Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mathijs Kok

Preview : Aerosoft FSX military line-up

Recommended Posts

True ... true.

Certainly as LAGO stopped sending out payments to Tim for the use of that model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have missed it, but what's the release date for this? FSX has been out in Canada for a week or more now.

Cheers,

Suds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I may have missed it, but what's the release date for this? FSX has been out in Canada for a week or more now.

Cheers,

Suds

Planned for this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kofi, can we borrow your A-10 from time to time? Nobody likes a kid that "hogs" all the toys :wink:

The line up looks promising!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Groan. There always has to be one, doesn't there Mr. C.

I don't suppose you've managed to find a way to update or create a new version of the refuel module as well have you, Mathjis?

Ian P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Groan. There always has to be one, doesn't there Mr. C.

I don't suppose you've managed to find a way to update or create a new version of the refuel module as well have you, Mathjis?

Ian P.

No, as far as we know now this is not possible in FSx. But we got a while to try to figure out ideas...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only just seen this thread...those shots are amazing! Can't wait for the A10!! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why the air force would think of retiring the A-10 after such a relatively short life, especially without a 1:1 replacement. It seems to me to be a perfect platform for what it does. I think it is a beautiful plane.

Awesome photos!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand why the air force would think of retiring the A-10 after such a relatively short life, especially without a 1:1 replacement. It seems to me to be a perfect platform for what it does. I think it is a beautiful plane.

Awesome photos!

Well, they TRIED to retire it twice before and every time they started a war and needed the aircraft. Keep in mind that destroying stuff with a few shells is a lot cheaper than sending a Hellfire towards it.

Note the fact that many modern navy ships are getting big guns these days, the kind that can hit target accurate over 50 miles at $2500 a shot. You might even have seen the news about the massive railgun the US navy is testing that should be able to hit targets at 200 miles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, now, Mathijs. We must remember that the JSF and Lightning II can do *every* job an aircraft might need to, with one aircraft doing the job of five. Of course the US Military don't need anything but those two types!

(And if anyone outside the US Government actually believes that, I have some cure all snake oil you might be interested in... ;))

Cheers,

Ian P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, now, Mathijs. We must remember that the JSF and Lightning II can do *every* job an aircraft might need to, with one aircraft doing the job of five. Of course the US Military don't need anything but those two types!

(And if anyone outside the US Government actually believes that, I have some cure all snake oil you might be interested in... ;))

Cheers,

Ian P.

Lol... In the second Iraq war killing tanks with missiles as the fast movers and the rotorheads liked to do, just became too expensive. Only the A10's could do it with a few shells cost effective (with the Iraqi crews watching from a safe distance, poor guys).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JSF and Lightning II are the same ugly thing. :wink:

Gino

:lol: umm now the Lightning II was the prototype ATF (YF-22A), the actual F/A-22 is called the Raptor. DSB or what they are called got it wrong with their YF-22 release too ... called it a YF-22 Raptor or something.

Funny, this seens to confuse people a lot :lol:

The problem with the A-10 are the uranium shells - the fine dust that emanates from the destroyed shells is believed to be poisonous to the human organism. But sh*t, I'm talkin about war here ... I think we should reduce that stuff to virtual online battles, less collateral damage, more fun for the politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh. It's a computer with wings. Might as well just call it an Airbus... :lol:

(...waits for Chris B to throw something at me...)

I thought that was the way the US wanted to go anyway? Fight all their wars from a bunker somewhere using robots and computers... ;)

Like APFSDSDU tank rounds, the A-10 doesn't have to throw Depleted Uranium around. It's just more efficient than plain steel.

Anyway, the reason I think they should keep the A-10 around is because I am - and will always be - a lifeguard at heart. When the USAF had to do Combat Search and Rescue for the first time in anger since WW2, in Vietnam, they tried doing Rescue CAP (RESCAP) with Phantoms and Thunderchiefs. Excellent strike aircraft both, but low-and-slow loitering over a downed comrade? Utterly useless. Their response was to reactivate "obsolete" Skyraiders which proved massively successful in the role. The A-10 is the heir to that throne. Seeing an F-16 wheeling in two-mile circles over a wounded downed pilot won't keep the bad guys away. If every time they moved, a GAU-8A got pointed at them, they'd be rather less inclined to get too close. Plus, unlike the F-16 or any "fast" jet, the A-10 really has the loiter and rapid turn onto target capability and enough ordinance to be a real deterrent.

Ugly as stink, but you can't help but love the things... ;)

Ian P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ian,

Agreed mate. And lets not forget that other great asset a CSAR aircraft needs...... the ability to take a hell of a lot of damage. This I think we can all agree the A-10 does very well. You'd certainly feel better having just banged out if you had a hog or two keeping the bad guys busy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
word up on the thunderboltII ?

I'm not sure, I'd have thought it was obvious which side was up so why write it? 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*hello? your brains still active?*

YOU'RE CARRYING AWAY!!! Stop talking about war - this is politicians' work.

as to the line-up: That's some great news. :D

I'd like to have a guess: The F-16 is gonna be released by the end of June at the latest.

Might that be accurate? (it's just a guess^^')

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When are we going to get these versions that I purchased for fs9 to work in fsx? Have we not waited long enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...