[jr2]

Flight suits are bulky... life support equipment, as well as being designed not to tear when you catch your hand on something or another! 

[akenbosch]

i guess you could fit all that onto a bikini...but it would lose its appeal to some boys. UNLESS, of course, you like the very body shape of the bikini-wearer to be mostly obscured.

[Woolie Wool]

The thing is that the flight suit has to cover the ENTIRE body, which is why the GTA flight suit has a visor in the helmet and a neck seal.

[Agent_Koopa]

im for too-scale pilots where the HUD panel is located where it is in the cutscene (1-2 feet below eye level), and you have a co-pilot. THERES CANON FOR YA!

I'd be willing to bet that the cockpit varies from ship to ship, so it would only be for the Apollo that the opening cutscene would be good for.

Wait... a HUD below eye level? Does that make any sense at all?

[akenbosch]

it wouldnt matter, the HUD panel would be too small for the pilot to even see the reticle...

[jr2]

Future HUDs will be projected onto the visor of your helmet.  Current HUDs are projected onto a transparent screen mounted in front of the pilot.

[TrashMan]

im for too-scale pilots where the HUD panel is located where it is in the cutscene (1-2 feet below eye level), and you have a co-pilot. THERES CANON FOR YA!

ps: what about shivan and vasudan pilots?
pss: what happens if said bibkini cockpit has a male head ani?

then you'll LUV my models.

[Desert Tyrant]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhaps torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhaps bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

 

[jaedub51]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhas torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhas bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

 

Perfect explanation.

[Desert Tyrant]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhas torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhas bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

 

Perfect explanation.

Are you being sarcastic? 

[Excalibur]

to the main qeustion:

because only one will survive...

Hmmm......

The Sath has many blind spots though, the bomber could release their ordinates and warp out before the massive explosion.


Also, why don't they just get a conventional nuclear bomb and implant it just into the hull of the Sath?

Or fire one into the engines?

That'd be way cheaper than hundreds of helios'

[Snail]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhas torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhas bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

Perfect explanation.

Are you being sarcastic? 

I don't think he is. Helios warheads are ANTI-MATTER bombs.

[TrashMan]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhaps torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhaps bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

Yeah it is...but so is this comunity

IIRC, alltough the Yamato had technicly bigger guns, their power and range was approximately rated the same. The USA had better shells (explosives) and guns..not to mention killer targeting systems for that time.

[Desert Tyrant]

The topic question is about several different shades of retarded.

BY using 'lolz why put t3h gunz on shipz when bomberz do better lolz'  this, it's basically as stupid of a question as asking 'Why did the US Navy put 16in batteries on Iowa Battleships?'  WHy did the Japanese but 18 inch batteries on the Yamato and Mushashi?

Perhaps torpdos are ****ing expensive.  Perhaps bombers require a piss-load of fuel.  Perhas Beam Cannons give them zomg teeth!!!11

Yeah it is...but so is this comunity

Oh, so that's why you got your title.

IIRC, alltough the Yamato had technicly bigger guns, their power and range was approximately rated the same. The USA had better shells (explosives) and guns..not to mention killer targeting systems for that time.

The Iowa had better fire control, and speed.  The Iowa could dictate the terms of battle to the Yamato.

[TrashMan]

Oh, so that's why you got your title.

Nah..I ment that in the nicest possibl way..

I must have pissed off someone with the power to change my title.. It happens every so often after I dominate ( ) a discussion... some schmuck changes my title.
I don't mind..It shows they broke under pressure


B.t.w. - Khrone Beserkers?

[Polpolion]

Future HUDs will be projected onto the visor of your helmet.  Current HUDs are projected onto a transparent screen mounted in front of the pilot.

Where's the reticle going to be? It'd be kinda useless in your helmet, unless your head is bolted to the headrest so you can't move it.

[RangerKarl]

The gunsight reticle could easily be positioned on a virtual axis facing forward, while any offbore weapons could be slewed to helmet. Augmented reality and all that, nothing truly insurmountable.

[Snail]

I don't mind..It shows they broke under pressure

You suck at spamming. And your quotes don't even link or have time stamps.

[TrashMan]

You suck at spamming. And your quotes don't even link or have time stamps.

That's becosue I don't do that...
Since when must a quote link?
b.t.w - what's a time stamp?

[jr2]

Future HUDs will be projected onto the visor of your helmet.  Current HUDs are projected onto a transparent screen mounted in front of the pilot.

Where's the reticle going to be? It'd be kinda useless in your helmet, unless your head is bolted to the headrest so you can't move it.

Your reticle for a gun that did not move would stay where it belongs, dead center in the front of the aircraft, and as you turn your head, it will move to the side and eventually pass out of your field of view (move off-screen).  For missiles, the test version on the F-15 allowed pilots to lock onto targets behind them and fire their missiles; the missile would then fire forwards, turn around, and track the target.    IIRC, this system is standard on the F-22.  (And probably the F-35.)

You suck at spamming. And your quotes don't even link or have time stamps.

That's becosue I don't do that...
Since when must a quote link?
b.t.w - what's a time stamp?

A time stamp is the "on August 10, 2007, 02:38:36 PM" part of the quote.