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
/ F0 r, }. O8 |  T2 A( P$ m2 I0 I) v9 O2 \; R9 G, e
7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE
+ E; ]$ ~# Q: v5 g! HThe term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended- ?4 P3 o% V5 A- q; a  w+ Y
range operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with
- L4 I4 s) Z2 winstances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
+ q- e/ y. g9 t* [  VGuadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but
" a$ j# _- U) {could not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will
1 x3 }7 V3 v2 B7 \suffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal
# m, ?! f/ N. _' C: nand a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when8 R9 B9 f* Q2 P
planning operations that require such high risk.
3 q* g  Z# G' e8 b, U& Q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
$ V7 t; ]9 |+ p* Q5 F/ o% F. Z, M2 m3 Q* ~' R! w) r% K+ p, T6 o6 y
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5 L+ g) y1 i0 q6 v5 ~! z: w
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