PDA

View Full Version : Were RAF Pilots Sucidal?



ParrotPatrol
06-21-2008, 06:52 PM
I have been playing the Hurricane Season campaign and I gotta say to myself, RAF pilots had to be suicidal to fly during the Battle of Britain. I know I'm just a noob, but DAMN. Hurricane bullets barely do anything but scratch the paint on an ME-111, I emptied my entire load into the left engine of one, CONFIRMED HITS, I saw the impacts, and at point blank range, and he didn't do anything more than smoke a little and tell me to fire a little to the left to scratch the itch he had there.
Is Hurricane Season an unusually tough campaign, or did RAF fighters really have it that tough?

iL2fan
06-21-2008, 07:00 PM
My guess is that they were tough enough to go up in Hurricanes. But they should've went up in Spitfires http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

ParrotPatrol
06-21-2008, 07:20 PM
I looked at the armament for the spitfires and it doesn't look much better. Hell, I had trouble taking on Stukas in that Hurricane. They had tailgunners, sure, but this is rediculous.

Gumtree
06-21-2008, 07:24 PM
The .303 with Dewilde ammo was actually very effective. Not in the demolish a plane way but in the shred the crew and sundry equipment type of way.

The game lacks the detailed intricacies of the damage that the many hundreds of bullets did to an airframe and its occupants.

Whilst not as effective as the larger calibre rounds, a few thousand .303 certainly caused enough destruction to hurt the enemy.

As armour was placed more and more on the airframes obviously this threat grew less, in saying that I would not like to sit in an airframe with 8 Browning's pointed at me.

ElAurens
06-21-2008, 08:02 PM
Rifle calibre weapons make poor aircraft guns.

SeaFireLIV
06-21-2008, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by ParrotPatrol:
I have been playing the Hurricane Season campaign and I gotta say to myself, RAF pilots had to be suicidal to fly during the Battle of Britain. I know I'm just a noob, but DAMN. Hurricane bullets barely do anything but scratch the paint on an ME-111, I emptied my entire load into the left engine of one, CONFIRMED HITS, I saw the impacts, and at point blank range, and he didn't do anything more than smoke a little and tell me to fire a little to the left to scratch the itch he had there.
Is Hurricane Season an unusually tough campaign, or did RAF fighters really have it that tough?

In the BOB (real life) pilots were flying for their very HOMES. they have just seen most of Europe fall and know they`re next. In cases like that you`d fight with sticks and stones! There`s the determination and focus to FIGHT.

However, as to your question about Hurri effectiveness in IL2 is concerned. REAL pilots had more training than you (even the little they had) and knew to do things like get the optimum convergence (I think it was 150-200) and waited till they very close before shooting.

Just bear in mind that comparing yourself to the real guys is always a mistake.

Sirrith
06-21-2008, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by ParrotPatrol:
I looked at the armament for the spitfires and it doesn't look much better. Hell, I had trouble taking on Stukas in that Hurricane. They had tailgunners, sure, but this is rediculous.

Stukas are easy flamers if you aim for the fuel tank http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I forget where though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif either behind the cockpit or the wing root.

leitmotiv
06-21-2008, 08:12 PM
Set your gun concentration for 100 meters, and only shoot at 100 meters. Attack the Heinkel head-on or from the side in a swooping curve from above ("high side").

Freiwillige
06-21-2008, 08:29 PM
There were many cases of Spits and Hurries unloading everything and not downing a bomber. It was hit and miss but they got alot too...But rifle calibre bullets (303mm)or(.30 cal) were not ideal and the British learned that fast.

German's switched 7.9mm to 13mm (.50 Cal)
British switched .303mm to .50cal
.50 cal works! 20mm works!

Now imagine taking on a b-17!

Tempelhof
06-21-2008, 08:37 PM
Well. try the He-111 and do your best to escape 4 AI Hurricane, and you'll change your mind.

idonno
06-21-2008, 08:59 PM
I've had a good deal of success with the .303's. Leitmotiv is on the right track. It's all about hitting the target at convergence range. Although, I prefer to set it out a bit farther than 100 meters. I don't like getting that close to the gunners.

ParrotPatrol
06-21-2008, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by Tempelhof:
Well. try the He-111 and do your best to escape 4 AI Hurricane, and you'll change your mind.

Dude, escaping 4 hurricanes when you are alone is one thing, you don't NEED to escape them when you are in formation. Hell, that flight of bombers tore the AI to bits, it can't just be me.

I wasn't comparing myself to REAL pilots, I was just stating that they were insane to fly Hurricanes.

As for convergence range, I have it set to about 300 meters and I test fire at about 400 and see if I hit, fire as often as I can leading up to 200 meters, get a few hits in if I can at 200-100, and break off at about 100.

In this particular case I sat 250 meters off this guy's 8 o'clock and poured my entire load into his left engine.

Xiolablu3
06-21-2008, 10:22 PM
Bob STanford Tuck, who scored 29 Victories but crash landed in France in 1942, states that the 8x.303's were fine in the Battle of Britian, but in 1941 and later the Germans started adding more armour plate to their aircraft, particularly the bombers, and they were finding it hard to bring them down with mchine guns.

The pilots were pushing hard for 20mm cannon at this time.

I think its a clip on the World at War series with Laurance Olivier narrating where Tuck talks about it.


Theres also an interview with a German fighter pilot stating how effective the Machine guns were in the Battle Of Britain.

'There were so many bullets flying around that one was bound to hit something vital' were his words.

Obviously we all know that Cannon are far better than machine guns, however at that time in the War aircraft were not as heavily armoured. Also the 20mm cannon available in 1940 (MGFF/Oerlikon/unreliable hispano) were nothing like the 20mm cannons which appeared in 1941/42 (MG151/20 and Reliable Hispano). They were either unreliable or very low muzzle velocity.

Xiolablu3
06-21-2008, 10:29 PM
ANother thing, I think that the Hurricane Mk1 we have in IL2 is a derated/early export version, and although not vastly more powerful, the RAf Battle Of Britian Hurricane's had least slightly better performance.

Can you old timers remember when the Hurricane was the best dogfighter in Forgotten battles at one time? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

zardozid
06-21-2008, 10:37 PM
It may seem suicidal to us in the present day... but when you are scared for your family, friends, and country (way of life) you will do whatever you can to try and stop the enemy. Even if it seems to be seriously against the odds (or dam near suicidal) you will fight with whatever, or however you can... what would you do...give up?

ParrotPatrol
06-21-2008, 10:39 PM
Unfortunately, as it has been stated before, IL2 doesn't seem to model bullets entering the plane and ricocheting around, somewhat lowering the effectiveness of the round.

I finally managed to bring down a bomber with the round. Unfortunately for some odd reason the crew didn't abandon the plane and continued to fire at me ALL THE WAY DOWN EVEN AS IT SANK SLOWLY INTO THE OCEAN. Now that is what I call dedication.

I'm not implying they were suicidal to FLY, I was implying that they were suicidal to fly HURRICANES.

Where can I find out where the fuel tanks on any given craft are? I imagine if I were to find this out my kill rate would double.

leitmotiv
06-21-2008, 11:18 PM
If you are clever in the way you use the Hurricane MkI, as with all the airplanes in this game, you will get results. If you charge into battle and expect to have success, you will not.

Uncle_Stranger
06-22-2008, 02:37 AM
Simple equasion actually:

He-111 + Milenium Falcon type cockipt = no crew protection + head on attack = dead crew

GIAP.Shura
06-22-2008, 02:51 AM
Originally posted by ParrotPatrol:
I'm not implying they were suicidal to FLY, I was implying that they were suicidal to fly HURRICANES.


I would rather have been flying in the Hurricane than in the He-111. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

K_Freddie
06-22-2008, 03:14 AM
Hence the Kamikaze's in the pacific.
These people were 'indoctrinated' with fear of the enemy and the horrors they were to perform.

Anything is possible in wartime
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

x6BL_Brando
06-22-2008, 04:07 AM
Comparing the effects in a computer game to real life events is always flawed, especially when trying to combine it with some kind of ethical discourse on the nature of war; but there's a measurable distinction between being prepared to die in the defence of your country, and strapping on a bomb with the intention of immolating yourself in order to take as many of the enemy with you as you can. I doubt if anyone in the Battle of Britain took off with the latter intention.

It's also worth noting that the Hurricane was the best scoring Allied aircraft during that Battle. It was able to absorb far more damage than the Spitfire and still get the pilot home and, as mentioned above, 8 streams of .303 bullets converging onto a vulnerable portion of any aircraft will cause damage. Of course, you need a pilot capable of getting close enough and he then needs to be a good marksman to hit the plane, and he needs a good escort to keep the enemy fighters off him while he does it.......

The key to it all is teamwork. From the guys at the sharp end to the plotters on the ground and everyone else involved. That's something you won't find modelled in IL2.

B

BWaltteri
06-22-2008, 04:26 AM
Try first it with Ki-27 and once you think you beat the game move to the Hurricanes.

I did shoot down two Ju-88's in a Hurricane I yesterday so I think it's not conceptually impossible to say the least.

People who only fly the late war 8x30mm cannon planes will miss some essentials of the game.

il2battle
06-22-2008, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by ParrotPatrol:
I finally managed to bring down a bomber with the round. Unfortunately for some odd reason the crew didn't abandon the plane and continued to fire at me ALL THE WAY DOWN EVEN AS IT SANK SLOWLY INTO THE OCEAN. Now that is what I call dedication.


It seems that you did what you "always" should try to do - kill the pilot. If you do plane goes down in finally, but it could take some more time and in that time someone could steal your kill. Anyway you know whos kill it actually was.
When and if you kill the pilot, crew may not bailout, because they wait the pilot to bailout first, that's they order to do so too.

For bombers, try to do what leitmotiv says, attack high and side with speed. Aim your bullets to wing (engine) and the cockpit (kill the pilot) and you starting to score.
Second, try to attack the first plane of the formation, so other planes gunnery can't shoot you.
And ofcourse wait till you are close and couldn't miss him, as you know you didn't have much of bullets and they are effective only from close, if you don't get lucky shots.

With Hurricane it could take some time to get high enough and side of your victim, if you didn't already be there.
Select your target early and don't change it anymore, if there isn't good reason for that. If you want easy kills, attack same planes that AI has been attack and it already smokes (steal), but ofcourse don't waste your bullets for the burning ones, even if you could get that kill to be yours - no reason to shoot plane what already goes down.

Good luck.

luftluuver
06-22-2008, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:
There were many cases of Spits and Hurries unloading everything and not downing a bomber. It was hit and miss but they got alot too...But rifle calibre bullets (303mm)or(.30 cal) were not ideal and the British learned that fast.

German's switched 7.9mm to 13mm (.50 Cal)
British switched .303mm to .50cal
.50 cal works! 20mm works!

Now imagine taking on a b-17!

Sir, you need to do an edit in your post.

.303mm = 0.012" and 303mm = 11.9"

..........................

De Wilde = incendiary bullets

Aaron_GT
06-22-2008, 06:38 AM
But rifle calibre bullets (303mm)or(.30 cal) were not ideal and the British learned that fast.

The RAF recognised that the .303 was going to be insufficiently effective by 1940, hence F.37/35 - the 1935 specification the led to the Whirlwind. Hawker and Supermarine tendered 4 cannon versions of the Hurrican and Spitfire to these, the former with Oerlinkon cannon. Hawker and Supermarine were asked to concentrate instead on just getting their eight gun fighters working rather than risking having NO modern fighters by a projected 1938-40 war date.

The proposed future armament for the mid 1940s was to be 6 20mm cannon (proposed for various planes, including Tempest, Spitfire, Meteor, Reaper, etc) but never realised as the faster firing Hispano V reduced the need a bit, and by late war the hope was to move to 23 to 30mm, which finally arrived as the German-derived Aden.

The RAF did conduct trials on half-inch calibre guns in (from memort 1932). The conclusion was that the Vickers was the superior gun and the US round was the superior round, but the final conclusion was to skip to 20mm as soon as possible, keeping the 303 in the meantime due to availability of ammunition. Of course in the end the British ended up using the Vickers round for surface guns, the US one in the air).

By the late 1930s the hope was to also replace many defensive guns on bombers with 20mm cannon too, but the move to night bombing arguably meant that defensive armament at all wasn't all that useful.

Aaron_GT
06-22-2008, 06:41 AM
For bombers, try to do what leitmotiv says, attack high and side with speed. Aim your bullets to wing (engine) and the cockpit (kill the pilot) and you starting to score.
Second, try to attack the first plane of the formation, so other planes gunnery can't shoot you.

And this is also what RAF manuals (certainly from 1941) said to do.

ParrotPatrol
06-22-2008, 10:36 AM
So I should be aiming for the cockpit, high and to the side from now on...there really should be a site someone with too much time on their hands has made to point out all the weaknesses on these aircraft. I have no problem hitting enemy aircraft, its doing damage to vital areas to bring them down that I have trouble with.

stugumby
06-22-2008, 11:12 AM
I have read your post with great concern and some amusement, a veritable swarm of 3-400 .303 bullets ripping through any and all parts of an aircraft made of aluminum,in a aimed/converged 2 sec burst would be most traumatic indeed. Just take a shotgun and blast an old car door, even better sit in the car and have bubba blast away, you will gain a new appreciation of being in the "beaten zone" Hurrican pilots had a very capable machine and as some else said watching your home get bombed is sufficient motivation to kill your enemy. As far as hitting power, yes not the explosive 20-30mm damage per hit potential, but the cummulative effect of 3-400 rounds riping/shredding through beer can aluminum and you. Do the men some justice, this is a sim and has its limitations/frustrations. old.303 is no slouch in the balistics either, hide behind some modern concrete blocks and have bubba slam some rounds into them, if you survive let us know.

VW-IceFire
06-22-2008, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by ParrotPatrol:
So I should be aiming for the cockpit, high and to the side from now on...there really should be a site someone with too much time on their hands has made to point out all the weaknesses on these aircraft. I have no problem hitting enemy aircraft, its doing damage to vital areas to bring them down that I have trouble with.
Between firing at the proper convergence range and focus firing on a particular part of the bomber you should be able to make a fair bit of damage. Remember that the .303s will not demolish a Heinkel...you're looking to damage the engine(s), cause fuel leaks, and sever control cables. If you're lucky then starting a fire is a good plan as well.

In the grand scheme of things, Battle of Britain pilots were out to make it difficult for the enemy to continue the bombing campaign. Even if a bomber made it back with half crew and thousands of holes the plane itself was potentially a write off. Even better if the plane crashed in the English countryside or over the channel due to lack of fuel or inability to stay aloft because of wing damage or engine damage.

The .303s mean you'll get allot of half kills so the objective is not to become an ace but rather to shoot down the enemy in large numbers collectively. If you watch the movie The Battle of Britain (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064072/) then go find the scene where the pilots have returned from a successful raid and one of the newer pilots is saying how he shot down a plane with three stripes on the wings. He says he saw it go down into the water and then is told by the officer that he's the third one to have that kill. That kind of thing is going to happen.

Zeus-cat
06-22-2008, 11:50 AM
I don't remember if it was in Hurricane Season or another campaign that featured the early Hurricane, but I have brought down at least 2 He-111s in a single mission. Most missions I came back with lots of damage to enemy aircraft, but no kills.

It is rare for me to get multiple kills with the Hurricane, but it is a good plane when used properly. Boom and zoom the 111s aiming for vital areas with well-timed bursts and stay away from the gunners. You'll get home and some of them won't.

chunkydora
06-22-2008, 12:43 PM
Actually, 8 30 cals can be very effective if you hut in the right place. I use the p-40b all the time and score kills mostly by shooting off their ailerons/elevators/rudder. Aim for the wings and tail and 8 30 cals should do plenty of harm, even if they are incapable of really breaking up the enemy.

Aaron_GT
06-22-2008, 12:54 PM
I have read your post with great concern and some amusement, a veritable swarm of 3-400 .303 bullets ripping through any and all parts of an aircraft made of aluminum,in a aimed/converged 2 sec burst would be most traumatic indeed. Just take a shotgun and blast an old car door, even better sit in the car and have bubba blast away, you will gain a new appreciation of being in the "beaten zone" Hurrican pilots had a very capable machine and as some else said watching your home get bombed is sufficient motivation to kill your enemy.

Whilst I appreciate what you are saying the requirements for anti-bomber RAF went from 4 .303 guns (1930) to eight .303 guns (1932) to 4 cannon (1935), with 4 .303 only being retained in the flawed concept of the turret fighter. If there was no problem with rifle calibre guns then the RAF would not have issued these specifications.

Also you are not taking into account angles. From directly astern the angle relative to an aluminium shell (which is also very much thicker than a beer can, and stressed, unlike a car door) then the probability of bullets bouncing off is very much higher, and the effective thickness of the metal relative to the bullet is much greater. Think skipping stones off a pond. If you read thr RAF report on the Fw 190 you find that the rear of the fuselage was essentially impervious to rifle calibre rounds directly from the rear with just such an aluminium skin.

This is one of the reasons why the instructions issued from 1941 promote the use of beam attacks to give something close to perpendicular angles such that would allow penetration of the skin, but with much reduced firing times on target. It also had the advantage of reducing exposure to defensive fire, so there is a combination of effects.

RAF analysis of the Battle of Britain data showed that the 1940 doctine of pattern harmonisation and firing at 300 yards (the shotgun effect) in Vics was very ineffective. This was followed up in 1942 with a larger analysis of downed aircraft. But this process started in 1929, and even then the RAF felt the .303 was only going to be effective as a stopgap in large multiples of guns, pending with a .50 calibre or 20mm or 23mm weapon, with some effort being expended (as in the USA) of weapons in the 37mm to 40mm size.

The retention of .303 as the main bomber defensive gun calibre through to mid 1944 was controversial, although it was progressively replaced with .50 calibre. The 20mm installations never took off, except in the Lincoln which was too late for WW2. The best the RAF could really say was that they had lots of these guns and that night interceptions took place at such short range that they might be effective, if at least as scare guns. Some argued for removal of guns from night bombers, and some units removed mid upper turrets on aircraft (draggy, and with shrage musik, not much to shoot at) and powered turrets began to be removed from nose positions (e.g. Halifax).

chunkydora
06-22-2008, 01:44 PM
Just tested this out in-game.

That's interesting what Aaron_GT said about the construction of German planes and their near imperviousness to rifle caliber guns from behind. However, in game anyway, their wings are vulnerable to .303s from above. I got above the formation, dove almost straight down, and pounded one wing of the he-111. It simply damaged the flying surfaces enough that the bomber couldn't stay up. IRL all that was really needed was to get those gerries to drop their bombs before the target, and hopefully damage the plane enough to make them scrap it.

Talroth
06-22-2008, 01:48 PM
As a rather new pilot I deiced to try this out with all the Hurricanes in different quick battles against a single He-111 and a frontal strafe starting at about 150m aiming at the cockpit and raking the length of it brought it down about 2/5 times with all hurricane models. I was actually rather surprised of just how effective that was. Mind you, I did take heavy damage on about half the runs, but every strike left it as rather questionable as to if the plane could have made it back to a home base with the amount of smoke pouring off it.

Sillius_Sodus
06-22-2008, 01:48 PM
There is a video somewhere on youtube that shows how to attack HE-11's with a Hurricane (sorry can't find it right now). Anyway, a high angle frontal pass, i.e. shooting down at the target produced either smoking engines or at least large fuel leaks after each pass with a 1-1.5 sec burst. It takes patience however to reposition after each pass. I've found that if you are flying an mg only armed fighter, it's more effective to fire from at least a 30 degree angle to the top or bottom of the bomber.

The Hurricane's eight .303's can be quite effective, but usually only at convergence.

Aaron_GT
06-22-2008, 01:48 PM
That's interesting what Aaron_GT said about the construction of German planes and their near imperviousness to rifle caliber guns from behind.

I've only seen test results on a 190 - it may or may not be true of others. The 190 had a reputation for being tough.

Aaron_GT
06-22-2008, 01:52 PM
The He-111 has fuel tanks inboard of the engines. In the game diving from the rear, going below and the using energy to come, firing at the roots and then breaking up can be very effective. It also means multiple handovers between gunners, with reasonably to very high angular changes which reduces the chances of being hit.

MB_Avro_UK
06-22-2008, 02:22 PM
Hi all,

It will be interesting to see how effective the Hurricane Mk 1 will be in the forthcoming BoB SoW. (To be released this year? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif).

The Mk 1 we have in il2 is the 1938 version that was exported to Finland.(Shown in the Axis plane set).

It had a 900 hp engine but the BoB 1940 Merlin engine was 1,000 hp. The 1940 version also had other refinements.

As I understand, BoB SoW will have very highly detailed damage modelling. Would this allow the hits from the Hurricane's .303 guns to be more effective ???


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Xiolablu3
06-22-2008, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by chunkydora:
Just tested this out in-game.

That's interesting what Aaron_GT said about the construction of German planes and their near imperviousness to rifle caliber guns from behind. However, in game anyway, their wings are vulnerable to .303s from above. .

This just concerns the FW190, and concerns an average burst from direct 6.

It doesnt say 'imperveous', it says 0% chance oif hitting something vital (which would mean closer to 0% than to 1%, not impossible) and 'negligable' effect from the .303.

The FW190 was a very tough fighter, could withstand much more punishment than the Me109 or Spitfire, just like it can in the sim. Just 2 days ago I accelerated away from a 4 cannon SPitfire who was scoring hits on me while I was in range. I easily escaped with just a bit of damage and flew home on the deck..

There is a price to pay for being so tough however, the FW190 was quite a bit heavier than the Bf109 and SPitfire.

stugumby
06-22-2008, 02:48 PM
It appears we have missed each others points. There is no question of what hits harder and does more damage, the point was where hurricane pilots suicidal, the answer to that was no. Not much different than going to iraq in an unarmored humvee and saying, some armor would be nice..

chunkydora
06-22-2008, 04:42 PM
I APOLOGIZE SO MUCH FOR MIXING UP IMPERVIOUS WITH 0% CHANCE OF HITTING SOMETHING SOMETHING VITAL AND THINKING THAT APPLIED TO THE HE-111 REAR SECTION IN RELATION TO .303 MGS AND I'M SO HAPPY THAT YOU ALL MAY ONE DAY FORGIVE ME FOR MY SINS AND Xiolablu3 I JUST CAN'T EXPRESS MY JOY THAT YOU GOT HOME ALIVE AFTER BEING HIT.

Xiolablu3
06-22-2008, 05:13 PM
I forgive you Chunky,, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Hatter_RAF
06-22-2008, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
In the grand scheme of things, Battle of Britain pilots were out to make it difficult for the enemy to continue the bombing campaign. Even if a bomber made it back with half crew and thousands of holes the plane itself was potentially a write off. Even better if the plane crashed in the English countryside or over the channel due to lack of fuel or inability to stay aloft because of wing damage or engine damage.

That is the key. You want the raid to jettison it's ordinance and turn back, or at least cause severe disruption to the bomber formation so it is more vulnerable. That is why head on attacks were effective: they unnerved the bomber pilots and broke up the formation.

ParrotPatrol
06-22-2008, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by stugumby:
It appears we have missed each others points. There is no question of what hits harder and does more damage, the point was where hurricane pilots suicidal, the answer to that was no. Not much different than going to iraq in an unarmored humvee and saying, some armor would be nice..
If the thread wants to derail itself, let it. This is starting to get interesting.

On a side note, thanks for the advice on the Stukas. They ARE easy flamers. I managed to pull off an ace-in-a-day because of this advice. I don't suppose there is an info source telling me the weak spots of all the craft like this is there?

luftluuver
06-22-2008, 08:49 PM
Some might what to do some research on what the guns of RAF fighters were set to during BoB. Might explain why it was hard to shoot down bombers.

ParrotPatrol
06-22-2008, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
I don't know how anyone can compare flying a puny 100-150hp GA a/c designed for stability spinning a toothpick 2 or 3 bladed prop to a fire breathing 1600hp+ monster designed to be somewhat unstable spinning a 3 or 4 club bladed prop?

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u231/cheezeguy/n725075089_288918_2774.jpg

luftluuver
06-22-2008, 08:56 PM
See the other thread Parrot. Posted in the wrong thread.

leitmotiv
06-22-2008, 11:20 PM
The "Dowding Spread" was designed to give even bad shots a chance of hitting, but, in the Battle of France and later, the better shots harmonized the guns at closer range for greater destructive effect. A real Battle of Britain British fighter pilot was shocked when I posted my favored convergence range at 50 yards for the .303 in BATTLE OF BRITAIN II. I can't remember what the original "Dowding Spread" convergence was---maybe somebody else recalls? I think it was around 400 yards.

The key with .303 ammunition is to set the convergence at 100 meters where it still has a reasonably flat trajectory and still has some velocity for penetration. At close range any rifle-caliber shell has power for tearing up airplanes. The game Hurricane I rips Bf 109Es or Bf 110Cs to pieces. Both were lightly constructed and vulnerable.

Freiwillige
06-23-2008, 02:38 AM
Hurricanes had their main fuel tanks in the wings just outside the cockpit. And the fear of burning to death was a very real fear for hurri pilots. Bailing out of a burning Hurri with both sides burning was described as jumping through a tunnel of fire. Yea those guys in WW2 had guts!

Xiolablu3
06-23-2008, 03:50 AM
Thats interesting, I alwyas thought the Hurricanes fuel tank was in the same place as the Spitfire's - Right in front of the pilot.

The SPitfire fuel tank was placed perfectly for aerodynamics and handling, right over the wing and COG, however very undesirable should your plane catch fire. Many SPit pilots were burned badly through WW2.

See the only VC awarded to a Fighter Pilot during the BOB, this was however a Hurricane....

http://www.victoriacross.co.uk/nicolson.html


'On 16 August 1940 near Southampton, Flight lieutenant Nicolson's Hurricane was fired on by a Messerschmitt 110, injuring the pilot in one eye and one foot. His engine was also damaged and the petrol tank set alight. As he struggled to leave the blazing machine he saw another Messerschmitt, and managing to get back into the bucket seat, pressed the firing button comtinuing firing until the enemy plane dived away to destruction. Not until then did he bale out., and when he landed in a field , he was unable to release his parachute owing to his badly burned hands.
Additional Information:.
His courage showed that although his aircraft was on fire, he stayed with it until he had shot down the enemy plane.
Nicholson found it difficult to open the cockpit cover of his burning aircraft. Once clear, of the plane, as he descended in the Parachute, he feigned death when an enemy aircraft pilot looked as if he was considering machine-gunning him.
His will power brought him back from virtual death, after his doctors had given up on him recovering. He returned to flying in 1941.
1942 saw him in India. and in August 1943 he was leading a squadron of fighters in Birma. During this time he won the Distinguished Flying Cross.
Wing Commander Nicolson's life ended when the Liberator, in which he was flying as observer, crashed into the Bay of Bengal after catching fire on the 2nd of May 1945..
He was the only a fighter pilot to be awarded the Victoria Cross during the whole of World War Two. '

Kettenhunde
06-23-2008, 05:50 AM
Luftluver says:
I don't know how anyone can compare flying a puny 100-150hp GA a/c designed for stability spinning a toothpick 2 or 3 bladed prop to a fire breathing 1600hp+ monster designed to be somewhat unstable spinning a 3 or 4 club bladed prop?


We can compare them or transfer experience because all aircraft fly by the same principles and physics.

Understand?

The difference is the forces involved which tends to speed the rate at which things go bad. In fact if you look at trainers, most of them have worse characteristics than the aircraft they are designed to prepare the student pilot for flying. Great example of this is the Piper Tomahawk or the T-6 Texan.


Another characteristic of the Piper Tomahawk that favors its suitability as a primary trainer is that the flight control forces mimic those of a much heavier aircraft. As a result, student pilots that learn to fly in a Tomahawk transition much more successfully to larger aircraft, hence the popularity of the Tomahawk with U.S. Air Force flying clubs.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-38_Tomahawk


The airplane is harder to fly than a P-51. I've flown both now, and I never would have never thought that was true. Understand, it's nothing a competent pilot can't handle, but the aircraft is the consummate trainer; she demands constant attention to be flown well just like the T-38 did.



http://www.warbirdalley.com/articles/T6-sf.htm

So now you know how we can compare a puny 150 hp GA aircraft to a 1600hp fire breathing monster.

It is your perception of airplanes that needs adjustment.

We could very well be talking about a 1600hp pussycat and a 150 hp fire breathing monster!


All the best,

Crumpp

luftluuver
06-23-2008, 07:15 AM
Wrong thread Crumpp. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

I didn't know the T-6 and PA-38 were General Aviation a/c. Thanks.

leitmotiv
06-23-2008, 07:49 AM
The Hurricane's main fuel tank was located right in front of the pilot with an additional smaller tank in each wing. There was no firewall between the fuselage tank and the cockpit. The fuselage tank was self-sealing, but had no other protection. If the fuselage tank caught fire, the pilot had better have been wearing gloves and goggles. His only hope was a fast exit.

For full details of Hurricane structure, see restoration photos in this site:

http://www.hawker-restorations-ltd.co.uk/

Kettenhunde
06-23-2008, 10:42 AM
I didn't know the T-6 and PA-38 were General Aviation a/c.


Well now you know. Today has not been a waste for you because you have learned something.

It's posted in this one, btw.

You can take the knowledge with you to the other thread!

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

All the best,

Crumpp

Zoom2136
06-23-2008, 11:19 AM
Always go for the cockpit... 12x 303s = instant pilot kill...

Aaron_GT
06-23-2008, 02:42 PM
A few additional observations.

The concept of using a vic as a single unit using pattern harmonisation at 300 to 400 yards (outside the effective range of mid 1930s single flexibly mounted rifle calibre defensive guns) was developed when the anticipated firepower per fighter was likely to be four rifle calibre guns with almost no margin of performance of the fighter over the bomber with attacks from the rear after a long chase being the only attack mode. This would bring 12 guns to bear (or the same as each Hurricane IIb).

By 1939, with most of the biplane fighters in RAF service removed from the frontline apart from in colonial outposts the policy was outdated. The Battle of Britain sounded its death knell and the old procedures were history before its end.

Lutwaffe single engined fighters had light armament without, as far as I know, a road map for replacement in place as soon. Many of the mid 1930s Zerstorer desins also initially projected only four nose mounted light guns. The experience in Spain changed that, but even then the change from just four rifle calibre guns had only just taken place in 1940 for the 109.

The USA also projected a move to cannon, but the search for a working cannon wasn't very frtuitful before a decision for mass production had to be made so the 50 cal was used. Some export Hurricanes received 4 50 calibre weapons, which was potentially much more effective than the Hurricane I.

The call for 12 rifle calibre guns as an insurance against lacking cannon, and given no licence or production for 50 calibre weapons also dated from 1937. 4 20mm cannon has at least twice the potency. With the Hurricane IIb and IIc you see the insurance policy and the desired solution, although by that point the real desired solution was what the Typhoon was -intended- to be. Hawker would probably rather made the Tornado, though.

luftluuver
06-23-2008, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
Well now you know. Today has not been a waste for you because you have learned something.

It's posted in this one, btw.

You can take the knowledge with you to the other thread!

Please show me where I posted in THIS thread the original comment. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Now what does your Wiki link say on the "Traumahawk"? Oh yes, The Tomahawk was Piper's attempt at creating an affordable two-place trainer.""

Tell me who was the original user of the T-6 trainer. One would have to include the P-51, Spitfire, F4U and all the other flying warbirds using your definition of a GA a/c.

I think you maybe right Xio. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Aaron_GT
06-23-2008, 02:49 PM
I APOLOGIZE SO MUCH FOR MIXING UP IMPERVIOUS WITH 0% CHANCE OF HITTING SOMETHING SOMETHING VITAL

No, that was MY error.

Kettenhunde
06-23-2008, 04:48 PM
your definition of a GA a/c.


So in your mind, just what is a General Aviation aircraft?

Now these guys might not have as much experience in aviation as you but I think their opinion is worth examining.


The U.S. Centennial Of Flight Commission is charged by the Congress of the United States with playing a leading role in coordinating and publicizing activities celebrating the achievements of Wilbur and Orville Wright, which inaugurated the first century of powered flight. The Commission has six members that not only bring their own dedication to the public appreciation of the legacy and promise of aviation, but also the enthusiasm of their member institutions.

General John R. Dailey, Commission Chair Director
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum


Marion Blakey, Administrator
Federal Aviation Administration


Sean O'Keefe, Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration


Richard T. Howard, President
First Flight Centennial Foundation


Tom Poberezny, President and CEO
EAA Aviation Foundation


J. Bradford Tillson, Chair
Inventing Flight



Perhaps the best way to define general aviation is to begin by listing what it is not. General aviation is not military aviation and it is not scheduled commercial aviation. To a great extent, all other uses of aviation in the United States fall into the category of general aviation. These uses include, but are not limited to, private and sport flying, aerial photography and surveying, cropdusting, business flying, medical evacuation, flight training, and the police and fire fighting uses of aircraft. The airplanes used in general aviation range from small, single-engine, fabric-covered aircraft to multi-million dollar business jets. They also include helicopters, restored warbirds, and homebuilt aircraft designed to use advanced composite technology. The term general aviation came into use during the 1950s. Before that time, commentators talked of private flying or business flying. Regardless of the term or terms used, the non-military and non-commercial airline uses of aviation date back to the very early history of powered flight.



http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/GENERAL_AVIATION/GA_OV.htm


The Tomahawk was Piper's attempt at creating an affordable two-place trainer.""


Just like the C-150 series, Beechcraft Skipper, Mooney M-10, MS880, and scores of other aircraft, General Aviation aircraft.

Facts are they all fly by exactly the same principles.

TinyTim
06-24-2008, 03:35 AM
Where can I find out where the fuel tanks on any given craft are?

I performed some tests (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5981049425?r=5981049425#5981049425) some time ago.

zardozid
06-24-2008, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by K_Freddie:
Hence the Kamikaze's in the pacific.
These people were 'indoctrinated' with fear of the enemy and the horrors they were to perform.

Anything is possible in wartime
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif


The problem was that when The USA started bombing civilian targets (in Japan) it seemed to substantiate peoples worst fears.

WTE_Galway
06-25-2008, 06:53 PM
Several comments based on the original question in this thread.

(The thread seems to have got off topic so I have not read all of it. Apologies if I am repeating points already made)

1. Rifle calibre guns did require accurate shooting to bring down a bomber. I have a BOB period photo of a Dornier that crash landed in France, running out of fuel before it reached its airfield. The caption states the crew counted over 200 bullet holes in the aircraft. this was apparently not unusual.

2. In terms of the he-111 its most vulnerable point in real life was lateral attacks as there was only the one waist gunner for left and right guns and he had to swap sides. The RAF developed a technique of making a faint attack from one side and then once they drew fire a real attack was made from the unprotected side. I do not believe this vulnerability is modeled in game, nor are most online players capable of that degree of teamwork.

3. In game it is possible to take out several bombers with the 38 hurri before running out of ammo. A typical attack might involve getting ahead of the bomber stream and hitting your first target headon (or laterally if you cannot get far enough ahead) at the same level as the stream (aim for pilot in ju88 or engine in he111). hopefully you can at least slow this plane down and reduce the number of defensive guns against you. ignore this plane once it drops out of the stream. Dive under the first target and staying low build up speed come back underneath and then pull up and fire directly into the belly/engines of a second target overshoot and go high, immelman back down and shoot again from above (aim for pilot in ju88 or engine in he111). Never sit on the 6 of the bombers.

4. If you manage to get a fuel leak happening you have two options ... let it go and hope the leak is severe enough for the plane to run out of fuel or (more dangerous but more fun) aim for the fuel leak on the next pass and try to set the wing on fire.