FSPilot

<span style='font-size:52pt;line-height:100%'>NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!</span> Sad thing is she might get elected purely because she'd be the first woman president. THAT would be horrible.

I had DiD's EF2000 a while back, still have it I think. Great game, very addicting, one of my first flight sims.

Do you know anything of any new stuff microprose has coming out? It's still a pretty popular game, I don't know why they'd drop it.

And that clip with the medic flying an airplane made me chuckle. Come on. I know we're not going to get a perfect historical reinactment, but lets try to be serious. WWII needs to be taken seriously. Making games out of it is fine, but try to have some respect for what actually happened. It's ridiculous how blatantly unrealistic this game got. Even for a video game.

Actually I'd prefer the bomber role. Not only do you get to do bombs, you get to fly like an airliner, and shoot back.

I was just naming a few off the top of my head. I haven't tried IL-2 or the mighty 8th, although they both do look REALLY good, especially the mighty 8th.

lol, i can picture people doing that, avonlady. i had this bookmarked for a while but just lost interest ... 44 that wretched last hole -_-

Most of the stuff in cambodia was counter-Ho Chi Mihn trail. Â Blowing up bridges, stuff like that.

if avonlady was a mod, this would be closed by now.

People are buttholes. We had to make up a study, then tell if it was ethical or not. This one wasn't Didn't literally complete the study, just pretended to.

I only bought BF1942 to play with a squad. But I quit that squad shortly after... bad story. -_- I didn't get my moneys worth out of BF1942. I even did a psychology report on why people would run their jeeps into your plane when you were trying to takeoff in BF1942.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Dec. 22 2002,00:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> IMO, the Iraqi people have been exposed to a lot of propaganda, so we shouldn't put too much stock in what they believe. Don't get me wrong, it'd probably be a bad idea to be storming into Baghdad expecting a warm reception from the civilians, but that doesn't mean that they're right, or that we should avoid invading at all.

As far as I know, LRRPs were just for recon (Long Range Recon Patrol), but they may have done special ops as well. Navy seals could of done that, so could any special ops basically. If you ask me, until they get the leaf bug fixed (you know, AI seeing you through leaves and bushes) there shouldn't be much jungle fighting. It'd be too easy to get shot and to hard to shoot back.

Don't even bother with BF1942 SP. It's exactly the same as MP, but with bots instead of real people. This REALLY pisses me off. There's no plot to the campaign. Not even a character. It's just MP with bots. I didn't pay $50 for an unrealistic piece of feces with bad gameplay.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Dec. 21 2002,23:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so you came to US for a redneck family gathering? what were you thinking! Â <span id='postcolor'> LOL I can't wait to get my hands on that Beretta 9mm they issue to pilots now. Hopefully I won't ever have to use it, but still. Good crotch armor.

I hated BF1942, it's only good for MP deathmatches. Whoever made this game put 50% effort in and is getting 150% reward. There is no way I'm buying an addon for that game. They don't even have the M1 garand in there. COME ON!!!

There are tons of easy to read paperbacks written by vietnam vets at barnes & noble and probably all the other good bookstores. I must have 2 or 3 of them in my room.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"Saddam is a great man please come and kill him, we will fight the Americans in the streets they will be very welcome here..."<span id='postcolor'> Hahaha, I saw that episode. Too bad they take long vacations on the daily show, probably wont see a new episode until the new year. -_- </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And soon you will realize just how lame David and his jokes are... Okay, I'm not going off topic more here.<span id='postcolor'> *high fives bn880* finally we agree on something

Me too, but I figured it'd be too much of a bother in the middle of a firefight. Then again, so would having to shoot twice.

Is it me or is accuracy increased with a revolver when you pre-cock the weapon instead of just pulling the trigger. Â When you don't cock the handle it's just more pulling on the trigger which gets released before the gun shoots, which may throw off your aim. Â I'm not sure though, don't shoot revolvers that much. Â The only range around here is for rifles. -_-

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Dec. 21 2002,10:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">@Pilot: in your knifle anology, I would suggest you leave so that the person is not knifing you all the time... the first self defense step is to leave or not to offend. Â Â <span id='postcolor'> But we're there to defend that neighbor, and the neighborhood.

Are you feeling lucky? Well are ya, punk?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Dec. 21 2002,04:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">go play with your marbles  <span id='postcolor'> ... B-Bs.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Dec. 21 2002,08:28)</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">Questioning my age only raises questions about your own.<span id='postcolor'> At least I don't have to use foul language to get my point across. Anyway, irrelevant. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They don't just pluck 'Generic Jet Pilots' and chuck them in a Harrier.<span id='postcolor'> In the beginning they had to. Thats what I was talking about, maybe I should've worded it differently, but I don't know of any harrier-specific training programs. There may be, but I don't know of them. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Additionally, hovering is only ever usually used for landing, as its actually safer than a conventional landing. Harriers generally don't 'hover around the battlefield'.<span id='postcolor'> Did I say otherwise? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bringing your helicopter skills over to fast jet would have very little effect in regards to flying the harrier, and vice versa.<span id='postcolor'> When the U.S. and possibly the UK started flying harriers, the problem they ran into was that helicopter pilots who converted to harriers were having trouble with the high speeds, and jet pilots who converted to harriers were having trouble with the VTOL stuff. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One more thing. From what you have written, do you think it would be prudent to try and train a cadet pilot VTOL and Viff'ing before he has even mastered the basics of flight?<span id='postcolor'> Did I say that? No. Looking back I did misword what I said though, -_- *sigh*. What I meant was I think it would be smart to decide what aircraft the student will be flying, then train him appropriately. Not train him specifically for a helicopter, then send him to a harrier, or specifically a jet then to a harrier. Again, I don't know how they do it, they might do exactly what I said or not.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Dec. 21 2002,07:52)</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">Eh? How the hell did you come across that information? That might be practise in th US services but it certainly isn't here. A fighter pilot is a fighter pilot. When you go to your conversion unit, they teach you how to fly that particular aircraft...<span id='postcolor'> Not in the U.S., I don't think. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A Harrier is a jet aircraft. It is flown like a jet aircraft, but with some additions which are not hard to master.<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, jet aircraft hover excellently. The harrier pilots even call it a tricky airplane to hover and land. Jet pilots are used to coming in at 140 knots and landing on a runway. Harrier pilots need to hover and land, at least for VTOL. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Complete arse. I know many pilots who have flown both types, and trust me they are quite capable. If the US military are following anything like your guide to aircraft training, no wonder they keep crashing the fuckers.<span id='postcolor'> What are you, 12? Your vocabulary sure seems like it. It's a simple concept, helicopter pilots aren't used to high speeds, jet pilots aren't used to hovering. So they have to have training to do it right. And no, it's not my guide to aircraft training, I heard it on a documentary.