Excalibur Squadron OOC Thread

[Zeinbrad]

This there any English films? Or this the Korean war one of those unsung wars

Also just found this little gem today
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBk14NLKUKs

[Goram]

Offf topic, but the thought just came to mind, Is their any good books/documaterys on the Korean war?Seeing as I want to be an historian I want to broaden my range past WWI and II

- Raiding the Beggar's Larder: The Search for Airpower Strategy in the Korean War, C.C. Crane
-The British part in the Korean War, Sir Anthony Hockley
- Leadership in the crucible : the Korean War battles of Twin Tunnels and Chipyong-ni, Kenneth Hamburger
- The Korean War, Max Hastings
- The Korean War : the West confronts communism, Michael Hickey
- The Korean War, Korea Institute of Military History
- The Korean War, Steven Lee
- The Korean War, Peter Lowe
- The Korean War : how we met the challenge : how all-out Asian war was averted , why MacArthur was dismissed , why today's war objectives must be limited, Matthew Ridgeway
- The Korean War: no victors, no vanquished, Stanley Sandler
- No bugles, no drums: an oral history of the Korean War, Rudy Tomedi
- The American way of war: a history of United States military strategy and policy, Russell Weigley
- Red wings over the Yalu : China, the Soviet Union and the air war in Korea, Xiaoming Zhang

From my course reading list. Have read some, but not all.

[Zeinbrad]

Offf topic, but the thought just came to mind, Is their any good books/documaterys on the Korean war?Seeing as I want to be an historian I want to broaden my range past WWI and II

- Raiding the Beggar's Larder: The Search for Airpower Strategy in the Korean War, C.C. Crane
-The British part in the Korean War, Sir Anthony Hockley
- Leadership in the crucible : the Korean War battles of Twin Tunnels and Chipyong-ni, Kenneth Hamburger
- The Korean War, Max Hastings
- The Korean War : the West confronts communism, Michael Hickey
- The Korean War, Korea Institute of Military History
- The Korean War, Steven Lee
- The Korean War, Peter Lowe
- The Korean War : how we met the challenge : how all-out Asian war was averted , why MacArthur was dismissed , why today's war objectives must be limited, Matthew Ridgeway
- The Korean War: no victors, no vanquished, Stanley Sandler
- No bugles, no drums: an oral history of the Korean War, Rudy Tomedi
- The American way of war: a history of United States military strategy and policy, Russell Weigley
- Red wings over the Yalu : China, the Soviet Union and the air war in Korea, Xiaoming Zhang

From my course reading list. Have read some, but not all.

Thanks.

[Goram]

- Raiding the Beggar's Larder: The Search for Airpower Strategy in the Korean War, C.C. Crane
-The British part in the Korean War, Sir Anthony Hockley
- Leadership in the crucible : the Korean War battles of Twin Tunnels and Chipyong-ni, Kenneth Hamburger
- The Korean War, Max Hastings
- The Korean War : the West confronts communism, Michael Hickey
- The Korean War, Korea Institute of Military History
- The Korean War, Steven Lee
- The Korean War, Peter Lowe
- The Korean War : how we met the challenge : how all-out Asian war was averted , why MacArthur was dismissed , why today's war objectives must be limited, Matthew Ridgeway
- The Korean War: no victors, no vanquished, Stanley Sandler
- No bugles, no drums: an oral history of the Korean War, Rudy Tomedi
- The American way of war: a history of United States military strategy and policy, Russell Weigley
- Red wings over the Yalu : China, the Soviet Union and the air war in Korea, Xiaoming Zhang

From my course reading list. Have read some, but not all.

Thanks.

Any time

If you want to be a military historian, it's not all about knowing lots about certain battles or how fast a certain weapon can fire. Whilst it's useful to know the specifics, especially if you're looking at technological developments, it's more important to look at the facts and interpret them. I can't really describe it, so read E.H. Carr, What is History?

If you never read another book on the military, make sure you read Vom Kriege by Carl Von Clausewitz. It's the book, as far as theory goes.

[United Kingdom of Poland]

Thanks.

Any time

If you want to be a military historian, it's not all about knowing lots about certain battles or how fast a certain weapon can fire. Whilst it's useful to know the specifics, especially if you're looking at technological developments, it's more important to look at the facts and interpret them. I can't really describe it, so read E.H. Carr, What is History?

If you never read another book on the military, make sure you read Vom Kriege by Carl Von Clausewitz. It's the book, as far as theory goes.

good book, also are you a historian.

[Goram]

Any time

If you want to be a military historian, it's not all about knowing lots about certain battles or how fast a certain weapon can fire. Whilst it's useful to know the specifics, especially if you're looking at technological developments, it's more important to look at the facts and interpret them. I can't really describe it, so read E.H. Carr, What is History?

If you never read another book on the military, make sure you read Vom Kriege by Carl Von Clausewitz. It's the book, as far as theory goes.

good book, also are you a historian.

It's a very good book, but hard to read I found. Took me a long time to digest it properly, but then what book like that is easy to read?

Yes and no, I'm a military history student. I RP on here because I find it helps me write my essays and because there's some knowledgeable chaps around. I did a paper a few months ago on the Cold War and French Indochina gave me the best piece of information I've ever come across, I'd never have found it alone.

[United Kingdom of Poland]

good book, also are you a historian.

It's a very good book, but hard to read I found. Took me a long time to digest it properly, but then what book like that is easy to read?

Yes and no, I'm a military history student. I RP on here because I find it helps me write my essays and because there's some knowledgeable chaps around. I did a paper a few months ago on the Cold War and French Indochina gave me the best piece of information I've ever come across, I'd never have found it alone.

see I'm more of a "what if" historian I go looking to see what the major turning point of a battle was.

[Goram]

It's a very good book, but hard to read I found. Took me a long time to digest it properly, but then what book like that is easy to read?

Yes and no, I'm a military history student. I RP on here because I find it helps me write my essays and because there's some knowledgeable chaps around. I did a paper a few months ago on the Cold War and French Indochina gave me the best piece of information I've ever come across, I'd never have found it alone.

see I'm more of a "what if" historian I go looking to see what the major turning point of a battle was.

That was actually what the essay was about. Something like

"Would NATO have been able to defend Western Europe with conventional forces had the Warsaw Pact launched a massive assault with AFVs during the Cold War (1949-89)?"

Just finished up one

"To what extent will warfare be the primary role of Navies in the 21st century"

T'was a bitch.

[United Kingdom of Poland]

see I'm more of a "what if" historian I go looking to see what the major turning point of a battle was.

That was actually what the essay was about. Something like

"Would NATO have been able to defend Western Europe with conventional forces had the Warsaw Pact launched a massive assault with AFVs during the Cold War (1949-89)?"

Just finished up one

"To what extent will warfare be the primary role of Navies in the 21st century"

T'was a bitch.

what did you find for the first one?
I actually did a project on that in high school, I actually set it right around the Berlin airlift (the nucleaus for the war was a fighter attack on one of the airlifts) It was a draw manely because of of 3 things
the soviets had better vehicles but the western allies had full air superiority.
the western allies would have had almost unlimited supplies because there would be no naval threats to the cargo ships 9the russians didn't have much of a navy during ww2.)
in other words, the russians might actually run out of blood, before we ran out of men
of course I ended it after a month with the US leadership (headed by both McCarthur and Patton) going nuclear on the USSR, resulting in both Moscow, Leningrad, and Berlin being destroyed (the USSR didn't have a bomber capable of reaching washington so they hit the closest allied controlled city) end result US victory.

[Goram]

This is the summary

In summary, from 1949-1989, the development of conventional capability, increasingly complemented the early preparedness to use a nuclear option. Technological advances in conventional weaponry, allied to refinement of battlefield tactics taking advantage of the region’s geography, would allow NATO to rely on conventional defence. Delaying tactics would enable reinforcements and the deployment of technologically superior conventional forces. NATO could therefore have successfully defended Central Europe from a WARPACT armoured attack from the mid/late 1970s. However prior to that time, due to inferior technology and a lack of resource, NATO would have been overrun unless it resorted to a nuclear attack.

I essentially said that a conventional defence pre-1975 was impossible. Post 1975, NATO had such vastly superior technology and training that they could overcome Soviet numerical advantages, as high as five to one and defend Europe without nuclear weapons.

Funny thing is, the Soviet numerical advantage is deceiving. They only maintain it because they refuse to scrap anything. In the 80s, when NATO fielded Abrams, Centurions and Leopard Is, the Russians still used large numbers of T-54/55s. The German tank crews tended to call them "Lunch".

[United Kingdom of Poland]

This is the summary

In summary, from 1949-1989, the development of conventional capability, increasingly complemented the early preparedness to use a nuclear option. Technological advances in conventional weaponry, allied to refinement of battlefield tactics taking advantage of the region’s geography, would allow NATO to rely on conventional defence. Delaying tactics would enable reinforcements and the deployment of technologically superior conventional forces. NATO could therefore have successfully defended Central Europe from a WARPACT armoured attack from the mid/late 1970s. However prior to that time, due to inferior technology and a lack of resource, NATO would have been overrun unless it resorted to a nuclear attack.

I essentially said that a conventional defence pre-1975 was impossible. Post 1975, NATO had such vastly superior technology and training that they could overcome Soviet numerical advantages, as high as five to one and defend Europe without nuclear weapons.

Funny thing is, the Soviet numerical advantage is deceiving. They only maintain it because they refuse to scrap anything. In the 80s, when NATO fielded Abrams, Centurions and Leopard Is, the Russians still used large numbers of T-62s. The German tank crews tended to call them "Lunch".

against a leopard, lunch is giving them to much credit a T-62 (provided that the NATO apaches, A-10's, and tornados didn't reduce them to scrap medal by then) would have been an appetizer for them, didn't they also still plan on using T-55's
also wouldn't the period between 1945-1949 still be a toss up, because the US would easily have air superiority and well, look at what happened to the Germans.

[Goram]

This is the summary



I essentially said that a conventional defence pre-1975 was impossible. Post 1975, NATO had such vastly superior technology and training that they could overcome Soviet numerical advantages, as high as five to one and defend Europe without nuclear weapons.

Funny thing is, the Soviet numerical advantage is deceiving. They only maintain it because they refuse to scrap anything. In the 80s, when NATO fielded Abrams, Centurions and Leopard Is, the Russians still used large numbers of T-62s. The German tank crews tended to call them "Lunch".

against a leopard, lunch is giving them to much credit a T-62 (provided that the NATO apaches, A-10's, and tornados didn't reduce them to scrap medal by then) would have been an appetizer for them, didn't they also still plan on using T-55's
also wouldn't the period between 1945-1949 still be a toss up, because the US would easily have air superiority and well, look at what happened to the Germans.

I meant to say to say T-54/55, not T-62.

Air power would have played a huge role. NATO had two doctrines; AirLand battle and Follow On Forces Attack (FOFA). AirLand was US only, FOFA was adopted by the rest of NATO. The idea, in a nutshell was to use ground forces in an aggressive defence, whilst stand off weapons (like aircraft, artillery and MLRS pieces) engaged Soviet reinforcements.

As I say, until the end of the Vietnam war, any Soviet attack would have been met with tactical nuclear weapons. To be honest though, I don't think anyone wanted a fight in 45-49. America held all the nuclear cards and they were hot off the heels of the last war.

[United Kingdom of Poland]

against a leopard, lunch is giving them to much credit a T-62 (provided that the NATO apaches, A-10's, and tornados didn't reduce them to scrap medal by then) would have been an appetizer for them, didn't they also still plan on using T-55's
also wouldn't the period between 1945-1949 still be a toss up, because the US would easily have air superiority and well, look at what happened to the Germans.

I meant to say to say T-54/55, not T-62.

Air power would have played a huge role. NATO had two doctrines; AirLand battle and Follow On Forces Attack (FOFA). AirLand was US only, FOFA was adopted by the rest of NATO. The idea, in a nutshell was to use ground forces in an aggressive defence, whilst stand off weapons (like aircraft, artillery and MLRS pieces) engaged Soviet reinforcements.

As I say, until the end of the Vietnam war, any Soviet attack would have been met with tactical nuclear weapons. To be honest though, I don't think anyone wanted a fight in 45-49. America held all the nuclear cards and they were hot off the heels of the last war.

if I remember right this was their unit structure
A units: T-72's all the new toys, the spearhead units
B units: slightly older stuff such as T-62's, moderate training,rear guard
c units: completely outdated equipment, almost no training, the reservists (russias old men and young boys)

[Morrdh]

Offf topic, but the thought just came to mind, Is their any good books/documaterys on the Korean war?Seeing as I want to be an historian I want to broaden my range past WWI and II

Regarding the Korean War a housemate gave me No Mercy, No Leniency: Communist Mistreatment of British & Allied PoWs in Korea. a while back. Haven't gotten round to reading it just yet, apparently it covers the story of British PoWs and it written by the chap you debriefed them when they were released back to their own side.

[Zeinbrad]

I had to have found the most amazing film to every have been conceived . It is called Harkor 44 and it's about the Warsaw uprising with a twist, It is cyberpunk/dieselpunk. The Nazi's are cyborgs or soldiers in armored suits while the rebels are just WWII esuqe civilians, just look at the concept art https://www.google.com/search?q=Hardkor ... B281%3B500 sadly the possibly of it coming out of Poland is low

[Len Hyet]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

[Morrdh]

For anyone who's interested a programme about Operation Black Buck, the Vulcan bombing raid during the Falklands which my uncle took part in. My uncle was on John Reeve's crew as an Air Electronics Officer, though I recommend reading Vulcan 607 by Rowland White as my uncle features a fair bit in that book and there are more details.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40knj0qg_Us

[Kerblaekistan]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I like that. Or all three of us can take over red flight. That would be even better.

[The Two Jerseys]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I like that. Or all three of us can take over red flight. That would be even better.

Red flight is already Toff Flight. Please pass the Grey Poupon...

[Kouralia]

I like that. Or all three of us can take over red flight. That would be even better.

Red flight is already Toff Flight. Please pass the Grey Poupon...

Feck...

Despite Smythe talking posh, and technically being a landed gentry (which he may/may not have happen to him later on in the war), he's also pretty poor. So there's no chance of a transfer...

What if he lets you in on the fact that he is willing and able to make tea in the field for officers? ("Good evening, sirs, I am the squadron's batman.")

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I won't lie - something approximating that idea did occur to me.
Unfortunately, Page doesn't know if the Americans can yet be trusted to entirely be kept to themselves. They can be so...impulsive.

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I like that. Or all three of us can take over red flight. That would be even better.

Fat damn chance.

Anyway, slight update - it turns out the new computer I've been waiting on for a while just came in today, and it'll take a while to get it ready - so the new operation may have to wait until tomorrow. Gotta make sure shit is in order.

[The balkens]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I won't lie - something approximating that idea did occur to me.
Unfortunately, Page doesn't know if the Americans can yet be trusted to entirely be kept to themselves. They can be so...impulsive.

I like that. Or all three of us can take over red flight. That would be even better.

Fat damn chance.

Anyway, slight update - it turns out the new computer I've been waiting on for a while just came in today, and it'll take a while to get it ready - so the new operation may have to wait until tomorrow. Gotta make sure shit is in order.

this calls for a statement by internet hitler....

[Monfrox]

I'd like to request that Lieutenant Pat Arnold and 2nd Lieutenant Jimmy Blanc be immediately transferred to Gold Flight, which is to be renamed Eagle Flight.

Why? Because America. That's why.

I won't lie - something approximating that idea did occur to me.
Unfortunately, Page doesn't know if the Americans can yet be trusted to entirely be kept to themselves. They can be so...impulsive.

HEY! Samantha was keeping a tradition and she hadn't had any alcoho-wait...does Page know Samantha got drunk?

[Kouralia]

I won't lie - something approximating that idea did occur to me.
Unfortunately, Page doesn't know if the Americans can yet be trusted to entirely be kept to themselves. They can be so...impulsive.


Fat damn chance.

Anyway, slight update - it turns out the new computer I've been waiting on for a while just came in today, and it'll take a while to get it ready - so the new operation may have to wait until tomorrow. Gotta make sure shit is in order.

this calls for a statement by internet hitler....

Dr Who ftw

[The balkens]

i actually found a site that lets you make hitler rants videos.....

i really need a new hobby. There's always Aircraft modeling.....

Just bought a BF-109G-2.