"Fulda Gap" Map Study

Cold war is over. How about hot war!

Iran, Syria, (Israel)! Do you want evil countries on your map? :icon_axe:

MBot: Ah, I was waiting to see what you'd come up with ;) Very nice, and certainly an exciting scenario to consider.

If ED ever decide to do a Middle East theatre I sure hope it's Iran, atleast that country is pretty mountainous, unlike the billard table that is Iraq :)

Both these possiblities have the (IMHO) disadvantage of being limited in their naval scope

Both these possiblities have the (IMHO) disadvantage of being limited in their naval scope

Not realy, during Desert storm, there was fighting in the sea. The USS stark firgate took an exocet missile. Iran has a few subs, and even a few Orions.

The mediterranean is also not far as the 1991 war showed.

I don't like it, for me it has to be somewhat belivable.

 

But if you don't mind a unbelivable scenario... The Swedish-Norwegian Union was not broken up in 1905, the Norwegian uprising was quenched in their own blood... it is now 1987 and Norway are ready to break the involontary union by force... JA-37 Viggen, J-35 Draken vs. whatever planes that Norway had back then ;)

Heh...it was a joke. Many of us here in the US joke about this scenario, since so much of our strategic force is concentrated in South Dakota. ;)

Heh...it was a joke. Many of us here in the US joke about this scenario, since so much of our strategic force is concentrated in South Dakota. ;)

We only needed a credible story behind this scenario like:

Conspiracy and fraud during elections gives an ultra nationalist the seat of power. Many states declare violation of the constitution (insert reason here) and decide to cecede from the union. The other states leaded by the new president declare such act as illigal and vow to gain control by force if needed.

Any resemblance with reality is pure coincidence...:biggrin:

In the imaginations of those who lost perhaps. ;)

Not realy, during Desert storm, there was fighting in the sea. The USS stark firgate took an exocet missile. Iran has a few subs, and even a few Orions.

The mediterranean is also not far as the 1991 war showed.

Yes, but 90% of the naval power in the region would be fielded by coalition forces and only a minuscule number of engagements would be among vessels. Most of the action would be aircraft vs. ships or ships vs. land targets. Not a single one of the regional powers has a true blue water navy that could hope to make a lasting impression on the USN which could deny them the opportunity to engage at all simply by keeping a certain distance to the enemy shores. Several CVBGs taking on a handful of corvettes and 3 (yes, all of 3!) Kilos does not make for a particularly interesting or balanced battle ;)

To give you a better impression of the terrain, here are some Google Earth shots of the Fulda Gap ( that programm is so great ):

From a mud mover or rotorhead point of view, this is certainly much more interesting than flat deserts...

Aaah, Fulda Gap - takes me back to when I was a student in the 1970's and played "serious "wargames on paper hexagon covered maps by companies like SPI and Avalon Hill. I think I still have SPI's Fulda Gap in my attic somewhere (unless the mice have eaten it).

The state of South Dakota cecedes from the union.

Rest of the Union says "OK, whatever."

you'll like this one:

 

there's sth missing....

Jever AFB; Oldenburg AFB (next to Ahlhorn and 1 km from here) and some more AFBs i think

there's sth missing....

Jever AFB; Oldenburg AFB (next to Ahlhorn and 1 km from here) and some more AFBs i think

I know it's not complete... just a quick note, "AFB"s are only in USA, overseas should be just "AB". AFAIK.

"Nörvenich AFB" in Belgium? WTF!

Google-hickup? ;)

...and the war would be over in 2 days LOL ;)

 

Another scenario, would be India VS Pakistan. But I dont feel like to martirize the pakistanis furhter even if its only virtualy. Not the indians either. Great landscape to play though. China VS Tawian has the disavantage of being fought mostly over water and traveling through the distance between both countries would make missions long.

 

The only realy strong airforce I would like to demolish virtualy would be the israely AF. Lots of planes...good ones too. Smaller mission travels, in this hsitorical and mythical land.

Over in two days? Why?

Thats the leght of time both airforces would last. :)

"Nörvenich AFB" in Belgium? WTF!

 

Google-hickup? ;)

please review your geographic skills before posting ;)

Notice how Norvenich is much further east and south than it was in your original map? Maybe his geographical skills are better than you realize. ;)

If these are German ABs, Soesterburg isn't in Germany. :D

Thats the leght of time both airforces would last. :)

Notice how Norvenich is much further east and south than it was in your original map? Maybe his geographical skills are better than you realize. ;)

 

If these are German ABs, Soesterburg isn't in Germany. :D

I thought Merseberg was supposed to be south of Nobitz

-SK

Come to think of it...Bitburg AB isn't there either.

Notice how Norvenich is much further east and south than it was in your original map? Maybe his geographical skills are better than you realize. ;)

 

If these are German ABs, Soesterburg isn't in Germany. :D

It isn't further east and south now... zooming out Googlesat moved the name Norvenich close to Geilenkirchen AB, which is really close to Netherlands, more than Belgium. I've not changed my bookmarks in googlesat. I just zoomed in and added borders.

Second, these are some (not all) airbases in Central Europe, I've never said that these are German airbases. In the original map you can also see some Polish and French airbases. Soesterberg (not Soesterburg), aka Camp New Amsterdam is in the Netherlands.

Come to think of it...Bitburg AB isn't there either.

C'mon man...

PS: just a little "errata" in my previous post: it's GoogleEarth and not googlesat, and the bookmark for "Birburg" was corrected to "Bitburg" ;)

I thought Merseberg was supposed to be south of Nobitz

 

-SK

The data about airbases in former GDR is taken from Jane's World Air Power Journal issue #20 (article "Red Stars over Germany"). Merseburg is north of Nobitz.

There is also a problem for identification because some names were in use by Russians, and were different from the original German name. eg: Finow/Eberswalde, Nobitz/Altenburg and many others.

Just one note: the map I've published is a screen taken from GoogleEarth, but the level of detail and zoom, does create some confusion. Some names are swapped, some are moved, some are deleted. But if you zoom in, airbases are located where they should be. I've used a mix of coordinates/GoogleEarth search to acquire visual ID of airbases. It's not guaranteed to be 100% error-free, but there was some form of data-validation ;)

C'mon man...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PS: just a little "errata" in my previous post: it's GoogleEarth and not googlesat, and the bookmark for "Birburg" was corrected to "Bitburg" ;)

Did your original map show Bitburg AB? No, it did not. Why are you taking this stuff so personally? Norvenich DID, in fact, change its relative location significantly between zoom levels. Not sure why you can't see that. Also, in your first map, it looked as if Brussels was being labeled as Norvenich AB...in keeping with the apparent format of the name being to the right of the map symbol. On the subject of the spelling, well, it would seem that the USAF is just as confused as I seem to be about this issue...since both spellings can be found at ALL KINDS of af.mil web-sites. RELAX dude, some of us are just critiquing your maps, we didn't mean to get drawn into a "I know more than you about geography" pissing contest. I would have looked at the googleearth maps outside your links...if I cared...but I didn't. Oh well. :rolleyes:

Did your original map show Bitburg AB? No, it did not. Why are you taking this stuff so personally? Norvenich DID, in fact, change its relative location significantly between zoom levels. Not sure why you can't see that. Also, in your first map, it looked as if Brussels was being labeled as Norvenich AB...in keeping with the apparent format of the name being to the right of the map symbol. On the subject of the spelling, well, it would seem that the USAF is just as confused as I seem to be about this issue...since both spellings can be found at ALL KINDS of af.mil web-sites. RELAX dude, some of us are just critiquing your maps, we didn't mean to get drawn into a "I know more than you about geography" pissing contest. I would have looked at the googleearth maps outside your links...if I cared...but I didn't. Oh well. :rolleyes:

Sorry there must have been some misunderstandings, I didn't want to get into a ""I know more than you about geography" pissing contest". I just said that I'm quite sure that most of these locations were correct. There was a bit of error caused by googleearth which swapped two airbase names at that zoom level (and deleted bitburg).

IMHO the tone of some replies (not just yours) were already of the kind "I know more than you".

Anyway, no problem here, I don't wanna start a flame over a stupid map ;)

It isn't further east and south now... zooming out Googlesat moved the name Norvenich close to Geilenkirchen AB, which is really close to Netherlands, more than Belgium. I've not changed my bookmarks in googlesat. I just zoomed in and added borders.

 

Second, these are some (not all) airbases in Central Europe, I've never said that these are German airbases. In the original map you can also see some Polish and French airbases. Soesterberg (not Soesterburg), aka Camp New Amsterdam is in the Netherlands.

My geographic skills are fine. I live in Belgium.

In the screenshot it looked as if "Nörvenich AFB" was a label for the "icon" over Brussels, but it was a label for the AFB icon in Germany.

Screenshot:

http://mbot.catclan.ch/fulda1.jpg