|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:55 pm
I doubt they actually launch from carriers... but ill look into something for it, besides, the long distance runs are what the air Force forces did to the gulf war,
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:56 pm
The air force does not have aircraft carriers, so your right. xp
Also, there is a specific area in the guild that requires people from both the Navy and Airforce to learn how to use aircraft carriers correctly.
For the guild battleground...
Because they are an island we can pretend that like, they are only a couple hundred miles away or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:15 pm
which actually, was what i was thinking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:28 pm
Archer_Jack which actually, was what i was thinking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:21 pm
Streamlining the joining process? I have an idea of making that happen. Erase the need to register oneself to the each branch. Let it be enough to register in the Recruitment subforum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:35 pm
Mill Wilkinson Streamlining the joining process? I have an idea of making that happen. Erase the need to register oneself to the each branch. Let it be enough to register in the Recruitment subforum. Aight. whee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:29 pm
Sorry to say, but Airforce has no idea how to use or land on a Carrier, nor will they ever know. The airdales on a carrier are specially traine for that stuff, and the F/A - 18 Hornet and Super Hornet are specially designed for it. Not to mention Naval Aviators are amongst the best in the world. The idea did make me laugh, though. And I'm here to keep you on a realistic track lol.
Oh, and the Admiral Chief of Naval Operations name has to go. I know that's what the thing says that you posted, but it irks me. He's simply called the Chief of Naval Operations. And yes, he's a four star admiral. Gary Roughead is the current CNO.
It's like saying The President Command In Chief. You know? Two seperate titles. But I don't hold it against you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:03 pm
Mechanical Spin Phenomena Sorry to say, but Airforce has no idea how to use or land on a Carrier, nor will they ever know. The airdales on a carrier are specially traine for that stuff, and the F/A - 18 Hornet and Super Hornet are specially designed for it. Not to mention Naval Aviators are amongst the best in the world. The idea did make me laugh, though. And I'm here to keep you on a realistic track lol. Oh, and the Admiral Chief of Naval Operations name has to go. I know that's what the thing says that you posted, but it irks me. He's simply called the Chief of Naval Operations. And yes, he's a four star admiral. Gary Roughead is the current CNO. It's like saying The President Command In Chief. You know? Two seperate titles. But I don't hold it against you. I have met this problem several times. In order to keep the roleplays more linear, however, I have decided to make joint forces rather than make an individual unit within another one that preforms a specific role in accordance with another. While I understand that the marines were (and technically still are) a joint force to the Navy; and that the Aircraft on the Aircraft Carriers are the same thing, my guild doesn't do that. For all intensive purposes... the aircraft carrier people train with the airforce. It's to make it more linear. I don't expect my command unit of the Navy to understand a DAMN thing about the airforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:08 pm
Eh, just making a suggestion. Sorry if it didn't come off like that, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:10 pm
Mechanical Spin Phenomena Eh, just making a suggestion. Sorry if it didn't come off like that, though. No, it's alright. I've been told by roughly 10 people so far that Airforce Aircraft don't go in Navy Aircraft Carriers. My response? Tailhook.Also, in the future, all F-35's will be pretty much STOVL so, the idea of a runway will be removed, and a hundred foot space for take off will be all that's needed. Aircraft carriers are a mile long. blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:12 pm
All I'll say is good arguement, and leave it at that. Lol. Don't want to stir the pot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:17 pm
Haha, it's not an argument. It's a reason for concern. I've thought about it though.
The realism is that any fighter jet-plane from an F-15 onwards can land or take off from a carrier if need.
Bomber planes, electronic warfare, surveillance... not so much. With much do consideration, I've decided that instead of making the Navy have land units, air units, and sea units, that I'd delineate from the general concept and instead make the branches as a whole, more linear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:20 pm
I got ya, though there are surveilance aircraft on carriers. E-2C Hawkeyes have a radar on them with a 250 mile radius. P-3 Orions have ASW (anti submarine warfare) radars, as well as Seahawks, though seahawks are generally carried about frigates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:23 pm
Mechanical Spin Phenomena I got ya, though there are surveilance aircraft on carriers. E-2C Hawkeyes have a radar on them with a 250 mile radius. P-3 Orions have ASW (anti submarine warfare) radars, as well as Seahawks, though seahawks are generally carried about frigates. Yes there are. Those are sea specific planes, however. There is also a specific sea helicopter, called the "Sea Knight". Most aircraft surveillance planes can't land on an aircraft carrier, however. They don't have strong enough landing gear, and their mechanics would probably break. Aircraft carrier electronic warplane planes, are, pretty expensive. You have to factor in a lot; even the jolt from an Aircraft carrier specific plane landing can give the pilot a concussion, so finding a way to protect the various instruments is hard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:25 pm
I'd rather not argue this. I'm not an airdale. I'll argue anything submarines or general Navy, though. Lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
