dieseltaylor

Just to show I care and that with goodwill most things can be accomplished. From a UK consumer site Personally I think this guy and his family watch way way too much trashy TV Come to think of it I like Cnadian broadcasting so why I am suggesting watching US pulp I have no idea: (

noxnoctum - You are correct as testing a MkIv, a Panther and a Tiger they all reach the games generic reverse speed of slightly over 7.6mph within 15 seconds. It may be even quicker than 15 seconds but my test was really aimed at acceleration times forwards. Forward speeds for the 15seconds seem also to be around the 7mph mark. I did not look at crews for reaction time differences. For those unfamiliar with tanks the Tiger was a rarity in having multiple reverse gears that allowed it to reach 5.6mph far in excess of most other tanks in reverse. As for accelearation on paved [cobbled?] I see that top speed is reached after 60 seconds and that the Tiger I and Panther G seemed to have the same top speed. It may be different on road.

When it first came out I spent some time looking at the way Tigers reacted in game and with the videos on the net. It did seem to me then that the Tigers accelerated and reversed too quickly and of course the rocking motion was overdone hugely given I was looking at the short movements that one commonly sees in the many videos. BF have now gone to a one size fits all reverse speed - including in that the armoured cars with two drivers/positions who could travel at speed in either direction. The speed chosen is actually quite high. In the case of some tanks 300% higher than reality with the common Sherman 200%. The Tiger alone I thought from my tests is almost correct though VAB's test gives higher speeds than mine. Hid tests are more recent and if this reverese speed applies to all tanks the Churchill will be 400-500% faster than reality. Also there is no benefit from turning the turret to allow the commander and gunner to assist in guiding the driver in reversing. In fact having the commander up confers no advantage facing either way. Bizarrely the driver is adept at reversing that he can reverse at full speed for kilometres through buildings with no problems. In real life drivers would try and recall recent movement so if required they could safely reverse quickly. Arguably then there should be some restriction on retrograde movement over more than very short distances unless the tank commander or a nearby tank was able to provide instructions. The wartime literature is full of cases of tanks reversing into buildings or ditching themselves due to no effective rearward vision.* Obviously being in the middle of a field this would be not the same problem as if in a village. Things may have changed in V2.00 which I only briefly opened after paying for the upgrade but not tested. It has been an enormous sore point to me that in a game touted as realistic BF in CMBN could not even get reverse movement right. It also had tanks firing on the move with extreme accuracy! What was going on at BF HQ? Is it all to make life simple for the AI or a cavilier attitude to game design. I do think acceleration over distance may well be correct for things like the Daimler armoured car which I tested extensively. I have never tested on inclines. *I wonder if on the Panther you could look through the shell ejection plate? Serious goggery!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle I am a bit disheartened thta none of my Napoleonic reference books is kind enough to give a indexed item either to the inventor or to air-rifle. With a reported air pressure of 800psi [!!!!!] one can only assume that thye may have been a bit delicate for normal warfare though as a seige defense weapon they would be a force multiplier. Anyway here is the nub of the long article IMO

Thanks for the information Marcus. Always been a great site for groggery. BTW for nu. read: http://www.nunames.nu/about/about1.pdf

http://www.conscript-heroes.com/Art48-Lockhart.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_Lysander

"The longest operator of the Lysander in the Indian Air Force was No.4 Squadron. About the time No.1 Squadron was involved in the thick of the battles over the retreating battle at Burma , No.4 Squadron, IAF was officially raised at Peshawar on 1 February 1942 as the third operator of the Lysander. The core of the squadron was made up of the pilots who returned via the middle east after an year long stint with the RAF fighter command in 1941 in the UK. Plt Offrs MM Latif, Edwin Nazirullah and MS Pujji were the first to report from this lot, they were followed in later days by Plt Offrs Ranjan Dutt , Shiv Dev Singh and OP Sanghi. Habib Ullah Khan, a Cranwell trained officer formally took command on the 12 February. " http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1940s/Lysander02.html But are Indians relevant to the book??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Indian_Air_Force I had no ideea it was of 1932 origin!. If the author wishes to stray into seniority territory vis a vis The Navy and Army I would mention that both had fairly senior officers and indeed a colonial governor. I have a copy of the 1939 "Flying Reference Book" which has nothing useful on colour but is intriguing for being pre-war guide to aviation. The BBC had its own flying club at Redhill!!.

The full shortlist and their share of the vote: 1) Goblinproofing One's Chicken Coop by Reginald Bakeley (Conari Press) 38% 2) How Tea Cosies Changed the World by Loani Prior (Murdoch Books) 31% 3) God's Doodle: The Life and Times of the ***** by Tom Hickman (Square Peg) 14% 4) How to Sharpen Pencils by David Rees (Melville House) 13% 5) Was Hitler Ill? by Hans-Joachim Neumann and Henrik Eberle (Polity Press) 3% 6) Lofts of North America: Pigeon Lofts by Jerry Gagne (Foy's Pet Supplies) 1% And you can read more here: http://www.thebookseller.com/news/goblinproofing-ones-chicken-coop-wins-diagram-prize.html

Nice map/chart?. I have a this book which is interesting on early travel. http://www.questia.com/library/407387/touring-in-1600-a-study-in-the-development-of-travel

I side with the comments about the terrain. I think BF made a major error by having Normandy as the first in the series as it is expecting new players to the system to deal with by far the hardest terrain. It would have been a big ask even if the game system had been up to scratch which it was not. However we have now reached V2. But lets face it given the choice most real soldiers in WW2, I suspect, and most gamers prefer not to operate in a claustrophobic environment.

Seems the BBC have picked up omit also with an article today:

CMAK for me : )

To be honest I am very surprised that most contributors here has not already got a copy, or at least have a large enough WW2 library that the stories are not new and therefore did not feel the need to buy it. But perhaps I am very book oriented.

The Companion is excellent reading and I would recommend it to anyone. The problem appears to be the shipping costs being disproportionately high. Has anyone investigated the chances of slipping them across them in bulk to a reseller in Europe and Canada? I was in New Brunswick in October so somebody giving me 50 copies coming up from Maine [OK so its an 8 hour round trip to Woodstock but ..] I could be selling them here against receipt of funds. How many are left?

I have heard it said that the British defended the slab nature of the tank armour on the bais that in combat it would rarely be perpendicular to an enemy gun. Literally true but one feels it may be a post-event rationalisation. The Valentine did actually have curved armour. I do have an English tank commanders memoir where he retreats from the enemy firing over the back deck. As he put it it had more slope than the front and he liked the idea of having armour and the engine between him and the enemy. The difference in speeds between a Valentinne in reverse and full speed across country probably being reasonable it does make some sense. Now whether someone took this view for the Archer design .... : ) I kid.

I read the article linked below today and wondered how one deals with people in power who misuse it. Apparently Nixon prolonged the Vietnam war by sabotaging the 1967 Vietnamese peace talks on the premise it would help his election prospects. Now if we can get back to milk conspiracies .... : ) http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/shocking-new-evidence-reveals-depths-treason-and-treachery-watergate-and-iran?paging=off

The growth of towns and cities is quite an interesting subject. The necessity of a town within half a days travel was quite an important driver to expand commerce from the village. All other things being equal you could find towns a certain distance from each other being twice a half days travel. Obviously towns themselves had reasons to be where they were - good communications, river for travel or crossing, a pass, or raw resources. Salt being one of the prime ones from earliest times. You can download free travel books and my favourite for travel descriptions and a very clever plot is "The Lightning Conductor" by C.N & A.M Williamson October 1902. I have the eighth edition dated November 1904. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33845/33845-h/33845-h.htm For context: " By the start of the 20th century, the automobile industry was beginning to take off in Western Europe, especially in France, where 30,204 were produced in 1903, representing 48.8% of world automobile production that year."

Travel in the US from 1800. Though an obvious booboo is that there were no trains in the US in 1800 and few in 1830 so despite the blurb it is not just trains being considered. : ) " This first map from the 1932 Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States shows the rate of travel by rail from New York City in 1800. " http://www.treehugger.com/slideshows/public-transportation/how-fast-could-you-travel-across-usa-1800s/page/2/#slide-top

I am impressed that you take the words above from the link as being the final word. I too read the application before posting originally and see it as an example of weaseling of the highest order. Milk apparently can contain nutritive additives without mentioning it in the name and now we are looking at a request that non-nutitrives can be added also without providing any warning to the casual consumer. And not just milk but 17 other products. Now I may be daft but I like foods to say what they are and when it is a natural product like water, milk , eggs if there is any tweaking I want to know about it. And I do not mean by reading the list of ingredients on what should be a fundamentally pure product. It does seem to slide past people that the amount of consumer time devoted to reading small labels with ingredients might be better served if there were some categories of food which were ALWAYS know to be pure. So to "promote honesty and fair dealing" a natural product can also be adulterated and sold under the same word. If they truly cared for honesty why not actually categorise milk and sweetened milks. If you care to buy a sweetened milk then you know to read the label.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesnoth looks very good

I see that the US Dairy industry is asking for milk to be redefined so that added sweetners would not be mentioned as an ingredient! Cute. One of the applicants is the grandly named: International Dairy Foods Association which actually seems to be solely US companies and includes the like of Abbott Labratories. Anyway I am sure there is an uproar in the US but perhaps not as it will only affect milk and 17 other milk based foods. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/20/2013-03835/flavored-milk-petition-to-amend-the-standard-of-identity-for-milk-and-17-additional-dairy-products One of the sweetners that could be added is aspartme which has quite a catalogue of doubts. As you are what you eat it does seem that a great con is being had on the general population. But bear in mind the good intentions of the lobby: You could not make it up could you!

And more from the jugglers http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/22/quadracopter_throws_and_catches/

Ah yes the Chinese versus the Japs and perhaps also the early and late Russian battles. COuld be some serious mileage in the Chinese market. : )

And then its not only drones but also people who drone on and on on their on-line accounts http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/raytheon-makes-it-easier-for-the-government-to-track-you/12529?tag=nl.e660&s_cid=e660&ttag=e660 It is going to be a very complex problem and I can see that the drone manufacturers and the gun industry would both probably the fruits of a continued stand-off. As for enforcing any public land/private land border shootings ..... nightmare.