Stag

Er, no, they sent what they could load onto a boat.

if you're talking about a fourth force, The Brits, and producing like for like, it won't work that way, at least with helicopters. Gazelle would be roughly equal to Kiowa, though there are some which are armed with ATGWs. Puma would be the direct equivalent to the Huey or Black Hawk, but the Lynx is in a class of its own, mounting TOW (Last time I looked) with serious talk of also bunging on Hellfire, but as far as I know never mounted a serious gun. But even without ATGW, it was still used offensively, carrying a pair of MILAN teams to the most embarrassing place on the battlefield the enemy could imagine, kill something, and get out with unparralleled speed. Actually, That would be a #### of a mission, wouldn't it? Correction: Fourth force (Edited by Wardog at 2:38 am on Dec. 7, 2001)

The modifications are being done by HK, but the originbal design was by Enfield and actually dates back to 1947; back then it was called the EM2 and the round was 7.62. it never went into production at the time, but the design resurfaced in the early 70s, when Enfield built the prototypes, Named Individual Weapon (IW) and Light Support Weapon (LSW) in 4.85mm. Never heard of that calibre? Good. It died when common sense kicked in and NATO agreed that 5.56mm should be the standard round. The British Army finally took the weapon as the SA80 and has been leaving bits of it all over the battlefield ever since.

Ok, and bung in an LSW, too

Check your oplflash disk. I think you'll find what you need there in adobe format

No, it can be done with the metal frame towers too. As you say, just a matter of positioning.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Greg Dragunovski on 3:03 pm on Nov. 28, 2001 OH AND SORRY FOR NOT KNOWING CRAPPY AMERICAN SLANG!!!!! SORRY FOR NOT KNOWING WHAT OR WHO LEBENSRAUM IS!!! SORRY I BETTER EXCUSE MYSELF TO THE LITTLE BABIES THAT CAN ONLY SAY YOU FUC KING IDIOT!!! <span id='postcolor'> Okay, you nausiating little specimen, listen up. All you are able to prove is that you are a totally immature pillock. You haven't  an ounce of evidence to back up any of your  statements, So why the #### bother when anybody that can use a mouse can disprove anything you say? You are making a fool, of yourself, and the thing that REALLY pisses me off is that you appear to be of Polish decent, I find you personally embarrasing, because so am I, and to me, there is nothing so embarrasing to a nation as a racist.  You are doing nothing for the reputation of my heritage. Read and learn. The Merkava is arguably one of the best tank designs in the world, and owes nothing to any previous designs of either the East or West. Nobody else has got anything quite like it. The T-91, Jeez, you can't even get the designation of Poland's native AFV right, appears to be a product improved T-80, nothing more, and as such should never be deployed by any country against western vehicles, unless they want their soldiers to live short, exciting lives. The reactive armour of which you boast would have almost ZERO effect against an incoming sabot round, and the 125mm gun starts putting rounds into the dirt at 2.5 klicks. The missile may be a threat, but it's unlikely you would just be meeting tanks; You don't have to beat the tank, you would have to beat the Army. Now if you want an intelligent argument, I suggest you go and check your facts before hitting the keyboard. If you are going to reply with your usual crap, go ahead; make yourself out to be an even bigger pratt. Oh, yes, And Liebensraum is a soundbyte from your best mate Hitler. It's got sod all to do ith the USA. Was the only education you ever had called obnoxious 101? (Edited by Wardog at 2:46 am on Nov. 29, 2001)

I know I shouldn't but...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from theavonlady on 6:17 pm on Nov. 26, 2001 Gentlemen! Gentlelem! I think we should compromise and meet Hasharajima Midway. <span id='postcolor'> :snigger:

Not advocating dumping it FOPFSP... whatever What I'm saying is we shouldn't be limited by it. The fact that BIS brought out the addons for a later times seems to me to indicate that they believe so, too.

Where did this information come from?

US marines use the twin engined UH1N even now. Their other transports are the CH46 Sea Knight, same layout as the chinook, but smaller, and the CH53 Seastallion and Superstallion. But hueys are common as muck the world over. There is a saying; "When the last Blackhawk goes to the boneyard, it will arrive there slung under a huey." I think they'll be around for a while yet.

UK

Doh! you're right. Lost the source of the duff info, so can't even inform them they're talking bollocks.

Where to?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from The Blind Sniper on 9:49 pm on Nov. 24, 2001 I think it was the only abrams lost in the gulf war.. or one of few.. none lost to Iraqi tanks. <span id='postcolor'> This is an official account of the battle of 73 Easting; I dispels a few myths about the Gulf War. You'll find out what the Combat performance of the Abrams is realisically; It isn't a super tank. Er, actually, thinking about it, it is.. No info about Challenger losses, though. but this has got my interest... http://www.mideasti.org/articles/bourque.html Oh, BTW, The people there called it "Fright Night..." the worst losses to the Iraqi's in a single action in the whole campaign. (Edited by Wardog at 12:31 am on Nov. 25, 2001)

BTW, you probably never would see a good British tank before your T90 brewed up...

Jub-Jub, You do realise that you have exactly ZERO chance of convincing an adolescent? If you do manage, you could probably make a fortune nailing jelly to ceilings... BTW, you forgot the big one; The Apache Longbow. Westland took the US airframe, re-did the avionics and sensor suites and sold it to the British Army. The US is in the process of ugrading its Apache fleet to British standards.

True. but you'll note that the name of the game is Operation Flashpoint, not Operation Flashpoint 1985. If you look in the campaign folder of OFP, there is one single file there, titled 1985. The file is locked, you can't add to it, not even the addons which are appropriate to that year. So what is this fixation with 1985??? Why shouldn't somebody take the G36, and all the other hardware which didn't exist in '85, make a new campaign and call it 1990?

Good points, well put Scooby. Excatly the same points as the Proto- Sh1tbar, but without the arrogance. If you are talking about issues with the code rather than new units, I think it's very unlikley that the same people will be doing the modelling as are doing the coding, so in theory BIS could be doing both. Of course there is the matter of rescource allocation by the company (The staff could be working on other projects), but as far as I can see, the coding staff will be working on fixing bugs anyway. Of course, if BIS would release the SDK, they wouldn't have to bother with further add-ons. ####, I'd be willing to PAY for a graphics/model editor which would work with OFP. As I said earlier, a lot of garbage would result, but so would some gems. You just have to look at what has been achieved with other games (I'm talking top-end flight simulators, not fragfests) to see what could be achieved. In the meantime, as far as I'm concerned everyone has a perfect right to request whatever addon they wish, including exploding skateboards. I also recognise BIS's right to ignore everyone, and do what they think is right for them and us, in that order,to take this game forward. because if BIS goes down the tubes, it may well mean the end of development of OFP.

Interesting. I back off a little, and he gets more offensive. Tactical thinking by a psychology major? A bit obvious. Okay Proto-Sh1tbar, Your argument is that in the context of the game, Anything which is not American is crap? What arrogance! Which is typical of your stance all the way thorugh this. “I’m more intelligent than the Average forum member?†I think you would be very easy to sucker into an ambush; you just wouldn’t believe anyone could out-think you. I hope your assessors spot this flaw before you get someone killed. And if I were you, I really would improve my literacy; The war won’t wait while you look for a socket to plug in your word-processor, and ambiguity can be fatal in real life. What did you mean; cretin, or were you trying to write creation? See my point? Professionals don’t have time to second-guess sloppiness. Now, back to the original subject; It’s none of your d*amned business what other people ask BIS for. It could be very possible to revolve a campaign around a SINGLE addition, even something as basic as a non-American or Soviet rifle. If you can add nothing creative yourself don’t try to criticise those who are willing to try.

And there was me just starting to mellow out. Yes, I am British, though my father wasn't. As for anybody else who posts, The only thing I have in common with them is that I think you are wrong Yes, there's a lot of things which could be added to the US, AND to the Soviet sides, for that matter. So what? It's a start for a game engine which is capable of more. Why not add basic nationality packages to use as a springboard for other things? BIS have stated that they may release an SDK when they see a memorable user campaign. Should it follow present U.S. military doctrine which is to dismantle a country's infrastructure and C3I before sending in ground troops? ####, sounds like you need fast movers and Buffs to me, sonny. Let's face it; If the States got such an ass-whupping as occurred in the early part of the Campaign (Never got very far with it, having too much fun figuring out how to create scenarios), Realistically, that is what Uncle Sam would be sending. If the Maldens are so strategically important, they wouldn't give ground like Somalia. So where to go? Blast the Maldens to bedrock, or just wipe the slate clean and start from a completely new foundation? Get the SDK released, then you have many people working on whatever they d*amned well please, including the gaps in the inventory you consider so important As for the explosive skateboard, I think that is called "Humour." You should try it some time.

Right and wrong. The Vickers Gun was a .303 calibre water cooled machine gun based on the old Maxim gun, but improved. In its reliability tests it was fired for seven days constantly without a jam. It was only taken off the British Army inventory in 1960, after more than 50 years of front line use. The drum fed gun Teevor talks about is probably the Vickers-K, air cooled, a very different weapon, But in the Jeeps and Chevy's the LRDG and SAS used in WW2 were armed with just about anything lethal the teams could lay their hands on. By '85 the Vehicles were Landrovers, but the layout of the weapons remained similar.

Thanks man

Call in the Wrath of God in single play, no problem. Try it in multiplay, of course, when everyone is looking at you, it doesn't work. mumbled excuses of bad weather don't really cut it when an armoured column is advancing on your pos. Can anyone spare me further embarrasment? BTW group leader was selected.