PDA

View Full Version : Paper wings on the 109



XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:02 AM
Is it me or do the Bf109's now lose there wings after 3 bullet hits? It seems like they have changed the DM so much that you could knock off a 109 wing with a peashooter.



<A HREF="http://www.dyno-tech.com/bravo" TARGET=_blank>http://www.slukklyset.no/RAF662/banners/rafbanner3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:02 AM
Is it me or do the Bf109's now lose there wings after 3 bullet hits? It seems like they have changed the DM so much that you could knock off a 109 wing with a peashooter.



<A HREF="http://www.dyno-tech.com/bravo" TARGET=_blank>http://www.slukklyset.no/RAF662/banners/rafbanner3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:09 AM
109's don't' take well to damage at all. they do tolerate more since the final patch, but just barely

http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/images/alex.jpg<span class="MSG"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="1">
"Oh bliss, bliss and heaven. Oh, it was gorgeousness and gorgeosity made flesh. It was like a bird of rarest spun heaven metal, or like silvery wine flowing in a space ship, gravity all nonsense now. As I slooshied I knew such lovely pictures."<font></span></p>
<p align="center"><span class="MSG">
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><a href="http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/"> <font size= 1>Fiend's Wings<a/></center>
</font></span></p>
<center></font>
<font color=666666>

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:55 AM
or is it the WS hitting power ?

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:12 AM
The real question is why is the B-17 so darn tough, I can hit it multiple mk108s and it keeps on puttin away, and some how the gunners have perfect aim at .6 KM! 1 OR TWO 30 MM EXPLOSIVE SHELLS(oops caps) should take it out.

http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/griffon.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:26 AM
Griffon
Go have a looksee at this webpage.
Its dedicated to B-17's that took major damage and still made it back home.
Some pretty hectic piccies there.
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/

Seems it was a tough old bird after all.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:33 AM
I only fly 109's, and to me depending on which one you fly they seem to react differently to damage, I might be wrong.
Historically though there were massive differences in the armor from type to type.
The latest patch seemed to improve the performance a bit, or decrease the performance of other planes at altittude, making the 109 more competitive as I believe it should be.
My fav plane is a G2 with mg pods on.
It seems the best balance when it comes to speed, climb rate, manouverability and firepower. G2 default loadout is like popgun ammo.
To me there is a difference between the K4 and G2 on damage. From directly behind the K4 takes a pounding whereas the G2 will fall to pieces pretty quick. Maybe its my imagination, but if that is the case, then it is correct due to the difference in armor on the to plane types.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:35 AM
well Griffon i know EXACTLY where you are coming from

a bomber taking more than 5 Direct Mk108 hits was just about Unheard of

here is a stationary Mk108 hit on a Spitfire done in a british test


http://server4.uploadit.org/files/021203-1SchusswithMK108onSpit.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:38 AM
here is a B-17 with what was reported to be ONE direct hit from a Mk108

http://server4.uploadit.org/files2/131203-B24 hit by a Mk108.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:58 AM
I have heard that the picture which shows the damaged spitfire is a little misleading. the round was not fired at the spitfire, but placed inside the tail then detonated. now I am not saying that a spitfire was a tuff plane nor that the 30mm was some weak round, only that the 30mm round would be more devastating being placed in a confined area.

as far as the pic showing the damaged B-17, I have seen this pic posted somewhere else on the web at a web sight. I thought then and still believe now, that the damage seems to be very excessive for just one 30mm round. especially after seeing pics of damaged bombers that were hit by 88 mm rounds.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 11:27 AM
Got a webby link to where those pics come from pls.
thx

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 12:26 PM
i guess that 108 round landed where 2 panels join or something, the damage is pretty neat, think its lost its panels rather than mucho internal damage.


whineingu /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 12:31 PM
Does it surprise you? I have seen it as a main trend in IL-2 and FB that german planes ar´nt given its right perfomance. According to Heinz Knoke in I flew for the Fuhrer so would three four hits with the nose gun down a Liberator.

I got three hits in the wing from a B-17 more than 500 m above my ME-262 and the wing fell of.

Berlin would have been liberated by the Red Army in autumn 1941 if the aircrafts have the right prestanda in reallity as it has in this game.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 01:30 PM
pinche_gabacho wrote:
- I have heard that the picture which shows the
- damaged spitfire is a little misleading. the round
- was not fired at the spitfire, but placed inside the
- tail then detonated. now I am not saying that a
- spitfire was a tuff plane nor that the 30mm was some
- weak round, only that the 30mm round would be more
- devastating being placed in a confined area.

If those were the circumstances of the test, it would have been to simulate an "ideal" hit by a high explosive MK-108 shell- a penetration of the outer skin with detonation of the round a moment later within an internal aircraft cavity.

I suppose there is the possibility of a MK-108 cannon round detonating without penetrating the aircraft skin (much lessening its effect that relied on creating an overpressure to blow the aircraft apart from the inside), but I do not know how reliable the fusing was and the likelyhood of surface detonations.


"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

http://www.invoman.com/images/tali_with_hands.jpg


Look Noobie, we already told you, we don't have the Patch!

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 03:20 PM
Nero111 wrote:
- Griffon
- Go have a looksee at this webpage.
- Its dedicated to B-17's that took major damage and
- still made it back home.
- Some pretty hectic piccies there.
- http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/
-
-
- Seems it was a tough old bird after all.

great site...thanks for the link. Before anyone does more "b17 is too tough" whining, they should look here.



http://palpatine.chez.tiscali.fr/Dilbert/Fist-Of-Death.gif


ALICE FOR MODERATOR!

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 04:04 PM
Great B-17 site, thanks for linkage.


http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/body/radroom1.gif


"A rocket fired by an enemy fighter inflicted this damage on The Sack, a B-17 of the 379th Group. A 14-inch fragment of the rocket tore the pants off of the turret gunner without hurting him."

Hehe. Anti-garment shells. Designed to cripple the enemy
with social humiliation.

Btw, when viewing pics like this in different mags etc,
there's usually a sunshine story. "Amazingly, they walked
away unhurt" etc. Not so with this site, some sobering stories.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:01 PM
Something I noticed in IL2 as well when attacking heavy bombers (anyone for that matter) is its always better to go headon and go for the pilot. Alternatively go for the wings, inbetween the eninges on each wing if it has 4.
Also most importantly is controled single shots or very short bursts a second or 2 apart from eachother seems to register a lot more damage rather than wringing the neck on the trigger. It seems to work for me at least.
Dont bother with the fuselage, its highly unlikely you gonna saw one of those beasts in half, hehehe.
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:04 PM
zugfuhrer wrote:
- Does it surprise you? I have seen it as a main trend
- in IL-2 and FB that german planes ar´nt given its
- right perfomance.

Which planes would those be, and what elements of their performance?

You are aware that Maddox have actually gone out of their way to use the best performing late 109s manufactured as the basis for the FB models, yes?



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:32 PM
Nero111 wrote:
- Something I noticed in IL2 as well when attacking
- heavy bombers (anyone for that matter) is its always
- better to go headon and go for the pilot.
- Alternatively go for the wings, inbetween the
- eninges on each wing if it has 4.

Yup, the engines - on any bomber - are also very vulnerable to a high deflection shot from above. Best is, as you mentioned, head on, but it takes time to repeat the headon. I usually go high after the first headon, 1Km vertical seperation, get slightly in front of the bomber and then dive down aiming in front of the engines as I dive down. Bombers go down to this very easily and it gives the robo-gunners fits trying to shoot you, even when they're set to Ace.

- Also most importantly is controled single shots or
- very short bursts a second or 2 apart from eachother
- seems to register a lot more damage rather than
- wringing the neck on the trigger. It seems to work
- for me at least.

Again correct. Spraying 20/30mm slugs all over a bomber makes lots of pretty explosions, but - and I am sure this is a surprise to some people - shooting the right wing of a plane does not magically damage the left wing. Concentrate the fire on the same spot and it's not long before a strut is severed or an engine catches fire.

- Dont bother with the fuselage, its highly unlikely
- you gonna saw one of those beasts in half, hehehe.
- http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The other thing to bear in mind is that if you're completely crazy and go for 6 o'clock shots, it's quite easy for shots to spray so that the tailplane will intercept some of the shots. Especially, the elevators do quite a good job of taking fire aimed for the wing roots. Not that you should ever attack from the rear, of course.

The other point I forgot to reply to in the previous message is to beware gunners shooting at you when you're perpendicular to the bomber. Deflection shots always hurt in FB, and the turrets get a handy speed / damage boost shooting at you from there too.



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:19 PM
come on , give it up clint-ruin

german guns dont hit as hard as they should

Yak 3 .50cals hit as hard as Mk108s in snap deflection shots ive done

& the B-17G in FB has incredibly tuff damadge panels all over it

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 10:35 PM
B-17's were tough...could absorb huge amounts of damage and the images shown on that website are a testament to what the plane could take and still return to base.

Rarely have I seen a German 20mm not perform well. A few rare occasions yes...on a couple of planes with perhaps some error or bug in the damage modeling but in recent tests offline and online against Yak's I've blown wings off, tails, aircraft have exploded, and all maners of things from a half second burst of 20mm fire. I've also severed wings on a P47 with the MG13...go figure that one out.

VVS aircraft cannons are the in general the best...historically and in game. Goes all the way up through the range of cannons...and in most cases, the VVS fighters have around 1/4th of the firing time from their ammunition belts as the German aircraft do. Yet another reason why I prefer to fly German over VVS when given the opportunity.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 11:04 PM
WUAF_Badsight wrote:
- come on , give it up clint-ruin
-
- german guns dont hit as hard as they should
-
- Yak 3 .50cals hit as hard as Mk108s in snap
- deflection shots ive done.


O.M.G.


http://forums.ubi.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif




"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 11:11 PM
WUAF_Badsight wrote:
- come on , give it up clint-ruin
-
- german guns dont hit as hard as they should
-
- Yak 3 .50cals hit as hard as Mk108s in snap
- deflection shots ive done

Ah - no problem then. I am sure that with such testimony Maddox will 'fix' this problem for you in the paid addon. What could possibly refute such evidence?

- & the B-17G in FB has incredibly tuff damadge panels
- all over it

There's a story - I have no idea whether it's a real one or just an example of lateral thinking - where B-17s had damage assessments done on them after returning from missions. Quite often with huge chunks missing from the wings, engines burned out, props torn off, etc. The teams from the USAAF and Boeing added armour to the places where no damage was observed - reason being that the ones with the crap shot out of them made it home, but damage elsewhere was obviously causing the B-17s not to make it back.

The other thing to remember with the MK-108 is that 1/3rd or 1/2 of the shots coming out of the gun will simply make a nice 3cm home and do nothing else. If your shooting is 'average' by FB pilot standards you're likely to be missing a good 80-90% of your shots. Only some of the rounds are the nice mine-shell killer ones.

It is interesting that with a couple of nice big posts on bomber engagement tactics in the thread the only thing you seem to want to say is 'TEH VVS DM IS BS'. While I don't think you deserve a 'learn to fly' remark, I think you will find that things get a lot easier in the game as a LW pilot with the correct choice of tactics.

Try three Me-262 passes on a B-17 formation. One at 300kmh, one at 500kmh, and one at 700kmh. See which one gets you shot up the most. You can take out huge formations of bombers single handed provided you don't make predictable, slow attacks.

VW-IceFire wrote:

- VVS aircraft cannons are the in general the
- best...historically and in game. Goes all the way
- up through the range of cannons...and in most cases,
- the VVS fighters have around 1/4th of the firing
- time from their ammunition belts as the German
- aircraft do. Yet another reason why I prefer to fly
- German over VVS when given the opportunity.

I'm a big fan of the Ns-37 and Ns-45 myself, over the VVa or ShVAK cannons. But yes, I agree that pretty much every assessment I've ever seen done shows the ShKAS being better than the MG-17, UBS being better than MG-131, and ShVak being better than MGFF/151. There has to be some reason why the VVS stuck with one single UB and one single ShVAK for so long, after playing with such experiments as the 5-gun Lagg 3 '41 we have in FB.

It's definitely a tradeoff of 'kill quicker then RTB' with the VVS armament Vs 'hang around and kill more for longer' with the LW gear.



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=yzbcj)

Message Edited on 12/13/0310:15PM by clint-ruin

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 11:40 PM
Yes MK108 was a devastating weapon, capable to down any fighter with only one hit.. however remember, that we are only dealing with a simulation.. meaning Real B_17s usually went down after 20-30 MG151/20 hits.. 3 MK108 hits were more than enough to bring them down.. in the game the the figures are something like 80 20 mm hits and 10-20 MK108 hits. Average fighter like Lagg3 usually sustains some 20-25 MG151/20 hits.. so my point is, it is a game, and my point is if Oleg would change this to correspond the IRL figures kills would become extremely easy.. in real life it was naturally harder to score hits with cannons, average hit percentage for germans were probably less than 5 %.. while in this game most of us have it around 20 %.. its a simulator, we have to settle between realism and gameplay.



clint-ruin wrote:
-- VW-IceFire wrote:

- I'm a big fan of the Ns-37 and Ns-45 myself, over
- the VVa or ShVAK cannons. But yes, I agree that
- pretty much every assessment I've ever seen done
- shows the ShKAS being better than the MG-17, UBS
- being better than MG-131, and ShVak being better
- than MGFF/151. There has to be some reason why the
- VVS stuck with one single UB and one single ShVAK
- for so long, after playing with such experiments as
- the 5-gun Lagg 3 '41 we have in FB.
-I
- t's definitely a tradeoff of 'kill quicker then
- RTB' with the VVS armament Vs 'hang around and kill
- more for longer' with the LW gear.
-

VVS guns like UBS were in terms of firerate and muzzle velocity were probably the best in the world.. but there are other factots too. German MG131 had some advantages over UBS:. it was lighter, it goes into smaller space, and it had electric firing mechanism. And it was shorter. Meaning I would rather take the Twin MG131s from the Gustav, than a single UBS from Yak-9, because I'd like to think the twin MG131s would be more powerfull, than a single UBS.. That is why early Yaks and Migs could only mount one UBS on the nose. So yep, the reason why there was only single UBS was because it usually was enough, and a second UBS would have brought some more problems to allready light soviet fighters like Yak just couldn't yet mount a second UBS.. Eventually these problems were ofcoursed fixxed with bigger engines in later Yak-variants..


The Fantasy Lagg3, series 4 we have in game is perfect example of it (5 weapons, 1x shvak, 2x shkas, 2x Ubs).. if this bird would have actually flown in combat the nose load would have been so heavy it would have make the real Lagg3 even worser fighter to unexperienced early war soviet fighters.. and Soviet pilots allready called the early Laggs as lacquered coffins.. real Lagg3 was very heavy fighter.. It certainly couldn't match the specs of contemporary germans fighters in any perfomance area.. I think Oleg modelled the Lagg3 1941 perfomance we have in the game from a standard Lagg-3 1941 with standard armament (2x shkas 1x ubs, or sometimes 2x shkas 1x shvak).. Yes the extra weight on the nose of the three extra guns with allready poor HP/weight-ratio Lagg3 really should cause some problems conserning manouvarability (sorry hard word to spell :P ) ... but funny, it does not.

Other factor is ofcourse ammunition quality.. German MG151/20 should be more powerfull, than Soviet Shvak rounds. And it composes more High explosive..ofcourse this is not modelled in the game.. SO just because Oleg decided to model VVS weapons to be this much superior compared to germans, does not mean German weapons actually sucked this bad in real life http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Thanks for the link Nero111 by the way.. interesting pictures there..



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/sig3.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 12/14/0312:56AM by Vipez-

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 01:06 AM
From a German report that deals with the effectiveness of existing and planned board weapons, including the MK 108, it is said that <u>on avarage</u> 5 hits from 3cm or 20 hits from 2cm Mineshells were required to reliably bring down a "viermot". Of course this means that sometimes less was enough to make such extensive damage that the bomber was doomed, and of course sometimes they were lucky and can took more and return to base. Most likely the bomber was a wreck and was written off, but the crew was safe.

BTW, I just spoken with some 109 vets, they described the MK 108 in action as the following:

"It was firing slow, you could almost count the individual shots as it rumbled between your legs : bang, bang bang... it was frightening and amazing, you fired a small burst, just a few rounds... and the Yak in front of you just disappeared like it was never there, and after landing, the mechanics would clean up the oil tank with the remaining bits of Plexiglass ..."

http://www.mit.bme.hu/~tade/ac-pict/Hung-AF/pre-1945/Bf-109/Bf109col.gif

Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 01:47 AM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
- BTW, I just spoken with some 109 vets, they
- described the MK 108 in action as the following:
-
- "It was firing slow, you could almost count the
- individual shots as it rumbled between your legs :
- bang, bang bang...

Well, that sure is not the case in the game, the rate of fire is extremely high.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 02:07 AM
Cappadocian_317 wrote:
-
- Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
-- BTW, I just spoken with some 109 vets, they
-- described the MK 108 in action as the following:
--
-- "It was firing slow, you could almost count the
-- individual shots as it rumbled between your legs :
-- bang, bang bang...
-
- Well, that sure is not the case in the game, the
- rate of fire is extremely high.
-
-

which makes the existing DM model even worse, lol



Major Pedro
www.jzg23.de (http://www.jzg23.de)

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 02:12 AM
ok clint go and actually boot up your FB game

take on the B-17s in a Mk108 BF

see how many rounds your can manage to land inone of them

ive managed 8 & then the gunners killed my motor thenthe pilot but the B-17 RTB

8 Mk108 rounds in a b-17 is BS


clint-ruin wrote:
I think you will find that things get a
- lot easier in the game as a LW pilot with the
- correct choice of tactics.


well DUH

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 02:15 AM
and another thing .... how many Mk108 hits do you personally believe the Lavochkin LA-7 would be abel to withstand ???

ive landed 5 hits & it flew on

try saying the Mk108 is moddeled right

regular LW flying players will laugh out loud

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 02:28 AM
I flew a mission against B-17s today. Flying a 190-A8 myself, with mk108 wingcannons.
I downed 4 of em maybe getting hit by 2 of their rounds. After that my ammo was done for. I had to crashland because I was out of fuel.
No, I didn't saw all of their wings off, but I damaged them good enough to either have em abort the mission or bailout/crash.

The mk108 did it's job just fine.

And yes, I'm a regular LW flyer.


good evening

<DIV ALIGN=right>That's right!</DIV>

Message Edited on 12/14/0302:33AM by Sigi_di_Capri

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 03:02 AM
if 5 hits is the average, 8 is very reasonable.

And an La-7 taking a fe rounds . . that is odd, because 8 50 cals will eat an La-7 in a nano-second.

Hmmm.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 04:10 AM
Whats the loadout on the late 109s with Mk108? My bet is the Yak or La, if shot directly in the fuselage from close range, would only last up to the mine round.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 09:48 AM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
-
- From a German report that deals with the
- effectiveness of existing and planned board weapons,
- including the MK 108, it is said that <u>on
- avarage</u> 5 hits from 3cm or 20 hits from 2cm
- Mineshells were required to reliably bring down a
- "viermot".

That's interesting if the wording there is the exact wording in the report.

Do you know if that report concerns the mineshells only or all rounds including mineshells?

If it's the latter, even with a 50% MS loadout that means on average 10 MK108 hits total to get those 5 mineshots, assuming 100% accuracy. Assuming 10-20% accuracy and .. that's a lot of MK108 shots required to get those MS hits.

Also, was a "viermot" exclusively a B-17 or does this include other types reknown for being less tough, such as the 26 or 24 or Lancaster?

Thanks for your post Isegrim, it's nice to see you posting raw info again :>

edit: lanc not lib :>

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=yzbcj)

Message Edited on 12/14/0309:06AM by clint-ruin

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 09:54 AM
viermot, means "four engine"
4 engines planes only,


RED_Boandl
http://images.google.de/images?q=tbn:cnWm7BnZyxwC:www.news.harvard.edu/guide/students/images/yrbook/gw_bush.jpg

Best looking Mercenary out there( Playgirl, November/2003 )

http://www.bayern.de/Layout/wappen.gif

Bavaria is one of the oldest European states.
It dates back to about 500 A.D., when the Roman Empire was overcome by the onslaught of Germanic tribes. According to a widespread theory, the Bavarian tribe had descended from the Romans who remained in the country, the original Celtic population and the Germanic invaders.

Bavarian History : http://www.bayern.de/Bayern/Information/geschichteE.html#kap0

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 02:08 PM
JZG-Pedro wrote:
-
- Cappadocian_317 wrote:
--
-- Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
--- BTW, I just spoken with some 109 vets, they
--- described the MK 108 in action as the following:
---
--- "It was firing slow, you could almost count the
--- individual shots as it rumbled between your legs :
--- bang, bang bang...
--
-- Well, that sure is not the case in the game, the
-- rate of fire is extremely high.
--
--
-
- which makes the existing DM model even worse, lol
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Major Pedro
- www.jzg23.de (http://www.jzg23.de)

Not really, it makes the accuracy of the MK108 far less.

With the old rate of fire in the early stages of IL2 it was easier to hit and destroy planes with the MK108, but then they changed the rate of fire into this super high fire rate and the accuracy fell well below 15% for me.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 03:12 PM
http://www.axishq.wwiionline.com/~ring/info/ammo/air.jpg



that is a good table what dude named "ring" is doing right now, note that that table also count in the explosive amount and power, not only kinetic damage, sure it looks way more different than in game now.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 09:41 PM
clint-ruin wrote:
-
- That's interesting if the wording there is the exact
- wording in the report.

Yep that`s it, 20x20mm or 5x30mm Mineshell hits for "assured" shotdown of the e/ac, with the comment that the same result can be expected with less as well. So some correction, these numbers are hit-that-many-times-and-you-are-doomed ones, not avarage (I was recalling from memo).


- Do you know if that report concerns the mineshells
- only or all rounds including mineshells?

It concerns Mineshells and the most optimal configuration of armament to deliver enough of them.


- Also, was a "viermot" exclusively a B-17 or does
- this include other types reknown for being less
- tough, such as the 26 or 24 or Lancaster?
-

Well they only mention "viermots", or 4 engined planes, guess they don`t see so fundamental difference to be more specific.

Also to answer other questions, the rate of fire of the MK 108 was 600-650 rnds/min (quite high for such caliber, as high as Hispano cannon), and Me 109s equipped in the nose with such cannon carried 65 rounds for it in total, 50-50% mineshells and incendinary shells. The latter`s effectviness should not be underestimated, even though vs. fighters they are less useful, but note that about half a viermot`s wing was made up by fuel cells... a single hit there would set the whole thing on fire and would make the plane doomed.

http://www.mit.bme.hu/~tade/ac-pict/Hung-AF/pre-1945/Bf-109/Bf109col.gif

Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 01:33 AM
When the B-17 first made it to Germany, the German pilots would go up to meet them and return home, and tell how they would empty their guns into them and they flew away.

Granted they did not say what types of guns were being used, but there are only so many choices.

So after a B-17 had gone down and crashed landed all the german engineers went out to it, to look it over and find out what the problem was.

They came up with one simple solution, since the planes was huge and most of it was empty or had no major parts in it, that the best way to down one was to take out the pilots. This also kept them away from all the gunners near the rear of the plane.

You can look at some of the posts about the B-17 and see pic's of them in many ranges of damage but you will note a lot are done to the nose area, although a lot were from flak, you can see the ones that had taken hits from fighters.

Also keep in mind when your going after bombers you really should be in bomber killers, not dogfighters. The Fw-190 was the best attack plane to bring down the big mommas, for it had the fire power and durabilty to do a better job then the 109. Not that the 109 couldn't it was just more suited to intercept fighters.

Example of fighters to bomber killers.
British = Spitfire -- Hurricane
U.S.A. = P40 or the Republic P-51 were for escorting and didn't handle damage well. But had the range.
Germans = Bf 109's -- Fw 190's
U.S.S.R. = il-2 -- No really durable planes for bomber assult, they seemed more focused on ground attack planes.
Japan = A6M2 0r 5 -- The King George.
Japense planes were also named for how they preformed, manly names to the better and women names to the weaker. Zeek, King George, Betty's, etc etc etc.

In the end you wouldn't use a dive bomber to attack planes, Just as you wouldn't use an interceptor to attack ground targets. So for each purpose in the war there was a suitable or acceptable plane for the missiion.

PlatinumDragon...

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 02:01 AM
PlatinumDragon wrote:
- When the B-17 first made it to Germany, the German
- pilots would go up to meet them and return home, and
- tell how they would empty their guns into them and
- they flew away.
-
- Granted they did not say what types of guns were
- being used, but there are only so many choices.
-
- So after a B-17 had gone down and crashed landed all
- the german engineers went out to it, to look it over
- and find out what the problem was.
-
- They came up with one simple solution, since the
- planes was huge and most of it was empty or had no
- major parts in it, that the best way to down one was
- to take out the pilots. This also kept them away
- from all the gunners near the rear of the plane.

That's actually my interest in posting the anecdote I did before about B17 damage reports..

The Germans only got to see the planes that had been taken down.

The Americans only got to see the planes that had made it back.

So we get one figure for how many shots are needed for a kill from one side and a reputation for extreme toughness from the other.

As always the truth is in between the two somewhere :>

In FB it's all about the hit location. A single mine shell in the cockpit will do the job, a few 20mms from above can set it on fire, etc. If you just pound at it blindly all over then don't expect much.


http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 06:49 AM
PlatinumDragon wrote:
-

- Japense planes were also named for how they
- preformed, manly names to the better and women names
- to the weaker. Zeek, King George, Betty's, etc etc
- etc.
-
-

No Japanese a/c were given code names for what the their purpose was: Bombers (including attack and dive-bombers),
Reconnaissance planes (land or carrier-based), Flying boats and Transports (transport names began with "T") >>> female, Fighters (both Army and Navy, single or multi-engined) and Reconnaissance seaplanes >>> male, Training aircraft >>> tree names, Gliders >>> Bird names

As for Japanese naming of a/c: Fighters > Meteorological phenomena, Carrier Fighters > Wind names ending in pu or fu, Seaplane Fighters same as Carrier Fighters, Interceptor Fighters > Lightning names ending in den, Night Fighters > Light names ending in ko, Attack planes > Mountain names, Bombers > Star (sei) or constellation (zan) names, Patrol planes >>> Sea or ocean names, Reconnaissance planes > Cloud names, Trainers > Tree, plant or flower names, Transports > Sky names, Miscellaneous Named > for landscape effects.







http://www.f1boat.com/03/boats/300x100/27.jpg



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 08:55 AM
Well just today I shot an La5 with 3 good bursts of 30mm shells and it was around 4 bullets per burst that hit him in the tail.... and yes it was dead 6 but still he flew on with a little trail of barely visable smoke and hell i even smashed into him after cause I expected all this to disintegrat the buggar... Fluke that it didn't but still even after I smashed into him he flew on....

Sure he had nothing left for a rudder or elevator but..... what the heck....

<a>http://www.talonsoft.com/images/hiddenanddangerous/hiddenanddangerous-eyes.jpg</a>

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 08:57 AM
O and as for paper wings ya they are weak but better than before... although the K4 seems to be a cable cutting machine lately those cables must have magnets so I fly the G6/AS now so now I only have paper wings and not magnetic cables /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<a>http://www.talonsoft.com/images/hiddenanddangerous/hiddenanddangerous-eyes.jpg</a>