Spanish Bombs Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Hmmm. As anybody with a 4 year old daughter might know, 'Aurora' is Sleeping Beauty's given name. Sleeping Beauty is, of course, Disney property. Could the long-rumored Battlefront/Disney merger finally be happening? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by Akula2: to the best of my knowledge Spooky refered to what we now know as the AC-130 gunship, as does "Puff the Magic Dragon". I could be wrong. You could. Haven't checked lately, but AIR, Puff was an AC-47 with miniguns. There was also an AC-119 with miniguns and maybe a Vulcan 20mm. I don't recall if it was ever called Puff though. I don't recall the AC-130 was ever called Puff. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by Akula2: to the best of my knowledge Spooky refered to what we now know as the AC-130 gunship, as does "Puff the Magic Dragon". I could be wrong. You could. Haven't checked lately, but AIR, Puff was an AC-47 with miniguns. There was also an AC-119 with miniguns and maybe a Vulcan 20mm. I don't recall if it was ever called Puff though. I don't recall the AC-130 was ever called Puff. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Heh. I know it's all in good fun, but. . . No, Sleeping Beauty is not Disney property -- it's an old fairy tale and as such Disney cannot lay claim to the basic story and characters. Disney can only lay claim to properties specificially related to their version of the tale -- graphic representations of the characters, the screenplay of the film, etc. If the name "Aurora" were unique to the Disney version, they could lay claim to its use in the context of the title character in Sleeping Beauty, but I think the use of the the name Aurora for Sleeping Beauty also predates the Disney version. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Heh. I know it's all in good fun, but. . . No, Sleeping Beauty is not Disney property -- it's an old fairy tale and as such Disney cannot lay claim to the basic story and characters. Disney can only lay claim to properties specificially related to their version of the tale -- graphic representations of the characters, the screenplay of the film, etc. If the name "Aurora" were unique to the Disney version, they could lay claim to its use in the context of the title character in Sleeping Beauty, but I think the use of the the name Aurora for Sleeping Beauty also predates the Disney version. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Have Blue is obviously a reference to IBM who, presumably like Microsoft, are entering the game business. Aurora, I believe, refers to the fact that Aurora are most premanant during periods of high solar activity. These periods also play havoc with radio communication. Battlefront is obviously researching when these periods occured during World War II. If a scenario takes place during one of these periods, expect slower reaction time from all units as radio communications will be poor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Have Blue is obviously a reference to IBM who, presumably like Microsoft, are entering the game business. Aurora, I believe, refers to the fact that Aurora are most premanant during periods of high solar activity. These periods also play havoc with radio communication. Battlefront is obviously researching when these periods occured during World War II. If a scenario takes place during one of these periods, expect slower reaction time from all units as radio communications will be poor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Aurora and Have Blue are, I believe, old stealth fighter code names. At least Have Nap and Have Blue were stealth fighter prototypes. I think Aurora comes from the 'x-files' crowd who believe there's a super-secret exotic technologies spy plane out there. Looks like BFC is recycling old Air Force code names for their own secret projects. What it all means to me is the one game company that I respect is working on new projects! That can only be good news to us all ...unless they've been contracted to build private Pentagon training aids or something like that. Then we're out in the cold. Don't laugh, it happened with the Australian Army project! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Aurora and Have Blue are, I believe, old stealth fighter code names. At least Have Nap and Have Blue were stealth fighter prototypes. I think Aurora comes from the 'x-files' crowd who believe there's a super-secret exotic technologies spy plane out there. Looks like BFC is recycling old Air Force code names for their own secret projects. What it all means to me is the one game company that I respect is working on new projects! That can only be good news to us all ...unless they've been contracted to build private Pentagon training aids or something like that. Then we're out in the cold. Don't laugh, it happened with the Australian Army project! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarker Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 The Walrus is Paul. And Charles is a brain in a jar. Coincidence? I think not. Forget you read this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarker Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 The Walrus is Paul. And Charles is a brain in a jar. Coincidence? I think not. Forget you read this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Bombs Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by YankeeDog: Heh. I know it's all in good fun, but. . . No, Sleeping Beauty is not Disney property -- it's an old fairy tale and as such Disney cannot lay claim to the basic story and characters. Disney can only lay claim to properties specificially related to their version of the tale -- graphic representations of the characters, the screenplay of the film, etc. If the name "Aurora" were unique to the Disney version, they could lay claim to its use in the context of the title character in Sleeping Beauty, but I think the use of the the name Aurora for Sleeping Beauty also predates the Disney version. Cheers, YD OK, Fairy Tale grog, but the tortuous nature of your explanation only serves to confirm my original suspicions. Besides, how do you explain the whole Briar Rose subterfuge? Jeez, next thing, you'll be telling me that Disney doesn't own Pocahontas who was an actual historic person, or that Tarzan was based upon early 20th Centrury American literature. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanish Bombs Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Originally posted by YankeeDog: Heh. I know it's all in good fun, but. . . No, Sleeping Beauty is not Disney property -- it's an old fairy tale and as such Disney cannot lay claim to the basic story and characters. Disney can only lay claim to properties specificially related to their version of the tale -- graphic representations of the characters, the screenplay of the film, etc. If the name "Aurora" were unique to the Disney version, they could lay claim to its use in the context of the title character in Sleeping Beauty, but I think the use of the the name Aurora for Sleeping Beauty also predates the Disney version. Cheers, YD OK, Fairy Tale grog, but the tortuous nature of your explanation only serves to confirm my original suspicions. Besides, how do you explain the whole Briar Rose subterfuge? Jeez, next thing, you'll be telling me that Disney doesn't own Pocahontas who was an actual historic person, or that Tarzan was based upon early 20th Centrury American literature. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akula2 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I'm watchin a "Mail Call" marathon (or something) and they just did fixed wing gunships. Turns out that "Puff the Magic Dragon" was an AC-47. Same general idea as the later AC-130. There was also another one 'tween that and the 130. I just saw it 5 mins ago but I already forget the designation ... AC-119 maybe? :confused: EDIT- I see Michael already beat me to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akula2 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I'm watchin a "Mail Call" marathon (or something) and they just did fixed wing gunships. Turns out that "Puff the Magic Dragon" was an AC-47. Same general idea as the later AC-130. There was also another one 'tween that and the 130. I just saw it 5 mins ago but I already forget the designation ... AC-119 maybe? :confused: EDIT- I see Michael already beat me to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Originally posted by Akula2: I see Michael already beat me to it. But of course. And by more than a week. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Originally posted by Akula2: I see Michael already beat me to it. But of course. And by more than a week. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.