JediMaster

Oh, that was the level with the beached IJN carrier, right? There were actually at least 2 maybe 3 planes strewn around that island.

That's one difference between FC and Crysis...FC was multiple islands, with each level pretty much on a different island with a couple of exceptions. Crysis is one far larger island that you spend the whole game on, and after the first few along the coast you start moving inland.

Here was my MAJOR problem with Die Hard 2---the entire premise! You can NOT strand airlines in orbit over an airport in DC!! They could GLIDE to half a dozen other airports in the area easily! What dumbass pilot would just sit up there and worry about running out of gas?

For one thing, no plane carries enough extra fuel to loiter for hours, they take as much as they need plus a reserve. If they can't land within 15 mins of arrival at their destination, you divert.

I once took a flight from Orlando to Reagan Int'l...but as we got close Reagan was temporarily closed due to a severe thunderstorm. We turned and landed at Dulles. From 5000 ft you can see both airports if you're between them with ease. They were going to bus us over, but then Reagan cleared up. So, they had to refuel the plane to fly the handful of miles to Reagan! That's right, there wasn't enough just sitting in the tanks to do it.

THAT is why I dislike DH2. I like them in the order DH, DH4, DH3, DH2.

WiC is a VERY demanding game. I think if your PC is indeed AGP you need either an nvidia 7800 or 7900 or an ATI 1950 if you want it to run well.

To find out if you have AGP or PCI Express, go into the BIOS. If you see options for AGP, that's what you have. If you see something like "PEG" or at least no AGP options, you likely have PCI Express.

LOMAC was a real hog when it came out, but all these years later a current mid-range system can handle it fine...as long as you leave it on medium settings!

That's what the USAF is doing, replacing F-16s with F-35As. There's no way it won't be able to do what the F-16 can do. The F-16 after all was designed to have 2 Sidewinders and a gun and a tiny radar to help lock those on and that's it. The C model introduced capabilities (later retrofitted to the A models) that turned it into a fighter bomber, but just look at an F-16 with no armament or pylons...it doesn't LOOK like it should be a multirole plane at all.

Now the A-10 replacement is a bit of a joke, and that's why they're being upgraded to A-10Cs as we speak despite the planned replacement by F-35As.

I don't know much about the Gripen's air-to-ground abilities, but I'm guessing it has to be at least as good as the Viggen it's replacing.

As for replacing a fleet with fewer planes, that has been happening since WWII. Everyone had massive fleets then because of low effectiveness. You needed a fleet of bombers to take down a target that today can be done by one plane with LGBs or JDAMs on its way to another target!

Just look at our silly 21-strong B-2 fleet. You'd think that few wouldn't be able to do anything, but they've been using them for years now to great effectiveness.

However, 6 Gripens does sound like a bit of a joke. You'd need a whole logistics chain setup for it anyway, sounds like more trouble and cost than it's worth.

I bet they're replacing the engines. Those fighter engines have risen in price astronomically.

The funny thing really is the airframe is by now the cheapest part of the plane by far. The engine is the most expensive followed by the radar and then the other avionics. I think airframe rates just above canopy and ejection seat.

It is for some missions. It's not for others, and the F-22 will surpass it.

However, rigid topic police are not to be found here. We'll move a topic if it's in the wrong forum, or try and reign things back in if a First Eagles thread turns into a CoD4 thread, but it's ridiculous to ban people for behaving like people!!

Baked beans are off!

They have this 2-fold justification of it beyond the obvious security one, which is silly because sites that have never known to have issues can't be "assumed" to be liable to have them. Why not block EVERY site then?

One, which is total BS, is they worry about the use of bandwidth. They don't seem to be able to grasp the idea of "demand-based" control and that the network guys can instantly switch things over to give priority to the important stuff. No, they think it has to sit idle or it won't be there when they need it.

Two, which can be understood, is the whole "people wasting time on the net" thing. What bugs me is I am perfectly capable of multitasking, going to sites like this in 5 mins of dead time and then doing other stuff. I can do about half of my job from my desk remoting in to other machines and making calls, so while I'm waiting for a PC to reboot or some other process to complete I go and surf.

Of course, they have this "all or nothing" idea, so...

I like that pic of the one ship inside the other...

Sorry for ranting bout that! But what I was trying to say was that I think it is still used as a secret testing facility nothing more. BTW those damn MIB keep on peering through my window! And I will stand by my statement about the Doughnuts on a rope contrail! As it happened right in front of me! While I was standing outside talkin to my parents I looked around to see if there were any aircraft flying about in the in the sky as there was no cloud cover that day,not seeing any aircraft and contrails I then turned to look at my dad then I heard a loud crack then a roaring boom. My parents and I looked around and saw a weird looking contrail which was not their previously! I do not know waht kind of aircraft made this contrail and sonic boom but it wasnt anything that I know of. I dont care if you believe me or not I know what I saw and heard so im sticking to my statement!

I've posted here previously about that. I know a guy here who worked on that engine. It was for the "Aurora", a code-name for a plane to replace the Blackbird. It was mounted on the back of a Blackbird, where the D-21 drones were launched from, for testing. That's what he was involved with and what created those contrails. If an actual flying prototype was made, he didn't say, but you can bet it wouldn't have flown in daylight. He also confirmed the program was cancelled "pretty much" because of the high cost and end of the Cold War combined with the effectiveness of satellites, U-2s, and the coming introduction of UAVs like Darkstar and Global Hawk.

So basically what the pics were of in AW&ST that everyone saw were advanced engine tests on a 20+ yr old airplane.

I can't believe the planes will have been gone for a year by the time the movie is out...

Remember the time 2 F-14As famously shot down 2 A6Ms with guns and an AIM-9 with no trouble in 1941?

The A6M can outturn the F-14A all day long...

PLZ MAKE SU-34 AND SU-47 WITH FRWARD SWEEP WINGS NOW KTHXBYE

TK must recode MP to do that, and he's stated he's not focusing his energies in that area.

Terminator 2? Nuff said!

As for Transformers, it was budget that kept the robot fight scenes to a minimum. He shot that film for $150m and by all rights it should have cost at least 50% more than that. However, it was an unknown...would it draw crowds? The studios would not bank on betting more than that. Bay has said the sequel will get a larger budget thanks to the first's success and that there will be more robot time on screen.

TM isn't the same company it was when Buzz Hoffman and Bob Church started it over 15 years ago.

They sold it and retired from the business and it all went downhill. Buzz of course died over 10 years ago now...

"We're a regular sim...that you pay for like it's an MMO! It's WoW for racers!!"

NOT.

FC2 is not being done by the guys that did FC1 and Crysis. Ubi owns the rights to the name, so they're making FC2 with a different internal team. The odd thing is you're not playing the same character and it basically has NOTHING to do with FC1 at all. They might as well have called it "African Safari".

Anyway, FC did have funky mutants to fight, it was basically a SF B-movie turned into a game. However, for the day it looked incredible and awesome wide open islands that let you do things in a most non-linear fashion. You had certain objectives that HAD to be done, but you could easily sneak around and avoid more than half the guys if you tried. Really the only thing i didn't like was the final level or two which were a bit over-the-top difficult and silly.

I paid $20 when I bought it, but yes, that's Il-2 46's current price and it is the latest version. It's only 4.06 out of the box and 4.08 is the latest (released) patch, but it has everything from FB since, including Aces Exp, Pac Fighters, 1946, Sturmoviks over Manchuria, and Pe-2/3 addons.

That's just the way the CA DL section refers to .rar files, as "x-rar". It's not a separate type.

what's the point in acquiring C-17s when Il-76s are doing the job more cheaply for the IAF.

These c-130s fit into a category between An-32s and IL-76s in terms of payload capacity.

Which was exactly my point, the C-130s were bought because they needed a plane in that class. You don't buy a C-17 to do a C-130 job when you could buy the same number for less or more for the same price. Being a newer design I'm sure the C-17 would be nicer than the Il-76, but they don't need them.

I guess those F-117 Nighthawks shot down over former Yugoslavia were also lucky shots then... Don't think the F-22 is invulnerable to bad luck... And it doesn't have to be AAA that fills the sky, MANPADs en masse can also be quite nasty...

That F-117 (one, not plural) shouldn't have been there, simple as that. It was a tactical mistake and they paid for it by losing the plane. They got overconfident. The difference is the F-22 has a comprehensive EW suite the F-117 does not. Other than its shape and material coating, the F-117 is a 1970's warplane. It's basically a radar-less Hornet as far the avionics goes. It has no jammer and whether it even has an RWR or not is classified! It has no visible antennas for them.

The F-117 must totally rely on pre-flight intelligence to tell it where it should or shouldn't go. The F-22 will know everything that is known plus be able to learn far more than that on its own and even change its plans based on what is discovered on ingress.

Just like the B-2 isn't the "stealth bomber", it's the "advanced technology bomber", there are things the F-22 is capable of we aren't allowed to know. The F-117 was first-generation and the shoot down only proved that simple shapes and materials were going to be enough in the 21st century. Don't think the loss of one plane means stealth is some sort of phantom that doesn't really matter.

As for MANPADs, the F-22 should never be in range of them unless it's taking off or landing.

I must resign myself to the permanent loss I think. I have little to no time at home/on weekends to go online, so it looks like I'll be posting no more than a couple of posts a day there now.

It's good this place was taken off the blocked list! That hacking way back when got it banned as a "phishing website".

I have intimate knowledge of 5a.