JediMaster

Not to mention that given their ages most of them were either in their early 20s or younger, or weren't even BORN, during the times they feel we should return to. In short, their perspectives on those times are insular and biased. The ones that were old enough to grasp the world around them then aren't necessarily the sharpest tacks in the box anymore.

I saw Swoop at one point as well. Not sure if I saw the other 2 or not, and I don't even remember their names.

If only all cars had the stop/start switch. I waste a lot of time just idling at traffic lights, more than any other location. Not leaving or arriving at home or another destination, sitting at the stupid lights is where I spend a good 8-9 mins of my 25 min commute each way.

Because after 25 years they have a mostly nostalgic view of how things were then and they don't really remember the bad parts.

You can't judge whether missiles are modeled realistically by kill streaks in a sim. We don't worry as much about dying as a real pilot would. The environments are modeled far simpler (no worries about temperature or moisture or whether the ordies hooked it up right etc). The AI are never ordered to disengage, it's always "fight to the death!" In real combat, you'd have two groups of dozens of planes meet and maybe 4 or 5 would get shot down. In a sim, you have two groups of 8 planes meet and it's a good bet all 8 on one side will drop and a large number on the other side will as well. Real combat is NEVER as lethal as it is in sims. AI planes just don't disengage from battle damage like they should. There is an inherent unreality to sim combat that can't be removed. You'll always be better than the AI for the simple reason that we can get shot down 100 times without dying and learn from it. Real pilots die before they get to learn that, only a select few are good enough or lucky enough to survive to get good. If all of us died or at least were permanently banned from ever flying again the first time we were shot down...none of us would be here!

You're free to believe whatever you want, facts be damned!

The Dinobots were introduced in 1985 or 86, it's hardly new.

So, is Nightwatch extraterrestrial media or something? It's just someone else's view.

Is that....BREAD???!? DEATH TO GLUTEN!!!!

Look at the Mi-24 in the modded EECH for a good Hind.

Just as much as the 1980 Olympics and the invasion of Afghanistan did, anyway.

Well, in the F-111's case it also WAS the airbrake. The AV-8B's main gear door is another one. Of course, in the 35B's case it opens into the wind, so the max top speed has to be much lower than for an airbrake that opens against it.

It was the MiG-25 before the advent of the 29 and Su-27. Once those showed up, I quickly embraced their superior aerodynamics.

The problem is if you get bit by a little fish that makes you bleed and that provokes a bigger one that can do serious damage. I've seen sharks and cudas aplenty and they've always ignored me...but I've never been bleeding around them or around a feeding zone. However, an absence of proof is not proof of absence, you can't prove a negative. So whilst no one I know has ever been attacked by one, I know that they do attack people. The question of frequencies is hard to figure out since it's so dependent on multiple factors such as season, density of people/fish, individual circumstances, and so on. Are people attacked by sharks just because there are more of them where the people are, or because they're more aggressive? If every one of them was replaced by a barracuda in the same situations, would the bite frequency increase or decrease? I honestly don't know.

The material is very lightweight. Expensive carbon-fiber stuff IIRC.

Paint scheme notwithstanding, I was just depicting a C model instead of the much-later R.

I've never been bitten by anything in the water myself, and have been only a few feet from multiple cudas. So by my experience, nothing in the ocean is dangerous. Doesn't really prove anything.

Keep away from open flame...

Tuvalu is that tiny island Pacific nation that has been serving as a bugaboo for sea-level alarmists because it's barely higher than high tide, so a sea-level increase of just a foot or so will submerge it.

It seems like the one that's coming now is far more than the one that was originally conceived when the IG campaign ran 2 years ago. It's possible that was more FC-level while this will be DCS level, or at least closer to it. Of course, I probably would've been satisfied with what it almost was back then vs waiting 2 more years. A few months I don't mind, but this is a bit too far.

For the 50s, this pic would be more appropriate:

It flexed because it set the nose down harder than normal. My guess is other B-1s have done that before and since, just with the nose gear down, to no ill effect. In other words, had the nose gear been down, I don't think that was hard enough to have burst the tires let alone damage the fuselage other than the bit under the nose that scraped along. Large planes flex, they're not rigid, that would make them too subject to cracking and breaking! Even small planes flex for that matter, although to a much smaller degree. Even the hood of my car I've seen flex in extreme wind.

Screw that, I want Jet Jaguar!

Around here you usually worry more about barracudas than sharks.

Breaking Kaiju