Page 5 – Key Publishing

Bug Lover

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 124 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →

Author

Posts
February 10, 2005 at 1:39 am in reply to: F-15 vs. Su-27 #2657486

Bug Lover
Participant

Americans practically never admit having lost, anyway.

Oh boy! Here we go. :rolleyes:

January 29, 2005 at 12:45 am in reply to: Lockheed Team Wins Presidential Chopper #2606667

Bug Lover
Participant

It’s 80% US-built: what’s the biggie? I don’t believe Sikorsky claimed their product was 100% US-manufactured, or did they?

Apache fuselages are now made in South Korea but I’m sure you consider that an all-American product.

Steve ~ Touchdown-News

Sorry Steve,
I hadn’t heard the 80% part.

I am also aware that these days rarely is anything 100% “US-manufactured”. Could you please point me to a link on the Apaches? Not the remaufactured ones but new fuselage being built outside the US.

Not to start a flame war but for my own reading. Thanks.

January 28, 2005 at 11:43 pm in reply to: Lockheed Team Wins Presidential Chopper #2606713

Bug Lover
Participant

Lockheed is the “golden company” it can do no wrong in the current administration eyes. 🙂

US president in a foreign copter. I could understand it if the aircraft was superior …… with many US contractors already passing out layoff notices it just looks bad.

January 28, 2005 at 3:51 am in reply to: I'm Angry #2607227

Bug Lover
Participant

I had the same problem and I will never order from them again. By the time I got the last book in the mail it could be had in a book store…..used!

January 28, 2005 at 2:50 am in reply to: F/A-18E/F's engine doubt #2607232

Bug Lover
Participant

The engine has been upgraded since the early block. And most of the stuff is blown up by the haters of the Super Hornet.

The wing drop incident sticks firmly in my mind. 😀

January 27, 2005 at 5:30 pm in reply to: No love for the F-16? #2607432

Bug Lover
Participant

The F-16 was and still is a good system. What I found funny is that the F-16 is an old design but its latest Block #, with the ugly conformal tanks, is something you’d expect to see on a design that may be at the end of its cycle.

The Typoon II and Rafale now have mock-ups that have these tanks on them. 😀

January 27, 2005 at 5:22 pm in reply to: Israelis beat American pilots 220 out of 240 engagements #2607438

Bug Lover
Participant

As it has been said, you would need to know ROE…..period! Without it, we are simply spinning our wheels.

The US uses a “network” approach and that being the case, if it (fight) gets closer then BVR someone screwed up. 🙂

January 16, 2005 at 11:52 pm in reply to: F/A-18E/F's current missions #2612533

Bug Lover
Participant

It is/was doing more. I know it has done bombing and recon along with its tanking functions. Part of the problem had to do with politics. Some people (F-14 lovers?) being upset and saying that a certain aircraft was being used and it hadn’t been cleared to use certain weapons or tactics. That was the rumor…..for awhile.

Do a search (Google) on F/A-18E/F mission in Iraq. Maybe you will come up with something.

January 14, 2005 at 11:50 pm in reply to: F-22A Pics, News & Speculations Thread #2613198

Bug Lover
Participant

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123009594

In a nut shell, 1.7mach is very impressive, without burners! But one has to wonder at what altitude 😀

January 9, 2005 at 4:18 pm in reply to: The "that aircraft is so damn ugly, it's beautiful" thread #2615961

Bug Lover
Participant

The thread is “that aircraft is so damn ugly, it’s beautiful” so we are post names of aircraft that we this or sort of ugly/unusual that we like it. Right?

January 8, 2005 at 2:39 am in reply to: The "that aircraft is so damn ugly, it's beautiful" thread #2617028

Bug Lover
Participant

F-104, F-22, A-10, SU-25 and AV8B come to my mind…..and then the X-32 😀

December 30, 2004 at 3:56 pm in reply to: Raptors may be cut to 160 #2622160

Bug Lover
Participant

I doubt that it will be cancelled, the President is from Texas! 😀

Seriously, this is something that has historically been brought up after a crash. F-14 and F-111 comes to mind. It is more of a…”see I told you!”. I think it is all gonna be fine and the number will increase. 😀

December 27, 2004 at 2:29 pm in reply to: Boeing X-32, "Monica" #2625145

Bug Lover
Participant

The reason the X-32 wasn’t chosen was because it couldn’t meet all of the mission requirements. Period. It DID NOT meet the STOVL requirements, it suffered from hot gas reingestion (That means the intake sucks back in the hot lift thrust which drops the thrust enough to cause the engine to stop producing much thrust). It also never landed at full up weight. The X-35 did.

.

Not totally true.
The Boeing aircraft did meet all program requirements! Lockheed did it better and had additional thrust for possible expansion in the STOVL mode. Boeing had a better managed program and Lockheed’s wasn’t. Most people don’t realize the VTO to supersonic (hat trick) WAS NOT a mission requirement. Period.

December 26, 2004 at 8:56 pm in reply to: Pacific fighters utter crap? #243542

Bug Lover
Participant

Patch 3.03 is out and I got to do some online dogfighting. Things are looking better!

December 24, 2004 at 3:15 am in reply to: Pacific fighters utter crap? #243668

Bug Lover
Participant

No I’m not giving the game a bagging the maps are great the FM is excellent for what it is supposed to be it is great and I love it.

But

I have never purchased a piece of software as buggy as PF, I’ve patched it to 3.01 but I’m still not playing it again until a decent patch comes out and fixes the many annoying bugs and stuff ups in it. This game off the shelf is a perfect example to why games should never be rushed for release.

If BoB goes the same way I’ll cringe everytime I had over my money for a Maddox game.

I purchased it with the hopes of some online gaming. I am really disappointed.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 124 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →