aircrafts

[Damage Inc 0]

But I wouldn't buy a new GeForce when it's completely new because it would still have incompatibility problems.

[madmike 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (christophercles @ Jan. 11 2002,15:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Have you noticed that none of the units that they have included in the patches have broken the timeline either? So why would they make an exception for the osprey?<span id='postcolor'>

Wrong, the G36 and Steyre were not around in 1985

[mithrandir 0]

All the helis are OK!

But when it comes to the airplane missions I think they really sucks. For me the airplanes (the piloting thing) could have been removed. This is the weakest part in OFP!

[Dr Jekyll 0]

I don't really care about the timeline as long as I can make and play cool mission involving V-22 drops or piloting.

[zverushka 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm tempted to say the Hind, but I dident. Yes ok, the Hind is a very well armed chopper, it's well armoured, and flys reasonably well. HOWEVER.. in terms of real life spec the AH-64 would be the best due to it's superoir weaponry, advanced avoinics and targeting systems - which arn't eveident in OFP.

<span id='postcolor'>

WRONG! The Mi-24 Hind is as fast as an Apache, is more resilient towards hand-held SAMs, it's armored like a tank, and it has many, MANY missiles

[bluelaser 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Satchel @ Jan. 11 2002,18:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Apache wasn't around in 1985.<span id='postcolor'>

It was, actually since 1982, when it´s gotten out of prototype and preproduction phase.

1 82   11  82-23355

2 83   48  83-23787

3 84  112  84-24200

4 85  138  85-25351

means 309 AH-64A out of serial production were around in 1985 .<span id='postcolor'>

Ownage.

[Guest]

Last I heard the Osprey has killed 56 marines in it's short life span..not acceptable IMO.

[SimplyCosmic 0]

Only 56? *pfft*

I get Corporal Armstrong killed at least twice as often as that during any particular OFP session.

Does that make me the more dangerous of the two?

[Assault (CAN) 1]

"WRONG! The Mi-24 Hind is as fast as an Apache, is more resilient towards hand-held SAMs, it's armored like a tank, and it has many, MANY missiles"

True, but in the real world an Apache would blow that big, heavy, hard-to-manouvre, piece of junk out of the sky. More resilient? Possibly, the Mujahideen were still able to shoot those things down with a single RPG-7 rocket.

The Hind is a flying tank, thats for sure. However, the Soviet designers forgot to put armour on the tail section, its made almost entirely out of fiberglass. A simple .30 cal machine gun can take out the tail-rotor.

The Apache is more manouverable and has better electronics, thats why I would rather be in one of those than a Hind.

Tyler

[jimz0rz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WRONG! The Mi-24 Hind is  as fast as an Apache, is more resilient towards hand-held SAMs, it's armored like a tank, and it has many, MANY missiles<span id='postcolor'>

Thats not what I said... I dident say the hind was slower, less armed and less armoured. I said AH-64 was more advanced in terms of technology.

Remember that Mi-24 was a peice of 1960's technology and the AH-64 was being developed through the 1980's-1990's.

Please read my post carefully next time zverushka.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Apache is more manouverable and has better electronics, thats why I would rather be in one of those than a Hind.<span id='postcolor'>

Thank you.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

Didn't know you were posting under 2 different names.

JimzOrz and

zverushka

Whats up with that?

Tyler

[jimz0rz 0]

I'm not zveruska!!  

[SpaceAlex 0]

I voted for Apache because it's the best chopper in the game and in the real life (Don't kill me now. The best chopper from those in the game).

Comparing AH-64 and Mi-24 in real life:

AH-64 would take down Hind. Why??? Because Mi-24 is really a flying tank. It's hard to move and it's much bigger than Apache. You think that's a good thing, don't u. Well, it isn't. For example. Hind would turning 3.3 seconds, Apache would turning 1.3 seconds. What's better. Apache could win without gunner, because it's much more lively and easier to turn than a Hind. Hellfires do much mure damage than AT6 rockets and targeting of apache is much better too. And one other thing. Hind is capable of flying only at daytime. Daytime with clear sky. That's true. No rain, no night. Later hind exported versions have added night and weather capabilities, better avionics, weather radar, autopilot, HUD, GPS, NVG compatibility, more armor, and an increased weapons load. Ok, ok. One good thing about Hind is that it's a very good-looking chopper with nice armor and it can transport troops.

Advance to OFP version:

Hind's armor is much better than apache's armour, but Apache targeting is much better than Hind' targeting (AT6 targeting is really bad. It should be better.) and it's easier to turn, just like in the real life.

All in all. Hind is a really good chopper considering that it was developed in 1964. It is a very good chopper but apch eis better

[red oct 2]

heeeeeeeeeeeeeey, you dont have the SU-37. you gota have the SU-37, its one of the worlds most advanced fighters and its the coolest if you ask me, check out this pic

if you wana see the site, heres a link

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su37/pics01.shtml

[Type0 0]

I had to go with the Apache, it is the most advanced helicopter in the game. It feels the most comfortable for me to fly. And being a newbie to the game, I dont fly anything well.

But I cant help but keep trying.....lol

[EvilSanta 0]

The 0H-58 rules all hands down. I get so many kicks out of just setting up an ammo truck and a couple enemy inf squads, and just blowing them up in numerous ways. the only problem is the low ammo, hence the ammo truck. What would be really awesome was if you could aim a scud with and Oh-58 laser thingy. BTW, does the laser targeter target for anything?

[shadow 6]

I voted for the Apache too (since it was the worlds most advanced and effective gunship) and the best looking

About the comparrison between the Apache and Hind....The Hind has a higher topspeed, but verything else is better on the Apache

...on a different note: Would be nice to see a sea-plane

[Jamesia 0]

I voted for the beautiful chinook.

This is the chopper you want. It can carry pretty much armies of people to places and it kicks ass. Its much better than a blackhawk. Apart from the blackhawk is faster and more maneuverable.

[christophercles 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (madmike @ Jan. 12 2002,07:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wrong, the G36 and Steyre were not around in 1985<span id='postcolor'>

actually, the styer was released in 1978, but yes the g36 wasnt made till 1990, so that makes me wonder why they put it in the hands of american soldiers in red hammer...

[christophercles 0]

I like the chinook too, but its underestimated in the game, so its pretty useless compared to the ffar version of the blackhawk. In vietnam, one chinook airlifted 148 refugees (all cramped up) in one trip. And since the americans get a huge load carrier, id like to see this in game- the mil-26, the russian counterpart of the chinook, it would fit in into the timeline, and the resistance could have it aswell because its commercial as well as military,

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/mi-26.htm

Or alternatively, its a bit old, but the mil-6 was also pretty cool

[Damage Inc 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (christophercles @ Jan. 13 2002,16:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wrong, the G36 and Steyre were not around in 1985<span id='postcolor'>

the styer<span id='postcolor'>

It's Steyr.

[christophercles 0]

Ok, yes your right, i just have compulsion to spell things the way i say them, its hard to quell.

[madmike 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Damage Inc @ Jan. 13 2002,14:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wrong, the G36 and Steyre were not around in 1985<span id='postcolor'>

the styer<span id='postcolor'>

It's Steyr.<span id='postcolor'>

Ok so I cant spell.

I got a D in GCSE English

[Chernaya Akula 0]

WHERE IS THE Mi-26 Halo and the Ka-50 Chernaya Akula???

[christophercles 0]

Thats what i was asking! except for the second one, i dont know what it is. Ill go find out. Ok, i found out, the reason the hokum probably isnt in it, is that it 1- wouldnt fit in with the timeline, and 2- Isnt even finished yet as an actual fielded chopper. Picture time.