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 5 x9 V/ P& w3 C
8 j: X  i$ n2 a
7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE4 ?" L( T; b7 T; z
The term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended
$ `1 F2 r0 j) u7 K) Srange operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with
# D! r  K/ y$ Q( ^instances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
2 I1 `0 n: ]% S# X! A  JGuadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but
  E# L: G8 B/ b8 lcould not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will
, D4 k! B! @$ K, P) r1 G; usuffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal
) b  O9 H$ W) ~and a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when
- e$ r; u3 O* f, c  Iplanning operations that require such high risk.5 {+ ]2 {; L3 Q; u2 C- b7 a1 ?
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
5 i+ k% t: `8 Z2 v/ M( |7 r3 h5 `3 ^% y" W
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 |* R* e5 Y9 H. S& x' @$ G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