Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Data007

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64
Blows the dust off of this old account.

Blows more dust off of this thread.


I'm wondering how the devil I'm still the 6th most prolific poster on the forum, too. :D

Because none of the rest of us used the "set post count" command.

In all seriousness though, glad to see you drop in.

Artwork and Design / Re: Making sense of Discovery's Klingon Starships...
« on: January 12, 2018, 09:50:58 PM »
I really like, and would have vastly preferred your interpretations of these Klingon ships.

General Trek Discussion / Re: New Series in Development!
« on: May 03, 2016, 08:10:26 PM »
Gives me a reason for visiting Toronto.

Trivia, Games, & Fun / Re: New SCN Collections thread
« on: February 14, 2016, 11:05:21 PM »
I've got a Saber myself and quite like it.

General Trek Discussion / Re: New Series in Development!
« on: February 11, 2016, 09:00:42 PM »
I have hope for the best.

Get a Life! / Re: General News and Current Events Topic III
« on: September 28, 2015, 08:34:44 PM »

Artwork and Design / Re: Rapier-class (Multi-role Ship)
« on: August 29, 2015, 03:03:18 PM »
I think you've got a very good start.

Trivia, Games, & Fun / Re: New SCN Collections thread
« on: April 26, 2015, 12:35:26 AM »
Update: My panorama picture of the D has now been signed by Jonathan Frakes, and Marina Sirtis. I also got him to sign one of my Riker cards from Star Trek: Attack Wing.

Videogames and computers / Re: Star Trek Online Ship and Star Charts
« on: February 24, 2015, 11:45:42 PM »
Hey Xero, this is weird, but what the heck is up with the next gif in your photobucket after the ship pic?

Trivia, Games, & Fun / Re: New SCN Collections thread
« on: October 08, 2014, 06:40:39 AM »
I've recently bought the Vor'cha, which I can say is pretty good for it's price point.

My suggestion for the flat-bottom/landing gear compromise is have the primary load bearing surface be the underside of the secondary hull, with stabilizing gear that extend from the corners of the saucer.

Seems okay to me.

That's actually a neat idea. Perhaps the hullform is tweaked for skimming the mid-high layers of gas giants.

Artwork and Design / Re: Sparrow-cass Frigate and her relatives: A Major WIP
« on: September 21, 2014, 01:39:05 AM »
I wouldn't say that the position of the RCS thrusters really has to change. All I would do is square them off, and maybe thicken them a little. That way they look a little less stabby.

Videogames and computers / Re: Star Trek Online Ship and Star Charts
« on: September 13, 2014, 11:43:57 AM »
I may get an Intrepid just for that.

Happy birthday, Razor.

Videogames and computers / Re: World of Tanks anyone?
« on: August 17, 2014, 05:24:03 PM »
Yeah, my Alecto is one of my preferred tanks.

Videogames and computers / Re: World of Tanks anyone?
« on: August 17, 2014, 08:24:40 AM »
I've played the PC version, where one of my favourite tanks is the squat little British TD with a big ol' howitzer on it.

Get a Life! / Re: Politics and Government Thread
« on: August 06, 2014, 08:43:28 PM »
Thing is, there have been NATO exercises attended by the Eurofighter and the Raptor, and the Eurofighter is the one that came home with the better score.

And I don't particularly care if another country looks weak in the knees about a purchase, the Lightning can't do all the jobs it's going to be asked to do. It's underpowered and sub-optimized. It can't stay on station and take a hit while shitting out the sort of firepower the A-10 does, because it doesn't have the armor. Know what happens when you blow away an engine on an A-10? It probably kills you then goes home. The same on a Lightning, it becomes a glider.

It can't compete with the actual fighter aircraft out there that are going to out-thrust, or have a better wing loading than it does. And when the supporters point at stealth as the balancing factor, they don't account that to fully utilise it's stealth, that means you can't mount the wing pylons, which effective cuts it's payload to an sixth of what it would be with them. That means that a 'stealthy' F-35 gets 4 AIM-120s to try to take on, for example, the 11 missiles a current Hornet can carry.

The only plane the F-35 manages to consistently improve on, is the Harrier, where it's better in most regards, except for the part where the carriers that would be fielding this literally can't take the heat of high frequency sustained deployments, and the required heat stresses on the deck.

The F-35 is a plane that was sold to out of touch generals, admirals and bureaucrats, who were shown a silver plated miracle plane that, on top of it all, was going to give 'so many jobs' to their constituents that it was a political must have. Now, so much money has been sunk into this project, and it's partner plane (the F-22), who was supposed to be the actual air superiority aircraft has been trimmed back because of other technical issues, and all we can currently look forward to is how the developers are going to fix this:

    "Current aircraft software is inadequate for even basic pilot training.
    Ejection seat may fail, causing pilot fatality.
    Several pilot-vehicle interface issues, including lack of feedback on touch screen controls.
    The radar performs poorly, or not at all.
    Engine replacement takes an average of 52 hours, instead of the two hours specified.
    Maintenance tools do not work.

The JPO responded that more experienced pilots would be able to safely operate the aircraft and that procedures would improve over time.[184]

Even in the final "3F" software version, the F-35 will lack ROVER, in spite of having close air support as one of its primary missions.[185]

A 2014 Pentagon report found these additional problems:

    Only a third of the fleet is airworthy.
    The Inertial navigation system does not work.
    There is an unknown bug with the AMRAAM.
    DAS confuses the aircraft's own flare launches with incoming missiles.
    A single well-placed bullet can render the F-35B's vertical landing capabilities useless."

It's shiny, got some (I stress some) good chrome, and it looks like it's from the near future. But anything I'm going to ask my country's combat pilots to trust their asses had better be more than some showroom models. One sure thing we can say is that Lockheed's balance sheets have probably been doing very well for some time.

Get a Life! / Re: Politics and Government Thread
« on: August 04, 2014, 05:15:32 PM »
I don't disagree, but currently, the CF-18s we operate are used for defence tasks, and air to air duties. The A-10 doesn't have the speed to accomplish an intercept mission far enough away. The Hornet has an extra 80 miles on the Warthog, and it'll get there faster. The downside, unfortunately, of the Gripen is that it's a single engine model, which by it's nature has slightly less survivability, due to no ability to absorb an engine failure.

Get a Life! / Re: Politics and Government Thread
« on: August 04, 2014, 12:03:37 PM »
While I do think we need an upgrade, A-10s probably couldn't do the job we need, and I wouldn't currently ask our combat pilots to sit in a Raptor. I recommend the Saab Grippen.

Videogames and computers / Re: Star Trek Online Ship and Star Charts
« on: August 02, 2014, 10:23:57 PM »
Cool, sweet to hear.

General Trek Discussion / Re: The True Size of the UFP.
« on: August 02, 2014, 01:02:19 AM »
I have to go with TNC here in that maintaining an interstellar empire without instantaneous transit means that there are a lot of regions out there that are less homogenous with their defence assets than we'd otherwise picture. I thinks it's more accurate to think of any interstellar entity as more akin to a foam, spreading from each major system relative to their ability to detect and respond to transgressors.

Trivia, Games, & Fun / Re: Funny Images
« on: August 02, 2014, 12:57:18 AM »
Taking that sign as a whole, entirely appropriate.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64