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
* b# f" W4 t- M5 l6 c3 U3 B( W
# M' }8 B/ V+ a: C. d" ?7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE( T* |& a( K, h! T0 S
The term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended
" w  f4 G: L8 m: L1 O& W3 Srange operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with
% {7 f3 N3 p# z# @" j! Ninstances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
! v- K( @6 l7 B; M% r0 QGuadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but) s5 D# j- w7 }: u3 {! o8 E
could not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will2 A1 }* v2 C* G
suffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal
7 k: i7 v9 }# Z0 Pand a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when* q* |( _; ?! }" A3 _2 [2 x: Z
planning operations that require such high risk." v1 e4 @, L/ M
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
7 c4 Y8 n9 \# q6 d- W# d* Y
- v  ]3 F4 ^# K/ I9 u# {& s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$ d+ O  E9 g7 Q/ J. V4 \
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