The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
They should just come up with a toned down version and start selling them to allies because if we're only going to buy 46 more F-22 then we need to start selling them abroad to keep the production line open.
Do not fear, for I am with you; Do not anxiously look about you, for I am your God.-Isaiah 41:10 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made - Psalms 139.14a
Also active on WePlayCiv.
We haven't decided the exact amount, but the order will be between 48 and 56 planes.
Do not fear, for I am with you; Do not anxiously look about you, for I am your God.-Isaiah 41:10 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made - Psalms 139.14a
Also active on WePlayCiv.
If it's not been in any you're trying to dismiss his post with smoke and mirrors.
So every war we fight uses every tool in our arsenal? The planes were not active during the conventional phase of either war, if it had been it would have been used.
The nuclear submarine is a perfect rebuttal, because while they were used they didn't have to be used. They were simply there with the CSGs anyway and had Tomahawks so why not let them take a jab. We could use F22s for any number of missions in Iraq/Afghanistan today, but it is certainly not worth it to do so.
There are all sorts of things in our arsenal not being used in either war, or that were only useful for certain parts of it.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
Oh, I agree the F-35 is a useful multi-role aircraft. Additionally, if the military is truly saying they don't want more F-22s, then that should be the end of the argument - politicians in general don't know ****.
Congress gave us some extra submarines last year too, despite the Navy saying it already had a procurement schedule we were cool with. I am sure Congress knows better.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
Personally, I hate it when politicians try to force the military to take something it doesn't want because it's just old fashioned pork barrel politics. Sure, it creates jobs in certain districts but the military's mission shouldn't be to provide corporate welfare.
Another example is C-130s which for years the military has said they don't need more but each year some how Congressmen force them to take more. It's a complete waste of money.
What amuses me in all this is the the two aircraft carriers being built for the Royal Navy may well be ready a couple of years before there are any F-35's for them to operate (the Harriers being scheduled for withdrawal from service in the next few years) leaving the RN with no actual carrier capability whatsoeveer after spending all that money. In the cost overrun/delay entering service competition this is looking like a win for the US over the Brits - quite outstanding.
So France is the primary naval power in Europe now?
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Missile Cruisers like the Ticonderoga have proven themselves useful over and over and over again including the launching of missiles in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo. They're not going any where as they're so damn useful. The F-22 has its uses as well and that's why we have 141 of them right now with orders in place to bump the number up to 187. The question is do we need more then 187? Tons of analysts say no because it gets used to little and 187 should be enough especially since we're going to have over 400 F-15s helping them out for at least the next 20+ years.
AEGIS surface combatants have never been used in the role envisioned(and thus, caused all that expensive hardware to be installed). Spru'cans could, and did, deliver cruise missiles much more cheaply than CGs or DDG-51s. However, just as an AEGIS warship can do other things than shoot down a ****load of missiles, so too can a F-22 do other things than only fight otehr fighter jets.
Remember, the F-22 is suppose to replace the F-15, of which there's something like 900 in USAF service. No matter how superior the F-22 is to the F-15, 900 planes can be in 700 more places than 200 F-22s. So stopping the program at 190 doesn't make any sense, especially when we're rolling the dice on a fighter jet that hasn't even reached production yet to pick up the slack.
The F-35 will be replacing three aircraft plus seven countries have already put down their hard cash to be the first to get them so the F-35 production is going to be many times F-22 production. Foreign purchases of the F-35 already amount to 138 to the UK, 131 to Italy, 85 aircraft have been ordered by the Netherlands, an unknown number to Canada but probably in the 50-100 range, 116 to Turkey, 75 planes with an option to buy 25 more from Australia, an unspecified number for Norway but Norway has spent $125 million in order to take part in the design specification process which means they're extremely likely to buy around 50+ aircraft, the Danes want to replace 48 F-16s so they'll be buying 40-50 F-35s. Hell, the F-15 is still selling strong around the world and likely will for years to come.
Meaning while Israel has said they want over 100 aircraft but will likely have to wait until the other orders are filled as will Singapore who will probably want 25-50 aircraft. In addition to these orders Finland, India, Brazil, Spain, and Taiwan said they're interested or maybe interested and all of this before the first plane has even been produced. Not even counting US demand (which is no doubt be far larger then any other purchaser) we already have demand for 700-900 planes (with the US orders likely to be ~700) so the F-35 is going to be a smashing commercial success even on its initial production run.
Yeha, the JSF program was designed in such a way that it's "too big to fail". Unlike the F-22, which only has one customer.
By the way, the RAAF is so sure that the F-35 thing is going to work they've gone out and bought 24 (new)Superbugs to act as an "interim" strike fighter...conveniently giving them a 4.5 Generation fighter on hand when the F-35 falls apart/fails to meed production schedule.
BTW just because the US doesn't buy more then 187 F-22 doesn't mean the plane is dead. Australia says they might want to buy some as does Israel and I'm sure there will be more to come (Korea, Taiwant, and Japan all have aging F-15s they might want to replace not to mention the gulf states). The F-22 is an expensive fancy toy but there is a need for air superiority fighters around the world so it can continue production based on foreign demand. Hell, even the F-15 continues to have strong export demand so there will be no shortage of demand for air superiority fighters.
The reason why the F-15 has strong export demand is because the F-22 is currently not being permitted to be sold overseas. Japan and Australia have both lobbied very heavily for that restriction to be lifted, Australia because it has zero faith in the F-35 reaching production in time, and Japan because it needs a replacement for their F-15s.
The problem is if we sell the F-22 to those two countries, the Israeli lobby will probably make sure it's sold to Israel, and Israel is entirely untrustworthy to be given that kind of technology.
Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.
Oh, I agree the F-35 is a useful multi-role aircraft. Additionally, if the military is truly saying they don't want more F-22s, then that should be the end of the argument - politicians in general don't know ****.
OSD is saying that, but there have been USAF Chief of Staffs who say they do need more F-22s. And they got fired for publicly contradicting Gates. Which is why it's better to say:
"The Pentagon says we don't need any more. The Air Force, on the other hand..."
Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.
The problem is if we sell the F-22 to those two countries, the Israeli lobby will probably make sure it's sold to Israel, and Israel is entirely untrustworthy to be given that kind of technology.
The Japanese aren't necessarily trustworthy, either.
KH FOR OWNER! ASHER FOR CEO!! GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!
Tweet
Comment