dark light

Lawndart

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 207 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Tom and Benny's dedicated FS shot thread :D #1582421
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Well ****** me! I always thought FS2004 was a bit primitive in the graphics department :eek:, just shows how wrong I was. I’m ordering it now, should tide me over until I re-motherboard the computer into an awesome gaming rig so I can support FSX (my puny 256mb ATi X600 just isn’t upto the task, although it should king FS2004)

    Thanks again. 😉

    in reply to: Tom and Benny's dedicated FS shot thread :D #1604323
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Well ****** me! I always thought FS2004 was a bit primitive in the graphics department :eek:, just shows how wrong I was. I’m ordering it now, should tide me over until I re-motherboard the computer into an awesome gaming rig so I can support FSX (my puny 256mb ATi X600 just isn’t upto the task, although it should king FS2004)

    Thanks again. 😉

    in reply to: Tom and Benny's dedicated FS shot thread :D #1582539
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Mighty fine screenshots chaps, most impressive, so impressive that I’m considering flying airliners myself ( Lock On: Flaming Cliffs and IL-2:1946 junkie at present.) However, may I just ask which version of FS you are using? :confused:

    Cheers, Mike

    in reply to: Tom and Benny's dedicated FS shot thread :D #1604329
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Mighty fine screenshots chaps, most impressive, so impressive that I’m considering flying airliners myself ( Lock On: Flaming Cliffs and IL-2:1946 junkie at present.) However, may I just ask which version of FS you are using? :confused:

    Cheers, Mike

    in reply to: Harrier GR-7/9 lack of gunpod #2560180
    Lawndart
    Participant

    There was a 30mm revolver cannon under development in the mid 1990’s by Royal Ordnance to fit to the Harrier GR.5/GR.7 fleet, but the programme was cancelled. I’d say the lack of a gunpod for the Harrier fleet is just another example of the sheer treasonous lunacy and political penny-pinching madness inflicted upon the armed forces by repeated inept government’s in this country over the last decade or so.

    in reply to: Israeli warship 'badly damaged' by 'explosive drone' #2047811
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Yeah me too, the problem is the pictures of the Diesel exhausts have done the rounds. The Wiki and a number of other sites are using the Diesel exhaust stains as evidence of damage.

    Indeed mate,if we could see a decent photo of the damage, then I’d imagine it’d be quite apparent if it was either a C-701/Kowsar’s 50kg or the C-802’s 165kg warhead that did the deed. Although again, for it to have been a C-802 that struck Hanit, then I’d imagine that something must have gone wrong with the missile in order for the ship to survive such a comparatively heavy weapon.

    Perhaps a similar situation to what took out HMS Sheffield occured when that Argey Exocet struck home, with a dud missile severing fuel lines and sparking a fire as it passes in through one side of the ship and clean out the other without detonating.

    in reply to: Israeli warship 'badly damaged' by 'explosive drone' #2047920
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Now if I remember correctly doesn’t the C-701 have an optional optical seeker. That would make a lot more sense in this case, I don’t think activating a surface search and tracking radar for an ashm in that part of the world with all the IAF electronic warfare and SEAD assets in the area.

    Indeed,the C-701 as built in China comes in 3 distinct and delicious flavours, TV/electro-optical, IR imaging and millimetric band radar. I’d imagine that the Kowsar also comes in the same variety of seekers, with the TV or IR version being the natural choice for a guerilla force like Hezbollah that might not have access to surface search maritime radar.

    I’d also find the use of a C-802 hard to swallow as well, I’d have thought that barring any kind of malfunction,that the Hanit would have been blown to pieces if hit with the C-802’s 165 kg HE warhead.

    in reply to: 25 May 82 – Phantom shot down Jaguar with AIM9 #2566720
    Lawndart
    Participant

    As I recall,they were taking part in an exercise, supposedly with safe weapons. Apparently in order to score an air-air kill the pilots of the Phantom’s would have to squeeze the trigger in order to trigger the gun camera and get footage of the lock through their HUD in order to substantiate their claims to a kill. Unfortunately an armourer had neglected to ensure the missile was safe, so on pulling the trigger to set the camera rolling,the Phantom pilot instead let fly with an AIM-9 that brought down the Jaguar.

    in reply to: Heathrow last Monday #604098
    Lawndart
    Participant

    I thought it could have been part of a defensive system, as I recall El Al are supposed to be fitting the BAE NEMESIS to their fleet, if I remember correctly……….

    in reply to: Heathrow last Monday #604107
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Nice photo’s mate 😉

    Can I just ask though, what’s the bulge on the El Al 777-200? It’s just over the 2nd door……….:confused:

    in reply to: Travel City Direct, What Are They Like? #610828
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Well, the pilots seem nice enough when their aircraft taxi past the viewing park…

    Indeed,as I recall,taxiing to the gate at Sanford,the flight engineer came over the tannoy

    “Ladies and Gentlemen,we have arrived at Sanford and should be at the gate shortly, It’s (can’t quite remember now) local time, but the bad news is that we’re due some rain…….the good news is though,we can go to the pub now, yippppppeeeeeeeeeeee!”

    Boy that made me laugh

    in reply to: Travel City Direct, What Are They Like? #610847
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Put it this way, after flying with them in 2002, I was seriosuly considering pitching the screaming kids and drunken yobos that abounded the aircraft out of one of the emergency exits high over the Atlantic. NEVER AGAIN

    in reply to: Could the Dutch defend their Caribbean Islands? #2575302
    Lawndart
    Participant

    If this did come to pass, which just isn’t likely IMO,and the US couldn’t find a way to get involved directly,then I’d imagine they’d support the Dutch in any other way they could, such as basing rights, transports,tankers,AWACS, satellite imagery etc…………

    In short,it’d be a surefire way for Chavez to get his military to take a hammering

    in reply to: "F-22's for sale, get'em while they're got!" #2585428
    Lawndart
    Participant

    In fact, the US and China were once pretty cosy,right up until Tienanmen Square. I think it was Reagen who said words to the effect that:

    “China is a stick to beat Russia with”

    in reply to: DL and NW #531175
    Lawndart
    Participant

    Thanks God I booked with a credit card (see signature below)! We’ve used Delta quite alot over the years and it’d be a shame to see my favourite airline go under after all these years

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 207 total)