracts by literal criminals and terrorists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
Pro "whatever is least likely to result in getting slapped by the almighty pimp hand of the US military".
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:He also wants to know what part of the total FY profit we are expected to pay off to shareholders as dividends. At the end of the year we must pay out 10% of our profits. If we have no profits we pay 10% of assets. I'm not too worried about Goldman, it's the brutes with the Teachers Retirement Fund that make me worry. JcDent posted:Hey, do pilots get paid any sum of all that money we made? Of course! Each shareholder get's a share at the end of the year after Herbert does our books. And after the Class A shareholders take their cut. simplefish posted:I second the thing about no spoilers in the AAR image, but realistically I'm gonna watch either way. Sorry about that one guys! In the future I'll spoiler it for sure. VKing posted:One thing I think is a bit lacking in this game is that you can't (AFAIK) intercept a bogey and try to force them out of your airspace without shooting them down. Not that shooting those J-8s down was the wrong choice in this instance; they were definitely unhealthily interested in our transports. There are definitely mechanics, like chasing a bogey away, that would require some event editor exploring. At the same time we'll have to set our own boundaries too. A crafty opponent could lead a pack of Gripens back into a pocket of SAM's with the radar turned off... From a narrative standpoint I want the missions to be challenging without being borderline impossible. If we were all playing this at home, solo, then you could just save-scum and move some flight paths. That's not a luxury we have with a play by post model. I need to stick to the plan otherwise the narrative falls apart. In-Character I'm some front line coordinator, not a planner. I'd like to think it represents more closely the true model of mission planning and sending your flights out into the unknown. You guys are the Flight Marshalls, the retired Air-Force Colonels, etc. There are reasonable threats to be reasonably dealt with. I don't want to see the entire operation crumble in a single mission, but poor decisions will be punished. For a good read on complex mission planning check out Operation El Dorado Canyon Thank you all for the feedback Hired Goons. I'm very much new to recording what I'm actually doing. I'll get the mic closer for the next recording. I might edit out the boring bits too instead of compressing everything. One keyslip with time compression and I run a minute instead of dropping down to 4 seconds. The info on procurement is great as well, I won't give you exactly what you want, but I'll give you some interesting choices. More to come!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
I did a quick test, and on the surface of it, having vs not having a datalink capable plane doesn't seem to make much of a difference, if any. Possibly something they were changing in the new DLC/standalone pack? I haven't checked. However, one thing I did notice is that the Meteor has Bearing Only Launch capability, so as it stands in game right now, it can be fired without the Gripen turning its radar on, and a unit on patrol will do so automatically if told to not use their radars. For the target being attacked, they'll have an ESM contact on the AWACS bird, and then the missile when it's in radar range, and that's it. I know Meteors are expensive, but drat do they seem to be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
This LP is great  May I join the reserve pilot queue? Callsign Clara.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Mikl posted:May I join the reserve pilot queue? Callsign Clara. Done! We currently have a reserve pilot list of 38 pilots. There's room for plenty more. I have a feeling we're gonna need 'em.  
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
Minor thing I noticed in the video - in the second engagement each plane launched one missile (looking at the loadout on the side, one plane had 2 left and the other 4, after the launch it was 1 and 3), so one of the kills should go to the second pilot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:Minor thing I noticed in the video - in the second engagement each plane launched one missile (looking at the loadout on the side, one plane had 2 left and the other 4, after the launch it was 1 and 3), so one of the kills should go to the second pilot. Good point! I'll have to check the loadouts closer. I might have had it in group view instead of unit view and just saw 4 missiles left.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
One request for future AARs: could we have a (spoilered out like the picture) text breakdown of what happened? It would be nice to quickly get an overview of the mission from start to finish without having to watch a 20 or 30 minute video, especially on mobile or at work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
It was surprisingly tense watching a bunch of symbols dance around a screen. It's been an excellent effort on your part, Yooper - you're doing fine. I did like how you took the time to explain what each of the symbols etc. actually meant, since whenever I've seen CMANO in screenshot form it's been nigh-on unreadable. I'll agree with the guy earlier who said that the sounds from the game were rather loud (though I'd say the volume of your voice is okay). Combined with unfamiliarity, when I heard the take off sound effect I thought something had been shot down. One last critique - FOR YOOPER'S EYES ONLY: Is there any way to hide the "event fired" messages in the dialogue box during missions? I spotted them by accident, and although they didn't affect much here, in missions where you want to give us an unpleasant surprise it could cause problems. Perhaps consider non-indicative but memorable names for the events? If I had PMs I would've sent you one, but I figured it was more important to give you a heads up now while it's still minor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
Congrats on a mission well done! I say we rent out a spot at every career day and job fair we can at universities, malls, and fairgrounds, put a Sk60 on display with two attendants, and at least try and use them for advertising or recruiting some more guys for maintenance etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
I'd like to update my pilot request such that Nails gets first dibs on any F-35 if we ever get one. Also once we're financially settled I would recommend a stock buyback program to cut that 10% annual payout down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Congrats on a mission well done! This actually isn't too bad of an idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:It was surprisingly tense watching a bunch of symbols dance around a screen. It's been an excellent effort on your part, Yooper - you're doing fine. I did like how you took the time to explain what each of the symbols etc. actually meant, since whenever I've seen CMANO in screenshot form it's been nigh-on unreadable. I might just disable the sounds. There's the WHOOP WHOOP of new contact, a missile sound, an exploding sound, and a take off sound. We're not missing too much. Or I can edit them in if I'm feeling spunky. In regard to REDACTED, I'm not sure. I had a city marker asset set to MERCS instead of CHINA so we saw the results. It's something I'll have to test out and see. I know on other scenarios you'll sometimes see events happening to allied forces.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
I'm going to say no boat for us. The Santa Marias are old, don't have VLS, would be expensive for us to run (what with needing over 170 crew) and you can't do a huge amount with only one frigate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
We can make our own promotional cover of I'm On A Boat and that alone is worth it, I feel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
 After our first successful mission I tallied up our munitions expenditure and took it out of our payment. If we don't want that done in the future please let me know. Otherwise I'll assume we want a full weapons loadout. Procuring additional weapons might also be very helpful given potential supply disruptions in the future. Or if we're running long term ops and need to reload. Our Man in Washington Jack is continuing to text me. He's working every angle I guess. I'm not too familiar with the world of lobbying but it seems to involve a great deal of alcohol. He sent a picture of himself with the Yugoslav Union defense under-minister, Uri Kolivic.  As part of the Yugoslav Unions debt process they are liquidating drat near everything in Greece. If it isn't bolted down, concreted in place, or walking, they are trying to sell it. But this is turning into a hot ticket and every two bit dictator and corporation wants some. loving Wal-Mart is in the bidding now. He also sent me a list of potential jets from a secondary supplier in South Africa. I'm still collating the texts and parsing out the photos of Jack with strippers. But once that's done I'll give you guys some pricing. Politics  The Chinese finally made a statement. They will continue to engage us, regardless of airspace, as if we were pirates on the high seas. Simple enough eh? Nyingchi is barely holding. A rogue Chinese General has overthrown local rule to our east and has seized a portion of Sichuan province. One supply line to Tibet has been cut. All the Chinese have now is the rail line into Lhasa.  India is still amassing ground troops under the cover of halting the advance of rogue forces and refugees. In reality I'm seeing truckload after truckload of "volunteers" passing through. It's hotter than a monkeys nut sack here and everyone has winter clothes. I'll let you guys piece this together but it's looking like a Donbass surprise. Speaking of surprises. A General named Xiao Zhen has taken command of the Lhasa air wing. This info came from Jack via the Indian ambassador. Supposedly he's a wily old bastard. Though of interest is his planes haven't arrived yet. Mission I'm putting together a mission package now. You guys are gonna love how this poo poo is going down. It's like walking into Mcdonalds and taking a dump in the ball pit. Everyone gets riled up. It seems introducing a professional military organization into an unstable political situation escalates things. Who knew?  Do you want a bulk order of ammunition? We can put our Airbus CN235 to use and haul in munitions. Please see the below chart of pricing. The mission is still settling in, but I can guarantee close air support and lots of it.  This chart shows how many we need for a full flight of each weapon. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Well, let's stock up on ammo while we've got the chance. I have no idea exactly what we should get, though. As long as we keep enough cash in reserve for our frigate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
Why are people insistant on buying a frigate? I'm pretty sure that was just fluff line in the VA anyways! Ammo-wise, we probably want order in more Paveways (they are cheap and get the job done) and rockets (because they are so cheap having multiple flights of them is no burden but might be useful if we have two ground attack intensive missions at once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:29
|
|
