That Works posted:

Platystemon posted:

I looked into what was being reported about the shooter and after a few minutes decided that there are several billion people on this Earth who deserved my attention more than them, so I closed the tabs and went on a walk.

That Works posted:

I hate this idiot.

There’s a pretty consistent pattern of right wing trolls to immediately claim trans/ minority status / otherwise obfuscate any shooter that makes the news lately, seems like what’s going on.

Deadnaming someone even if they are a piece of poo poo is the same as calling someone a slur imo and it’s easy to do better.

GD_American posted:

https://twitter.com/IndefiniteLT/status/1757257308902469959

AreWeDrunkYet posted:

...does that count? Like in previous wars, if someone shot down a guided missile was that credited the same as taking out a plane?

Xakura posted:

V-1 flying bombs didn't in WWII.

At some point drones have to count, because they'll be able to maneuver and fire back, but I'm not sure I'd argue some alibaba special flying a waypoint mission does.

psydude posted:

Do helicopters count? I'd say they're about as much of a threat to fighter aircraft as a drone.

Stravag posted:

If you use bombs to kill an airborne helo it should count double

Soylent Pudding posted:

Can helicopters cary anti-aircraft missiles? Like replace some hellfire missiles with stingers or something?

Conversely, if a helicopter pilot gets a gun kill on a fighter in a dogfight that should count as five right there.

Soylent Pudding posted:

Can helicopters cary anti-aircraft missiles? Like replace some hellfire missiles with stingers or something?

Conversely, if a helicopter pilot gets a gun kill on a fighter in a dogfight that should count as five right there.

Soylent Pudding posted:

Can helicopters cary anti-aircraft missiles? Like replace some hellfire missiles with stingers or something?

quote:

Conversely, if a helicopter pilot gets a gun kill on a fighter in a dogfight that should count as five right there.

hobbesmaster posted:

Helicopters are actually very dangerous to aircraft if the aircraft is in the helicopter’s engagement envelope. Think of them as extra mobile AAA battery+MANPADS with good sensors. Fixed wing combat aircraft do not need to get close to helicopters however.

Naramyth posted:

wouldn’t have to bring your kid to a shooting if we had good childcare in this country smh

Stravag posted:

If you use bombs to kill an airborne helo it should count double

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

But the the touch of the 'tism it takes to touch the Intelligence poop is inherent, so we do get some rain man motherfuckers that can tell you DPRK tail numbers of which MiG-15 from whatever factory in 1953 that made it from a blury 5x6 photo taken on a lovely soviet camera. From across a briefing room. And with complete confidence. Without the ability to properly and effectively wipe their own asses or not masturbate at work, mind you. But goddamn was Timmy good at Vis Recce.

Wasabi the J posted:

Excuse me I don't need this kind of personal attack this early.

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

But the the touch of the 'tism it takes to touch the Intelligence poop is inherent, so we do get some rain man motherfuckers that can tell you DPRK tail numbers of which MiG-15 from whatever factory in 1953 that made it from a blury 5x6 photo taken on a lovely soviet camera. From across a briefing room. And with complete confidence. Without the ability to properly and effectively wipe their own rear end or not masturbate at work, mind you. But goddamn was Timmy good at Vis Recce.

ASAPI posted:

Years ago, someone posted about a war game where the helicopters kept wacking the fixed wing opposition. Apparently it got to the point that helicopters had to get handicapped so the fixed wing could participate.

Wingnut Ninja posted:

I thought that was just a thought experiment some helo guy wrote one-handed, because it boiled down to "if fixed wing operates in the stupidest possible way then helos are a major threat". But yeah, they can absolutely mount A-A weapons.

e:
The helo is more agile and can hug terrain features better than you. It has no "rules of engagement" or considerations for its own safety. In a fair fight it will win.
1. DON'T FIGHT A HELICOPTER
2. USE YOUR RADAR
3. USE BVR WEAPONS

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

F-15E's pulled a hat trick in Northern Iraq decades ago by not only getting a kill on an airborne helo, with a bomb, that turned out to be a U.S. Blackhawk (womp womp).

bulletsponge13 posted:

Reminds me of play Ace Combat 6 on XBox, and one dude just merking the board with a Helo under the Eiffel Tower- a location most fighters couldn't get to, and in Multi-player, you would come out of dogfight mode with a loving lock.

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

But the the touch of the 'tism it takes to touch the Intelligence poop is inherent, so we do get some rain man motherfuckers that can tell you DPRK tail numbers of which MiG-15 from whatever factory in 1953 that made it from a blury 5x6 photo taken on a lovely soviet camera. From across a briefing room. And with complete confidence. Without the ability to properly and effectively wipe their own rear end or not masturbate at work, mind you. But goddamn was Timmy good at Vis Recce.

Wingnut Ninja posted:

I thought that was just a thought experiment some helo guy wrote one-handed, because it boiled down to "if fixed wing operates in the stupidest possible way then helos are a major threat". But yeah, they can absolutely mount A-A weapons.

e:
The helo is more agile and can hug terrain features better than you. It has no "rules of engagement" or considerations for its own safety. In a fair fight it will win.
1. DON'T FIGHT A HELICOPTER
2. USE YOUR RADAR
3. USE BVR WEAPONS

Stravag posted:

I thought dogfight mode and player flyable helos was only in assault horizon? Wasnt that the only ac in real world instead of strangereal? I never played ac6 multi tho so i could be completely wrong

Discussion Quorum posted:

Different incidents - the helo bomb kill during Desert Storm was an honest one. The Blackhawks were downed by F-15Cs 3 years later.

bulletsponge13 posted:

I think it was 6- it was definitely an AC game.

A.o.D. posted:

I can kind of see helicopters becoming a credible operational threat to fixed wing air craft if you were, for instance, to combine the non-permissiveness of Ukraine's airspace with terrain like the Appalachian mountains. Pop up anti-air missile launches could be a thing.

mlmp08 posted:

In the days of modern radar, this goes not nearly as well for helicopters unless just sitting as a kind of ambush force waiting for ground strikers to fly by in a valley whoa re more worried about hiding from other fighters and SAMs than they are looking for helicopters. Dedicated AESA radar capability on CAP aircraft looking down on helicopters is mean to them.

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

Also growing up a Navy brat means I have an ungodly amount of hull numbers memorized, which is surprisingly useful in archive work.

A.o.D. posted:

how are you flying CAP in a non-permissive environment?

mlmp08 posted:

If your argument is that helicopters will have an advantage over enemy fighters if the enemy fighters fly deep into the helicopters' airspace to fight the choppers while being shot at by SAMs, this describes a SAM problem more than a jets vs helicopters problem.

Helicopters trying to do front line combat or penetrate friendly lines are likely to either evade detection from fighters or get dumpstered by them, but not likely to shoot down modern fighters who can just sling rounds from farther away than a helicopter can reach. The J-CATCH problem was primarily a radar capability problem which is now largely solved.