Categorize B26 As "Attack"

[skorpion]

Man skorpion, you just can't stay away from that shovel. Who knows, if you keep digging, you might actually be able to dig your way out, you'll just end up on the other side of the world.

why am i digging a hole? also, wheres your return argument to why a B-26 should be classified as an attacker?

[wil3ur]

BEHOLD THE STEALTH FIGHTER!!!!  (F-117)



Now if I could just figure out how to fire the guns in this thing...

[Karnak]

Did the F-117 actually have, even in vague theory, any air to air capability whatsoever?

[Tank-Ace]

why am i digging a hole? also, wheres your return argument to why a B-26 should be classified as an attacker?

I can't answer as to why you're digging yourself into a hole, only you can answer that.

As to the B-26 being a bomber,

1) it has a bombsight, and is MORE EFFECTIVE when using it.
2) its built like a bomber, and preforms like a bomber. Not really manuverable enough to dogfight, like the A20, and even the B-25's in an emergency.
3) lack of ammuntion in the forward amament would suggest that it was for defensive purposes, and not really intended to strafe ground targets, which is essential to any attacker aircraft.


Now, it CAN bomb without the bombsight, it CAN dogfight, and it CAN strafe ground targets, its just not anywhere near as effective when doing so. So thats why it merits the bomber/attacker designation, as opposed to just strait bomber or just strait attacker.


@ Karnak, I think it would be the 1980's version of the A20, or possibly the B-25. It probably could dogfight in a pinch, it just wasn't very good at it, and it took a skilled pilot to do so effectivly.

[wil3ur]

Did the F-117 actually have, even in vague theory, any air to air capability whatsoever?

To my knowledge it has absolutely no air to air offensive capabilities.  It should be classified as a bomber, however I believe it's technically an 'attack' craft...   

[skorpion]

I can't answer as to why you're digging yourself into a hole, only you can answer that.

if you cant even explain it yourself you shouldnt really be talking in the first place now should you?

[Tank-Ace]

I can't answer as to why you're digging yourself into a hole, only you can answer that.

You asked WHY you're digging yourself into a hole, and I can't answer that. I can answer how if you like, but nobody save god can know WHY you yourself do the things you do.

[skorpion]

You asked WHY you're digging yourself into a hole, and I can't answer that. I can answer how if you like, but nobody save god can know WHY you yourself do the things you do.

ok Mr. Literal, tell me how im doing it.

[Tank-Ace]

Making a ton of comments that are not only unhelpfull to the argument you're trying to dig, but are also irrelevent. If you're going to come out and say "Nuh-uh! You're wrong, see? Look right here! And THERE too!", then you need to have several things ready to go:

1) a counter-argument to likely responses
2) details, facts, and sources to support your argument
3) a willingness to admit you might be wrong. Because its gonna happen about 50% of the time.

You have none of these, and so really don't have a solid foundation for your argument (which is irrelevent anyway).

Loudmouth + wrong + irrelevent = dislike, or at best apathy, from other people. And since you insist on keeping it up, you're digging yourself into a hole.

If you stop digging, the hole will eventually fill up. It won't be quick, and any more digging will be noted, but it WILL fill up.

[skorpion]

Making a ton of comments that are not only unhelpfull to the argument you're trying to dig, but are also irrelevent. If you're going to come out and say "Nuh-uh! You're wrong, see? Look right here! And THERE too!", then you need to have several things ready to go:

1) a counter-argument to likely responses
2) details, facts, and sources to support your argument
3) a willingness to admit you might be wrong. Because its gonna happen about 50% of the time.

You have none of these, and so really don't have a solid foundation for your argument (which is irrelevent anyway).

Loudmouth + wrong + irrelevent = dislike, or at best apathy, from other people. And since you insist on keeping it up, you're digging yourself into a hole.

If you stop digging, the hole will eventually fill up. It won't be quick, and any more digging will be noted, but it WILL fill up.

funny. i did one, two and three of your "list to be perfect"

just because i dont follow the same principals as you, doesnt mean you have to get all whiny towards me about it. not to mention the PM you sent earlier was some of the biggest whining ive ever heard from you. id like to know why im wrong here, please tell me how i was wrong. i want to know how i was irrelevant, this entire argument was on topic and was perfectly fine. not to mention that you dont even know what irrelevant means, it means not on topic, or not on the subject at hand.

get out of my bellybutton  jager, i dont care what you think is perfect and nice. you spend at least 10 hours a day on these boards, and you have 1500k posts, almost 10 posts a day and not to mention you did that all in 5 months. congratz, its a new record.

[ScottyK]

u have 3404 

[ScottyK]

3407, sorry fat fingers here.

[skorpion]

u have 3404  

he got 1553 in 5 months. i did mine in about 15. multiply his by 3 to get the same # of months and hes got another 600 posts on me.

[Tank-Ace]

Yeah, but most of mine are actually constructive. I try to help people out, and I contribute to the thread, rather than just yelling "Nope, U'r wrong!!" "Lol yeah, because thats totally how it went!" "You don't know what the hell you're talking about".

infact, I can't think of the last post of yours I've seen where you actually had something constructive to say.


Anway, heres how you screwed up:

1) tried to say I was wrong for considering the Il-2 as purely an attack aircraft in the game, because thats not what the USSR called it in real life. (both irrelevent, and not entirely correct)

2) you tried to say that what the government called something, or what it started out as, is more important than how it was used.

3) You're posts are all the same. Only the subject of your flame-attempts changes, but the content never does.

[Tank-Ace]

quintuple post