AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Total Eclipse/Muv-Luv

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-01-13, 01:12   Link #481
wavehawk
O GALILEO LET ME GO
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
How accurate are the trgetting computers on the battleships? EG are they able to do 'Danger Close' (EG right in front of your nose) fire on areas with TSFs in them? Based on what I've seen so far, the answer is no, but---just how close can you target BETA within range of friendlies?
__________________
"This is the worst webpage ever. Of all time."
wavehawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-14, 00:37   Link #482
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Accuraccy seems to be about the same as IRL. The thing to remember is that the computer is just half of the equation - even with smart weapons you still have a circular error probably.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-14, 02:22   Link #483
Kyuu
=^^=
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 42 10' N (Latitude) 87 33' W (Longitude)
Age: 35
Somehow, whenever I watch any sort of military related series -- I can imagine as to why Japan lost the war.
Kyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-24, 10:58   Link #484
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
Why don't they just put nuclear mines in the ground. wait for the horde to pass by it. When laser class is under those mines. Boom. Air Force comes swooping in killing the rest of the BETA
Victory.
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-24, 12:08   Link #485
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Because generally, you kinda want to live there, perhaps?

That said Japan would have benefited from emplaced S-11s, but either cowardly kiting did not appeal to the YAMATO DAMASHII Japs or the BETA advanced too fast for them.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-25, 10:42   Link #486
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
If nukes wont work. Neo genesis Evangelion style. Land kick-ass strong landmines to be detonated under class class. In comes arty, TSF and airforce. Supported by a armoured assault by tanks and IFVs
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-25, 14:49   Link #487
Alastor Mobius Toth
Idar Lead
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: World Marshall bureau
Nukes, or for that matter most WMDs are not very effective against BETA. For one, Mankind already has lost a lot of ground, using WMDs as a part of "scorched earth" is counter-productive, as it destroys the very area you're meant to protect, plus the fallout will make it indefensible for human troops in the long run. Plus, BETAs are also pretty much immune to radiation.

S-11 is about below N2 in power, but no-one actually thought of it as a defensive weapon. My guess that placing minefields of those would be too cost-inefficient, given that most defensive lines are on the coast, or would require near-constant replacement. Plus, I'm sure that continuous usage of tactical nukes would probably blow up the defensive lines as well; whereas placing minefields more to the inlands would be both expensive (you'd have to cover a huuuuuggggeeee stretch of land), plus there's no guarantee that BETA would pass through it - you'd have to herd them via military operations and artillery fire, and the cost of losses would probably equal it with already practiced static defense actions.

Also, while it's not really showed in the anime (or for the matter, the Alternative itself), typical defensive line is composed of tanks, IFVs, Artillery, conventional mines, TSFs and helicopters.
Battles near the coast will also involve all manner of ships.

The problem is that the BETA enjoy ungodly logistical advantage, with near-limitless numbers and capacity to replace all their losses in short period of time. No amount of WMDs can fix that, since no WMD can really touch BETA hives.
__________________
Let the world fear us all.
It's just means to an end.
Our salvation lies in the Father's sins.
Alastor Mobius Toth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-26, 00:32   Link #488
Dragonkid11
A random-man
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
S-11 seems to be a really powerful conventional explosive

All I could wonder is why they don't put it in those giant shell used by battleship to bombard the hell out of BETA.

Maybe they are too unstable to be fire out of a barrel or something?
Dragonkid11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-26, 04:46   Link #489
tsunade666
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: In my room
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonkid11 View Post
S-11 seems to be a really powerful conventional explosive

All I could wonder is why they don't put it in those giant shell used by battleship to bombard the hell out of BETA.

Maybe they are too unstable to be fire out of a barrel or something?
I don't think so if they had it armed and used in fast moving tsf for hive infiltration. So I think its should be usable for bombardment. Though its limited in numbers. Its specially used in hive infiltration.

Its just that messed up world setting and nipon damashii? (I forgot the term) instead of living like the american ways of thinking they go suicide in the hive.
__________________

tsunade666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-26, 07:16   Link #490
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
I think the only way to win or any chances of winning is by sheer firepower alone. Like the Korean War. UN vs China's human wave attacks. In this case for the BETA. They have strong frontal protection. Air support is denied by the laser class.
In the Korean War. UN troops used Quad 50's to great effect. Perhaps A-10 mounted on some chassis to provide faster mobility. Since A-10s knock the shit out of the BETA?
Munitions that include airburst capability/ landmine that could render BETA's frontal armour useless?
Deep flanking attacks by fast TSFs to destroy laser class to open up the air?
Fast and mobile armour units. Light tanks AFVs, IFVs with rapid firing armaments? Bushmaster, 75mm cannon?
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-26, 15:44   Link #491
Znozzy
Praise the sun!
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by timtiang View Post
I think the only way to win or any chances of winning is by sheer firepower alone. Like the Korean War. UN vs China's human wave attacks. In this case for the BETA. They have strong frontal protection. Air support is denied by the laser class.
Depends, if the TSF's take out the laser classes, air support can move in
Quote:
In the Korean War. UN troops used Quad 50's to great effect. Perhaps A-10 mounted on some chassis to provide faster mobility. Since A-10s knock the shit out of the BETA?
Isnt the A-10 based on the F-4? (or was it the F-5?) and it isn't really a frontline fighter, Destroyer classes would rape it, it isnt mobile enough(Even though some of those issues was attempted to be fixed by the A-10C) against tank classes and Grapplers, sure, but Destroyers would bring it down too quick.
Quote:
Munitions that include airburst capability/ landmine that could render BETA's frontal armour useless?
Deep flanking attacks by fast TSFs to destroy laser class to open up the air?
Numbers would be the issue here, besides, havent they used that tactic in the eurofront?

Also, the laser classes have a insane range, even if you take out the ones in the vicinity you might have more waiting out of sight, and those could shoot down the transports
Quote:
Fast and mobile armour units. Light tanks AFVs, IFVs with rapid firing armaments? Bushmaster, 75mm cannon?
Is already used, numbers is once again the issue here :/
Znozzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-26, 21:15   Link #492
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by timtiang View Post
In the Korean War. UN troops used Quad 50's to great effect. Perhaps A-10 mounted on some chassis to provide faster mobility. Since A-10s knock the shit out of the BETA?
As mentioned, A-10s lack the thrust to move at fly at high speed to evade BETA. They're essentially somewhat mobile gun turrets. Also, physics plays a part here: if you make the A-10 lighter in an attempt to increase mobility, the recoil effects of the dual Avenger gatlings will be stronger, as the recoil has less mass to exert it's force on. That's why big guys can handle heavy guns easier compared to small guys, or why bigger guys take more hits to go down: the force is spread out over a larger mass.

To give an IRL example, there was an attempt to fit the GAU-8 into a smaller package that could be carried by a faster fighter. The result was the GPU-5 gunpod, which was fitted to the F-16. However, tests found that the recoil adversely affected the F-16, which was a small light fighter, and the gun quickly lost its zero.

Adding more powerful engines may not solve the problem of A-10 mobility either; during the Cold War, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy's Phantoms were modified at great cost to accept the Rolls-Royce Spey engines, which were more powerful than the J79 engines used on American Phantoms. Unfortunately, the increased drag from the heavier Rolls-Royce engines meant that the Spey Phantoms actually had inferior performance in certain areas, compared to the American Phantoms.

Life is full of tradeoffs.

Quote:
Munitions that include airburst capability/ landmine that could render BETA's frontal armour useless?
These are already being used - arty fires DPICM and beehive. The problems are that these don't do much against Destroyer shells, which are rated 15 on the Mohs scale of mineral hardness. I should note that diamond is rated as 10, which is the highest the scale goes IRL, and that tungsten carbide, which is used for AP ammo, is rated 9.0 - 9.5 on the scale.

As shown in Schwarzesmarken, artillery and landmines are used on a massive scale to protect the Oder-Nisse Line and its defensive fortifications. However, the BETA keep attacking in such great numbers that minefields aren't really as useful as one would hope.

Quote:
Deep flanking attacks by fast TSFs to destroy laser class to open up the air?
They do this in Schwarzesmarken as well, and it's called laserjagd (Laser Hunt). An equivalent doctrine in our world is Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses, or, as American pilots call it, "Wild Weasel." (Which is actually a corruption of the Vietnam-era terms; when the USAF first started doing SEAD, missions were called "Iron Hand" and crews & aircraft were called "Wild Weasel." Both terms eventually became conflated, and now Wild Weasel refers to the mission, crew, and aircraft.) Laserjagd still exists - note how Tasha and Keith were killing lasers in Kamchatka and Yukon - but generally the protagonists we follow aren't assigned to these missions.

Also, in Schwarzesmarken, while laserjagd is important in opening the air, the main reason the NVA (National Volksarmee, East German Army) stresses laserjagd is so that artillery support can be provided, otherwise the lasers would just intercept all the shells.

Quote:
Fast and mobile armour units. Light tanks AFVs, IFVs with rapid firing armaments? Bushmaster, 75mm cannon?
In terms of combat endurance and mobility, TSFs are superior to AFVs and IFVs, on account of being able to fly and move fast. Destroyers aside, the 36mm caseless round is sufficiently powerful for fighting BETA; the problem is that it's all to easy to run dry and get swarmed as you're trying to reload. Note the Imperial Royal Guard at Kyoto, who were killed as they were reloading.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.


Last edited by Wild Goose; 2013-02-26 at 22:23.
Wild Goose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-27, 22:45   Link #493
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
Artillery to airburst overhead. hence possibly negating their frontal armour. The only way that i can think of to slow a destroyer advance is to shoot their legs. With the whole frontline unable to move, they'll be blocked the entire BETA herd of destroyers, grapplers so on.
The deep strikes is a gamble. BETA do not have tactics and make use of numbers. The laser class would most likely sortie their entire group. If not split into different groups.
The TSFs would be flying close to ground level though.
As for the trapped herd. mortar half tracks or arty vehicles. especially howitzers can bombard them. mortars and howitzers not like artillery. Do not require direct fire and plunge straight down on target. Mortar unit on jeeps to shoot and scoot.

Any ideas. There is no perfect plan. This is just what i would/might do given the circumstances. Able to come up with a sound plan yourself.
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-27, 22:57   Link #494
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
Quote:


In terms of combat endurance and mobility, TSFs are superior to AFVs and IFVs, on account of being able to fly and move fast. Destroyers aside, the 36mm caseless round is sufficiently powerful for fighting BETA; the problem is that it's all to easy to run dry and get swarmed as you're trying to reload. Note the Imperial Royal Guard at Kyoto, who were killed as they were reloading.
Vehicles are cheaper, faster to produce compared to a TSF. through they might not be able to endure or be as mobile as compared to a TSF. They are still an important role and the backbone of many armies. They are not meant for frontal confrontations. Mainly establishing a base of fire/ flanking fires.
An M2 Bradley has 900 rounds for its chaingun and up to 7 TOW missles. Resupply can be in the form of humvees and jeeps. making resupply faster.
These combat groups would have rotations to ensure ammo and fuel resupply.

Anyone thought of super big size claymores? TSFs place it along wings/flanks of enemy advance. It would surely make the Destroyer class's frontal armour useless. Due to fire coming from the side.

Tactics wise i might depend on Hannibal's tactics used in Cannae. Some mods in it. Units at the tip would be in a fighting retreat. Leapfrogging whatever.Under artillery cover. The wings would attack the flanks/rear spread around wreck mayhem. Hmmm what do you guys think of mounted barret 50cals or whatnot on fast vehicles. LSV travel around 110km/h why not a ferrari or a lambo. These units would attack sides of the herd and slowing frontal advance by destroyer class. by targeting legs casuing a hold up or a bottleneck in the advance.
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-28, 00:50   Link #495
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by timtiang View Post
Artillery to airburst overhead. hence possibly negating their frontal armour.
This is already being done, and it does work. The problem is that this is only effective where there are no Laser-class, as a Laser-class group can interdict an artillery battery's fires, so much so that you could fire until you ran out of ammo, and there would be no effect, because the Lasers have intercepted all your fire.

Remember, you're not fighting just against the Destroyers, or Grapplers and Tanks: there's the Laser-class to consider.

Quote:
The only way that i can think of to slow a destroyer advance is to shoot their legs. With the whole frontline unable to move, they'll be blocked the entire BETA herd of destroyers, grapplers so on.
Again, this is has been done, though the only three examples of this action that I've seen have been American pilots, one being Yuuya, the other two examples being the A-10s.

Quote:
The deep strikes is a gamble. BETA do not have tactics and make use of numbers. The laser class would most likely sortie their entire group. If not split into different groups.
The TSFs would be flying close to ground level though.
Yes, it is a gamble to go deep into BETA territory to hunt the Lasers, but if you don't neutralise the Lasers, you can't use your artillery. It's one of those things that has to be done. The need is dire and the cause is just. That sort of thing.

And really, so long as you take the terrain into effect, it's quite possible to fly nape of earth (NOE) to the Lasers to kill them. The problem is that it's a balancing act: not too high that the Lasers kill you, not too low that Destroyers run you over or Grapplers drag you down.

Quote:
As for the trapped herd. mortar half tracks or arty vehicles. especially howitzers can bombard them. mortars and howitzers not like artillery. Do not require direct fire and plunge straight down on target. Mortar unit on jeeps to shoot and scoot.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Howitzers are a type of artillery, and all modern artillery use the principles of indirect fire to gain greater range and fire over terrain features. It's tank guns that are direct fire. (Mind, many artillery pieces can also be used in the direct fire role, though that's not a primary focus.)

Again, the issue with mortars is that generally mortars don't have the same weight of fire as artillery, and shoot and scoot is of limited viability here, because the BETA don't conduct counterbattery fires, which is what shoot and scoot is meant to counteract for artillery. Furthermore, as I said, until you neutralise the Laser-class, you can put as many shells in the air as you want, the Lasers are going to shoot them all down. Saturation fire is of limited usefulness, as what little fire that makes it through the Laser-class gauntlet will not be enough to significantly affect the battle.

And if you mean shoot and then run from the BETA, we saw that in Kamchatka. Doesn't seem to have been as effective as you might hope.

Quote:
Any ideas. There is no perfect plan. This is just what i would/might do given the circumstances. Able to come up with a sound plan yourself.
Generally, while there are some issues, for the most part the combat doctrine in Alternative actually does work, given the threats that they're facing.

It is not that the ideas are perfect, but whether they are practical and provide sufficient advantage to be used. All things are possible, but not all things are practical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timtiang View Post
Vehicles are cheaper, faster to produce compared to a TSF. through they might not be able to endure or be as mobile as compared to a TSF. They are still an important role and the backbone of many armies. They are not meant for frontal confrontations. Mainly establishing a base of fire/ flanking fires.
This is true, and I don't dispute that AFVs have a place in combined arms doctrine. However, it is also very clearly shown that in a direct confrontation with BETA, which is what most combat devolves into, tanks and IFVs are at a significant disadvantage compared to a TSF.

Quote:
An M2 Bradley has 900 rounds for its chaingun and up to 7 TOW missles. Resupply can be in the form of humvees and jeeps. making resupply faster.
These combat groups would have rotations to ensure ammo and fuel resupply.
A Type-94 Shiranui in Gun Sweeper configuration carries the following weapons:

* 4 x 36mm Assault Cannon. Each magazine for the chaingun holds 2000 36mm HVAP shells. Contrast that to the M2 Bradley, which has a 25mm chaingun with 900 rounds.

* 4 x 120mm Cannon. Each Magazine holds 7 shells, if I recall correctly.

Total maximum load of ammo for a Type-94 in Gun Sweeper configuration is 12 magazines of 36mm ammo. Each magazine holds 2000 rounds, meaning that in addition to four 36mm chainguns, fully loaded, holding 8000 rounds total, a Type-94 carries 12,000 rounds of spare ammo. I say again: Twelve thousand rounds of spare ammo.

The Bradley's maximum speed is 66km/h. It is limited to traveling on the ground, has a single 25mm chaingun and TOW launcher, and holds only 900 rounds of 25mm ammo, and 7 TOW missiles.

The Shiranui can reach speeds in excess of 700km/h, more than a hundred times faster than the Bradley. It can run on the ground and fly, and is exponentially more maneuverable than the Bradley. It has four 36mm chainguns, which fire larger and more powerful shells compared to the 25mm Bushmaster. It carries four 120mm guns, with 28 rounds of ammo. It carries a total maximum loadout of twenty thousand (20,000!) rounds of 36mm ammunition.

It costs more to make a TSF, but you get what you pay for.

Quote:
Anyone thought of super big size claymores? TSFs place it along wings/flanks of enemy advance. It would surely make the Destroyer class's frontal armour useless. Due to fire coming from the side.
That presumes you're actually able to get to that flank of enemy advance in the first place, and that you can position these super claymores before the enemy gets there. As has been seen, the enemy numbers are simply too large for this tactic to be very useful.

Quote:
Tactics wise i might depend on Hannibal's tactics used in Cannae. Some mods in it. Units at the tip would be in a fighting retreat. Leapfrogging whatever.Under artillery cover. The wings would attack the flanks/rear spread around wreck mayhem. Hmmm what do you guys think of mounted barret 50cals or whatnot on fast vehicles. LSV travel around 110km/h why not a ferrari or a lambo. These units would attack sides of the herd and slowing frontal advance by destroyer class. by targeting legs casuing a hold up or a bottleneck in the advance.
While this is a good idea, as we've seen the BETA come like an onrushing tide. Fighting retreats seem to not work very well, as they quickly devolve into a rout, though this would be a training/morale issue. The other danger, however, is that a fighting retreat is still a retreat, and may allow gaps for the BETA to exploit; a retreating TSF is a TSF that is not shooting at the enemy. And you keep mentioning artillery, and I will continue to reiterate that artillery is useless if the Laser-classes have not been neutralised. Artillery also needs to be used carefully where you have air assets, as you don't want them flying into your artillery (this was a very big danger in Vietnam).

.50 BMG is decent enough against Tank-class, but is not sufficiently powerful to kill Grapplers or Destroyers. Again, light ground vehicles lack the speed of TSFs, and can be outpaced and destroyed.

As for Ferraris and Lamborghinis, Italy's been overrun. Furthermore, these cars are complete and utter crap off paved roads, which is where much combat takes place.

If you want powerful guns on a fast platform with a high rate of fire, such a platform exists. It's called the Tactical Surface Fighter.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-28, 08:49   Link #496
timtiang
Junior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Goose View Post
If you want powerful guns on a fast platform with a high rate of fire, such a platform exists. It's called the Tactical Surface Fighter.
Hmmm. i do agree with whatever you said though. lasers a bitch in a fight. Especially due to humanity's dependence and over-reliance of aerial assets. The most is to take out as much laser class as possible and pray.

Is it possible to reflect lasers with mirrors? lol. just a thought. Perhaps investing Moorcock-Lechte engines on the bombers/fighters to disrupt laser class or bomb the crap out of the herd. Expensive but a possibility?

What would you do huh buddy? Any tactics or plans?
timtiang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-02-28, 11:46   Link #497
Alastor Mobius Toth
Idar Lead
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: World Marshall bureau
The mirror thing was discussed here at a length.

In short, it boils down to there being no perfect mirror, and that even successfully relecting a laser bolt will not reflect its heat which gets transferred to the TSF over time, with the mirror material making it difficult to remove that heat from the system, leading to TSF cooking itself.

That, and mirrors are mostly reflective against specific light wavelenght, and there's no guarantee that BETA lasers aren't multi-wavelenght rainbow.


As for anti-gravity engines, their availability is strictly limited by the quantity of certain G-elements. Mankind has a very finite, very small supply of those, so it's simply not possible for using them to create enough drives to outfit one squadron. Said G-elements also get consumed as engine works, and the consumption increases when it's under heavy stress, such as taking fire.

Also, "anti-gravity" is actually a bit of misnomer, since Moorcock-Lechte engines manipulate gravity rather then just create some sort of anti-gravity field. It has been mentioned (in main Alternative VN) that precise control over the fields that such engines produces is simply impossible without hyper-advanced Quantum computer - otherwise you get fields running out of control and ripping people manning the machine into a paste; which was the fate of original crew manning the Susanno/XG-70
__________________
Let the world fear us all.
It's just means to an end.
Our salvation lies in the Father's sins.
Alastor Mobius Toth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-29, 03:12   Link #498
wavehawk
O GALILEO LET ME GO
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Is it possible for a TSF in full flight (EG full forward thrust) to rotate its whole body (except the jump jets) backwards (with the Jump Units being the axis of rotation) and fire while still maintaining forward speed (no change in speed)?

I'm not talking about performing a loop, turn, or Kulbit, but rather a "Shelton Slide" (Wing Commander fans know it as an 'autoslide')--sort of like a J-turn or Herbst Maneuver (if it were a real-wordl aircraft).
__________________
"This is the worst webpage ever. Of all time."
wavehawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-29, 03:38   Link #499
Wild Goose
Truth Martyr
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doing Anzu's paperwork.
Age: 28
Hmmm. Depends on the jump-jets, but I don't think it's possible - from what we see of TSF stylings, their front is where it's all angled to cut the wind, while the back is flat. They'd have severe drag issues trying to pull this off.
__________________
~Speaking my mind, even when it costs me~
One must forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged.Heinrich Heine.

I believe in miracles.

Wild Goose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-29, 03:59   Link #500
wavehawk
O GALILEO LET ME GO
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Well, real-life Herbst Maneuvers are also known post-stall maneuvers--eg they take place in situations that would cause a normal aircraft to lose their aerodynamic integrity--EG stall--and fall out of the sky. But due to a combination of powerful engines, thrust vectoring, and other things (design, computer controlled gyroscpes or what have you) , they instead perform maneuvers that would be...abnormal.

Basically, I'm thinking if a standard TSF can pull this risky maneuver off in combat. It's not a normal maneuver obviously, but just wonderign if it possible, or if it'd have to have a lot of tweaking/revision involved/
__________________
"This is the worst webpage ever. Of all time."
wavehawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
military science fiction, visual novel

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:04.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.