rickusn

Thanks

Ive tried that before and then it seems to get quite cluttered and hard to follow as more entries, data and any text are added. But that was my reason for asking. I find it very long to scroll through now but easier on the eyes when reading and searching.

EZ board is impossible to do tabular stuff right on.

Ill try something a little different on the next update. Just dont know what.

TopHatter

I see what you mean. All of my careful spacing of the numbers after the ship type were adjusted.
Gotta be a way to do this....

rickusn

Yep.

Im trying to talk may wife into my own web page. Or maybe Ill try to do something with Seawaves like I helped with their Ship Programs section. Which Id like to do something better with also.


hazegray.org has a pretty good format but hasnt been updated in three years.

globalsecurity.org has good stuff too but rather uneven in its treatment of navies but especially good on the USN. Although updating is hit or miss.

subsim.com is the best site for World Naval News but I find it all over the net.

sewaves.com is the best site to track vessel locations/deployments/commissionings/decommissionigs and as I mentioned the Ship Program section that tracks new construction. I help occassionally with that as I find info from different sources. Its not up at the moment as he is moving the site to a new home.

navaltechnology.com is a useful place for more detailed info on some new construction warships

TopHatter

Yeah I've seen most of those. I agree that updates are usually the bane of military websites.
I like navaltechnology though, seems to be updated pretty good and sticks to the facts in very neutral manner.

TopHatter

I hate to reply to a reply, but this might help the user friendliness.
How about changing point size or setting bold type to offset the countries?
For example

Great Britain
CV 3

DDG 12

Thailand

CV 1

rickusn

No probs. I never thought of that because I never used different Fonts. LOL

Not perfect but I should be able to reduce some spacing. OTOH It will be slower typing and I might confuse myself besides. LOL

Thanks.

rickusn

my mistake LOL

TopHatter

Doing a little sandbox testing are we?

Anon

"Sniper, that analysis would be almost correct...if we were talking 1985."

You seem to forget that NATO lacks the capabilities it did in 1985 also. The Russians fall from greatness has largely overshadowed a NATO downsizing of over 50% of it's force structure.

Orcaborealis

There is a huge difference here: While western Europe has downsized, there are new equipment coming along:

- Long range cruise missiles
- AAW ships (10 new state-of-the art already with ESSM and SM-2 missiles, more than 10 more to come)
- New fighters are now coming along
- Existing fighters are upgraded with better radar, better missiles, are getting air-to ground capable
- New helicopters both for navies and army use
- New subs for some countries, and new SSNs are underway for Britain and France
- Better air defense, with SAM-systems such as Patriot and Nasams
- Better anti-tank missiles, anti-tank helos are now operational in several countries
- The armed forces are gradually getting more professional, with less emphasis on drafted soldiers.


What about Russia?
- Almost every new aquisition has been postponed, postponed, postponed, ships are still half-completed in the yards after more than 10 years
- The morale in parts of the armed forces are extremely low, desertion is common, especially in the army
- It is even worse than this: There are not money for mantaining the existing equipment, which are hitting aircraft and the navy terrible hard, the real number which are operational is hard to tell, but it must be real bad by now.
Look at Ricks listing of the world navies, Russia has probably something like 19 operational surface combatants! 19 - and that is for four fleets! In the largest naval exercise this year, the admiral in charge of the Northern Fleet warned that the Kirov-class ship was dangerous to put to sea, because "it can blow up at any moment"!! He was obviously more concerned about his men than the Russian politicians, which are the one to blame, incapable of taking meaningful decisions regarding the armed forces.
-The Russian economy is smaller than that of France, and is more comparable to the economy of the Netherlands!!! Even if manpower is cheaper, this speaks volumes...


Orca

TopHatter

Simple solution. As you might have noticed, I have a thing about italicizing ship names and foreign words. (an italics fetish, you might say)
What I do is type the entire post, then go back and quickly highlight and click the italics hotkey at the top. Seems to work well, and the post get's a good proof read whilst I am hunting for ship names etc
Yes, I am a nitpicker

Anon

Army related systems are irrelevant to the naval battle, and i just don't think a NATO TF can survive against a multi-regiment backfire attack, and i don't think NATO can seriously threaten the Backfire infrastructure in any serious way.

That to me is the key, the rest is just window dressing, though the Russians still have a large SSN(and SSGN) fleet as well.

Any war between NATO and Russia would be over long before economic or industrial might came into play, so that's also irrelevant IMO.

Julie

Me too...I often find myself wanting to edit posts with typos.....posts that aren't mine. Typos really give me the willies.

rickusn

Me too!!! LOL

Thanks for your help. I didnt know you could do it that way.

Im not sure if I totally understand on second thought.

I can type the entire post. Then Highlight what I want for each font?

I dont think you can do that or at least I dont know how!!! LOL

Anon

Rick, you highlight the sentence you want to CAP or italicize, then right click, hit 'copy', then hit the I or B button on the control panel.

It automatically does the whole sentence. just like this.