Jump to content

=FEW=N3croo

Members
  • Content Count

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

95 Excellent

About =FEW=N3croo

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

514 profile views
  1. The problem with the kuban map is simply the airfield distribution, if its a line of airfields we fight over it gets boring pretty quick. Another thing about that line aspect or airfield seperation is mutual support / points of failure the russians basically push out into a cone, which gets especially bad with Taman and Zaprovskaya being 2 root airfield with magical repairing powers next to each other. Now as i mentioned there also aint much alternatives due to the AF distribution, the only suggestion I have to make Kuban more interesting and less of a chore is to actually cut the map in the east at the line of Visekly(Grid 334) and UST-Labinskaya(Grid 734). That way you can have the Airfields closer to each other in the area east of Novo till that point
  2. Crew hasnt been wounded here, My shells where pure HE belting and well ripped the wingroot in half. It looks like the headrest still exists and triggers the shells just has no armor value for penetrating shells. here's the sortie link http://taw-server.de/pilot_sortie.php?id=59592&name==FEW=N3croo
  3. Tailgunners 360 noscopes are a global problem, aircraft durability has gone up and crew DM is meh, now tell that to the little ishak chasing a Ju-88 on map #2 or a 110 on map #1
  4. @JG7_X-Man Really? Me calling another random dude circles our airfield gets engaged, crashdives and then bails as altitude is running low gets taken to the forum? Yes that is banter from my side... followed by you saying don't be rude and explaining it was AA that killed your engine... I listen to why you bailed and acknowledge it followed by conversation that is not hostile. With a promise that you wanted to take this to the forums the next time it happens and now we're here. Have the full story for everybody to get the picture, I didnt see your engine died since i was bleeding off speed to not rip my Ishaks ailerons. (I'm still for splitting feedback and general + administration on the forum) http://taw-server.de/pilot.php?name=JG7_X_Man
  5. The spit IXs can also recover superfast from a semi-developed stall with active inputs as long as its in the fairly flat phase of the stall, controls at slow speeds and torque really seem more like global errors I'd like to test the IXs energy retention before we get 150oct (which I really hope we get as a mod due to the tough competion), sure it has more excess power than the mkVb since it gained ... 100 and sth HP at peak power and a differetn prop, however it doesnt loose any energy and dives like a bat out of hell unlike the mkVb which doesnt dive at all and bleed alot of speed with the same wing design. The IX really doesnt click with me and doesnt fight just better than any other plane it does whatever it pleases, I really enjoyed the yak-7B from release but the IX .... its just magic
  6. all i can give you about the dural sheet metal performance is this, its more detailed on the mechanics not spefici to the 109s https://www.dropbox.com/s/mzkvkd8wc64c3w8/Vorg--nge-beim-Beschu---von-Panzerplatten-Bericht-166-Lilienthalgesellschaft-1943.pdf?dl=0 sth incomplete where i cannot tell you what the name of the original source is
  7. But on the last i suspect this may have happened, keep in mind at 300m the bullet would have started arching too and the F-4 we tested had no front armored glass, still weird that it said fueltank damage and that a hell of an angle if it passed through the cockpit and missed the armament. when the 20mm actually bounced on a few occasions on the cowlings
  8. This is the F-4 ... its dural "Behälterpanzerung" would degrade unlike solid plate. The pilots protection of the 109s seemed fine against rifles but those fueltanks happenings look weird. https://youtu.be/xJTyu2GLwPw?t=55 wanna have a single round of 8mm poke the fuel and kill the engine from the rear?
  9. I haven't done deliberate testing on .50 cals as designs did intend on making it "resistant" against under some conditions, with the guns accuracy being quite bad aswell as the headrest of those planes thin enough to be penetrated easily by a direct hit I didnt go into it. The water is muddled here when receiving in MP a bit by not being sure excatly what hit where and what gun actually did the kill. I've seen cases where i scratched my head, but i have no defenitive answer on that as its situational aswell as competing with other issues i could confirm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksA7bh1Q6h0
  10. Rifle calibers are able to penetrate/perform on headrests of FW-190 series and the P-47 He shells damage wingroots and engine when hitting the rear armor plates aswell as being able to somewhat injure pilots and kill within a couple of shots on the armor The whole aspect of pilot damage seems overly gamey and unfeasable for a sim... if you get a penetration of the headrest and shrapnel hits your melon or neck its game over. You can also perfeclty survive a rifleround to the chest or stomach from an unprotected angle and just carry on with your day. I'd heavily advise to have some sort of bleeding mechanic to not always have to kill the pilot outright, hence requiring emergency landing if the pilot gets hit badly. P-47 He shells can "perform" on headrests, I hear an argument of spalling ricochet coming up but that is rather limited since substancial spalling would blast the canopy open and its pretty reliable at killing pilots aswell as warm and leather clothing offering protection from bouncing fragments. In case of AP focused 8mm that line of fragmentation is really not an option since those shells will fragment at the plate and therefore really not have any angles to go forward in the canopy Why do i conclude following is the issue ingame I did my testing, all tests where conducted with a full fuelload to get rid of the argument of penetrations being possible through the pilots backrest. The fuellload was also to prevent from fueltanks exploding like they still did in the P-47, you cannot combust a fueltank effectively when there is only liquid fuel, fuel that is igniting needs gassious fuel in an oxigen environment. A fueltank "explosion" needs a really force distributing in case of an explosive shell or high pressure system for fuelvapour to then ingite. one of my next test since we had a physics issue with the P-47 here have some AI being my dummy in SP What are the expectations of Armor: The Mg17 would be shooting as a part of the ammobelt SmK with ~12mm of penertration with direct fire at 90° impace angle for the worst case, which does not include any aircraft skin or glass in the path of the bullet, desingers however where aware of angling armor plates when beneficial and when room allowed for it. Hence the realistic situation for an aircraft is passthrough of aircraft skin or glass/plexiglass required and then na impact (ger: indirekter beschuss) with much lower penetration of 4mm @100m according to my source. https://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/handbuchderflugzeugbordwaffenmunition19361945.pdf page 45 cover the Smk with direct and indirect aswell as impact angles Note: i acknowledge we have a bit of angle reduction due to the aircraft not being in flying attitude with an angled armor plate of the Fw series of 12mm aswell as an angle even in the worst case scenerio the should be able to hold up even with pretty much the worst case senecario. Its a german design, they defenitely made use of their assets, even in the unlikely even of direct fire the tested A-8 should hold up against the rifle rounds yet it doesnt. As a note on the fueltank penetration given the attitude of the aircraft this seems to be feasable as long as there is no substancial covering the the top of the tank present The P-47 has a 10mm angled plate and the US had their own 30-06 cartridge and had a copy of the mauser as the bolt action ... hence surely did their homework as NACA very often did. For this I',m going to reference greg and leave on the note that those 10mm on the unliekly event of direct fire look sketchy but rolled armor was manufactured with a positive tolerance on thickness.... by now you probably saw what the other problem with the P-47 was. The spitfires pilot armor seems to be the weakest of them all and I'll just include for the sake of completion. It should not be expected to hold up thicknesses and layout are page 41-42 aswell as multiple hints at those not holding up to 7.92 Ap bullets https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=189415&d=1531028358 Aside from the 8mm the 20mm canon seems to be able to kill pilots with He shells reliably in the 109s when striking the rear I also happen to have footage where I'm 95% sure an He shell landed the killing blow in MP aswell as messed my wing up I didnt aim to test this one thoroughly but i had experieced HE behaving unexpected in the past aswell done testing of He shells on pilots that proved very unsatisfactory with even 30mm and 37mm He shells in or around the cockpit not proving lethal. If you want a short clip take this one here and the link to the thread. (to those arguying MP is unreliable ... that footage is SP) Another problem with the HE shell is it damages parts like engine and wingroots quite often when hitting the rear armor sections. which should be limited to impossible depending on proximity to the plate. Odd the AP shell itself seems fine yet the bouncing on the engine not being taken out or bounced the few uninteded shots on cowling. As a sidenode ... please also have a gander at the fueltank "explosion" mechanic, its looks rather erratic and often times the fire is not rendered. A nicely visible deflagration would be much more appreciated and matching with guncamera footage. Greetings
  11. Nobody is speaking latency, its simply required to have the hit detection working reliable and if we get planes warping fixed we're good. And that is also a bit on the server admin finding working server configs... networking is also a bit of a compromise between smoothness(tickrate/datarate/packetsizes) and maximium possible serverload. Hence i dont understand your argument, the issue has largely been fixed and warping planes ... are a bit on what servers config on kick parameters. Having packets being lost for multiple minutes seems more architectural than anything to me.
  12. Still a thing as of 09.04.2019... How is it even possible to loose a packet for over 8 minutes, are you using some LIFO sheduling like popping a stack?
  13. made a post on crew damage of HE shells long and short, it needs fixin Mk108 in the canopy anyone? https://youtu.be/Y1bRXXYDCIw?t=529 https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/41999-crew-survivability-in-regards-to-he-shells
  14. I'd like to disagree CountZero that is sadly a thing. First one was on TAW, asked the admins they had some of cases like this, you notice there is a bit desync with that guy anyway. Few days later i had the 2nd clip on 72AGs training server, this is an invisible AI plane. If a dev is checking this pls take a look at ghostFX like ghosttracers, sounds in the parking lot of other planes that are no longer there getting shot at and the ghost contrails ... basically a big snowball hanging in the air, it seems FX dont get cleaned up in alot of places.
  15. Po-2 tailgunner hits anything at any speed, R.I.P 262s thats the issue as it stand if ppl wanna balance we got difficulties, sadly the top 2 are aimbots the bottom 2 dont know which end of the gun to use. Balance here or there the gunners have inhumane reaction times and wallhacks shooting you whizzing by at any opportunity nailing you with +300kph delte with every shot of the burst ezpz
×
×
  • Create New...