BF2S Forums D&ST - Military Affairs

UnkleRukus wrote:

This thread has boiled down to nitpicking some german guy and his gay barbie toy.


Another topic, anyone hear about the airforce potentially converting 747s to be flying cruise missile carriers? My bro was telling me about this today and I'm kinda skeptikal.

Maybe as cargo, otherwise sounds very doubtful.

Dilbert_X wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

This thread has boiled down to nitpicking some german guy and his gay barbie toy.


Another topic, anyone hear about the airforce potentially converting 747s to be flying cruise missile carriers? My bro was telling me about this today and I'm kinda skeptikal.

Maybe as cargo, otherwise sounds very doubtful.

yeah he's rio police...

Sounds like a horrible idea, just look at Korean Airlines Flight 007 for proof that 747s do not belong in a combat environment.

Last edited by Trotskygrad (2010-12-10 17:31:29)

While I think this is correct, I need some confirmation.

Can a shotgun be reloaded by putting a round through the ejection port straight into the chamber, as opposed to always loading rounds into the magazine tube and then pumping/cocking it?

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2010-12-11 11:12:04)

you could do that with an m16 too

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

For a D&ST thread, it seems to be lacking in debate and serious talk. Why is it not possible, why is it a horrible idea, think people.

You're the one who said you were skeptical. Any reason?

I don't know anything about it and i was wondering if someone else did.

Trotskygrad wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

You're the one who said you were skeptical. Any reason?

I don't know anything about it and i was wondering if someone else did.

Korean Airlines flight 007, again. A 747 plane was downed by a single Missile fired by a MiG. That 1 missile severed 3/4 of the flap control systems.

The same thing would happen to any military transport aircraft, or a B52.
Pretty well any aircraft, including military, can be expected to be brought down by an average air to air missile.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Trotskygrad wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

I don't know anything about it and i was wondering if someone else did.

Korean Airlines flight 007, again. A 747 plane was downed by a single Missile fired by a MiG. That 1 missile severed 3/4 of the flap control systems.

The same thing would happen to any military transport aircraft, or a B52.
Pretty well any aircraft, including military, can be expected to be brought down by an average air to air missile.

beh, point is that a civilian airframe is not suited towards military work. Where would they put said guided missiles?

Also, I'm pretty sure a B52 is more resilient than a 747...

M.O.A.B wrote:

747 is being tested for an ABM defence platform.

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/i … ser_lg.jpg

Saw this on discovery a few times now, it uses something like 3 different lasers to shoot down ballistic missles amirite? Looked pretty star wars-ish. And I liked it

JohnG@lt wrote:

I'll never really understand why stuff like this interests people so much.

Explosions, also historically, humans love to watch people die, as long as they aren't the ones being shot at.

JohnG@lt wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I'll never really understand why stuff like this interests people so much.

Explosions, also historically, humans love to watch people die, as long as they aren't the ones being shot at.

I used to like reading about this stuff too (not to the extent of nerds like pace and shifty but still...) until I was actually shot at. Now it doesn't interest me very much

Military subjects have always interested me but a lot of what I read these days (often in depth) is for research purposes. I'm busy writing a book with a lot of military-related content in it and trying my best to nail the technical aspects.

Not easy to find out a lot of the stuff unfortunately

Trotskygrad wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Explosions, also historically, humans love to watch people die, as long as they aren't the ones being shot at.

I used to like reading about this stuff too (not to the extent of nerds like pace and shifty but still...) until I was actually shot at. Now it doesn't interest me very much

because you know it matters very little when it comes down to the bottom line, infantry still get shot at?

No, because what you are discussing is simply different ways of killing other human beings. You can pick up a copy of Jane's and look at the pictures and the statistics and go 'wow, that's cool' but at the end of the day it's a machine designed to kill. Kind of loses it's cool factor when you see the results. War sucks.

M.O.A.B wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Explosions, also historically, humans love to watch people die, as long as they aren't the ones being shot at.

I used to like reading about this stuff too (not to the extent of nerds like pace and shifty but still...) until I was actually shot at. Now it doesn't interest me very much

Military subjects have always interested me but a lot of what I read these days (often in depth) is for research purposes. I'm busy writing a book with a lot of military-related content in it and trying my best to nail the technical aspects.

Not easy to find out a lot of the stuff unfortunately

550 cord and CLP

JohnG@lt wrote:

Trotskygrad wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I used to like reading about this stuff too (not to the extent of nerds like pace and shifty but still...) until I was actually shot at. Now it doesn't interest me very much

because you know it matters very little when it comes down to the bottom line, infantry still get shot at?

No, because what you are discussing is simply different ways of killing other human beings. You can pick up a copy of Jane's and look at the pictures and the statistics and go 'wow, that's cool' but at the end of the day it's a machine designed to kill. Kind of loses it's cool factor when you see the results. War sucks.

Well killing, destruction, and intimidation really.