OP rear gunners

[150GCT_Veltro]

I'm sure your fine with checking Shvak and Ju88 Dm as well. Am I right Veltro? 

https://youtu.be/arQb_o_dLZs?t=124

 

Off corse, as for the testing in flight to check how a damaged aircaft can handle.

 

Pe-2 DM is in some way simplified i think. You can down it with one only shoot if sniped in the engine, or.......you need to fire all your 20mm.

Edited November 3, 2016 by 150GCT_Veltro

[E69_geramos109]

That 1% in the P2 is allways a 30%. All the last times a i was shot down by a P2 was with my plane blowing in the air at the same time i break 

[Matt]

 

 

AI gunners just have no view restrictions exatcly like the pilot AI, they can look through the plane and thats why they can easily shoot you as soon as you are in the firing field for the gun!

 

Both pilots and gunners have view restrictions since day 1.

[Monostripezebra]

That 1% in the P2 is allways a 30%. All the last times a i was shot down by a P2 was with my plane blowing in the air at the same time i break 

 

I guess some people are unluckier than others.. I have shot down plenty of planes in the Pe2 and not yet see A SINGLE ammo explosion from gunfire. Not rearguns, not front guns.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Monostripezebra

[[TWB]80hd]

 

Both pilots and gunners have view restrictions since day 1.

 

 

He's saying AI, are you saying AI has restricted awareness?

[Monostripezebra]

He's saying AI, are you saying AI has restricted awareness?

 

i think so.. Rise of Flight had this famous discussions about the "angles" awareness of the ai gunners.. that would sit down, once you where not anymore in their field of fire, which could lead to hilarious stand-up-sit-down dances with just meters of swerving around.

 

So, there is some kind of "view model" since the predecessor, however it is not quite clear how exactly it works. I suspect that angles and some form of timer are inbuilt, as it seems the mechanic at play is some first reaction delay and then, after reaction, the to-hit probability increases the more you spend time in the gunners arc, also depending on distance. In BoS the old RoF trick of "gaming" the ai with long range shots (meaning very inaccurate return fire) still works.. but also still costs a lot of ammo.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Still works (or worked, not sure if it was fixed) on BoS/M. Looking back in the Pe-2-35 and watching the gunner open and close the hatch screaming about the enemy coming in was funny the first four times

[Matt]

He's saying AI, are you saying AI has restricted awareness?

Yes the AI has restricted awareness. 

 

And in case anybody doubts that, i just made a mission to demonstrate that. You spawn in a Bf 109 and there's a Mig-3 right above you, which will only react to you when you get in view.

 

Missions.zip

 

Looking back in the Pe-2-35 and watching the gunner open and close the hatch screaming about the enemy coming in was funny the first four times

That has been fixed (probably not to 100% perfection, but it's not a real issue anymore and it was bothering me before quite a bit).

 

 

Edited November 3, 2016 by Matt

[[TWB]80hd]

Thanks, guys, good to know!  Surprising too, I always just assume AI cheats.

[E69_geramos109]

I guess some people are unluckier than others.. I have shot down plenty of planes in the Pe2 and not yet see A SINGLE ammo explosion from gunfire. Not rearguns, not front guns.

Probably because you use to use the manual gunner. The strange thing is with the IA.

 

Alright good. Now we know that you really need to refine your tactics.  I have to say that I'm really skeptical about that 30%. Judging by your other posts and the way the "blue" side always likes to exaggerate thins and blow everything out of proportions That 30% is more like 1,5%.

Call me luftwinner now

 

 

There are tons of reports you can see by your own. Definitely IS NOT the 1%

Edited November 3, 2016 by E69_geramos109

[Monostripezebra]

Probably because you use to use the manual gunner. The strange thing is with the IA.

 

Call me luftwinner now

 

 

There are tons of reports you can see by your own. Definitely IS NOT the 1%

 

I think it is good that you want to base everything on data.. but while I applaude that effort, the method is flawed. Appart from the statistics not registering everying, one line of damage does not equal "one hit" or one bullet, it simply doesn´t.

Network phenomena such aus lag can make all damage appear at once or even have those dreaded onesided collisions: one player dies while the other takes no damage, also something that happens with high ping and serverlag.. and something I have seen considerable more often then ammo explosions. In all my online flying and that of friends making videos, I have seen around 5-8 ammo explosions, but much more lag collisions... or sudden damage accumulations.

 

Whithout knowing the fight, the assumption that every 100% damage is a plane blowup is very misleading (losing all fuel for instance gives the same 100% line, collisions, too) apart from the fact, that even if your analysis was right, it would still be the question wether that is an online phenomena or if it is really ai.. if it was "super luck" ai, it must be reproducable offline. I am very sure it is not. I have set a lot of experimental missions against Pe2s and never suffered an ammo explosion. With the wings of liberty stats, I really suspect a lot of ramming going on there, I have often been intenionally rammed by players not wanting to bother much with fighting a Pe2.

[E69_geramos109]

Maybe the ramming is when i told that was no hit report, only the damage. In IA guner reports should be the turret hit.

I will make more test about that online etc. But online is so often to see that explosions, at least from my experience. Maybe I have the worse luck ever .

 

If you compare other bombers you can not see that strange things on the reports with the same conditions so, something is different on that P2

Edited November 3, 2016 by E69_geramos109

[Willy__]

 

 

If you compare other bombers you can not see that strange things on the reports with the same conditions so, something is different on that P2

 

 

Yeah, it has a red star on it. 

 

 

 

[KoN_]

That 1% in the P2 is allways a 30%. All the last times a i was shot down by a P2 was with my plane blowing in the air at the same time i break 

I watched your video very interesting results . There was a time when you could attack a Pe-2 from its six o`clock and get that kill and get away from the tail gunner with ease . Today you have to be more careful . Thank you for your video .

[303_Kwiatek]

Blow up is not so a so rare occurence for the FW190, as you says. Off course machine guns are more powerfull of 20mm.......

 

Not a drama as Luke says, but it need to be checked at least, without waiting for another 6 months or more as for the 110 wings fix.

 

 

Something should have to be checked also in 20mm as for DM, or both.

 

Pe2  Flying Fortress?

[Yogiflight]

The 'Uber' Fortress.

[Monostripezebra]

The 'Uber' Fortress.

 

yeah. like totally.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YrnVCNuabk

[Gunsmith86]

Hits on important parts are modeled very well but hits on places were nothing important is like large parts of the wing and fuselage are not effective enough. On a real airplane these hits are still dangerous because they remove a lot of the lift that a wing is able to produce by demolishing the surface and the stability of the wing or fuselage. At the moment some airplanes can take up to 24 hits on a single wing at such places before loseing stability and lift to such a point that the aircraft goes down which is about as much as a 4 engine B17 could take at most if they are spread all over the airplane.  It would be good to see some more varieties in that point. Also some engines run much longer under damaged condition as others and i question my selve why is this we get always factory fresh planes to fly and we dont model any production failures or other such faults that could make much difference in that case why also can it be that the PE 2 can fly so much longer with engine smokeing black than any of the other planes.

 

See video:

[Monostripezebra]

that the PE 2 can fly so much longer with engine smokeing black than any of the other planes.

 

In my experience that does not hold true.. to me it seems there are different "black smoke" damage states (ie: just because you see black smoke the runtime won´t be always the same), but you can prolong the damaged often by cooling it with full mix and full open radiator as well as reduced RPM.

 

I don´t really think the Pe2 is that exeptional, other planes do have certain "tankish" damage angles too, if shot from the frontside you can be chased for 10m by a black smoking mc202 without it losing ground, had that happen twice lately.

[Gunsmith86]

Ok that would be another explanation for it and it leads to the question why the other engines take that sirus damge so much faster.

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

I'm not sure what most german and russian Pilots do, but when I get engine damage in any Aircraft I will reduce RPM and MAP to barely keep me airborne on the return leg back to base. And with conservative settings german and russian engines will survive 10-15 minutes after taking damage. I've nursed enough Attackers and Bombers back home, taking most horrific damage and pulsating engine revvs for 5 Minutes, be it a Stuka or Il-2.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

This is great advice, and it really makes a big difference. I've brought back many damaged DBs, Klimovs, Mikulins and Shvetsovs this way. So long as you don't get too greedy for airspeed and find the sweet spot between taking it easy on the engine and keeping the aircraft flying, you can drive around for even 30 minutes to get back home.

 

The developers have stated that since there are no reliable documents on damage resistance for the engines present in game, all in-line engines deal with damage similarly, and all radial engines are twice as resistant. Another thing I've noticed is that there are different types of damage - sometimes you can get an 'engine damaged' message but it won't affect any of the readings, and other times the engine will seize immediately.

[Aap]

yeah. like totally.

 

The pilot forgot that he was in a Pe-2 and jumped out? What a waste of a perfectly flyable plane. 

[E69_geramos109]

I think engine damage is ok. If you keep low the rpm and open the radiator you can keep a litle longer but of corse you can not fight. The other day i was damaged by a P2 and i could come back base after 10 mins. The single thing i complain is about to modell the shut of valves of each circuit in the 109. If you leaks coolant you can close one circuit and stay with only one radiator so you can fly all the time you want with no problem.

 

There is also red players who never fly as a german. Maybe this can change his point of view about the damage because most of this people also complain about the OP german planes as the german people who never fly a russian.

The other day i was flying with a lagg3 on TAW with the 20mm not the 23, and i found a JU88. I was in a ts channel with more red players and i ask them about how to attack the JU88. They were complaining all the time about how difficult is, how OP are the gunners that they allways hits them etc so i was afraid thinking that the JU88 was a P2 and i do the same tactic.

I was surprised how easy is to shot down a JU88 comparing the P2 only two runs with some hits from far thanks to the OP shvak the Ju was out of the sky.

 

Also i went last day to the old 46 and the BOS gunners are NOOBS comparing 46 guners but at least yoor gun is efective and if you do the wright thing and put some hits on a medium bomber you get the kill. On BOS you have to put a 4 seconds salvo on a P2 to get the kill after 25-30 hits is cracy. If he is at hight speed to attack from 6 is the only way or you will be all the day doing only 2-3 hits runs and spending all your ammo.

Edited November 8, 2016 by E69_geramos109

[Zoring]

 

The same thing has already happened to me while the Pe-2 was falling...

I think that developers will have to change if they want to keep some credibility...

 

I too can report having had this happen to me attacking in a 109, a single hit will explode you instantly. Seems to be a bit of a bug, I haven't had any issues with other planes besides the Pe-2

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

I too can report having had this happen to me attacking in a 109, a single hit will explode you instantly. Seems to be a bit of a bug, I haven't had any issues with other planes besides the Pe-2

This is a Steel Engine Block, You Alumnium Aircraft engine has even less resistance to .50 cals: Unfortunate Hits will stop you rather quickly.

Edited November 8, 2016 by CuteKitten94

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Yeah when hit in the right place a single or two hits will be enough

 

 

 

[KoN_]

I too can report having had this happen to me attacking in a 109, a single hit will explode you instantly. Seems to be a bit of a bug, I haven't had any issues with other planes besides the Pe-2

Three hits = instant Death . 109 front glass armour .

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Three hits = instant Death . 109 front glass armour .

What's the thickness of that glass ?

[KoN_]

This is a Steel Engine Block, You Alumnium Aircraft engine has even less resistance to .50 cals: Unfortunate Hits will stop you rather quickly.

We are all aware of fire power and what a 20mm or a 37mm can do , We are talking about the tail gunner and how hard it is to bring down a Pe-2 and the tail gunner is sniper even under fire from 20mm 109 . 

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

This is a Steel Engine Block, You Alumnium Aircraft engine has even less resistance to .50 cals: Unfortunate Hits will stop you rather quickly.

 

Not trying to be that guy but cast steel is a lot more likely to fracture due to traumatic stress than cast/forged aluminium.

[Dakpilot]

We are all aware of fire power and what a 20mm or a 37mm can do , We are talking about the tail gunner and how hard it is to bring down a Pe-2 and the tail gunner is sniper even under fire from 20mm 109 . 

 

But the pics you quote above and the vid are of .50 cal damage, as fitted in back of Pe-2, do not forget in Pe-2 you can be facing two manned, rearward firing high rate of fire .50 cals

 

 

far left is fired from German rifle caliber MG's, fourth from right is 12.7 x 108mm is from Pe-2 Berezin UB's

 

again I am not saying all is correct but some details are important

 

Not trying to be that guy but cast steel is a lot more likely to fracture due to traumatic stress than cast/forged aluminium.

 

This is very true, but that .50 cal is still going through that Aluminum engine block and probably hitting the steel liners 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited November 9, 2016 by Dakpilot

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

This is very true, but that .50 cal is still going through that Aluminum engine block and probably hitting the steel liners 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

This is an agreeable conclusion.

 

I'm not a material engineer or a mechanical engineer (just your good ol' pain in the arse IT guy) but I'd think a clean penetration through a soft engine block is less catastrophic than shattering an entire steel engine block.

 

I'm not as studied as many of the contributors here - merely a suppositionist.

[Lusekofte]

Have anyone here ever flown a PE 2? 

[KoN_]

Have anyone here ever flown a PE 2? 

In real life NO , in game yes of course . I have flown all VVS that`s in my hanger .

On WOL i try too do one month AXIS and one month VVS . well i used too . Not too worry . 

Edited November 9, 2016 by II./JG77_Con

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

What's the thickness of that glass ?

 

If WT model is correct, then it would be 60mm of armored glass, I don't know how this translates to an armored steel equivalent. No other armor in the frontal area of the plane, only the seat for the pilot.

 

The Fw-190 for example is better protected, with armor plates sorrounding the engine at the front and lower areas, pilot seat and fuel tanks at the lower side of the fuselage, this having the usual armor thickness of 5-8mm, enough vs rifle caliber mgs. However a .50 cal AP has around 20mm of penetration against a flat plate at the usual firing distances in aerial combat. Someone at this forum posted that there was a Finnish account of engaging IL-2s at the sides with Buffaloes killing the pilots or the engines, this makes sense as the IL-2's bathtub is around 4-6mm, no match for 12.7mm AP rounds hitting straight from the side.

 

Plane armor is mostly aimed at stopping rifle caliber mgs and the shrapnel from cannon explosive rounds. Against heavy machine guns and cannon AP it isn't going to hold.

[E69_geramos109]

The view from the a.i. =  ace in a day.  

 

Perfect example. Is ridiculous

[216th_Jordan]

Perfect example. Is ridiculous

 

Hmm, I bareley get 2 kills or take wings off with my AI. Maybe it was set to Ace, but even then this was though luck.

However: Lol at the mid air collision of the two 109s!

Edited November 13, 2016 by 216th_Jordan

[MiloMorai]

If WT model is correct, then it would be 60mm of armored glass, I don't know how this translates to an armored steel equivalent. No other armor in the frontal area of the plane, only the seat for the pilot.

 

The Fw-190 for example is better protected, with armor plates sorrounding the engine at the front and lower areas, pilot seat and fuel tanks at the lower side of the fuselage, this having the usual armor thickness of 5-8mm, enough vs rifle caliber mgs. However a .50 cal AP has around 20mm of penetration against a flat plate at the usual firing distances in aerial combat. Someone at this forum posted that there was a Finnish account of engaging IL-2s at the sides with Buffaloes killing the pilots or the engines, this makes sense as the IL-2's bathtub is around 4-6mm, no match for 12.7mm AP rounds hitting straight from the side.

 

Plane armor is mostly aimed at stopping rifle caliber mgs and the shrapnel from cannon explosive rounds. Against heavy machine guns and cannon AP it isn't going to hold.

Edited November 13, 2016 by MiloMorai

[Gunsmith86]

Just for information

 

Armour penetration part 1:

 

 

best case scenario

example 1 firing against armour plate: ( like we would do it against a tank )

 

 

For oure example we use the standart .50 AP which is able to penetrat 25mm at 100m with 90° impact:

 

From the picture above you can clearly see that at this angle the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is only 5mm and since it could penetrat up to 25mm under this condition we will penetrat the armour.

 

 

second best scenario

example 2 firing against armour plate with diffrent angle: ( like we would do it against a tank )

 

 

For oure example 2 we use the german 7,92mm AP ammo SmK-v (Spitzgeschoss mit Stahlkern verbessert = improved pointed bullet with steelcore ) which is able to penetrat 12mm at 100m with 90° impact,

8mm at 100m with 60° and 3,5mm at 100m with 30°

 

From the picture above you can clearly see that at 90° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is only 5mm and since it could penetrat up to 12mm under this condition we will penetrat the armour.

If the angle of impact is 60° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is now 5,77mm and since it could penetrat up to 8mm under this condition we will penetrat the armour.

If the angle of impact is 30° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is now 10mm and since it is only able to penetrat up to 3,5mm under this condition we will fail to penetrat the armour for the first time.

 

 

third best case scenario:

example 3 firing against armour plate which has a 3mm aluminium plate at 20° 1,5m before the armour plate: ( like we would have it against a aircraft )

 

 

For oure example we use the standart .50 AP which is able to penetrat 25mm at 100m with 90° impact:

 

From the picture above you can clearly see that at this angle the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is only 5mm but because we hit the aluminium plate first oure projectile starts to yaw which disturb the straight flight so that it fails to hit the armour head-on, thereby significantly reducing its penetrative abilitis to only  10mm at 90° at 100 m.

Since he armour is only 5mm we will penetrat.

 

 

 

 

worst case scenario:

example 4 firing against armour plate which has a 3mm aluminium plate at 20° 1,5m before the armour plate with diffrent angels: ( like we would have it against a aircraft )

 

 

For oure example 4 we use again the german 7,92mm AP ammo SmK-v (Spitzgeschoss mit Stahlkern verbessert = improved pointed bullet with steelcore ) which is able to penetrat 4mm at 100m with 90° impact,

3mm at 100m with 60° and 2,5mm at 100m with 30°

 

From the picture above you can clearly see that at 90° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is only 5mm and since it could only penetrat up to 4mm under this condition we will fail to penetrat the armour.

If the angle of impact is 60° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is now 5,77mm and since it could only penetrat up to 3mm under this condition we will again fail to penetrat the armour.

If the angle of impact is 30° the way the projectile has to move to penetrat is now 10mm and since it is only able to penetrat up to 2,5mm under this condition we will also fail to penetrat the armour.

 

The .50 AP could penetrat 14mm at 60° at 100m under this condition wich is enough to penetrat however it would fail at 30° most of the time. The 4mm engine armour of the IL2 will also protect from a large number of shots fired at 30° or less

 

Also AP/I or AP/T rounds are worse than pure AP rounds because they are not as heavy and lose speed faster.

For example the 12,7mm Berezin AP/I was falling from 25mm at 100m with 90° to only 8,5mm at 100m with 90° after passing the aluminium plate.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Diffrent armour plates:

 

8mm:

 

12mm:

 

penetration data:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sX8ZB27l94Dy7DXSG6dbhXqbVKdvJ78MDlmnUMD4Q3M/edit#gid=1465002216

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by Gunsmith86