EvilViking 0 Report post Posted November 26, 2004 Well, the M1A1 was 63 tons... :unsure: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shadow eagle39 0 Report post Posted November 26, 2004 I know they do it but they use 3 or 4 chutes they can drop light armor. but they dont have pilots in them. Hummvees and light tanks but not a MBT with those you have to watch out which roads you can take them on because they are so heavy. but you can paradrop light tanks and hummvees. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paladin327 0 Report post Posted December 11, 2004 But it not being able to carry dozers, makes the second mission (1.1) almost impossible Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paladin327 0 Report post Posted December 11, 2004 Your dad did not drop M1A1s. I think I C-5 can carry one Abrams at a time. Your dad probably flew them to different bases and unloaded them, but I highly doubt he dropped them. A parachute just isn't going to hold a 60 ton tank. 1 M-1 and 2 bradly's Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IronRaptor 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2004 just curious....what model Abrams are we talkin here....i am hearing M1A1's and M1A2's...... Â The A1's were the first model, but then the armor was beefed up and the tank side covers were extended down to give better protection by the tracks.....the A2 is like another 10 tons more than the A1 cause of more armor, but i was just wondering cause you guys get them mixed up. I know we are using the A2 varient in Iraq now, most A1's are back home in training bases, cause the only difference between the 2 is the armor and prolly some placement of componets in the tank.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opals25 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2004 (edited) A1 was not the first. The originoal Abrams was just the M1, then the M1A1. then the M1A2. A1 is the most common, but the A2 has an NBC system, which makes it the more likely choice in a future battlefield where Bio weapons are becoming so much more common. Edited December 12, 2004 by Opals25 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black DoomsDragon 0 Report post Posted December 20, 2004 the NBC system on the M1A2 does make it a better tank to use when dealing with chemical and bio weapons Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThE nO nAmE mAn 0 Report post Posted December 20, 2004 this is funny reading every bodies post about the chinnok and the air drops Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
usafirewarrior 0 Report post Posted December 20, 2004 (edited) ok first of all STOP WHINEING 2nd my idea ITS MINE was to have a new airfiled and have the ability to build cargo planes then loading it up then haveing a new builder infantry build a quick cheap dirt landing strip then the cargo plane would land on it let off its cargo and fly back to base why an infantry guy would build it because you can use a helicopter to transport him say the 2 bases are blocked bye a mountain thats why the infantry guy would be best so its a way to get units quickly transported across the battle field pcteen liked this idea i hope hes going to use it i think it would make everyone happy vlaa instant transportation vehicles tanks infantry etc etc Edited December 20, 2004 by usafirewarrior Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EvilViking 0 Report post Posted December 20, 2004 usafirewarrior, I'm going to have to as kthat you at least try to use some corect grammar, it's very hard to understand what you're trying to say... :blink: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blackhawk 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2004 I understood perfectly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbolt 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2004 It's just that the USA in C&C Generals AND Real Life, is built around Air Mobility. Excluding the Abrams every other know equipment in the US ground arsenal can be transported via Helo or a C-130. Just Hard Code the Abrams transport size to be larger then the Super Stallion can carry and have a "lighter tank" for that purpose like the M8 or the M551 Sherdian (Used up to the Gulf War in the Airborne Regiments) Since the USA in-game is structured around Technology and Finesse and not pure knock out power there needs to be a way to insert Armor in a enemys weak flank without have to trudge my Abrams through his Front Line first! Â Also, bring back the NBC Suits for infantry, I'm tired of waiting for my Med-Vac Humvee to finally realize that my infantry is wading around in Anthrax-Gamma, can you also increase the heal rate of the Bradley on friendly troops? It's almost inpercepetable, not to mention it's Bushmaster 20mm does pathetic damage against enemy infantry! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Garrick 0 Report post Posted December 22, 2004 this is just a beta, GLA will be completely gone in V2.0, so no more Toxin Tractors Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbolt 0 Report post Posted December 26, 2004 But the USA still needs NBC Suits to protect against the VX Agents that the Iraqi Generals can deploy against US Forces. Plus is there a way to increase the Med-Vac Humvee's reaction time in dealing with contaniments (SP)? That 5-6 second delay is enough to get all but my most experienced soldiers killed! (Even with their upgraded armor from the Hold the Line Battle Strat.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almendr0 0 Report post Posted December 26, 2004 about the new version. I downloaded v1.1 only and usa is the only new side. Is north korea and iraw supposed to be added in aaow2? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thunderbolt 0 Report post Posted December 30, 2004 Stop Hi-Jacking Threads! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom 0 Report post Posted December 30, 2004 This is 4 days old, no responses... I wouldn't call that a "hijacking". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deathwind 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 (edited) Modern day we can't drop a tank if we wanted to. Due to planes just not being able to carry that. Even the C-5 can't lift it and it can carry 8 Greyhound buses! :o Actually, there are some planes that can carry several tanks......Just thought I'd let you know. B) Â So, you want a link? Fine. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/start.html?pg=4 The plane it talks about here can carry 17 M1A1's. Happy now? Or do you want another link? B) Edited January 19, 2005 by Deathwind Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 Link anywhere or is it just an empty statement? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EvilViking 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 Not a 62-ton M1A2! :lol: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Opals25 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 (edited) We know, the C5A Can carry 2 M1A2s, but that doesn't mean the M1A2 can be paradropped safely. Edited January 19, 2005 by Opals25 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deathwind 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 We know, the C5A Can carry 2 M1A2s, but that doesn't mean the M1A2 can be paradropped safely. You put enough big parachutes on anything (and I mean ANYTHING) and you can drop it safely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hamsterpower 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 Modern day we can't drop a tank if we wanted to. Due to planes just not being able to carry that. Even the C-5 can't lift it and it can carry 8 Greyhound buses! :o Actually, there are some planes that can carry several tanks......Just thought I'd let you know. B) Â So, you want a link? Fine. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/start.html?pg=4 The plane it talks about here can carry 17 M1A1's. Happy now? Or do you want another link? B) US basterds, that idea has already been deweloped in the USSR, there was a giant plane known as Kaspien monster which did the same and was about the same size. But that is all in the past, the plane is not in service, it is somewhere just, well rotting up. It`s all the same this once super power, with its army, technology, and high living standards is now nothing more then a meer gloryfied banana republick with nuchlear arms, :( How ever they left the world with lots of high tech stuff so i thank them.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 I don't think a giant plane like that would be very effecient, why not use a naval transport instead? And high standard of living in the USSR? Hahaha. Maybe for the elite ruling class. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deathwind 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2005 I don't think a giant plane like that would be very effecient, why not use a naval transport instead? And high standard of living in the USSR? Hahaha. Maybe for the elite ruling class. What do you mean by "not very efficient"? Did you not read about it? It is very fuel efficient and pretty fast. Plus, flying at 20 ft. you are usually going to be under their radar so you wouldnt really have to worry about being spotted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites