返回列表 回复 发帖

[AE] 关于飞机扩展航程的问题

本帖最后由 redpeacock168 于 2012-2-17 11:35 编辑
% S" d' H" ?( \, w. v) U" G, `; G, q# k, \3 v5 i
7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE
) Q$ P$ \8 ~1 _- x/ \$ BThe term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended
) U& l5 T! b! ^* J) urange operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with
# L3 g. R7 a) e+ n+ n8 p1 yinstances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
1 ~2 T( M% z# _Guadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but+ c! x! f+ ?7 K
could not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will
# R( a  l3 h  T7 X$ bsuffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal4 t0 y/ T& L: J/ U3 a
and a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when
# V! {1 N9 I) a4 R/ Q2 f& Splanning operations that require such high risk.
3 k3 Y, _/ u* w& r. s( v" o谁能分析下这句话,我粘贴的,不知怎么中间有空格了,麻烦高手给翻译下,好像是说AE的扩展航程概念与原版不同了。
求翻译
看懂一点点,意思是扩展航程战斗会有风险?
本帖最后由 jay102 于 2012-2-17 11:45 编辑
) ~% F! t2 w9 f6 b+ ]+ k. e: u. C9 p5 e# |
中心意思就是AE里使用扩展航程所致的风险比WitP时代更高了。
意思就是 用扩展航程就像杜立特空袭那样 并不应该被看作常态 除非你觉得有必要用
AE里日本是架0战就可以从拉包尔sweep瓜岛,还可以把盟军的CAP扫的生活不能自理7 o- u5 P! U1 j4 U
扩展航程仍然做的不够好,当然损失率是大大提高了的,作战效能也会下降
"I have nothing to offer but supplies, fuel and women."
扩展航程的概念在AE里具有了新的内涵,更苛刻的规则使得扩展航程任务(包括普通的和增挂副油箱的)无法持久。尽管二战里存在着大量极端型的行动,如杜利特轰炸和瓜岛空战,确有可行性且产生了某种特定影响,但其不应被视为常规的和可持续的。在扩展航程上作战,综合作战效率必然下降,机身最轻微的擦挂都有可能决定飞行员的存亡。一个珍惜空军的人在计划此类高风险行动时将会谨慎从事。
返回列表