Durandal OG

Le but de la double coque c'est plus pour réduire les bruits. Certes ca augmente un peu la resistance d'un sous marin mais 300kg ou plus et même moins je pense de charge et ton SM est hors combat titane ou pas.

Je sais bien Rule et je respect énormémént les Anglais sauf peu être pour Mers Elkebir. [04] mais les US aiment bien nous comparer avec les Anglais, ils doivent se sentir plus Anglais que Français. [11]

Moi j'ai confiance, c’est plus un pet de mouche, il faut faire la différence entre les moutons et les leaders qui eux ont des idées vraiment pas cool, maintenant c'est le travail de la police et des RGs. La vie en France n’est pas facile non seulement pour eux mais pour les autres aussi, les salaires sont a la ramasse le coût lui augmente en flèche donc la machine va finir par casser et un jour il n'y aura pas que les racailles des cités dans la rue... Avoir 20 ans aujourd'hui pour peu que tes parents ne puissent pas te soutenir et bien dans 70% des cas tu ne gagneras que le SMIC et tu ne pourras jamais trouvé d'appart, bref vive le camping. Conclusion j'ai une haine farouche contre nos politiciens, et tous, avec leurs politiques depuis leurs palais dorés.

Soyouz, Ruskof n'est pas une insulte en France c'est le terme pour désigner un russe particulièrement dans la marine, c’est même limite affectueux. (russifier le mot russe) Maintenant si c'est une insulte en russe je ne le savais pas (j’en doute entre nous). Si tu n'avais pas eu une réaction aussi conne je t'aurais présenté mes excuses la tu n’auras que mon méprit. Donc inutile de monter sur tes grands chevaux. Par contre si un autre lecteur russe ou d’origine russe se sent insulté je lui présente mes excuses. Bref pour en revenir au sujet, certes il n’y a pas de pénétrateur sur une torpille mais la charge militaire est si puissante que je doute qu’une double coque même en titane te protége. Ca peu te protéger contre les explosions à proximités ou réduire les dégâts d’une torpille légère mais je doute que ta coque résiste a un impact direct d’une torpille lourde. Les effets d’une Mk48 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_48_torpedo Certes il n’est pas blindé mais franchement les dégâts sont extrêmes.

Le plus souvent la masse de la torpille est suffisante pour traverser la coque des SMs, c'est tres gros une torpille lourde, tres tres gros. L’impact + l'explosion et ta double coque vole en éclat .

C'est fort possible dans le sens ou suivre l'autre est un petit jeu classique dans la guerre ASM car ça reste plus dur de détecter quelque chose dans ton sillage, par exemple le sous marin aime bien être dans le sillage car le bruit du sillage les couvrent. En simulation de combat ASM ton bateau reste pas en ligne droite justement pour éviter qu'un sous marin te suive en toute impunité. En plus ce genre de petite guéguerre n'est pas rare en mer avec les Ruskofs. Même moi en un an j'ai eu ma dose de petits incidents que je vais garder pour moi pour certains. Ce que je peu dire c'est la fois ou un Krivak a pointé ses radars de tir sur nous (acte de guerre) et la fois ou notre task force Franco Anglaise était suivi par l'inévitable chalutier russe. Les 13 navires de la task force ont commencé a faire des ronds autour du chalutier, et bien croyez moi c'est mieux que le manège. [08] Pour en revenir aux collisions entre SM j'imagine très bien le sous marin russe suivi par un SM US et le russe de faire une marche arrière ou un 180° pour faire peur au SM US ou l'obliger a ce dévoiler. Et parfois après ton 180° et bien tu fini encastré dans le SM d'en face. D'ailleur il me semble bien que régulierement un sous marin fait des 180° pour voir justement si il est suivi. Un autre exemple de truc dingue. Nous étions en Mer rouge a une époque ou il y avait la phobie des mines et j'avais eu un contact sonar faible et immobile droit devant nous et pas vraiment loin, peu être 2000 yards et bien notre Pacha a fait passer le bateau sur le point en question pour savoir si c'était une mine. certes la chance est trés faible mais quand même.. remarque venant d'un gars qui cartone les mail mail a la 12.7... Au final c'était probablement une épave mais il y a eu un petit moment d'angoisse sur le bateau.

Normalement il y avait une convention comme quoi les conflits terrestres ne devaient pas s'étendre a l'espace. Mais c'est également en cas de conflit une belle opportunité pour prendre un avantage capital contre une ennemie non préparé. Comme toi Kedith ça me désole, je suis un grand fan d'Astronomie depuis 1981 donc pour moi l'espace est sacré mais notre connerie nous rattrape. Pour la petite histoire c'est le buisson qui une fois de plus fout la merde. Il est vrai que si ça n'avait pas été lui j'imagine qu'un autre aurait brisé cette convention.

Salut Léo!

Moi j'aime bien les Sushis, bref Bienvenue Kran.

Oui un sous marin en mer chaude reste redoutable contre un petit groupe avec une faible capacité asm. mais ca risque quand même d'être chaud pour eux. Oui ca a même déja été le cas mais sur des attaques éclairs elles peuvent faire des dégats. moi je suis marmoud je lance 200 avions sur une task force de PA US.

Cherche sur le site de jean-pierre petit. mais d'apres un amis Norvégien la photo qu'il montre d'un port de Norvege ou ce trouve le SNA US ne corespond pas à la bonne date...

Ce n’est pas l'A10 qui est en cause. C'est plus les Pilotes US ce qu'il y a de pire sur terre pour leurs alliés. il y a une vidéo célèbre ou un Pilote US tue 4 canadiens, quand il se rend compte de son erreur la 1 ère chose qu'il fait est de dégager sa responsabilité, même pas un mot pour ses victimes. L'US army a quoi qu'il arrive un sérieux problème avec ça et depuis bien longtemps, trop de gros cons chez les ouinouins? Il y a en plus cette histoire comme quoi les pilotes US pour tenir la cadence des sorties se dopent. Ca reste a vérifier mais vue le pays et le nombre de boulette je ne serais pas vraiment étonné, et ensuite ils trouvent étrange que personne ne veuille les accompagner dans leurs missions...

PARDON!? Mais avec 20 x 30mm il ne reste rien de ton avion. 1 x 30mm a de bonne chance de faire suffisament de casse pour envoyer ton avion au tapis

A trés bien. merci :)

Comme je le précisais dans un autre message voici, un peu d'argumentation a apporter au "French basher" qui disent que la France est un pays minable militairement parlent alors qu'ils parlent du pays qui a de très loin le plus gros palmarès de victoires. il est vrai que quand tu as autour de toi toutes les nations d'Europe les plus agressive tu te dois d'être sévèrement bur***** A noter comme il est précisé sur ce site que très souvent c'est une alliance Européenne qui est nécessaire pour battre la France ou ce faire botter les fesses par elle comme pendant la bataille de Bouvine qui est un bel exemple de la suite. Bref voici le site US qui n'est hélas plus en ligne mais que j'ai eu le temps de copier. Regardez au passage en bas du site les notes, il y a quelques notoriétés. A commencé par Jean Tulard LE grand spécialiste de l'empire (si bien sur c'est bien lui). A l'origine l'url du site est : http://web2.airmail.net/napoleon/bayonet_battles.htm 1750-1815 Battles: French vs British. Era of Modern Bayonet 1. Introduction - "The Invincibles" 2. French vs British: Battles, Combats, Actions, Skirmishes. 3. Addititional information from our visitors. 4. Links. . The authors of memoirs rarely got it right, often embellishing tales of their own bravery and exaggerating enemy’s losses. Introduction "The Invincibles" and chest-thumping You probably wonder why did we add this introduction to the list of French-English battles in th era of modern-bayonet. The answer is quite simple, after the publication of the list we begun receiving e-mails from people who claimed that we chose this period only for one reason. This is to show the so-called "low point" of their favorite (French or British) army. These people were (and some still are) genuinely convinced that their army, French or British, was invincible. There’s been well-worn chest-thumping rants, military brouhaha, about the victories and invincibility of the French and British armies by our French and English visitors. For this reason we have decided to give examples of French and British military failures and defeats suffered during other periods. Basically, this short introduction is only for the worshippers of the French and British army. If you are not one of them, go directly to the list of battles and combats. According to Julius Caesar, the nations and armies are like individuals, go through times of being more courageous or less so, according to circumstances. Every country, no matter how big and strong, had better and worse periods, periods of success and periods of failures and defeats etc. The Roman army - considered by many military experts as the best military machine - experienced just that. I would say they fell into so-called "victory disease" (according to wikipedia.org: "a habit whereby military commanders, armies, and even whole nations, having experienced a series of previous military victories, becomes susceptible to defeat. This change is often characterized by the emergence of arrogance, stereotypes of enemy, disregarding their actual military capacity etc.") France and England were two of five the most successful militarily nations. But do not believe those who claim that their troops were invincible and never defeated. The history of the two countries are full of "ups and downs" on military field. The so called superiority of this or other nation lies in their authors self-aggrandizing patriotic jingoism. Many participants of the campaigns denied their own mistakes for reasons of personal and national pride. Wellington refused to write the history of the battle of Waterloo because if he had, he would have had nothing good to say about some of the participants who were celebrated as heroes. Wellington wrote to the Earl of Mulgrave: "If a true history is written, what will become of the reputation of half of those who have acquired reputation, and who deserve it for their gallantry, but who, if their mistakes and casual misconduct were made public, would not be so well thought of ?" Below just few examples of "ups and downs" of England and France on military field. England. The English boasts of himself that he is so tough soldier that he does not know when he is beaten. Samuel Johnson wrote: "Our nation may boast, beyond any other people in the world, of a kind of epidemic bravery." :-) Reading certain accounts of English mega-prowess at war, you wonder if the English casualties are not all caused by friendly fire. The authors have a knack of turning defeat into victory in the Dunkirk style. (Mind you, the catastrophe at Dunkirk was called by many as "It is victory!" and was celebrated in speeches, paintings and poems.) You may even think they were never defeated. Actually the British were defeated not only by other Europeans (between 1750 and 1815 they lost more than 60 battles to the French alone) but also by about everyone they ever fought with; Albanians (78th Foot at Rosetta), Argentinians (in 1806-7 at Buenos Aires), Americans (at Cowpens and in 1815 at New Orleans), Poles (in 1810 at Fuengirola), native Indians (at Monongahela), Egyptians (1807 at El-Hamad or Hamaad) etc. At Cowpens "... the British infantry broke, and throwing down their guns and cartridges, made for the wagon road, and did the prettiest sort of running !" (- American eyewitness) French General Souham succeeded in taking the fortress of Nijmegen defended by 30.000 English infantry supported by 1.200 Dutch troops. After the American War of Independence the British infantry became an effective force until the parade of failed invasions on the Continent. French General Suchet defeated two British amphibious expeditions from Sicily against Spain's east coast. In 1808 British corps landed in Spain but when was threatened by Napoleon, they fled. General Moore was pushing his troops so hard that discipline almost collapsed, men deserted, and some cannons were abandoned. Moore's 200 mile run to Coruna was a very desperate one. The French knocked the stuffing out of him with the Brits being not just taken to the cleaners down to the coast by Napoleon's troops, but washed, pressed and sent home in a brown paper bag. Moore's failure was followed by the "disaster of Walcheren". In 1814 at Berg-op-Zoom the British 55th and 69th Regiment of Foot advanced in the dark then suddenly broke and fled in a wild panick. Not a shot was fired at them, nor was a single Frenchman seen." (Nafziger - "Imperial Bayonets" 1996 p 164) Defeats and/or failures suffered during other periods: About 200 BC 'England' had been invaded by Belgic peoples. 'England' was subjugated by Romans for very long time (400 years). The Roman Governor of Britain, Suetonius Paulinus, met the tribesmen in a bloody battle of Boudica. Some 80,000 of the tribesmen were slaughtered, against only 400 Roman dead. After Romans 'England' was repeatedly invaded and conquered by the Vikings. There were days when the Danes made the Brits tremble, and the English litany included the prayer, "From the fury of the Danes, Good Lord deliver Us." (ext.link) After Romans and Vikings came Normans from France (ext.link) The Norman French warriors defeated the English infantry at the Battle of Hastings (1066) and the Norman leader, William Conqueror and his descendants replaced the Anglo-Saxons as the ruling class of England. (Scotland was never conquered by "foreigners", it became part of United Kingdom and the Act of Union was signed by "bribed Scottish aristocrats" (according to nationalist Scottish history). During WW2 the japanese soldiers said they couldn't regard the British soldiers as soldiers since they "didn't fight". The Battle of Singapore was a brilliant military success by the Japanese against superior numbers and equipment of British infantry (140.000 Brits vs 40.000 Japanese !) In June 1944 at Villers Bocage German tank company single-handedly took on a column of the British 7th Armoured Division, and literally destroyed it, so forestalling General Montgomery's planned unhinging of the Wehrmacht's Caen defense. Only in this combat there were 138 destroyed British tanks and 250 destroyed armoured personal carriers, anti-tank guns and transporters. German commander's tank alone destroyed with easy 14 British tanks. Pretty good for a day's work, don't you think ? Even days after this fight just the sighting of a Tiger tank caused panic amongst British troops. During further battles German radio men sometimes picked up such messages like "Help, Help, Tiger Tank !" Montgomery banned any combat report describing the fights between German and British tanks. According to Montgomery these reports undermined the morale of his troops. However, the list of Britain's victories is much longer than defeats. There are also plenty of books, articles and websites devoted to the great British military leaders (Duke of Marlborough, Nelson, Wellington, Cromwell etc.) For those interested in the history of the British army I recommend Sir John Fortescue - "History of the British Army" France. Many military experts claimed that the French enjoyed the most on military field ("... the most militarily successful nation, the French ..." - B.H. Liddell Hart British military historian) Some disagree with it (especially the German and English-speaking). The French, as their English counterparts, had their victories and failures, no doubt about it. According to wikipedia.org the French military history is perceived in the USA as being mired by humiliating defeats (such as in the Franco-Prussian War). The French military is often the butt of jokes from comedians and political commentators such as Jay Leno. In the aftermath of the French defeat in the World War II, assessments about French military abilities suffered a significant reverse in the USA and UK. British authors want you to believe that Wellington's redcoats had exclusivity in defeating Napoleonic marshals. This is not correct, the Prussians and Russians won more battles against the French than the Brits. Below is a list of French defeats during the Napoleonic wars (and it was France's most glorious period !): Queetz - Russians defeated French (under Marshal Ney) Sacile - Austrians defeated French (under Eugene) Aspern-Essling - Austrians defeated French Kliastitzy - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Svolna - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Vinkovo - Russians defeated French (Murat) 2nd Polotzk - Russians defeated French (Oudinot, Victor) Viasma - Russians defeated French 2nd Krasnoi - Russians defeated French (Roguet and NAPOLEON) Plechenitzi - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Möckern - Russians and Prussians defeated the French (Eugène) Luckau - Russians and Prussians defeated French (Oudinot) Gross-Beeren - Russians and Prussians defeated French (Oudinot) First Pirna - Russians defeated French (St. Cyr) Second Katzbach - Prussians defeated French (Macdonald) Second Pirna - Russians defeated French (Vandamme) Kulm - Russians, Prussians, Austrians defeated French (Vandamme) Dennewitz - Prussians defeated French and allies (Ney) Wartenberg - Prussians defeated French and allies (Bertrand) Möckern - Allies defeated French (Marmont) Leipzig - Russians, Prussians, Austrians defeated French (NAPOLEON) La Rothière - Russians, Austrians, Prussians, Bavarians defeated French (NAPOLEON) Bar-sur-Aube - Austrians, Russians, Bavarians defeated French (Oudinot) Lâon - Prussians, Russians defeated French (NAPOLEON) Fismes - Prussians defeated French (Marmont) Arcis-Sur-Aube - Allies defeated French (NAPOLEON) La Fère Champenoise - Russians defeated French (Marmont and Mortier) Paris - Allies defeated French ( Marmont and Mortier) The failures and defeats were not something limited only to the Napoleonic wars. World War 2 was a humilation for the French army. Even though millions of French troops were manning the defensive Maginot Line in early 1940, Hitler's brilliant blitzkrieg strategy caught the Allies by surprise. The Germans skirted the Maginot Line and slashed into France through Luxembourg and the Ardennes Forest. The Blitzkrieg moved with lightning speed as Hitler's tanks turned and raced headlong to the sea. They reached the English Channel on May 21 cutting off the French and British armies in the North. The Germans turned again, fighting their way north to secure the coastal ports and annihilate the trapped armies. Germany occupied France within just 6 weeks. And as with the English, the French have enjoyed far more victories than defeats. You can easily find books, articles and websites devoted to the battles of Austerlitz, Borodino etc. For those interested in the Napoleonic French army I recommend John Elting - "Swords Around a Throne" (excellent read) So, were the French and British armies great ? Yes. Were they invincible ? Definitely not. ~ Battles: French vs British Era of 'modern' bayonet (socket-bayonet) and musket. The term "bayonet" is thought to have derived from the French town of Bayonne, and referred to a long knife or dagger (ext.link) which was carried by soldiers. In late 1690s more emphasis began to be placed on the use of the musket as a primary weapon of the common soldier and as a result, the long pike was gradually phased out and so called plug-bayonet was introduced. It was a spear-like blade to which was attached a long conical steel plug inserted directly into the muzzle of the soldier`s musket, a collar lodging against the barrel to prevent it sliding too far in. The disadvantage of this bayonet was that once fixed, the gun cannot be fired until the bayonet was removed. The new , socket-bayonet first appeared in the French army in the 1670s but it was not until 1715 (in British army circa 1725) when the familiar triangular section bayonets were introduced as the new standard pattern. The bayonet had the blade attached to a hollow sleeve which slipped over the muzzle of the musket. The blade was below the axis of the barrel and left clearance to permit the musket to be loaded and fired while the bayonet was fixed. The triangular socket bayonets were used in the following wars between France and Great Britain: - 1741-1748 : War of the Austrian Succession - 1756-1763 : Seven Years War (incl. the French and Indian War) - 1792-1802 : Revolutionary Wars (incl. French invasion of Ireland) - 1802-1815 : Napoleonic Wars The bayonets were also used in many other wars but not between the French and British. Battle/Combat/Action French victory British victory June 1743 Dettingen - German-British victory May 1745 Fontenoy French victory - Oct 1746 Roucoux French victory - July 1747 Lauffeldt French victory - Nov 1747 Berge-op-Zoom French victory - 1748 Maastricht French victory - July 1754 Fort Necessity French-Indian victory - July 1755 Monongahela River French-Indian victory - Aug 1756 Oswego French victory - July 1757 Hastenbeck French victory - Hannoverian-German-British army led by the Duke of Cumberland, son of King George II of Great Britain. Aug 1757 Fort William Henry French victory - Jun 1758 Louisbourg - British victory Jul 1758 Ticonderoga French victory - April 1759 Bergen French-Saxon victory - June 1759 Fort Niagara - British-Indian Aug 1759 Minden - German-British Sep 1759 Quebec - British victory Sep 1760 Montreal - British victory Oct 1781 Yorktown American-French victory - May-Aug 1793 Siege of Valenciennes - Austrian-Hannov. -British victory Aug-Dec 1793 Toulon French victory - 6-8 Sep 1793 Hondeschoote French victory - 17-18 May 1794 Tourcoing French victory - 22 Aug 1798 Killala Bay French victory - 27 Aug 1798 Castlebar French victory - 5 Sep 1798 Callooney French victory - 8 Sep 1798 Ballinamuck French victory ? - 12 Oct 1798 Donnegal - British 19 Sep 1799 Bergen Op Zoom French victory - 2 Oct 1799 Bergen op Zoom - Russian-British 6 Oct 1799 Casstricum French victory - 20 March 1801 Canopus - British 6 July 1806 Maida - British 15 Aug 1808 Rolica - British-Portug. 21 Aug 1808 Vimeiro - British-Portug. 21 Dec 1808 Sahagun - British 29 Dec 1808 Benevente - British 16 Jan 1809 Coruna French victory - 12 May 1809 Oporto - British 27 June 1809 Casa de Salinas French victory - 16 July 1809 Flushing - British 28-29 July 1809 Talavera - British-Spanish July-Dec 1809 Walcheren French victory - 16-24 May 1810 Siege of Mequinenza French victory - 10 July 1810 Barquilla French victory - 24 July 1810 Coa River French victory Ney defeated Craufurd. - 11 Aug 1810 Villagarcia French victory - 27 Sep 1810 Bussaco The Brit-Portug. repelled the assaults of French troops but were nevertheless forced to withdraw. According to Jac Weller Busaco was "a technical defeat [for the British] although claimed as victory" - 13 Oct 1810 Fuengirola Polish-French victory - 5 March 1811 Barossa - British 11-15 March 1811 Series of skirmishes at: Pombal, Redinha, Casal Novo, Foz do Arouce - British-Allies 25 March 1811 Campo Mayor - British 29 March 1811 Guarda - British 3 April 1811 Sabugal - British-Portug. April 1811 2nd Siege of Olivenza - British April-May 1811 Blockade of Almeida French victory - April-May 1811 2nd Siege of Badajoz French victory - 5 May 1811 Fuentes de Onoro French The French claimed victory, because they won the passage at Poco Velho, cleared the wood, turned the British right flank, obliged the cavalry to retire, and forced Wellington to relinquish 3 miles of ground. British-Portug. The British also claimed victory because the village of Fuentes was in their hands and their object (covering the blockade of Almeida) was attained. The French, without being in any manner molested, retired. 16 May 1811 Albuera British commander Beresford was certain he was defeated. Wellington's reaction to Beresford's account was: "Write me down a victory". In strategic terms it was a defeat for the British, since it forced Wellington to give up the rest of the 1811 campaign. draw ? British casualties 6,000 killed, wounded and prisoners French casualties were 5.936 (British authors "upgraded" the French losses to 7,000, 8,000 and even 10,000) 25 May 1811 Usagre - British May-June 1811 3rd Siege of Badajoz French victory - June 1811 Operations around Almeida French victory - 22 June 1811 Elvas French victory - 25 Sep 1811 Carpio de Azaba - British 25 Sep 1811 El Bodon French victory. Wellington was caught too dispersed by Marmont and was driven back several km in disorder. - 27 Sep 1811 Aldea da Ponte - - 28 Oct 1811 Arroyo dos Molinos - British-Portug. 29 Dec 1811 Membrillo French victory - Dec 1811 - Jan 1812 Siege of Tarifa - British-Portug. Jan 1812 Siege of Ciudad Rodrigo - British-Portug. March-April 1812 4th Siege of Badajoz - British-Portug. 11 April 1812 Villagarcia French victory - 18 May 1812 Almaraz - British 11 June 1812 Maguilla French victory - June 1812 Siege of Salamanca Forts - British 21 June 1812 Lequeito - British July 1812 Siege of Castro - British 18 July 1812 Castrejon French victory - 18 July 1812 Castrillo - British 22 July 1812 Salamanca - British-Portug. -Spanish July-Aug 1812 Siege of Santander - British 23 July 1812 Garcia Hernandez - British 11 Aug 1812 Malajahonda French victory - Sep-Oct 1812 Siege of Burgos French victory. It forced the British to withdraw all the way back to Portugal and give up Madrid. - 23 Oct 1812 Venta del Pozo French victory - 25 Oct 1812 Villa Muriel French victory - 28 (23 ?) Oct 1812 Villadrigo - British 28 Oct 1812 Tordesillas French victory - 30 Oct 1812 Puente Larga - British 10-11 Nov 1812 Alba de Tormes - British 17 Nov 1812 San Munoz French victory - 20 Feb 1813 Bejar - British 12-13 April 1813 skirmishes at: Biar and Castalla - British-Allies 2 June 1813 Morales - British June 1813 Siege of Tarragona French victory - 18 June 1813 skirmishes at: Osma and San Milan - British-Allies 21 June 1813 Vittoria - British-Portug. -Spanish 24 June 1813 Villafranca French victory - 26 June 1813 Tolosa - British 25 July 1813 Roncesvalles French victory - 25 July 1813 Maya French victory - July-Aug 1813 Siege of San Sebastian French-Allies victory - 26-28 July 1813 Sorauren French-Allies victory - 30 July-1 Aug 1813 Sorauren - British July-Aug 1813 Blockade of Tarragona French victory - 31 July - 1 Aug 1813 series of skirmishes at : Venta de Urroz, Sumbilla and Yanzi - British-Spanish 2 Aug 1813 Lizaso French victory - 31 Aug 1813 San Marcial - Spanish-British Aug-Sep 1813 Siege of San Sebastian - British 13-14 Sep 1813 skirmishes at: Ordal and Villafranca French victory - 7 Oct 1813 Bidassoa - British, Germans Portug. 7 Oct 1813 Vera French victory - 10 Nov 1813 Nivelle. - British 9-13 Dec 1813 series of skirmishes at: Villefranque, Nive, Anglet, Arcangues Barrouillet and St. Pierre - British-Allies 16 Jan 1814 Molins de Rey French victory - Feb-April 1814 Siege of Bayonne French victory - 15-25 Feb 1814 series of skirmishes at: Garris, Arriverayte and S. Etienne - British-Allies 27 Feb 1814 Orthez - British 8 March 1814 Bergen op Zoom French victory - 17 March 1814 Daunia's Raid French victory - 19 March 1814 Vic-Bigorre French victory - 20-24 March 1814 skirmishes at: Tarbes and Etauliers - British-Allies 8 April 1814 Croix de Orade - British 10 April 1814 Toulouse draw The French call it their victory. They lost only 3.200 draw The British call it their victrory. The British-Spanish casualties 4.500 14 April 1814 Bayonne French victory - 16 June 1815 Quatre Bras draw ? victory ? The French stayed on the battlefield. They lost only 4.000 draw ? defeat ? Wellington retreated after battle and failed in joining Blucher. Casualties 4.800, heavier than French. 17 June 1815 Genappe French victory - 18 June 1815 Waterloo - German-British -Netherland victory French British and Allies * Total victories 63 60 * * - the majority of 'French battles' was won by the French alone (but not all, the French also used foreigners), while a vast majority of 'British battles' was won by a mix of German, British and other troops. Often the British troops consisted only few percentages or half of the victorious army and it's very difficult to call their victories as only 'British'. For example at Waterloo the British infantry battalions consisted of 30 % of all battalions. In contrast the Germans made up 50 % (!) Approx. 20 % were Dutch and Belgian battalions. So it was rather an international or German victory over the French, and not British. ~ Additional Information From Our Visitors. 1. From Mark Townsend (England), he wrote us an interesting info: "One point which may or may not be of interest, the last British battle where bayonets were used, was during the 1982 Falkland's war. The Scot's Guards were given the order to fix bayonets before charging Argentine positions on Mount Tumbledown." 2. From J. Tremblay (France): "Greetings... Soult won battle against Wellington at Toulouse. First the question of losses. The French had lost near 4000 men while the Brits lost at least 8000. Secondly: the French position has never been taken nor pierced by the enemies. Moreover the Brits were exausted and gave up that position. Thirdly: this represents a strategic victory for the French but Soult obeyed senat's acts and from the provisional governor and thus the war ended in the "Midi de la France." Nicoles Gotteri (France): "Toulouse correspond à un incontestable succès stratégique." Jean Tulard (France): "Qualifiée de défaite française, cette bataille mérite plutôt le nom de victoire française, dans la mesure où le plan de Soult a réussi et celui de Wellington a échoué, sans parler des pertes ennemies deux fois plus lourdes." Links. Prussian Army ~ Russian Army Napoleon, His Army and Enemies

il faut que je pense a la poster avant. ^^ moi aussi je suis en retard. ;) c'est un site que j'ai eu la bonne idée de sauvegarder car il n'est plus en ligne et il compare les armées Anglaise et Francaise pendant la période de la baionnette. Au finail il y a 63 victoires Francaise pour 60 Anglaise et encore les Anglais ne sont jamais seul alors que nous nous le sommes bien souvent. bref une recherche que je voulais effectuer mais jamais réalisé par faute de temps. comme ils aiment nous comparer aux anglais et bien ils recoivent une claque et leurs monde et certitudes a deux balles s'effondre. ;-)

Ma 1 ère réponse répondais de façon générale, je pense que les Argentins sont entrée que d'un pied en sachant qu'ils ne resteraient pas et si l'Angleterre relevait le défis. Apres il n’y a peu être eu plus de combat en raison de l'élan de solidarité sud américains avec les argentins alors qu’à la base ils ne sont pas aimés. Et le peuple qui soutenait sont gouvernement, mais du coup il n'étaient pas prêt a ça. Si ils voulaient rester ils auraient effectivement commencé par envoyer des soldats de métier. Inondé les baies ou le débarquement est possible de mines. Et ils auraient acheté plus d’armes anti navire avant cette opération. Moi je pense que c’est plus un coup de bluff suivi du doigts dans l’engrenage. Face au SNA pas grand chose, rien même. c'est un peu pour ca qu'elle est resté bien caché. Si j'avais ete a la place de Galtieri j'aurais préparer mon armée a rester pas a repartir. systeme defense AA tres puissant missile anti navire cotier. troupes d'élites et le plus important une porte de sortie honorable pour les anglais si ca existe...

Ils ont quand même perdu plus de 50 avions... 22 par des Harrier et le reste par la flotte et les hommes au sol. Mais la Navy n'a pas été très efficace. Dans le détail, tableau de chasse des missiles déployés par les Britanniques (source = en.wiki et divers) Marine: Sea Wolf 2 + 3 probables (8 tirs) Sea Dart 7 (?) Sea Cat 1 (sur 80 tirs) Sea Slug 0 (1 seul tir) Army: Rapier 2 (mais 14 revendiqués) Javelin 9 (100 tirs) Blowpipe 9 (95 tirs) contre des cibles lentes principalement Le Seawolf (monté notamment sur le Broadsword) devait lui permettre de remplir cette tâche : 5 shots sur 8 missiles tirés (2 sûrs et 3 probables). Pour l'anecdote, lors d'une attaque de Skyhawk, le Coventry (dont la conduite de tir connaissait une défaillance) fit maladroitement écran et empécha le Broadsword d'accrocher les Argentins qui volaient bas. Résultat : 5 bombes sur le Coventry, qui coula. 19 morts. C'est énorme 10 bombes, une bombe de 250 kg sur un navire moderne qui n'a plus une once de blindage et le bateau est hors combat ou coulé. Si il avaient eu plus de succes avec leurs bombes tu aurais en plus retiré a la task force un peu plus de sa capâcité anti aériene a chaques fois. 50 c'est peu quand tu sais qu'ils font fassent a des avions pas adapté a l'attaque d'une task force. Tu me confirme que c'est le sea cat la cata de la guerre des malouines. Mais je suis un maniaque de la defense aa pour moi il y en a jamais assé a commencé par nos bateaux au passage. nous avons des pardon un PA mais rien pour l'escorter, mais ca c'est un autre sujet. :) Pour ce qui est de la 12.7 Cole ou Malouines la je sais pas tu as peu être raison, peu être les deux. Encore une fois si tu me demande a moi il y a 8 x 12.7 par bateau minimum. 1 systeme long portée 1 systeme courte portée.

Le moteur à hélice génère moins de chaleur que le réacteur donc visiblement ca peu être efficace contre un vieux manpad comme le strela. Il y a probablement peu de différence en des "light flares" et des "IR flares" en plus.

Oui je sais bien mais visiblement ils ont une double fonctions, ca reste a confirmer.

La planète entiere a interet a marcher avec les chinois, nous aussi. ;-)

Une barque? c'est lourd et tres gros une torpille, il faut un lanceur, ca aussi c'est gros, ta barque elle a coulé depuis longtemps. Je me souvien des barges de débarquement qui chargeaient nos tubes avec rien qu'une torpille la barge était bien chargé. Note, les mini sous marins Iranien peuvent facilement être vue du ciel par contre accroche toi pour les détecters une fois en plongé car j'imagine qu'ils plongent juste sous la couche d'eau chaude (10 mètres) pour éviter les sonars de coques.

les grecques sont fort contrariés par le deal des USA avec les turques au sujet de 100 F16. Ils risquent donc d'acheter des Rafales. pour garder l'avantage.

Marin qu'un an mais en un an j'ai constaté la poussé chinoise à Djibouti et en Somalie ou leurs ambassades étaient bien présente et affichaient leurs efforts a la vue de tous sur de petits panneaux en bois juste devant l'ambassade. pour l'atlantique 2 http://www.netmarine.net/aero/aeronefs/index.htm visiblement oui avec les Lance-cartouches éclairantes.

Oui je ne vois pas en quoi je ne te comprends pas. ?? Deby est clairement soutenu par la France alors qu'il n'est vraiment pas populaire au Tchad, (j'etais tombé sur un forum de ses opposents et les méssages étaient tres clairs). mais entre lui ou des reblles à la solde du soudan qui ne demande qu'a piller et massacrer il est peu être un poil mieux.