Jump to content

Andreas

Members
  • Posts

    6,888
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Andreas

  1. Seriously though, using surplus electricity for transport is a neat idea. Downside is that it will really demand a lot of extra power capacity.

    To give you the idea - in 2005 EU27 transport energy demand was 372 million tonnes oil equivalent (Mtoe). Net electricity generation was 237 Mtoe. Assuming most transport is oil (>90%), and it is used at 20-25% efficiency, while electricity is used at 100% efficiency in a car, you need to add 30-40% generating capacity. Existing capacity is about 620 GW, so you need about 210+ GW extra. A KW installed sets you back by about €1,500. If I got my math right that's an investment volume of € 315 billion, not including network reinforcements and control infrastructure to ensure that the cars don't all recharge after the evening commute home. You can easily add the same again for that, is my guess.

    It's an interesting concept, but it ain't cheap.

    All the best

    Andreas

  2. Yup. The same publication also had this:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/03/wind_power_needs_dirty_pricey_gas_backup_report/

    Which says that wind power is basically gas power with wind to help, as there are large country - and Europe - wide wind lulls that would mean the slack would have to be taken up with gas turbines, and due to them being used less would be built worse to be economical, leading to more emissions.

    I'm nuke all the way. As the first link says, it's dangerous, but not infinitely dangerous.

    Oswald is making the mistake that he is thinking only turbines for back-up. The Finns have something better (quel surprise...) http://www.wartsila.com Texas has just ordered a bucket-load of them to provide backup for wind.

    Nuclear is clearly part of the solution - but it should be kept in mind that it is baseload, and can therefore not really supply more than 30/40 percent (informed guessing) of your demand at the most, unless you are interconnected with other regions that want to import your power. So when you read that the French get 80% of their power from nuclear next time, remember that they send a lot of their nuclear surplus to Germany, Italy, the Benelux, and the UK.

    All the best

    Andreas

  3. I liked the Yakuza. Nice touch.

    You can get a copy of the book on Amazon.co.uk, at a paltry UKP 570 + P&P, or go to the École des Mines library in Paris and read it there:

    http://rocks.ensmp.fr/cgi-bin/koha/opac-MARCdetail.pl?bib=101316

    Of course, now that I have divulged this information, the Reptoidyakuza will burn the 2nd hand book store in the UK, and steal the book from the library.

    Or the other way round.

    All the best

    Andreas

  4. It is mostly going to be used for internet, photos, and light office stuff. My current (XP) laptop has a 5,400rpm drive, and I have an external 7,200 - the difference is noticeable, I find.

    I want to get it now since we are moving country, so no need to keep the French laptop, and a colleague of mine is going to the US, which means it reduces the price for the MBP by about 30%. I think in terms of processor speed it is going to be plenty fast enough.

    All the best

    Andreas

  5. After a few years in the wilderness that is Windows, I am going to treat myself to a Mac (17" Macbook Pro, latest version with the nVidia 8600). What is the current state of affairs regarding running CMBB and CMAK on these?

    My understanding is:

    1) I will need to partition a section of the HDD for a Windows installation - emulators won't do it

    2) XP is better than Vista

    How much HDD space is recommended for this? I am tempted by going for the 200 MB HDD because it is the fastest, but I guess I may end up with too little space? I am using a 250 MB external HDD for storing of pictures to manage space now (my current laptop has a 100MB HDD), and will keep that approach - are 100 + 100 sufficient for an OS X and a XP partition?

    Anything else I need to be aware of?

    Many thanks in advance for the help!

    All the best

    Andreas

  6. Originally posted by Rankorian:

    Gefechtsaufklaerung. Eh...trenches under buildings? Is the cover/concealment totally from the trench? Or is there an additive effect? And if I "rubble" the church (which would be SOP for me in this situation) what are the effects?

    Honestly, I have no idea. It seemed like a good idea at the time when I designed it.

    Originally posted by Rankorian:

    (A tactical smart scenario. One takes a reasonably historical mix of german units, and with reasonably historical tactics obtains a good result. No tricks! What a concept!

    Thanks. I think I still try to do this in my scenario design, since I find it most enjoyable. Some basic rules (which I try to follow, even though I may not always) for me are:

    - Don't lie to the player (unless it is historically defensible - but even then it should be used sparingly). So better to give foggy or incomplete info than outright lies.

    - Use historically accurate forces (the ones in Gefechtsaufklärung are - the force mix is on a picture taking by my grandfather in 1941).

    - No tricks. It should be up to the competence of a player to win, or not.

    I still think BFC should have used Gefechtsaufklärung as a demo scenario.

    All the best

    Andreas

  7. Originally posted by Seanachai:

    And the Purges will continue until I am the Number 1 poster on the Board.

    Regime Change was the only answer. Now, at last, the Forums will all be brought under the sway of my own brand of 'Compassionate Despotism'.

    Looks like we're going to need to get a new Horseman of the Apocalypso.

    At least for the parades, and such.

    You need to learn to stay at your place in the line, mate.

    Thus spoke he.

    All the best

    Andreas

  8. Originally posted by SteveP:

    I guess the real thrust of my question did not come across. There are two possibilities.

    1) German MG battalions often fought as infantry, because the weaponry involved could easily be used in that context (or, as a subset of this, it could be that they were only used often in this way by creative commanders like Rommel); or

    2) Using an MG battalion in this way at Mersa Berga was very unusual, in which case the tactic was remarkable not only for Rommel's insight into the flanking opportunity, but also to the battalion's ability to execute it.

    I'm still unclear as to which is the more correct interpretation.

    I think what you are missing is that there were hardly an MG battalions.

    http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/MGBataillone/Gliederung.htm

    All the best

    Andreas

  9. Just see the losses taken from the barrage as a loss of unit cohesion. It would not be realistic to get everyone together in the time of a scenario in any case.

    Regarding the other, no I don't think you should be able to switch in a 45-60 minute scenario. I don't think it worked like this. Either the guys were told before the action to work as HMGs, or as infantry. A drop off the hat switch is not realistic in my view.

    My 2 cents on the matter.

    All the best

    Andreas

×
×
  • Create New...