H-60 improvements

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-07-14 17:46

Battle for supremacy a bf2 WW3 mod have put one of them in.
Will look better in this mod... please!

Super62 · Post by **Super62** » 2005-07-14 23:33

Wolfmaster wrote:
[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker]
Super62 wrote:
No they changed it back to Seahawk, it is the SH60R model.
Actually, Super, you're thinking of the "Strikehawk." The C/MH-60S still carries the "Knighthawk" monicker and has been in service for a couple of years now, but the S/MH-60R Strikehawk was redesignated to S/MH-60R Seahawk (the S vs. M designation changes in every source, it seems). Here in the right foreground is a CH-60S Knighthawk on USS Bataan; I don't need to tell you what the other thing is.

eddie i´m much more interested in the other thing than in the knighthawk. put that one in!

The V22 osprey is still in experimental service, there having lots of problems with it.

Scoggs117 · Post by **Scoggs117** » 2005-07-15 00:32

actually i was watching Navy/Marine news(its a show on pentagon channel) a while ago...July 4 i think... but they said the osprey would be entering service soon.

but on another note, why cant we fix the stupid boxes in the passenger compart ment and be able to hold 6 people(+2 gunners) instead of only 4?

pilot is on the wrong side...self explanatory

and i think someone mentioned thies earlire but a co-pilot would be nice, second eyes would be nice to look around and tell you to situate your door gunners or(if the Dev are feeling nice) shoot them with rockets and whatnot.
also the viewing thing would be nice b/c maybe its only me but its pretty hard to let go of the joystick hold shit and move mouse to look, because dice was too stupid to implement a look feature w/ the hat switch.

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-07-15 01:42

I wish every vehicle had the capability in BF2 to be able to carry/carry out everything it can normally. its stupid when they put empty spaces in there. why dident they just make the dam engine right in the first place

!

hopfully there wil be a way around this. because if there is going to be large carrying vehicles that can hold tens of people it wil be stupid to put in 6.

Scoggs117 · Post by **Scoggs117** » 2005-07-15 02:34

hmmm i have an idea that would fix all of these engine and game problems, make Bungie Studios re-create the game, their devotion to thier prodicts is second to none.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-07-27 16:10

you could do what others have said and have it as 2 vehicles fused together or have half of hte helo as one and the otehr half as antoher. The pilot of the second one would be co-pilot and spot targets, shoot tv missiles, give laser locks for the laser bombs that we dont have, and maybe shoot the 30mm guns then have 2 hunners for each half and have on guy sitting on the side (besides 50 cal guy) and the other 2 in seats i nthe back

waffenbaum · Post by **waffenbaum** » 2005-07-27 17:11

Weserflug P. 1003

Type: German Tilt-Rotor VTOL Aircraft

Specific Features: The Weserflug P. 1003 was an airplane and helicopter rolled into one back when helicopter had barely lifted off the ground. Design work began on the Weserflug in 1938 and never progressed past the modeling phase, primarily due to the mechanical difficulties inherent in the aircraft's tilt rotor configuration. During the course of the war the Germans fielded a tiny handful of primitive helicopters, mostly for reconnaissance and courier duties. Back then the strategy of vertical envelopment relied on paratroopers and glider-landed soldiers; a dangerous, messy, and usually very risky strategy. It wasn't until the Vietnam War that helicopters came into their own as the trusty steed of the airborne cavalry. Had Germany realized that developing a fast VTOL transport like the P. 1003 would have allowed them to execute daring operations undreamt of at the time they might have fast-tracked its production.

Many would argue that the Weserflug P. 1003 was so amazing that it is still slaughtering United States Marines to this day in the form of the crash-prone and eerily similar V-22 Osprey. The Osprey started development in 1989, the P. 1003 started development in 1938. They look almost identical and were functionally intended for the same practical role. While the P. 1003 never hovered off the drawing board to wreak havoc on Allied soldiers the Osprey has spent more than a decade hammering itself into the ground and taking us out in the name of the Reich.

If the germans can't do it right, then how come the US airforce think they can pull it off? Tomfoolery!

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-07-27 17:19

actually the osprey is a good system, ive heard that many of the problems stem from operator error

waffenbaum · Post by **waffenbaum** » 2005-07-27 17:21

That's the ONE thing that CAN'T be improved.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-07-27 17:23

i think that a large cargo VTOL that can carry tnaks and other vehicles would be much desired appreciated. The ability to move large vehicle stratigicly would be great

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-07-28 02:06

BrokenArrow wrote:actually the osprey is a good system, ive heard that many of the problems stem from operator error

Some of it was software related too. Fortunately the bad press didn't kill the program. The USMC needs something fast to replace those POS CH-46's that are simply too old to fly.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-07-28 02:10

from what ive read its almost all bad press and its a very very good vehicle.

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-07-28 02:21

It's definitely bad press, possibly from some individuals that wanted the program killed. I believe the majority of deaths occured in a single accident where it was loaded with Marines. It's not like dozens of aircraft have been lost.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-07-28 03:00

Super6 wrote:i think that a large cargo VTOL that can carry tnaks and other vehicles would be much desired appreciated. The ability to move large vehicle stratigicly would be great

No such vehicle is currently in service. There are heavy lift helicopters that can transport light armored vehicles and towed howitzers, but not tanks. On maps that are 4 km by 4 km wide, though, it doesn't seem practical for the game.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-07-28 03:07

i am just saying that bypassing the AT round might be good for bringing hte tanks from your main to the base you are attacking without engaging in between and i know that the abrams is quite a load to lift, do we have the stats on the osprey to see if it could carry an abrams?

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-07-28 03:10

well 1 the osprey isnt being used yet and PR may or may not be in the future, second i doubt it could lift the abrams, most modern tanks are pretty beastly.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-07-28 03:23

the osprey is in use in new york somewhere of course this is the test base im sure

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-07-28 03:25

right, so you wouldnt see it on the battlefield is what i meant

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-07-28 03:25

Super6 wrote:i am just saying that bypassing the AT round might be good for bringing hte tanks from your main to the base you are attacking without engaging in between and i know that the abrams is quite a load to lift, do we have the stats on the osprey to see if it could carry an abrams?

No, it cannot sling-load an Abrams. Not even the CH-53E can, and in an emergency they might be used to help tow a ship. Nor can the C-130 carry an Abrams, and the C-130 in proper scale might even be too big for the game.

Right now USS Bataan is evaluating the first semi-operational Osprey squadron in the Med.