RE: metric system???

RE: metric system??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames

Message

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/21/2008 1:12:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SemperAugustus Please let me know if you need help with Japanese units Would you be interested in writing up something about the Japanese submarines and/or merchant marine?

SemperAugustus -> RE: metric system??? (4/21/2008 1:28:51 PM)
Sure no problem. I can read Japanese so I can use Japanese sources as well.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/21/2008 7:22:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SemperAugustus Sure no problem. I can read Japanese so I can use Japanese sources as well. Lovely. I'll email you material to get started.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 3:20:20 AM)
I keep getting a steady stream of writeups. Here are 3 I received this week. From Mark: [image]local://upfiles/16701/8A0DDEB135C941939960DF4E1EBDE325.jpg[/image] EDIT: I was a little too agressive with the cropping. The missing text at the bottom is "planes during the engagement."

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 3:21:51 AM)
Here is one from Andy. He keeps muttering about "no copilot!" for this one. [image]local://upfiles/16701/BD59DBA0AA54474999681AB888F0E75F.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 3:23:26 AM)
A special request from Rob (Warspite21). [image]local://upfiles/16701/28B034FA53594571A639C43CB45F759A.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 3:25:12 AM)
4th and last in the series. Rob did have a lot to say about the Warspite. [image]local://upfiles/16701/DF067ADC9C814BAB8A18361CE48034AD.jpg[/image]

wosung -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 11:23:19 AM)
Wow, interesting stuff to read. I like large write-ups. A minor correction for the Warspite: It should read "Fliegerkorps" instead of "Fleigerkorps". Regards

marcuswatney -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 2:55:14 PM)
I enjoyed the Warspite write-up very much, but while it is correct to refer to a ship as 'she', I have never heard anyone refer to the Royal Navy itself as 'she' (second paragraph). I am sure the Senior Service, having been founded by King Alfred in the ninth century, thinks of itself unsentimentally as 'it'.

Sabre21 -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 7:41:34 PM)
And I thought I was getting a bit verbose on the aircraft write-ups..I'll never think that again after reading about the warspite..lol.

composer99 -> RE: metric system??? (4/28/2008 9:16:01 PM)
I have spotted an error: quote: Admiral Cunningham had two choices, return to base or engage the enemy at night. True to his fighting character he chose the former [emphasis mine] but [...] To correct it and improve this sentence, I would suggest: "Admiral Cunningham had two choices: return to base or engage the enemy at night. True to his fighting character, he chose the latter. For their part, the Italians - not believing [...]"

Froonp -> Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (4/28/2008 11:46:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets A special request from Rob (Warspite21). 7th paragraph, the "Psychological" word seems wrongly spelled. For the B-25H, why not also say that this is the only one version with no copilot ?

warspite1 -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (4/29/2008 2:09:48 AM)
Guys Thanks for the positive feed-back on the "old Lady". Apologies for some of the schoolboy spelling errors! As for referring to the RN as she....Marcus what can I say?!?!? As I wrote to Steve the other day, my goal is to get all the write-ups I have signed up for done and will then set about proof reading and cross checking for accuracy - but your comments in the meantime are most welcome. Rob (Warspite1)

Joshuatree -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (4/29/2008 4:56:39 PM)
"while on route, she detonated a mine that caused major damage.... a speed of 15 knots therefter "---> thereafter Good luck with the proof reading [;)]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/4/2008 1:56:40 AM)
Here are some writeups from new contributors. Andy has been spending a lot of time and effort revising the air unit writeups. But here are two new ones. The mixed composition of the Mexican air force makes the usual standard of presenting statistics inappropriate. [image]local://upfiles/16701/FFF92E7D8DB84FDEAC0B763A37546C5D.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/4/2008 1:57:56 AM)
A second Mixed air unit writeup by Andy. [image]local://upfiles/16701/5920A3592A68450A8F8218861D4C9AA3.jpg[/image]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/4/2008 2:02:30 AM)
This is the first writeup by Birger. Looks good to me! He is working on doing writeups for all the Japanese submarine units. The general style will be to pick one or two actual submarines based on the year built (and other unique aspects of the WIF unit) for anecdotal information. Here it is I-19, one of the 20 "Flying Subs". [image]local://upfiles/16701/72EF6373930A4964B46ED9B7BA9924C1.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/5/2008 12:53:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets This is the first writeup by Birger. Looks good to me! He is working on doing writeups for all the Japanese submarine units. The general style will be to pick one or two actual submarines based on the year built (and other unique aspects of the WIF unit) for anecdotal information. Here it is I-19, one of the 20 "Flying Subs". Warspite1 Nice idea Birger - I shall look to do something similar for the CW submarines where possible.

Joshuatree -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 12:28:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets A second Mixed air unit writeup by Andy. [image]local://upfiles/16701/5920A3592A68450A8F8218861D4C9AA3.jpg[/image] In the middle of the writeup... North Africa and the Mediterranian ---> Mediterranean. I think my eyes hurt a bit now [;)]

warspite1 -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 12:37:58 AM)
Joshuatree Once I have finished my naval write-ups how do you fancy proof reading these for me? Warspite1

Joshuatree -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 12:52:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets This is the first writeup by Birger. Looks good to me! He is working on doing writeups for all the Japanese submarine units. The general style will be to pick one or two actual submarines based on the year built (and other unique aspects of the WIF unit) for anecdotal information. Here it is I-19, one of the 20 "Flying Subs". [image]local://upfiles/16701/72EF6373930A4964B46ED9B7BA9924C1.jpg[/image] Not sure about this one, my english is not perfect so excuse me if I'm wrong here. In the lower part of the writeup: Its captain Commander ---> shouldn't be this; It's ?

Sewerlobster -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 2:15:30 AM)
No "its captain Commander" is correct. It's=it is, your suggestion would mean "it is captain Commander". "its" is the English exception to the rule on possessives.

Ingtar -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 3:28:49 AM)
Leading to the ever popular: it's its captain, isn't it?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 5:01:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ingtar Leading to the ever popular: it's its captain, isn't it? Or: Tis its captain's responsibility, isn't it?

Sabre21 -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 8:10:47 AM)
Thanks Joshua..I got the Mediterranean fixed... Andy

Sabre21 -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 8:15:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish No "its captain Commander" is correct. It's=it is, your suggestion would mean "it is captain Commander". "its" is the English exception to the rule on possessives. It is possible though the the guy's name was Commander and as the capatain he would be captain commander...kinda like captain kangaroo. I did know a sergeant with a last name of major..and since there is a rank in the army of Sergeant Major..it got pretty confusing pretty quick when he was around.[:'(]

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 12:50:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sabre21 quote: ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish No "its captain Commander" is correct. It's=it is, your suggestion would mean "it is captain Commander". "its" is the English exception to the rule on possessives. It is possible though the the guy's name was Commander and as the capatain he would be captain commander...kinda like captain kangaroo. I did know a sergeant with a last name of major..and since there is a rank in the army of Sergeant Major..it got pretty confusing pretty quick when he was around.[:'(] In the book Catch-22 there is a character named Major Major Major.

Joshuatree -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 1:03:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish No "its captain Commander" is correct. It's=it is, your suggestion would mean "it is captain Commander". "its" is the English exception to the rule on possessives. Ofcourse, I stand corrected. [;)]

cockney -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 9:36:39 PM)
just to get this in. Right Wright, write wright right, right. Right.

cockney -> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land (5/9/2008 9:44:09 PM)
but on a technial note, navy guys can correct me. the guy in charge of a ship is tittled Captain and can be of any rank. Therefore you could have Captain able seaman Jones or Captain Captain Smith.

Page: << < prev 26 27 [28] 29 30 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1