The Battle of Baghdad - Page 9

grumbler · April 8, 2003, 21:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture I'm sure they have the range to do a round trip, but tell me there is almost 0% chance that F-14s are that far north.

F-14Ds have a lotta legs. They aren't F/A (F***/All)-18s, after all!

Alexander's Horse · April 8, 2003, 21:51

grumbler! where ya been?

Urban Ranger · April 8, 2003, 22:05

Is grumbler one of Horsie's DL's?

Alexander's Horse · April 8, 2003, 22:18

No he's Rimmer I think.

The Mad Monk · April 8, 2003, 22:36

Your DL has a DL?

Alexander's Horse · April 8, 2003, 22:38

Rimmer was never my DL, poor guy.

Ned · April 8, 2003, 23:20

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap

Maybe at the Frank's holiday home..but out here in the real world, it is not. In the Gulf War the US army performed way beyond expectations, and today what people remember is the cool bomb footage.

Had the RG put up a fight then we would not be here with someone calling Frank's attack brilliant..if it was airstrikes that broke the Rg then its the guy who put otgether the airwar that should get kudos, but the fact is that someone does not become "legendary" becuase the enemy turned out to be weaker than anyone expected.

One could say the exact same thing about Alexander's defeat of the Persions.

Alexander's Horse · April 8, 2003, 23:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned

One could say the exact same thing about Alexander's defeat of the Persions.

Not really - Persia was a superpower. Their total defeat by a small Greek army was a stupendous feat of arms.

Sten Sture · April 9, 2003, 01:32

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

welcome to the Pentagon, and everyone has to get in on the action...

forgot about that fundamental rule! Now it makes perfect sense.

Let's just hope the Navy doesn't feel like the SSBNs have been left out.

grumbler - welcome back by the way. 3200km range on Tomcats on the source I checked, but never sure how to read those kinda range numbers versus the burn rate of 30 seconds over target.

MichaeltheGreat · April 9, 2003, 04:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
"we"? somtimes you sound like you're directing ops

"Who's "we" sucka?"

"Smith, Wesson... and me"

Well, "they" wouldn't really work, since it's not a bunch of Aussies I'm talking about, is it?

ravagon · April 9, 2003, 04:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture

Now it makes perfect sense.

Let's just hope the Navy doesn't feel like the SSBNs have been left out.

I really wish you wouldn't joke about things like that ...

Ned · April 9, 2003, 14:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

Not really - Persia was a superpower. Their total defeat by a small Greek army was a stupendous feat of arms.

Not really. They fell apart like a house of cards. They way they fell apart when their king fled seems very much like the house of cards that Saddam built.

Besides, I believe the Greeks had far superior weapons than the Persians. Their Phalanx was nearly invincible at the time, IIRC. The comparison between an Iraqi 72 and an American M1 is apt.

Finally, the way the Greeks used their cavalry is very much like the way we used our airforce.

The Greek victory, in retrospect, was not surprising at all.

GeneralTacticus · April 10, 2003, 04:42

It was surprising only because people didn't know, at the time, how effective the Greek weapons and tactics were. They were new (or at least fairly new), and hence one wouldn't have known them to be so powerful, especially as they had never been tried against an enemy on the scale of Persia.

grumbler · April 10, 2003, 17:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
grumbler! where ya been?

Mostly at EUOT, some at matrix games, a fair amount at the Babylon 5 mod for Space Empires 4.

It feels... strange to be back here again and see so many posters that were here in the olden days still posting. A more loyal lot than I!

And I'm not any DL. If I'm there, I'm grumbler.

grumbler · April 10, 2003, 17:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture forgot about that fundamental rule! Now it makes perfect sense.

Let's just hope the Navy doesn't feel like the SSBNs have been left out.

I really wanted to see the boomers weigh in with conventional (inert) warheads on SLBMs. Imagine the kinetic energy of a 2-ton warhead at Mach 14! Kinda hard to imagine what would be worth targeting with a $65 million missile, though.

Quote:

grumbler - welcome back by the way. 3200km range on Tomcats on the source I checked, but never sure how to read those kinda range numbers versus the burn rate of 30 seconds over target.

Thanks. Rule of Thumb on the F-14D is about 700 miles with a somewhat standard 4,000 pounds of bombs, with enough time over target to find an obvious target or to deploy JDAM, with gas to spare for some hassles. Source is my memory!

MichaeltheGreat · April 10, 2003, 17:42

Quote:

Originally posted by grumbler
I really wanted to see the boomers weigh in with conventional (inert) warheads on SLBMs. Imagine the kinetic energy of a 2-ton warhead at Mach 14! Kinda hard to imagine what would be worth targeting with a $65 million missile, though.

Ah, hell, just pick a spot in the desert. We just want to see what kind of hole it can make.

grumbler · April 10, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
It was surprising only because people didn't know, at the time, how effective the Greek weapons and tactics were. They were new (or at least fairly new), and hence one wouldn't have known them to be so powerful, especially as they had never been tried against an enemy on the scale of Persia.

I don't think this is true, either. The "March to the Sea" proved that Greek tactics could beat eastern tactics, and the Persians were hiring every Greek merc they could. I think the surprise was that which Ned pointed out - the Greek way didn't involve cavalry, and the combination of shock cavalry with shock infantry was the key Macedonian advance.