Author Topic: enginers  (Read 1452 times)

Offline tmetal

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2279
Re: enginers
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2012, 05:30:50 PM »
They are engineers they have explosives, a few trees won't bother them  :cool:

The toothpick industry sure would thrive
The real problem is anyone should feel like they can come to this forum and make a wish without being treated in a derogatory manner.  The only discussion should be centered around whether it would work, or how it would work and so on always in a respectful manner.

-Skuzzy 5/18/17

Offline DarkHawk

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 341
Re: enginers
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2012, 05:32:09 PM »
not a bad idea however the runways would be grass, un-level, might have to watch out for trees on take off or landing, safe landing would only be in a hanger,
would restrict to fighters and 2 engine bombers, no formations allowed, only gv would be m8, m16, m3, jeeps and maybe a wirble, bombs should be restricted to 500lbs or less, no drop tanks, no rearm pads, no external gun packages, fuel restriction 50%, remember all supplies have to be flown in.
To Build a base will require 6 c47, plus and additional 3 with supplies (airfield)
For every 10 planes or gv's that launch from the field and additional c47 with supplies will have to be delivered. The initial build, using the above 9 C47 will provide enough support for 20 planes or gv's, each additional c47 will support another 10 of either planes or gv or a mixed amount. no supplies than no one can fly.
DHawk
49DHawk
XO for BOWL (DHawk)

Offline Klam

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
Re: enginers
« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2012, 06:29:39 PM »
I like it...... :aok
=Anglo-Saxon=


ingame ID: Petrol

Offline MAINER

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 607
Re: enginers
« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2012, 07:57:57 PM »
+1
Are those our bombers?-famous last words



 Member of the congregation of The church of David Wales

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: enginers
« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2012, 11:06:31 PM »
not a bad idea however the runways would be grass, un-level, might have to watch out for trees on take off or landing, safe landing would only be in a hanger,
would restrict to fighters and 2 engine bombers, no formations allowed, only gv would be m8, m16, m3, jeeps and maybe a wirble, bombs should be restricted to 500lbs or less, no drop tanks, no rearm pads, no external gun packages, fuel restriction 50%, remember all supplies have to be flown in.
To Build a base will require 6 c47, plus and additional 3 with supplies (airfield)
For every 10 planes or gv's that launch from the field and additional c47 with supplies will have to be delivered. The initial build, using the above 9 C47 will provide enough support for 20 planes or gv's, each additional c47 will support another 10 of either planes or gv or a mixed amount. no supplies than no one can fly.
DHawk

Pretty well thought out, good one. I would only change the bit with the trees-- there's a runway, but trees within say, 15 feet of it.

Offline matt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1136
Re: enginers
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2012, 01:13:12 AM »
+1

Offline surfinn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: enginers
« Reply #36 on: March 16, 2012, 11:24:38 AM »
I think 9 c47s would be a bit much no less than 3 no more than 6 and take out the gv capability. The original idea is for a light airfield lightly defended by auto acks and a couple of maned guns. All the other improvements to my original idea are greatly appreciated. :cheers:

Offline ScottyK

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: enginers
« Reply #37 on: March 16, 2012, 08:08:19 PM »
 have the airfields similar to the ones used in WW1 arena.
Childhood is over the moment you know your gonna die.  Fight not to Fail, or end up like the others.   In my crate, im the commander.


IGN: Scotty57