Krechet1

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from AKM74 on 12:45 am on Nov. 16, 2001 anyone ? <span id='postcolor'> yes... what made u thing it's not an SVD?

V-22 would be like a Russian "sabateur" unit. They fall out of the skies all by theselves killing whole squads. In 1986 the cost of a single V-22 was estimated at $24 million, with 923 aircraft to be built. In 1989 the Bush administration cancelled the project, at which time the unit cost was estimated at $35 million, with 602 aircraft. The V-22 question caused friction between Secretary of Defense Richard B. Cheney and Congress throughout his tenure. DoD spent some of the money Congress appropriated to develop the aircraft, but congressional sources accused Cheney, who continued to oppose the Osprey, of violating the law by not moving ahead as Congress had directed. Cheney argued that building and testing the prototype Osprey would cost more than the amount appropriated. In the spring of 1992 several congressional supporters of the V-22 threatened to take Cheney to court over the issue. A little later, in the face of suggestions from congressional Republicans that Cheney's opposition to the Osprey was hurting President Bush's reelection campaign, especially in Texas and Pennsylvania where the aircraft would be built, Cheney relented and suggested spending $1.5 billion in fiscal years 1992 and 1993 to develop it. He made clear that he personally still opposed the Osprey and favored a less costly alternative. The program was revived by the incoming Clinton administration, and current plans call for building 458 Ospreys for $37.3 billion, or more than $80 million apiece, with the Marines receiving 360 Ospreys, the Navy 48 and the Air Force 50. The first prototype flew in 1989. As of early 2000 three test aircraft had crashed: no one was killed in the 1991 crash, an accident in 1992 killed seven men, and the third in April 2000 killed 19 Marines. So i'd rather fly in 30 year old mi-8 than Osprey (mi-8s are quite fun to fly in, especially under hair of automatic fire and on board mechanic fixing the engine right in the air swearing and smoking right near the fuel pipe, i'd say mi-8 flights were my most significant memories, especially when 5,45 bullet went into vest on which i was sitting (would be really ugly if i didn't put that vest under my groin)).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Brass on 5:17 pm on Nov. 14, 2001 in the bmp2 id hate to be the driver if youre transporting a really annoying soldier who will be pestering you as he sits behind you. maybe its a stewardess. , although its good space utilization. great research spetznaz. <span id='postcolor'> "annoying soldier" would happen to be squad leader who will be more concerned with how to get his squad through the mission than "pestering a driver".

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from supergrunt on 8:26 pm on Nov. 11, 2001 scooby i agree with ya it makes no sense to ride on top of a apc the blast of a mine would kill ya (if you can stay on top when it is at half speed) <span id='postcolor'> when it is 40 degrees outside and more like 70 inside the APC with nothing to breathe and practically no ability to move around i'd like to see you ride inside the APC. People didn't start to ride of APCs because they are stupud. Those are the rules written in blood (Same as traffic laws:)).

no i didn't do it. And OFP's weapons models aren't exactly low poly. they just have horrible, horrible skins.

normally modelled AK74. And not an ak47 with hastily added muzzle compensator and ornage painted magazine. Here's an example of how AK74 should look like (750 polygons): It is for HL mod firearms.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Scooby on 8:52 pm on Oct. 20, 2001 I believe that it was 10 kilo AT which hit our APC took at peace keeping mission. People inside of it survived. Makes no sense to ride on top of the APC's. I've been on tank at fairly good speed, it gets bit on your strenght to hang on there. Idea is to get out before enemies see you and open fire. If they do you get out of top of it fast. With tanks you get to run quite alot anyways. If I still remember how it was squad is supposed to run 50 meters front of the tank so that in front of the tank there is 50 meter hole beetween men at the right side front of the tank and men at the left side front of the tank. <span id='postcolor'> What kind of APC it was to survive a 10 kilo mine? 10 kilo explosive subtance can level a small village... Riding on top of APCs has nothing to do with mine protection or not being able to provide adequate transport. Reasons are more obvious: heat and cramped conditions. As far as i know they dont make air conditioner equiped APCs yet and it gets real hot inside ( u actually cannot touch the inner walls they are so hot). Cramped conditions are big problem for a BMP. BMP are famous for their low profile, but that low profile is at a cost of not being able to move much. i had problems with sitting inside BRDM-2 (i am fairly large, 1'86cm at 98 kg). so we just dropped old couches and matresses on top of BMP and preferred to ride there. Also there are less obvious reasons: HEAT namely. everyone inside APC when hit by HEAT will literally melt. while if sitting on top there is a very good chance to survive. Also by sitting on top soldiers have better field of vision, ability to fire 40mm grenades and machineguns in any direction right away. Riding on top of tanks would actually make no sense (especially ERA equiped). ERA are very effective against AT fire but it is dangerous for infantry around it. i wouldnt be comfartable riding on top of T80 with C-4 blocks all around it. Although i've seen some daredevils do it.