Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

pace51 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

I'll do better, I'll do some research and get out a RWF.
why the fuck do we want that.
Hey. It's my thread, I do what I want.
you only got that thread because no one wanted your shitty guides spamming up our beloved EE subforum.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

I'll do better, I'll do some research and get out a RWF.
why the fuck do we want that.
Stop coming on bf2s.

Keep chocking dicks.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

-Sh1fty- wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

I'll do better, I'll do some research and get out a RWF.
why the fuck do we want that.
Stop coming on bf2s.

Keep chocking dicks.
I'm taking that as a personal attack. Since you do it so often.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California

seymorebutts443 wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:


why the fuck do we want that.
Stop coming on bf2s.

Keep chocking dicks.
I'm taking that as a personal attack. Since you do it so often.
If by "Attack" you mean insult, then you're right. In which case you do way more often to me than I do to you.  You're the last person who should complain about a personal attack. Oh boo hoo
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

-Sh1fty- wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:


Stop coming on bf2s.

Keep chocking dicks.
I'm taking that as a personal attack. Since you do it so often.
If by "Attack" you mean insult, then you're right. In which case you do way more often to me than I do to you.  You're the last person who should complain about a personal attack. Oh boo hoo
Ironical. You complain about others to mods all the time, the minute someone does it to you it's the end of the fucking world.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California

seymorebutts443 wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

I'm taking that as a personal attack. Since you do it so often.
If by "Attack" you mean insult, then you're right. In which case you do way more often to me than I do to you.  You're the last person who should complain about a personal attack. Oh boo hoo
Ironical. You complain about others to mods all the time, the minute someone does it to you it's the end of the fucking world.
You hit the nail on the head gonzo.

[edit]

Oh and bf2s vs me isn't exactly the same proportions as me vs seymorebutts

Last edited by -Sh1fty- (2010-06-21 09:12:19)

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario
I heard EE used to be called the junk drawer, that's how beloved it was.

Learjet
https://rentoid.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/learjet45.jpg

It's amazing how a simple, sleek business jet can become the icon of private jets. I love Canada. It may not be the best private jet, but it's comfy, serves its purpose, and is succesful.

And, that leads me to another awesome private aircraft. (This one is propellor powered)

Beech Starship
https://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/flight-after-cold-war-436.jpg
It had some problems, but was super maneuverable. And, it looked very, very cool. That's what an X-29 with forward swept wings, canards, winglets, two engines, and a propellor would look like.

Last edited by pace51 (2010-06-21 09:13:42)

seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

-Sh1fty- wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:


If by "Attack" you mean insult, then you're right. In which case you do way more often to me than I do to you.  You're the last person who should complain about a personal attack. Oh boo hoo
Ironical. You complain about others to mods all the time, the minute someone does it to you it's the end of the fucking world.
You hit the nail on the head gonzo.

[edit]

Oh and bf2s vs me isn't exactly the same proportions as me vs seymorebutts
Yeah, because you lose on both occasions.
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario
https://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/Oceana2005/Tomcats/GreyF14FastPass10oClock.jpg
I think tomcats are really cool. Anyone know what the square rectangular bump things on it are? The black rectangles on both sides of the cockpit? They're funky.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|5669

pace51 wrote:

Anyone know what the square rectangular bump things on it are? The black rectangles on both sides of the cockpit? They're funky.
it's traction tape, so you don't slip while climbing in the cockpit.
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario

burnzz wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Anyone know what the square rectangular bump things on it are? The black rectangles on both sides of the cockpit? They're funky.
it's traction tape, so you don't slip while climbing in the cockpit.
So thats what they are. Thanks! On an aircraft carrier, er, is there a lot of mist, (Or water), making the deck area wet a lot? I know the f-14's a naval jet, but, is that why the tapes there? Or are the jets just slippery in general?

https://www.nicewallpapers.info/pics/other/f-14-tomcat/f-14-tomcat_000.jpg
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|5669

what's beneath them, i have no idea. Miramar doesn't get much rain, that's where i saw an f-14. i'd guess it's fleet wide.
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

pace51 wrote:

burnzz wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Anyone know what the square rectangular bump things on it are? The black rectangles on both sides of the cockpit? They're funky.
it's traction tape, so you don't slip while climbing in the cockpit.
So thats what they are. Thanks! On an aircraft carrier, er, is there a lot of mist, (Or water), making the deck area wet a lot? I know the f-14's a naval jet, but, is that why the tapes there? Or are the jets just slippery in general?

http://www.nicewallpapers.info/pics/oth … at_000.jpg
Lets see, Seaborne jet on the ocean for months at a time. Takes off and lands in almost any condition. I wonder why they put them on there.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|5669

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

burnzz wrote:


it's traction tape, so you don't slip while climbing in the cockpit.
So thats what they are. Thanks! On an aircraft carrier, er, is there a lot of mist, (Or water), making the deck area wet a lot? I know the f-14's a naval jet, but, is that why the tapes there? Or are the jets just slippery in general?

http://www.nicewallpapers.info/pics/oth … at_000.jpg
Lets see, Seaborne jet on the ocean for months at a time. Takes off and lands in almost any condition. I wonder why they put them on there.
Do A research n00b - wikipedia it, and get back to us. remember to plagiarize verbatim, but don't cite your source. got it?
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|5767|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

burnzz wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:


So thats what they are. Thanks! On an aircraft carrier, er, is there a lot of mist, (Or water), making the deck area wet a lot? I know the f-14's a naval jet, but, is that why the tapes there? Or are the jets just slippery in general?

http://www.nicewallpapers.info/pics/oth … at_000.jpg
Lets see, Seaborne jet on the ocean for months at a time. Takes off and lands in almost any condition. I wonder why they put them on there.
Do A research n00b - wikipedia it, and get back to us. remember to plagiarize verbatim, but don't cite your source. got it?
Got it, you want a guide or something about it?
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario

seymorebutts443 wrote:

pace51 wrote:

burnzz wrote:


it's traction tape, so you don't slip while climbing in the cockpit.
So thats what they are. Thanks! On an aircraft carrier, er, is there a lot of mist, (Or water), making the deck area wet a lot? I know the f-14's a naval jet, but, is that why the tapes there? Or are the jets just slippery in general?

http://www.nicewallpapers.info/pics/oth … at_000.jpg
Lets see, Seaborne jet on the ocean for months at a time. Takes off and lands in almost any condition. I wonder why they put them on there.
Oh, to make it versatile. Thanks.
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|5886|US

pace51 wrote:

Beech Starship
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/fli … ar-436.jpg
It had some problems, but was super maneuverable. And, it looked very, very cool. That's what an X-29 with forward swept wings, canards, winglets, two engines, and a propellor would look like.
Huh?  Are you trying to compare the X-29 to the Beechcraft? 
...and forward swept wings look very little like rearward swept wings.
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario

RAIMIUS wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Beech Starship
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/fli … ar-436.jpg
It had some problems, but was super maneuverable. And, it looked very, very cool. That's what an X-29 with forward swept wings, canards, winglets, two engines, and a propellor would look like.
Huh?  Are you trying to compare the X-29 to the Beechcraft? 
...and forward swept wings look very little like rearward swept wings.
That's the old "know-it-all" pace.

Trying to compare an x-29 to a beechcraft... er... by dropping the authoritative tone, I don't sound arrogant now, I just sound stupid.
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|5672|so randum

RAIMIUS wrote:

pace51 wrote:

Beech Starship
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/fli … ar-436.jpg
It had some problems, but was super maneuverable. And, it looked very, very cool. That's what an X-29 with forward swept wings, canards, winglets, two engines, and a propellor would look like.
Huh?  Are you trying to compare the X-29 to the Beechcraft? 
...and forward swept wings look very little like rearward swept wings.
yes, he's a retard.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5583|'Murka

Holy shit. I know that guy. Worked with him on Air Staff.

pace51 wrote:

and the F-35 JSF along with the F-22 is replacing the duties of F-16's.
No. The F-35 is replacing the F-16 (and F-18, and--supposedly--the A10). The F-22 is replacing the F-15.

Last edited by FEOS (2010-06-24 13:39:05)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California
I don't understand how an F35 can take on the roll of a tank buster like the A10.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
pace51
Boom?
+194|4345|Markham, Ontario

-Sh1fty- wrote:

I don't understand how an F35 can take on the roll of a tank buster like the A10.
Actually, the a10 is too specialized for its own good. Very vulnerable to AA missiles or something. The F-35 has VTOL capabilities, and AG missiles which make it a quite capable weapons platform. However, it's kinda hard to compare an f-35 to an A-10, because although they have similar roles, they went about completing their missions differently. F-35 is more of a bugger to locate and kill, though, although the A-10 was heavily armoured. And, an F-35 can hold its own in a dogfight, whereas an A-10 cannot math the speed of many other jets, and it's vulnerable to various SAM's.

Don't quote me, I'm no expert, but that's the gist of it.

Personally, I love the A-10, but I think a stealthy a JSF like the F-35 (or even the X-32, the competitor) is a great replacement. For one, the F-35 can avoid radar most of the time, being stealth, and is hard to detect. Also, it can dogfight adequately, and do other kinds of AA combat. The A-10 had a bigger and arguably more brutal weapons load, but even with its heavy armour, it could be shot down quite easily because it couldn't engage many other aircraft in combat if they attacked. Also, it is low flying, and it's maneuverability, roll tactics, and armour mean little against multiple AAA batteries and SAM concentrations. Although it was deployed in zones where it would have to face as many tanks and as little AA as possible, more and more fighter and AA activity is present today then when the A-10 came out... it's pretty outdated.

The OA-10 is excellent though in the observation role. It can take a hit and survey the battlefield.

And back to the comparisons. I'd compare an F-35 more to the aircraft it's replacing, like the F-18. Which it is in many aspects superior too.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5583|'Murka

That "analysis" is rubbish...not to put too fine a point on it.

The bottomline is that the F-35 will not be able to fill the role of the A-10. Period.

You need to research the battle-worthiness of the A-10 versus air defenses a bit more, Pace. The Hog flew home with massive damage. It was designed specifically to sustain massive damage and still fly.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Ioan92
Member
+337|4894
God I swear I see a naked woman when I see this one..

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/34941/1688898.jpg

She's so fucking beautiful.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|4645|Ventura, California

Ioan92 wrote:

God I swear I see a naked woman when I see this one..

http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/34941/1688898.jpg

She's so fucking beautiful.
I wouldn't go as far as comparing that to a woman.

I will however, say that is freaking awesome and a beautiful picture.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard