Chinook

Unforgiven294827 · Post by **Unforgiven294827** » 2005-08-20 21:43

IS it possible the reality team can add a chinook to battlefield 2? I think it would be a lot better transporting wise, and the blackhawk would be a gunship

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-08-20 21:53

I think it is very possible the chinook will be added.

Unforgiven294827 · Post by **Unforgiven294827** » 2005-08-20 22:06

oo neat, I was watching a show called Max-X( dont know if you have heard of it) I saw a carrier on water so it got my attention since bf 2 was in my head atm, anyway, I saw a chinook onboard the ship, definetly got me thinking.........

Post by **Evilhomer** » 2005-08-20 22:13

Chinooks play a vital role for the UK force, and I should imagine that if not added in PR 0.1, should be in PR 0.2

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-08-20 23:31

will it be the CH-46 or the Marine variant? im not sure what the name of it is its a mini-me version that the marines use

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-08-20 23:45

I would think (hope) it will be the CH-47 that is capable of 54 troops, rover 110's and others internally or on the hook. Capable of lifting light tanks, artillery etc.
Would be a very nice addition to the game imo.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-08-21 00:13

Beckwith wrote:will it be the CH-46 or the Marine variant? im not sure what the name of it is its a mini-me version that the marines use

The CH-46 is the Sea Knight, aka "Frog." It is still used by the Marines and is supposed to be replaced by the MV-22; the Navy is phasing them out with the C/MH-60S "Knighthawk." We do not wish to include the Sea Knight in game, since the H-53 series can be modeled an provide us with a base for the USAF MH-53 Pave Low as well as the USMC CH-53D/E Sea Stallion/Super Stallion. Also, the horror stories we've heard about the Frog from various people have convinced us that if we should model it and implement it in game, a curse would befall all of our firstborn children.

The Chinook is used by the US Army (CH-47D and MH-47E) and the Royal Air Force (Chinook HC2), who operates the second largest Chinook fleet in the world. Since they are so heavily used by both US and UK forces, we definitely want to include them eventually, since it gives us a vehicle for two factions (two and a half if you include the MH-47E special operations variant) with some minor remodeling and reskinning.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-08-21 01:48

i would love to see the MV-22... sadly its still going through its paces in testing.

Pak · Post by **Pak** » 2005-08-21 02:35

BrokenArrow wrote:i would love to see the MV-22... sadly its still going through its paces in testing.

Not for long. Its in the final stages of Op-eval, if it makes it through this, its all up to the pentagon to put it into action.

CobraPhantom · Post by **CobraPhantom** » 2005-08-21 02:59

Ive always loved the chinook, Ill be happy to see it on the battlefield.

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-08-21 03:25

I'd like to see an ACV-22 gunship.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-08-21 04:28

the pave low can carry 53 guys and/or 2 hummers on bottom

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-08-21 11:27

The British have the largest fleet of Chinooks in the world

Post by **BlakeJr** » 2005-08-21 13:52

You mean to tell me that the MV-22 has been tested for, what, 17 years???
What's been the delay?
First flight of an Osprey was sometime in 1988 and since tilt rotor aircraft has been in the making since the 1950:s you would think that they had become operational sometime in the late 1990:s at the latest...
Then again, stranger things have happened.

Pak · Post by **Pak** » 2005-08-21 14:37

BlakeJr wrote:You mean to tell me that the MV-22 has been tested for, what, 17 years???
What's been the delay?
First flight of an Osprey was sometime in 1988 and since tilt rotor aircraft has been in the making since the 1950:s you would think that they had become operational sometime in the late 1990:s at the latest...
Then again, stranger things have happened.

Its because the original group working on it skipped a lot of test flights to try and meet funding renewals. Because they skipped all the test flights, whenever they tried to show it off, something went wrong that could have been fixed. Since the last accident (which killed 19 people) the team working on the MV-22 changed and began more thoroughly testing the plane. Now they're in op-eval (this is the second time its been in op-eval, first was with the other R&D team) and unless another problem comes up, it will most likely be put into use. They really are amazing planes, they can carry the same load as the seaknight, but fly twice as far, refuel in air, and fly much faster.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-08-22 00:13

pave low can refuel in air (i love that bird)

Post by **BlakeJr** » 2005-08-22 03:27

Pak wrote:
BlakeJr wrote:You mean to tell me that the MV-22 has been tested for, what, 17 years???
What's been the delay?
First flight of an Osprey was sometime in 1988 and since tilt rotor aircraft has been in the making since the 1950:s you would think that they had become operational sometime in the late 1990:s at the latest...
Then again, stranger things have happened.
Its because the original group working on it skipped a lot of test flights to try and meet funding renewals. Because they skipped all the test flights, whenever they tried to show it off, something went wrong that could have been fixed. Since the last accident (which killed 19 people) the team working on the MV-22 changed and began more thoroughly testing the plane. Now they're in op-eval (this is the second time its been in op-eval, first was with the other R&D team) and unless another problem comes up, it will most likely be put into use. They really are amazing planes, they can carry the same load as the seaknight, but fly twice as far, refuel in air, and fly much faster.

Didn't know that, obviously.

Thanks for the info.