RE: THE THREAD!!!

RE: THE THREAD!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room

Message

Mynok -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:23:23 PM)
Hump day tithe.......I love 3 day weeks.....[:D]

USSAmerica -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:30:23 PM)
Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D]

bobogoboom -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:31:34 PM)
I hate yall.

bobogoboom -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:31:44 PM)
morning tithe.

bobogoboom -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:33:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Parole - Tithe. [&o] My wife's birthday, so we're going out to eat at her favorite Mexican restaurant. [img]http://bestsmileys.com/eating1/10.gif[/img] Which one? Most "Mexican" restaurants around here are really Texmex. There are a few notable exceptions. A lot of the places around here offer both Mexican and Tex-Mex. Some of my favorites are the Tex-Mex variety...like fajitas. [&o] Tex-Mex is good too. I prefer to make my own fajitas, but a good chile relleno....yum. best texmex is in san antonio

bobogoboom -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:34:34 PM)
congrats YAVA!!!!

bobogoboom -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 2:34:45 PM)
-29

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 3:14:36 PM)
No turns [:(]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 4:19:44 PM)
Still no turns [image]http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/airforce/PDT_Xtremez_37.gif[/image] and no Threadsters about. 'Tis a quiet day indeed...

USSAmerica -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 4:26:38 PM)
I'm about, just busy with actual work at work today. [8\|] I can't help you with turns, though.

Speedysteve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:07:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Hump day tithe.......I love 3 day weeks.....[:D] LOL[:D] A Hump day over here could have another meaning[;)]

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:09:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yava Don't want to boast about anything but I did defend my BA diploma thesis [:)] Boast away! Well done ! [&o][&o][&o][&o] Now go home and enjoy yourself for a while!

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:12:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D] Good news for your re-union group. USS America will live again. Unfortunately as a LHD (LHD-9 to be exact) instead of a CVN, as the name so richly deserves. I wonder what they will name Enterprise , when CVN-65 is retired in a couple of years? A YP?

USSAmerica -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:19:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D] Good news for your re-union group. USS America will live again. Unfortunately as a LHD (LHD-9 to be exact) instead of a CVN, as the name so richly deserves. I wonder what they will name Enterprise , when CVN-65 is retired in a couple of years? A YP? A gator freighter, huh? I guess it's better than the current, "reef class" ship that carries the name. [:D]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:20:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D] Good news for your re-union group. USS America will live again. Unfortunately as a LHD (LHD-9 to be exact) instead of a CVN, as the name so richly deserves. I wonder what they will name Enterprise , when CVN-65 is retired in a couple of years? A YP? It's the march of time old boy. HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales have been ordered, but as CVs instead of BBs. However, the government have only ordered 6 of the new destroyers which are suppossed to escort them [8\|]

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:24:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: USS America quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D] Good news for your re-union group. USS America will live again. Unfortunately as a LHD (LHD-9 to be exact) instead of a CVN, as the name so richly deserves. I wonder what they will name Enterprise , when CVN-65 is retired in a couple of years? A YP? A gator freighter, huh? I guess it's better than the current, "reef class" ship that carries the name. [:D] There had been a very strong movement to name the Next CVN America, but Gerald Ford's death pre-empted that. And this "gator freighter" will carry 20+ F-35's.

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:28:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dixie quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve quote: ORIGINAL: USS America Me, too. I had my 3 day week last week. [8D] Good news for your re-union group. USS America will live again. Unfortunately as a LHD (LHD-9 to be exact) instead of a CVN, as the name so richly deserves. I wonder what they will name Enterprise , when CVN-65 is retired in a couple of years? A YP? It's the march of time old boy. HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales have been ordered, but as CVs instead of BBs. However, the government have only ordered 6 of the new destroyers which are suppossed to escort them [8\|] True, but the RN's not building many battleships these days , and previously those names did belong to ships of the line. I also wonder how the EU feels about it's member states having ship types with agressive sounding names like "destroyers"? I wonder if the European navies will re-classify such ships as "Large Frigates" or "Large Escorts" . Sort of like "Through-decked cruisers".

niceguy2005 -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 5:45:21 PM)
Xoing

rtrapasso -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:01:33 PM)
Found this comparison between different carriers: [image]local://upfiles/7543/2650BCF1AA354B4FABD20F638491D010.jpg[/image]

Mynok -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:07:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Speedy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Hump day tithe.......I love 3 day weeks.....[:D] LOL[:D] A Hump day over here could have another meaning[;)] It does here too..... [;)]

niceguy2005 -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:16:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Speedy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Hump day tithe.......I love 3 day weeks.....[:D] LOL[:D] A Hump day over here could have another meaning[;)] It does here too..... [;)] It does? D#@! and I missed it. [:(][:'(]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:28:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve True, but the RN's not building many battleships these days , and previously those names did belong to ships of the line. I also wonder how the EU feels about it's member states having ship types with agressive sounding names like "destroyers"? I wonder if the European navies will re-classify such ships as "Large Frigates" or "Large Escorts" . Sort of like "Through-decked cruisers". **** 'em [image]http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/airforce/PDT_Xtremez_32.gif[/image] I've heard all sorts of rumours about these carriers, mostly so bloody stupid they're unbelievable. We'll be sharing the actual carriers with the Froggies for example [:D][X(] How does that work? They run the mess decks while we run the fighting bits? [8\|][:D] There'll be JSF when QE enters service though, it'll be the carbon fibre death providers for a while. Hopefully I'll dodge that, Floggin the Oggin is not for me [image]http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/airforce/PDT_Xtremez_09.gif[/image] As an aside, has anyone else noticed how ugly ships are getting these days? [image]http://www.defencetalk.com/news/uploads/1/destroyer-type-45-uknavy_1.jpg[/image]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:30:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rtrapasso Found this comparison between different carriers: [image]local://upfiles/7543/2650BCF1AA354B4FABD20F638491D010.jpg[/image] They'll be the largest outside the US Navy. Ugly though. Also, with a ski-jump fitted how are they going to park the front few jets on the deck? [&:] [image]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/images/cvf-thales-2005-stovl-image1.jpg[/image]

Yava -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:31:50 PM)
THank you all, Brothers!

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:43:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dixie quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve True, but the RN's not building many battleships these days , and previously those names did belong to ships of the line. I also wonder how the EU feels about it's member states having ship types with agressive sounding names like "destroyers"? I wonder if the European navies will re-classify such ships as "Large Frigates" or "Large Escorts" . Sort of like "Through-decked cruisers". **** 'em [image]http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/airforce/PDT_Xtremez_32.gif[/image] I've heard all sorts of rumours about these carriers, mostly so bloody stupid they're unbelievable. We'll be sharing the actual carriers with the Froggies for example [:D][X(] How does that work? They run the mess decks while we run the fighting bits? [8\|][:D] There'll be JSF when QE enters service though, it'll be the carbon fibre death providers for a while. Hopefully I'll dodge that, Floggin the Oggin is not for me [image]http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/airforce/PDT_Xtremez_09.gif[/image] As an aside, has anyone else noticed how ugly ships are getting these days? [image]http://www.defencetalk.com/news/uploads/1/destroyer-type-45-uknavy_1.jpg[/image] Yeah , but from a radar-cross-section point of view, they are beautiful. Maybe I have no poetry in my soul, but I'd rather sail in a less attractive , but stealthy ship than a beautiful ships that's also a missile magnet! I'd love to the the Sea-wraithe proto-type put into service. carbon fibre death providers??? And I must say , that having the French run the mess decks isn't a bad idea. As long the Brit's run the ships pub! I thought that the French were going to simply buy a sistership instead of riding on yours? [&:]

AW1Steve -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:45:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dixie quote: ORIGINAL: rtrapasso Found this comparison between different carriers: [image]local://upfiles/7543/2650BCF1AA354B4FABD20F638491D010.jpg[/image] They'll be the largest outside the US Navy. Ugly though. Also, with a ski-jump fitted how are they going to park the front few jets on the deck? [&:] [image]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/images/cvf-thales-2005-stovl-image1.jpg[/image] They could always get rid of the ramp, replace it with catapults and arresting gear and buy the USN version of the F-35 , instead of the RN/USMC vesion . That would give them all-around superior performance. [:D]

Mike Solli -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:45:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Where is everybody?[&:] Another busy day here. Long, long meeting too. [>:]

niceguy2005 -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:49:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Solli quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Where is everybody?[&:] Another busy day here. Long, long meeting too. [>:] That's an oxymoron. How can it be a busy day of meetings. [:'(]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:49:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve Yeah , but from a radar-cross-section point of view, they are beautiful. Maybe I have no poetry in my soul, but I'd rather sail in a less attractive , but stealthy ship than a beautiful ships that's also a missile magnet! I'd love to the the Sea-wraithe proto-type put into service. carbon fibre death providers??? Harriers quote: And I must say , that having the French run the mess decks isn't a bad idea. As long the Brit's run the ships pub! I thought that the French were going to simply buy a sistership instead of riding on yours? [&:] That is the plan. There was a bizarre rumour a while back that we would be sharing the actual ships [8\|]

Dixie -> RE: THE THREAD!!! (7/9/2008 6:51:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AW1Steve They could always get rid of the ramp, replace it with catapults and arresting gear and buy the USN version of the F-35 , instead of the RN/USMC vesion . That would give them all-around superior performance. [:D] They are being built for catapults and arrestor gear, but not with them. IIRC they are being built as STOVL carriers, but will later be converted to a more conventional operation. I think the French design will have cats and wires. EDIT: I wonder if it'll be possible to operate F-35s off of the Invincibles should they stay around for a bit longer? [&:]

Page: << < prev 56 57 [58] 59 60 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.734375