Trotski

Point one, this is an old (ish) Flight simulator. Point two, this is not the hyper realistic DCS. Point three, there has to be some poetic/artistic licences taken, as this is a simulator, not real life, the guns in game however, are good, yes maybe your example is on the more extreme end of the scale, also I am not sure of the hitbox/damage box on the A-10 modelled in game, so it is possible that it is down to the damage model of this particular aircraft. Were the rounds incoming from the ground, or from the rear ( engaged by a bogey) Finally, A 30mm round with depleted uranium, will reach out and lovingly caress anything ( within reason) that it wants to, as mentioned above ............... I would agree that armour in some cases is relatively easy in some cases, however, I redirect you to my previous 3 points, rinse and repeat.

The main thing is that the Pilot managed to bang out, However as for F-35, at least they didnt go for the Boeing contender, that was even uglier and even more crap. I see no other alternative for a Carrier aircraft though, unless we buy French !!

Glad the Pilot is ok, dont give a crap about the F-35 though, that can reside in Davy Jones's Locker and rot. Not a fan of the type I fear.

Oh very nice mate, very nice indeed.

Airbus is a multinational, and therefore NOT French

This is true, and were so traumatised by the whole sorry affair, that the vowed never to use our Gallic "friends" aircraft again, except for the Jaguar collaboration of course, and that was just a british, as it was french, and besides, the RAF version was better anyhow , So There

The RAF....Using......Dare I say it......I shudder at the very notion............Equipped, with, FRENCH Aircraft..The Humanity !!!

No such thing an an invincible, or invulnerable Tank, Western Tanks, are more survivable than the Former Soviet, or current Russian Tanks, however, they are designed on two totally different tactical doctrines. The West, had envisioned an assault through the Fulda gap, and therefore developed its armour to counter this, ie, better command and control, better Infantry and air combined operations, the Russians/Warpac had one goal in mind, to get in, defeat, occupy and end the war, therefore their armour is faster, lower, and more numerous. Gunnery is another factor, with possibly the advantage going to NATO, as they needed accuracy and quality, that being said, the Russians, build bloody good kit, and, had the cold war gone hot, the outcome would have been awful, as tac nukes would have come into play, and sorry Gents, but no one wins that particular scenario. Anyhow, Russian Tanks are very good, as good as, if different from Western armour, yes they ergonomics can sometimes leave something to be desired, but, they worked, very well, did the job, and are still running in armies all around the world, not bad for 1960's/70's tech !! As a former Cold War Warrior, I am fully aware of how terrible a Soviet invasion would have been, my approximate life expectancy was 24 - 48 hours buying time until the US and NATO could pump bodies into the Theatre of ops. Also, another point, even the Israeli's used Soviet Tanks in the form of the Tiran, that speaks volumes in my book. However, ATGM's will kill pretty much ANY tank, be it Western or Eastern European in origin, so the argument is actually academic, as neither side really has a "better" Tank. To make a droll comment here, it aint the size that counts, it's the way one utilises it that really matters.

From what I understand of German Archie, is that it did get nastier and more accurate later into the war, I suspect that there were areas more heavily defended with more guns, this is a reason that balloon busting was frowned upon. As the war progressed, the Germans developed effective Flak guns, things like SockelFlak etc, also the developed guns specifically for throwing as much hate skywards, as accurately as possible as they could, and they were very good at it, a trend to be repeated in WWII. Maybe the sector your gallant French aviator is flying in, happens to be one of those "unpleasant" and rather warm areas, where the attentions of Mr Archibald were more unwelcoming. Also, flying at low to medium altitude was a risky process at the best of times. It must have been terrible for Art Obs pilots, flying figure 8's whilst being potted at by every gunner for miles around.

Congrats on getting your 3rd Stipe mate, dont stop there though, we want to hear about your promotion to Sgt Major ( or whatever the equivalent rank in Spain is )

Ahhhh ok cool, DCS does need a big beautiful Cat that isnt a TomCat.

Ooooh mate !! are you working on a new model of the beautiful Cat ?

I mean in SF2 not in FE, as the gunners in FE are sorted, and not bad at all.

We could use some Luftwaffe Pilots and crews with the German pattern of oxy mask, and as I said, rear gunners, as the generic ones are just foul.

we need more of these, German pilots with the correct oxy masks, and also rearward facing ones to subtitute for the awful gunners , in fact we need to kill all the in sim gunners, as they are all bloody awful, I do hope someone can carry on Geezers stirling work, I really hate the stock gunners they look crap.

Wizard Prang old chap !!! more flyable aircraft would also be nice.

Napalm fumes, they smell really good in the morning you know

I seem to recall that the RNAS, and some RFC squadrons used the French cockades early in the war, maybe as far in as early 1916, so it isn't incorrect. you will also see RNAS roundels that are just a red circle, with a white centre, but I have a feeling that they were for home defence squadrons. So I am unsure if they were used in France at all.

Oh yes I did plow my way through the various packs, of course I did, however, due to extreme shell shock, and eye boggling, I failed to find the droid I was looking for, However the Mk 82 para retarded are just the job, thank you all for your help, so problem solved. I did also find them in the B52 files you mentioned, So thank you for that pointer !! I think the issue is I have not really delved into the area of munitions, retarded, or well adjusted, and sometimes the packs can be rather intimidating, and give , in a lot of cases at least, very little clue as to what the weapon actually is, without looking at the Data,INI file for the thing, it also doesnt help that many of the weapons in question, are called different things, rather than having the "idiot guide" clue in the title ( IE mk 82 Parachute retarded Bomb)

Or, for us Brits, because we are so polite.......Bang tube , awfully loud and inconsiderate, vertically dropped, with regards from your friendly British neighbourhood awfully jolly good chaps, delivered with love, and fluffy pink bunny wunnies. Top hole eh wot wot !!

Device, Alternatively stable, Horizontally and vertically enabled ( Special ) loud noise and inconveniencing, for the use of. Mark Alternative, and non offending number. With soft and fluffy wrapping, to prevent any untoward damage to the naughty enemy....Ooops sorry, personas of opposing ideas and quite correct acceptable alternative views....Phew !! ahhh fuck it...Bomb, big, huge bang and blood guts and damnation, mark who gives a shit. A1 ( of course, because we got to have an A1 )

No not balutes, actual old school Chutes, my good friend Nightshade sent me some, just a few minutes ago, I am sure I had some 750 lb Parachute retarded ones, but I cant for the life of me find the buggers. Also the Weapons packs are so vast , that trawling through them to find one single weapon is .........Well you get the picture.

Does anyone know where I can find any of these, either in the 500Lb/KG or up to 1000Lb/Kg range, I used to have one but I cannot find it anywhere.

The Cypriot National Guard has T-80U's and T80 UK's