Staffan

Great read, however page 156 the M4A1 Late, I take it someone got carried away sine there is some stuttt.. stute... stat... repeats! Staffan

USS New Jersey was used shortly in Vietnam, she was recomissioned on 8th April 1968 and used to provide supporting gunfire (80% of targets attacked in Vietnam was within reach of the 16 inch mk7 gun on the Iowas) her appearance was however shortlived diplomats claimed her gunfire was destabilizing the situation and provoking a "hostile superpower response" so she was withdrawn again and placed back in reserve on December 17th 1968. The accuracy of ship artillery is better than land artillery it has to be by design. you are hurling shells from a vessel moving at speeds greater than 25 knots while maneuvering against tarets doing the same thing. A british officer that was involved in fighting in the '82 Falklands war was once quoted in lamenting the fact that the Royal Navy had to few guns to lend in gunfire support. Also having heard accounts fron the effect of just the 3 inch Oto Melara I worked on in the RDN I wouldn't want to be were it hit and it only has a 9 nautical mile range (about 18kyds) and it should have been quite a sight and rather devastating on the shore. (I'm glad to see the RDN having adopted the US Mk45 on the newer ships and even making modular mountings that can accomodate both 3 and 5 inch weapons depending on the circumstances. Oh btw we were capable of faster and more accurate gunfire than the 155mm M-109s from the danish Army, and also a greater volume of fire. 85rnds pr minute Staffan

In the first Desert Storm they could take out HAS at those ranges, and you have to remember that they are designed to hit other targets moving rapidly and maneuvering, the salvos are made to create a spred (new Jersey delivered 210 tons of ordnance over a nine minute firemission in lebanon in the 80's) The firecontrol systems are a lot more advanced than those on groundbased systems. With regard to seas, the guns are stabilised you need very rough seas state 5-6 to seriously impair performance. Staffan

I never heard of any warships being at anchor (In the 20th and 21st centuries) while providing gunfire support. You need to be able to do maneuvering and have steerage so you can defend yourself and also stay flexible. I'd like naval gunfire support in CMSF though the new 5inch guided rnds and LASM would be cool, but outside if timeframe. Staffan

Broadsword, 14 and 16 inch rifles have effective ranges of about 20 NM. the US 5 inch 38 Cal was no good over 20.000 yards so that is the extremes. Staffan

Normally you would fire one tube (Or in BB slang rifle) at a time, mainly to spare some of the stress in firing, but also to keep a stable firingplatform. (A fun fact regarding the use of sequential firing is the forced use by the italian ships, there mount were fairly poorly constructed so you had to fire sequentially to avoid disrupting own fire). Sequential firing also spares the blastbags on the barrels, and lastly you get a longer effect inland. With regard to naval rifles there are a lot of extra factors involved in the firing because of the range, that can also contribute to sequential firing. Staffan

I'd propably start with the baby steps in the editor (Never really mastered the editor in CM:SF). My goal would be designing some defense scenarios, company sized units or less for defender, my main objective being realistic, playable but not necesarily historic battles. playability and replayability would be the key here. Staffan

In a CL you could turn against the wind, you couldn't give any support accurately though. The Mulberrys lacked the maneuverability Admitted being on a DD or DE would propably ruin ones feelings for a hot dinner, with soup! I have gone through rather unpleasant winds in coasters and if the master is even remotely competent it is possible to work in those conditions Staffan

Considering that naval artillery is any infantrymans wet dream for support (Ask any marine about BB support) mainly because even light naval guns 3-5 inch on destroyers are way more effective than most ground artillery, both in firecontrol and in volume of fire (16 inch 50 cal on the Iowa class BB (only class with the 50 cals) had a reload time of about 30 seconds and could hit targets up to 20 miles inland each broadside consisted of 9x2000 lb shells it could ruin most peoples days when you drop VW's on them and even filling those things with HE. Also magazines on ships are fairly large in excess of 200 shells per 16 inch mount, then you have combat support ships that kind top off ammunition. Lighters guns have vast increases in ammunition. Staffan

Actually ship based systems are a lot more accurate than land based systems, we had the 3inch (76mm) Oto Melare in the dansih navy on the corvette I served on, we did some "burst" firing at ranges out to 9 miles (nautical) with salvoes of up to 10 rnds in 15 seconds and we got everything in a CEP of 100 meters... Nor the dasnish support ships carry the 5 inch (127mm Mk45) and it is a vastly superior weapond albeit with a lower sustained firerate Staffan

127mm Mk45 guns, pretty good dual purpose IIRC Staffan

Thanks Yair... good initiative

Just a funny little swedish IFV, sporting a 35mm Bushmaster cannon, very capable FCS, camera's for the troos in the compartment (viewable on a slewable monitor so everyone inthere can see) http://www.armyvehicles.dk/cv9035.htm Staffan

FM Blücher Yeah possible, but there are some serious differences though and I will miss the CV9035. Still working with multimedia stuff on a daily basis I'm just happy to se some serious wargames being developed... Staffan

I still lack one side to CMSF, where are the danes, we've been fairly active in Iraq, we're doing a more than decent job in the Helmand province an afghanistan, we'd propably send troops to Syria if need be. we have decent equipment Leo 2A5DK, CV9035, M-113G3 (Any M S fans here could call it the VikingGavin:D) EAGLE armored cars and the usual small arms stuff... would be nice to be remembered once in a while... Oops Rant mode off Staffan