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
  Z! J( P6 k) p4 X: l# i# @7 o
" }5 k$ P! v% ^8 N/ |! I, @7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE
# f5 h1 G' X* ]0 ]The term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended
: @/ r$ }1 K2 U$ G5 {) l# ^) h/ {3 c" rrange operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with% a" m, q( Y( ^8 U$ `
instances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
# c% H/ b! k$ }0 X" a4 pGuadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but
' b* z+ z: e. r' D/ K- Mcould not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will
: B/ ?' P) ^5 g5 `& [3 vsuffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal: \9 L3 y/ `0 w+ g
and a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when
" t( a+ Q- ^" y! ^1 ]. Nplanning operations that require such high risk.) X( W. f4 `' g0 C
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 ' q; W. p2 k! P* F6 C

( P! B7 s, g3 b* V. v9 ~' A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, V. _2 Z4 [0 A! j% w' e* R, N
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