Flagrum Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 You guys do realize that "DCS AT-802" is just a long-running, silly joke? :) Which is more substancial evidence than many other speculations on these forums had! ;o)
FlyingHighAU Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 You guys do realize that "DCS AT-802" is just a long-running, silly joke? :) I hope so lol - because I don't think the AT could even survive a single hit from one of these:
PFunk1606688187 Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 I'm not making an argument for the AT-802U. Proceeds to make an argument for the AT-802U Any limitations involving the A-10 apply equally to the AT in the online context but the AT suffers more detractors and is far less survivable. Any methods one could use to survive in the AT apply equally to the A-10. That extra endurance is a wash in any multiplayer scenario anyway barring a marathon. The real difference in Ka-50 versus A-10 performance is how its flown in my opinion. But its all a joke anyway. DCS Crop Duster would inflame the forums too much. :P Warning: Nothing I say is automatically correct, even if I think it is.
King_Hrothgar Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Yes, the AT-802 was a joke on Cobra's part and as said, it's not high on my wishlist. But I also think a lot here underestimate what it could do.
PFunk1606688187 Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 I know it could do something, but I think it would be extremely fragile and basically incapable of defending itself except via wholesale avoidance of threats. Its hard enough for an A-10 to out fly threats that engage them, nevermind a prop plane thats basically going to be flying at least 1/3 slower. If you look at the history of that type of aircraft in the Vietnam war you'll notice that the Misty Fast FACs flying F-100Ds were created specifically because those slow flying prop planes were getting shot down in droves. The Misty FACs would fly at 400-450 knots over the target in order to survive, and this was really before MANPADS became a factor even. Misty FACs also suffered a 25% casualty rate with that capability. The prop planes suffered far worse. The real advantage helos have in that situation is being able to hide behind hills and kite the enemy. Fixed wing really needs to play a totally different game and so an armed recon/FAC type prop plane, even with modern goodies, is pretty much a sitting duck in most situations that aren't basically flying over Columbia fighting the drug war or something like the post war phases of Iraq and Afghanistan. The only real advantage that aircraft would have over an A-10 is cost and loiter time, but a loiter time thats only really beneficial to a mission longer than anyone is going to be playing. Warning: Nothing I say is automatically correct, even if I think it is.
ChoSeungWan Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 "Our planned theaters are very closely associated to the aircraft we have in development" Vietnam?
King_Hrothgar Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 The MiG-21Bis has seen combat in a lot of places. They could make a map of just about any war zone since 1970 and the MiG-21Bis would be right at home.
ChoSeungWan Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Wouldn't Mig-21 and the Tomcat suggest the Iran-Iraq war or an alt-history US-Iran war?
King_Hrothgar Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Both fit perfectly for an Iran/Iraq war. They also fit for the 1990 Gulf War as does the MiG-29A, Su-25A and F-15C (no AMRAAMs). The upcoming AH-1W and Mi-24P work in both scenarios as well, though technically the Iranians used upgraded AH-1J's and the Iraqis Mi-24D's.
Recommended Posts