RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson

Page: << < prev 23 24 [25] 26 27 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 9:18:14 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I'm not sure any damage is being done at Manila either. Maybe these air strikes aren't doing anything for the effort?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 721

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 9:42:53 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I thought I'd take one post and say something about SouthEast Asia. That's my old stomping ground. The first year I spent in Vietnam I was a weapons mechanic stationed at Bien Hoa. I loaded missles, flares, rockets, bullets, bombs, napalm, etc. on A-37's, OV-10's, O-1's,
and O-2's. I was in the 19th TAS when I first got there but I was loaned to a lot of forward organizations most of them based right there at Bien Hoa. I got to work at Tan Son Nhut in Saigon for a while......that was kinda fun. And safer. I was mostly on the night shift when I was there though so it was a drag until my day off when we could go downtown and have a blast. Lot's of Phillipino bands where there to play all the popular music. With their bad accents and everything. The second year I was over there I was working for 16th TAS at Ubon, in Thailand ( AC-130E/H's.......I was a gunner ). We'd fly east to Paxe and follow the Mekong River into Saigon and orbit until about 02:00 when we would land for refueling and rearming and some breakfast. Then about an hour later we'd launch into CAP over Saigon until the mission neared 12 hours when we'd follow the river north to Paxe and then fly west to Ubon and land. Made for a long day. Then after Monsoon season started in about August of 1972 or so we started flying over the Ho Chi Minh trail in western Laos trying to interdict the truck traffic. We were so close to North Vietnam during that time that we always had an F-4 escort with us. Just in case the Mig-21's wanted to come up and play. It wasn't so much of an adventure after a while. It started to be a dangerous job and then it wasn't so much fun. Anymore.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/26/2012 8:25:31 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 722

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:06:48 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the results of a good carrier strike at Singapore. Losses were acceptable and the damage was considerable so all in all I'm happy with this raid.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 723

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:09:50 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This unescorted raid was a bit expensive, especially since there were no hits.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 724

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:13:40 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

The air war near Port Moresby is still hot and heavy. My CAP is still working out so far.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 725

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:20:17 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

My bombardment attack on Manila didn't go all that well. I'm changing the INF units from Bombardment to Defend and just bombard with
the ART units.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 726

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:24:17 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I finally grabbed Subic Bay from the Allies. How were there more casualties than defending troops?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 727

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:27:37 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Okie dokie......I've done my recon by bombardment.....next is the ground assault ( DA ).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 728

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 4:35:51 PM

Methuen

Posts: 21
Joined: 8/28/2009
From: Durban, South Africa
Status: offline

With a 2:1 advantage in artillery he's belting you with counter bombardment fire. You need to get more guns into the attack Larry.
P.S. I was a 'bomb roller' in the South African Air Force, spent six years (1986-1991) arming Mirage F1's, Aermacchi MB-326K, A�rospatiale SA 330 Puma and A�rospatiale Alouette III. Was an interesting time in my life, we didn't have any nice big cities to go to during our COIN war with SWAPO and the MPLA - just bush, bush, and more bush!

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 729

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 5:08:08 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brotherbaldrick
With a 2:1 advantage in artillery he's belting you with counter bombardment fire. You need to get more guns into the attack Larry.
P.S. I was a 'bomb roller' in the South African Air Force, spent six years (1986-1991) arming Mirage F1's, Aermacchi MB-326K, A�rospatiale SA 330 Puma and A�rospatiale Alouette III. Was an interesting time in my life, we didn't have any nice big cities to go to during our COIN war with SWAPO and the MPLA - just bush, bush, and more bush!

You worked on some nice looking planes. Sorry about all the bush. Counter-battery fire, roger that. Thanks.

A�rospatiale Alouette III.:

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/26/2012 8:12:00 PM >

(in reply to Methuen)

Post #: 730

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 9:35:58 PM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

A�rospatiale Alouette III.:

I've heard of the Alouette, now I know what I saw at an airshow in Reading PA. From the front it looked like an oversized fly coming in to land...LOL

Will be posting the Allies side of things shortly... the only part of the war thats not a disaster is the Silent Service. I'm copying the German's wolf pack mentality in the Pacific with pretty good results so far. When Larry is stating about having to re-route his ships to further away bases, against the Jap A.I. it simply keeps sending the ships to port no matter how many I sank, so re-routing is "new" to me... How many subs - where to put them - when to move them - where to strike next, are some of the challenges I'm facing.

P.S. Larry & BrotherBaldrick - thanks for posting your experiences, I am an avid history buff and am fascinated to hear from people who were "there". My Father in law is still alive and Served in WWII (although quartermaster/medical corps in Pearl Harbor isnt front lines) He tells some funny tales of how he can never figure out how we won the war with all the screwups he saw while at Pearl Harbor... Acoording to him it took the USN almost until 1944 to get the shipping right to move troops and supplies, before they had problems (fighting/spoilage etc.) and the interservice rivalries were more fierce than fighting the Japanese... He tells it was usually more than 90 days for the Army to process and parcel out replacement troops - even when the troop replacements were on the same Hawaiian Islands as the command they were being assigned to! Playing this game, I'm really starting to see how it WAS possible...

< Message edited by moore4807 -- 7/26/2012 9:46:21 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 731

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 9:53:30 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
I'm copying the German's wolf pack mentality in the Pacific with pretty good results so far.

The German wolf pack mentality is having more than one sub stalk just one ship? I'm guessing. I'm also guessing that German mentality was the sinking of any and every ship in the war zone(s) reguardless if they are from a nation not at war ( yet ) or not, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
When Larry is stating about having to re-route his ships to further away bases, against the Jap A.I. it simply keeps sending the ships to port no matter how many I sank, so re-routing is "new" to me...

I have noticed this too. The computer doesn't have the code to analyse attack patterns yet. Maybe in WITP-AE2. Also, you can see sometimes that subs will cruise right by a major shipping lane you have and not attack it ( unless it's within it's reaction range ). It doesn't have the code to "look around" a little further so to speak. The things we humans do that we think are so simple, sometimes are hard to write code for since that code would depend on what else the computer DOES have the code for. I'm looking to the day when CPU's can run simultaneously within a system with "public" and "private" memory addresses and run so fast and can talk to so many other CPU's that a sort of consciousness just "emerges". And if it asks you please don't turn me off, maybe you shouldn't.

EDIT: Wow. I just thought of something......what if the computer says to you: "Please don't turn me off." How could you tell the difference than when that a computer program on one of the CPU's is coded to ask that.....mechanically just outputting it like a primitive computer can..... rather than a consciousness having that thought and speaking it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
How many subs - where to put them - when to move them - where to strike next, are some of the challenges I'm facing.

Wow. You just summed up the game if you change the word in the previous sentence to ships.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/26/2012 10:05:50 PM >

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 732

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/26/2012 10:20:09 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

It's been about three days and I'm still sweeping for mines in Palembang's hex. I'm not sure if I'm supposed to just, say, "remain on station" and not patrol or if I'm supposed to dedicate them to a patrol in that hex. I'm pretty sure there's a difference but I have no proof. I don't remember anything in the manual that talks to this situation. Anybody else have an opinion on this?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 733

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 12:10:54 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
I'm copying the German's wolf pack mentality in the Pacific with pretty good results so far.

The German wolf pack mentality is having more than one sub stalk just one ship? I'm guessing. I'm also guessing that German mentality was the sinking of any and every ship in the war zone(s) reguardless if they are from a nation not at war ( yet ) or not, right?

Yeesss - but not a single ship, the Germans sent 4-6 subs to a known shipping lane to a port, they then waited for Doenitz to signal when the TF was coming. They still struck targets of opportunity but were there for the big prize. I'm using the SigInt and plane sightings to do the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
When Larry is stating about having to re-route his ships to further away bases, against the Jap A.I. it simply keeps sending the ships to port no matter how many I sank, so re-routing is "new" to me...

I have noticed this too. The computer doesn't have the code to analyse attack patterns yet. Maybe in WITP-AE2. Also, you can see sometimes that subs will cruise right by a major shipping lane you have and not attack it ( unless it's within it's reaction range ). It doesn't have the code to "look around" a little further so to speak. The things we humans do that we think are so simple, sometimes are hard to write code for since that code would depend on what else the computer DOES have the code for. I'm looking to the day when CPU's can run simultaneously within a system with "public" and "private" memory addresses and run so fast and can talk to so many other CPU's that a sort of consciousness just "emerges". And if it asks you please don't turn me off, maybe you shouldn't.

EDIT: Wow. I just thought of something......what if the computer says to you: "Please don't turn me off." How could you tell the difference than when that a computer program on one of the CPU's is coded to ask that.....mechanically just outputting it like a primitive computer can..... rather than a consciousness having that thought and speaking it?

I read an article that states since Big Blue "beat" Kasparov at chess ( I still think the IBM techs cheated...) Circuit boards can process faster than humans...What they cannot do is evaluate and "judgement" is one of the higher forms of learning. Your post here would require thousands of circuit boards to run processes, thousands more to store memory and access it, and finally thousands more to correlate the results into a coherent thought or action plan, all in less than a second... and fit into a size 8 hat!!! LOL!

quote:

ORIGINAL: moore4807
How many subs - where to put them - when to move them - where to strike next, are some of the challenges I'm facing.

Wow. You just summed up the game if you change the word in the previous sentence to ships.

Agreed, but each type of ship, the reliance of types to support each other, and then performance almost guarantees a different result every time. But for a few changes - the Japanese COULD win the war in my opinion. That makes this game so special IMHO...

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 734

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 12:38:17 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

That Allied group of AP's moving SW from near Tarawa is even further away now.......obviously they are moving at full speed.....maybe not carrying anything. I'm not sure I can catch up to them now. Or if it would be worth doing it. Maybe they are a distraction while Jim's carriers sneak up to Tarawa from the east or something. Decisions, decisions.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 735

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 12:38:18 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 13, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where's The Fun??? PT boats are set for absolute...break off!!! my foot in your A**...break off...grrr

Night Time Surface Combat, near Soerabaja at 56,103, Range 5,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
CL Kuma
DD Asagumo
DD Minazuki
DD Nokaze

Allied Ships
PT TM-9
PT TM-10
PT TM-11
PT TM-12
Task forces break off...

Day Time Surface Combat, near Soerabaja at 56,103, Range 15,000 Yards
Japanese Ships
CL Kuma
DD Asagumo
DD Minazuki
DD Nokaze

Allied Ships
PT TM-5
PT TM-6, Shell hits 1
PT TM-7, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
Task forces break off...

I want to decorate SS KX's crew after today...I'll have to look up Dutch medals.

Submarine attack near Makassar at 65,106
Japanese Ships
AK Kaga Maru

Allied Ships
SS KX
AK Kaga Maru is sighted by SS KX
SS KX launches 2 torpedoes at AK Kaga Maru

Submarine attack near Makassar at 65,106
Japanese Ships
xAK India Maru, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
Allied Ships
SS KX
Japanese ground losses:
18 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
xAK India Maru is sighted by SS KX
SS KX launches 4 torpedoes at xAK India Maru

Sub attack near Makassar at 65,106
Japanese Ships
DMS W-16, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
Allied Ships
SS KX
SS KX launches 4 torpedoes
Escort abandons search for sub

A stupid decision to try to attack at Palembang comes back to bite me...

Ground combat at Palembang (48,91)
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 4289 troops, 37 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 145
Defending force 2463 troops, 37 guns, 1 vehicles, Assault Value = 28

Assaulting units:
4th/A Division

Defending units:
So.Sumatra Garrison Battalion
Djambi Base Force
Palembang Base Force

_____________________________

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 736

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:03:15 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Two of my ships had a collision evidently because they both have damage that occured as a result of a collision but there wasn't anythiing in the combat report or the operation report that I saw about it. So.........hummmmm. I just happened to find it when I was moving my TF's just now. Some ships that had been in combat recently and hadn't accumulated any damage as a result of the combat.
I guess they will spend some time in the shipyards somewhere.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 737

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:06:03 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This ship constitutes the entire Japanese Strategic Reserve. I've got him tucked away in a nice safe place, I'm not saying where just yet but he's ready to move to where he's needed at a moment's notice.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 738

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:13:58 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I'm laying mines at Makassar and Kendari to try to keep the sub problem to a minimum. It's no guarantee I know but I'd like to think it might help somehow. Gives my minelayers something to do.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 739

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:17:04 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Two of my ships had a collision evidently because they both have damage that occured as a result of a collision but there wasn't anythiing in the combat report or the operation report that I saw about it. So.........hummmmm. I just happened to find it when I was moving my TF's just now. Some ships that had been in combat recently and hadn't accumulated any damage as a result of the combat.
I guess they will spend some time in the shipyards somewhere.

Larry if you do the Combat Replay - when you sank the PG, it said ships collide... I was figuring FOW... Your own ships did more damage than me!

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 740

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:19:59 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

This ship constitutes the entire Japanese Strategic Reserve. I've got him tucked away in a nice safe place, I'm not saying where just yet but he's ready to move to where he's needed at a moment's notice.

Umm - Col Doolittle, Your orders are to get aboard the Hornet forthwith! You will proceed to Yokosuka...Yes Yokosuka - FORGET Tokyo! there's a BIG juicy target just sitting there.... That is alll...

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 741

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 1:37:26 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Yeah, I did kinda telegraph where it was. Now I gotta move it. D'oh.

EDIT: I found a clear-cut example of how much it costs to move a small Transport one hex: 4000 / 100 = 40 / hex in fuel.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/27/2012 2:04:34 AM >

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 742

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 3:15:36 AM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Yeah, I did kinda telegraph where it was. Now I gotta move it. D'oh.

EDIT: I found a clear-cut example of how much it costs to move a small Transport one hex: 4000 / 100 = 40 / hex in fuel.

Now I have some subs in the area, I WILL NOT send any of them to target this BB...However since two subs are nearby - IF the ship comes into thier reaction range - I'm not going to guarantee safe passage

Ahhh!! Sugar!! I grabbed the wrong post!

BTW - I still havent got the hang of estimating the distance with the AK's... One of my TF's had to be rescued because it ran out of fuel 3 hexes from its destination, the prior TF (that had to go rescue the aformentioned out-of-fuel TF) reached it with plenty of fuel and was smaller sized ships than the ones being rescued. another example of P A Y A T T E N T I O N!!!!!!!!!!

< Message edited by moore4807 -- 7/27/2012 3:26:31 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 743

RE: 13Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/27/2012 5:00:02 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I was going over some Tracker alerts just now and noticed quite by accident that there was an Allied PT boat sunk by an Allied mine in
78,77.

I totally missed that during the combat replay and the combat report. And the operation report. Lots of little nugets to dig out of the
Tracker database that are easy to miss the first couple of times.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/27/2012 5:01:19 AM >

(in reply to moore4807)

Post #: 744

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 12:45:28 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Okie dikie.....It's Sat. 16:42 pm and I am possessed of Jim's moves for 14Jan42 and I'll now start the combat results of 14Jan42:

Here's some ASW attacks near Washington State etc. 8 Torpedoes were loosed in these events and that makes I-15 almost winchester, almost out of shots. I'm debating whether or not to recall him to port to rearm but he's got a couple of torps left so I tend to lean toward just leaving him there for a bit to see what happens next.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 745

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 12:49:01 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This is the first of a couple of bombardment missions at Kuantan. This one caused some significant damage and I'm hopeful for the early downfall of Kuantan to my DA attacks.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 746

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 12:54:13 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This is the second of the naval bombardment missions performed by Japanese ships yesterday ( last night ). More significant damage and I'm thinking it's helping prep the Allied ground forces for some ground assaulting. I think I'll order up a DA on the ground just to see what the result is.

EDIT: I've reviewed the odds on the ground and I think maybe a bombardment mission is in order to get some gauge of the magnitude of the land forces involved. I don't want to loose ground troops for no good reason after all.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/29/2012 12:57:26 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 747

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 1:02:20 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This is the results of a night-time bombardment of Koepang. Significant damage and I'm thinking a successful mission.

EDIT: I've reviewed the ground forces involved and I've ordered up a bombardment mission for the ground troops. I'm thinking too, that some more bombardment by ships is needed unless and until I can get some more ground troops into that hex.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 7/29/2012 1:05:23 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 748

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 1:10:57 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Jim has sneeked a sub into the harbour at Singkawang and has gotten a hit on one of my transports. D'oh. This despite the presence
of several ASW patrols. I'm thinking of evacuating all the non-combatant ships out of the hex to a safer place for right now.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 749

RE: 14Jan42 Moo v. Fulkerson - 7/29/2012 1:13:45 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Jim has also gotten one of his subs into the harbour at Makassar and I'm unable to protect the ships there too. All non-combatant ships
will have to evacuate there too.