Battlefield Megathread

Off Topic > Games

<< < (1224/2003) > >>

hgpucom:

--- Quote from: Qwepir on April 04, 2012, 01:28:54 AM ---Only in the broadest, most literal use of the word. When someone says "machine gun", they are almost certainly going to be referring to a man-portable automatic weapon rather than a tank-killing gatling gun.
That was not its' sole combat role. The P38 could also function as a long range escort, photo recon plane, and interceptor, among other things. The "II" in F35 Lightning II is there for a reason. And since you seem so intent on referring to autocannons as machine guns, I might as well point out that the P38 had five, so there's another similarity.

--- End quote ---
No, when someone says "Machine gun" and is referring to them on jets, most people know how devastating or powerful they are talking about and I am pretty sure the P38 did not have 5 GAU-12_Equalizers mounted on it. Instead, it was equipped one standard T1 Army Ordnance .90 in (23 mm) autocannon with the exception of two .30 in (7.62 mm) Brownings on a certain variant. Also, if you read a little deeper you could find out the there have been multiple attempts to make the P38 Lightning a better "dog-fighter" but many attempts failed since it lacked the capability of high speed maneuvering so the only thing close it had to air-to-air combat was to get in optimal ranges of up to 1000m (if you had a pilot with exceptional aim) and it targets at extremely long distances and/or above with higher altitudes.
Also, as far as sole combat roles go, You listed all of the possible roles it had through history except direct combat of air-to-air.

Qwepir:

--- Quote from: hgpucom on April 04, 2012, 01:45:17 AM ---I am pretty sure the P38 did not have 5 GAU-12_Equalizers mounted on it.

--- End quote ---
No, it had 4 browning .50 cal machine guns and one 20mm autoca- machine gun. Back then there were no rotary cannons.

--- Quote from: hgpucom on April 04, 2012, 01:45:17 AM ---Also, as far as sole combat roles go, You listed all of the possible roles it had through history except direct combat of air-to-air.

--- End quote ---
monday you don't even know what interceptors do, do you?

hgpucom:

--- Quote from: Qwepir on April 04, 2012, 01:51:07 AM ---No, it had 4 browning .50 cal machine guns and one 20mm autoca- machine gun. Back then there were no rotary cannons.
--- End quote ---
That's funny look what I found. The original rotary cannon was the Gatling gun, designed by the American inventor Dr. Richard J. Gatling in 1861 and patented in 1862.

--- Quote from: Qwepir on April 04, 2012, 01:51:07 AM ---monday you don't even know what interceptors do,do you?

--- End quote ---
Thank you for the racial comment but I am not of African-American Ethnicity. Also yes I do but as I said, read deeper and you will find that it was a fail interceptor. It shouldn't have even been classified as one in the first place for the dissatisfying elements it was given. Unless of course you think a 2-plane, 1 pilot aircraft travelling at 640km/h would turn fast enough to avoid fast-movers going approx 600km/h that turn and aim with 3 times more accuracy of a class of plane like this. Yes, It has speed giving it the title for "interceptor" but if all you can do it fly in a straight line and hope to catch prey from behind before they out maneuver you, then it is pointless.

Jubel:
Rush jets handle like stuff Frontrox and you know it.

Qwepir:

--- Quote from: hgpucom on April 04, 2012, 02:03:52 AM ---That's funny look what I found. The original rotary cannon was the Gatling gun, designed by the American inventor Dr. Richard J. Gatling in 1861 and patented in 1862.

--- End quote ---
How many of them were mounted on planes and fired explosive ordinance?

Navigation

 Message Index

Go to full version