AAA and two types

[Uriah]

I found this over at the WT forum and thought it interesting and so post it here.  It was posted by Officer_Scunion

 

There were two types of AAA, high altitude and low altitude.

High altitude AAA used flak guns, like you see in game.  They were meant to shoot at formations of bombers.  To cause dismay and break formations up.  The main reason:  so carpet bombing was not as effective on it's intended target.  It did not shoot at lone fighters flying at 500m altitude.  It was not accurate enough. Rounds were set with timed fuses.  So if the gun was shooting at a target at 3000m altitude, they would need to readjust the gun and the rounds if the target(s) dropped or gained altitude.  This would take a hell of a lot longer than 2 seconds.  These high altitude AAA could not even shoot below a certain degree.  It was not built for that.  Nothing was engaged with these guns at low altitude, let alone an enemy aircraft that were extremely close.  The adjustments would take too long, too much calculation and end up being guess work which would be simply a waste of rounds.  Not to mention these same guns could not do a complete 180 in half a second.....it would take more like 30 seconds to turn the entire gun around on hand cranks.

What we have in game for high altitude AAA is like a damn

.

Low altitude AAA was like you see in game with player controlled AAA in ground forces.  Big machine guns and cannons that were adjustable on the go, smooth-running and efficient at low altitude aircraft but could only fire at aircraft so high before being inaccurate, ineffective or both.  Nonetheless, low altitude AAA was very quick to move and easy to adjust.

There needs to be both in game.....high alt AAA should not be one shotting aircraft going 450kmh at 1000m altitude.  

It's everything but realistic.

[Y-29.Silky]

I made a thread about this a while ago, it was swept under the rug.
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12180-aaa-fix-more-immersive-experience/

Edited January 9, 2015 by Silky

[33lima]

I think we need to be guided by both historical accounts and the physical capabilities of the predictors used to aim medium and heavy flak. Figures show that the German predictors were quite capable of tracking targets with a high angular rate. We also need not to mix minimum engagement altitudes with slant range, in considering where minimum fuse settings come into play.

 

My main issue with the current BoS medium flak is not its minimum engagement height  - which in theory at least, could be quite low, at a long slant range - but the fact that barrages seem rather feeble, like they are just firing a series of ranging rounds; not that I especially want to be regularly swatted from the sky.

 

If you think BoS is bad you should see some other sims; a certain excellent WW1 sim has flak which will frequently plaster the air and the ground around a target that's basically on the deck!

Edited January 9, 2015 by 33lima