Jump to content
Han

Game version 3.007 discussion: Bf109K4, P47D28, Camel, Pfalz, FM, Multiplayer, Damage and more

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, HR_Zunzun said:

Then you misunderstood my analogy too.

 

The picture analogy was not a reply to anything you said, but to the "picture proof" that P-47's wing could not break from wing root. If you scroll up, you will see what I was replying to, as I quoted it in my message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HR_Zunzun said:

After this, is all about interpretation of the experiences of the time

No,

either that or you have some literature to compare it to, which is exactly the difference that I tried pointing out above.

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

The picture analogy was not a reply to anything you said, but to the "picture proof" that P-47's wing could not break from wing root. If you scroll up, you will see what I was replying to, as I quoted it in my message.

 

Well, I originally pointed out the effect of a bullet in a pilot forehead causing the demise of a plane. I thought your picture was a response to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does someone know what the main causes of fatal damage of the P-47 was?

There was a study one time to improve the survivability of planes. They analysed the damage of combat planes after combat missions and improved the durability of the most hit areas of the plane.
Later that proved wrong because the planes already could bear the damage in that area and tha planes that didnt get home where damaged in other ways.
I saidly cant remeber where that occoured. Maybe in the US during WW2?

I think you shouldnt give to much about the pictures of planes that made it home or the stories of their pilots.  ...that guys that didnt made it home would have the critical informations.


You can find pictures with the same amount of damage for example Bf 110s, a aircraft without sturdy reputation.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Grim said:

You can find pictures with the same amount of damage for example Bf 110s, a aircraft without sturdy reputation.

One off occurrences happened of course but with the P-47 it wasn't some odd or rare occurrence it was a common thing for them to come home severely damaged.

It was an everyday for the Jug.

 

Of all the qualities of the P-47, it's durability is it's defining trait. And the fact that P-47s flew over 500,000 missions and only lost around 3000 aircraft says alot to it's durability.

 

No one is saying the P-47 should be invulnerable but aircraft don't earn reputations for no reason, and the P-47 in-game does not match it's reputation and all the first hand accounts/evidence.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Matt said:

I also had the impression that the P-47 loses wings a bit too easily at first, so i made tests during beta testing and again did some tests yesterday, shooting down 40 P-47 AI planes total.

 

20 of those using 50 cal. while flying P-47 myself (because why not). I was unable to shoot the wing off of any of the planes (however, three planes exploded and lost the wings that way).

10 only using MG 131 of the G-14. Was unable to to shoot the wing off of any of the P-47. 

10 using MG 151/20 nose cannon of the G-14. Three times the wing fell off after being hit multiple times.

 

Overall, most kills were pilots kills or i damaged the engine so much, that it started burning or the pilot decided to bail out.

 

I can't say i've a huge interest in testing what effect the Mc.202 guns have on the P-47 (because i extremely dislike the Mc.202), but will probably do that aswell. In any case, one video of a P-47 (or any other plane) losing a wing too quickly is not gonna cut it and if there's a problem, it needs to be reproducable.

My observations are entirely different to that.  I've tested yesterday evening with PainGod damage model of P-47 for aproximately three hours, due to time limitations.

Methodology was simple, we spawned and in level flight (he was flying autolevel) from a distance of less than 200 m I was shooting his wing (and wing exclusively), trying at each instance to hit different part of wing - tip, middle section or root. Speed of flight was for him about 220 to 250 mph. We've tried various types of weaponery, starting with 7.92 mm German MG from F-4, 12.7 mm Breda, 13 mm MG131, 20 mm MG 151 and 30 mm MK 108. This of course had a limitation in that impacted area was the trailing edge of the wing, thus explosion did not affect wing deeper like it would if I hit him from top or at any angled position. Angled shots I am hoping to test as well during the weekend. But in this case AP rounds sometimes ricocheted due to very low striking angle and I assume a fair part of explosive energy was wasted.

I've recorded each attempt, also using tacview, though of this I am not sure how accurate in Il-2 it is - particularly in hit recording. In any case, tracks are available. I may record it to later upload on youtube, but I am not sure I will be able due to limited bandwidth of my net connection (1.2 Mb/s upload).

 

Anyway, results (written now from my memory, I'm at work atm, thus cant give exact number of hits at each case) were as follows:

- 7.92 mm - at all three attempts I was able to cut off the wing after prolonged bursts, using about 1/3 or 1/4 of ammo capacity and only a portion of it hitting. Estimated 100 or less 7.92 rounds hitting, though some ricocheted from the skin.

- 12.7 mm - again, at all attempts I was able to cut off the wing. Also once wing was set afire. I estimate 20-40 rounds were needed.

- 13 mm - same, but with a bit less rounds required. MG 131 is definitely more potent. Also, somehow impact around wing root area damaged the engine block. No idea how did that happen.

- 20 mm - also could detach a wing, managing in the meantime to damage area near it and remove ailerons, damage control rods, cause fuel leak, etc. I estimated 3 to 8 hits required, though at two instances a mere two hits were enough to remove entire wing at the wing root.

Finally the fireball thrower, aka MK 108, now this thing wasn't as potent as we expected it to be and more than one hit was required to remove wing. Sometimes as much as three hits. But regardless, the effect on the entire airframe was devastating. Often explosion on the middle or inner section of the wing damaged completely engine, ignited fuselage, etc.

 

Another observation I had, both as a shooter and target (since we switched), was that hit wing, even much much before it was cut off, so after initial hits, was damaged to such level that it caused a significant loss of lift. This was clearly visible when even autopilot struggled to keep airplane in level and machien wobbled left and right. I cant recall seeing such effect appearing so easily on any airframe so I think it is exaggerated here. Way to fix it is to shoot other wing, which 'evens' the situation. This reminds me of War Thunder damage model, where damage to one wing could lead to unrecoverable spin due to loss of lifting capabilities, but often if you stopped shooting before that and switched to shooting other wing, aircraft could keep flying like nothing happened.

Still, detailed testing has yet to happen and seeing now that this may take significantly longer than I expected, I may have to split it into parts across few weeks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just dropping more gasoline on P47s wing spar sturdiness bonfire :rofl:

 

 

It seems a MG can do real damage if the fire concentration is achieved.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Hiro said.

 

The thing that makes me scratch my head the most - at least regarding up to 13mm caliber - is the fact the unloaded wing on the P-47 could be damaged to such a degree that it would disintegrate from astern. I would honestly expect the auxiliary spars and rear main spar shield enough of the structure to prevent catastrophic failure while compromising lift quite a bit.

 

To a lesser degree this also applies to 20mm mine rounds - these should blast skin off, but at the same time, I'd be surprised if they had enough oomph to actually compromise the wing's structure to the point of failure.

 

30mm grenade lobbers, no contest - I was actually surprised one hit alone never caused any kind of breakup - that said, the P-47 isn't an overweight spacewhale for nothing. Compared to it, the Spitfire is flimsy.

 

I will probably help Hiro with testing this weekend, this time firing from oblique angles. My expectation would be much less damage for MG caliber, but more for explosive rounds due to the fact explosions will be channeled by the spars on either side instead of just out the back while MG rounds would just pass through the skin without being able to chew through the spars at their thickest.

6 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

Just dropping more gasoline on P47s wing spar sturdiness bonfire :rofl:

 

 

It seems a MG can do real damage if the fire concentration is achieved.

 

You don't get it. The P-47 has two main spars and three auxiliary spars. Passing through one of them will rob the projectile of much of its energy and protect the spars ahead of the one you hit.

Plus, do you really think a few holes are going to severely compromise the integrity of a wing spar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

Ok, I´ll try and explain it to you again.

 

a) In one case you are shooting different ammo against a single target and rank the results which you then compare that to a benchmark (literature)

This is what Ivy did

What you did is point out that his conclusion id flawed (I disagree, because the difference to the benchmark is evident, but I´ll give you this point for the sake of argument)

 

b) you propose to shoot a single ammo type at different wings and compare the results... well TO WHAT? To the story you heard about the p47 being really tough that one time? WHAT IS YOUR BENCHMARK?

So even if you find a benchmark other than some photographs, I´m sure there is going to be people like you questioning every bit of it saying it´s flawed

 

The Kruger Dunnings is really strong in you and for someone who constantly claims to be working with models, you have astonishingly little knowledge of testing.

 

See I´m not even disagreeing with you that the P-47 might be to nimble, but I guess you have very high standards regarding those tests adn it would only be fair if you upheld them for all tests

 

You are literally wasting your breath arguing with that dude, as soon as he feels he's losing the argument he says "I put you on ignore". It's hilarious. He must literally have half the forum on ignore.

Edited by 15th_JonRedcorn
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, PainGod85 said:

 

 

You don't get it. The P-47 has two main spars and three auxiliary spars. Passing through one of them will rob the projectile of much of its energy and protect the spars ahead of the one you hit.

Plus, do you really think a few holes are going to severely compromise the integrity of a wing spar?

2x MG131 rate of fire 1800 rounds per minute equals 30 13mm rounds each second hitting the jug's wing. And you guys say it's wrong to get a wing ripped off? !?! :rofl:

 

Just take a look in the mass output M factor.  It's really powerful gun.

 

Screenshot_2018-11-23-11-16-26-1.png.5ec932727acc8a431350ac3cc8a3d1bb.png

 

Screenshot_2018-11-23-11-18-05-1.png.a356993ec360cadb235822b4fd52d854.png

Edited by 6./ZG26_Gielow
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

2x MG131 rate of fire 1800 rounds per minute equals 30 13mm rounds each second hitting the jug's wing. And you guys say it's wrong to get a wing ripped off? !?! :rofl:

 

Just take a look in the mass output M factor.  It's really powerful gun.

You do realise that shots fired are not always shots hitting ? As a matter of fact, usually its only a % of fired rounds that actually hit the target. We're not counting how many can hit, but how many hitting should or should not cause a failure of the wing. Rate of fire here is irrelevant.

Also, how exactly is gun output per second related to destructive potential of hits and specific rounds ?

 

I'm also not entirely sure if "its really powerful gun". It fires a shorter and lighter rounds with lower than competition muzzle velocity, trying to compensate that with the use of some HE rounds. But that you also forgot to mention.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how many of those will hit? How many of those that hit will be in a concentrated grouping? How many of those that are will punch through holes already made without ricocheting off the edges?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CUJO_1970 said:

You guys need to make this a separate thread.

 

Preferably one with some actual data in it.

  • Upvote 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 6:33 PM, MDS1 said:

So Far the Jug is fab, a heavy girl but awesome! 😄 one question though.... (and thanks for the info on linking the throttle levers) there is a red turbine warning light in the cockpit, it's either on all the time or it flashes.... (screenshot attached) I have messed about with intercooler settings and supercharger/turbocharger settings.... but the light is always on. What am I doing wrong? Once again forgive the ignorance of this old guy. 

 

 

 

Turbine_light_2.jpg

 

So the light when it is on all the time tells you are overspeeding the turbo, albeit you can do so at 22k rpms for about 3 min, if the light is blinking the turbo rpms are nominal.

you have 2 ways to control the turbo either by using the turbo throttle directly or by liking it with the Throttle and use that as your regulator for turbo speed.

At low altitudes to I think 5000 meters,  you can just keep the turbo in the max position and forget about it, but as you start going higher you need to start closing it.

 

Also to control the MAP (manifold) at high altitudes you can keep the throttle open and just use the turbo rpm control.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

2x MG131 rate of fire 1800 rounds per minute equals 30 13mm rounds each second hitting the jug's wing. And you guys say it's wrong to get a wing ripped off? !?! :rofl:

If the rounds don't hit the supporting structure of the wing then it doesn't matter how many rounds hit it. Hitting the spar with enough MG rounds to cause failure is near impossible in-combat. I understand this is a game so MG need to have some power but 30-40 rounds should never cause a wing off, even 100 rounds shouldn't, especially when spread across the entire wing.

 

The problem is with the damage model and how it's modeled imo, while I dont know exactly how it works I'm willing to bet it's rather large hit boxes and not individual parts. Reason I think this is because I can ht wings nowhere near the spar or wing root and they'll  come off. A more detailed damage model and hitboxes with individual parts modeled is needed but I doubt we will ever see it with the current time restraints of the Devs.

 

9 minutes ago, R6ckStar said:

 

So the light when it is on all the time tells you are overspeeding the turbo, albeit you can do so at 22k rpms for about 3 min, if the light is blinking the turbo rpms are nominal.

you have 2 ways to control the turbo either by using the turbo throttle directly or by liking it with the Throttle and use that as your regulator for turbo speed.

At low altitudes to I think 5000 meters,  you can just keep the turbo in the max position and forget about it, but as you start going higher you need to start closing it.

 

Also to control the MAP (manifold) at high altitudes you can keep the throttle open and just use the turbo rpm control.

 

22,000 rpm is for 15min not 3min.

 

To add to what you said, when the Turbo is not in use (guage shows 0 rpm) the red light stays on, when the turbo is in use (rpms anything over 0) the red light will start blinking and will stay that way until the turbo is either no longer in use or is overspeeding. When the turbo is overspeeding the light will stay on and not blink.

 

For normal operation turbo rpms of up to 20k are fine, 22k is available for 15min if needed and anything over this can damage the turbo. The turbo can be oversped to upwards of 24-25k rpms but this is only possible above critical altitude iirc.

 

In-game Turbo damage isnt fully modeled so you can leave it forwards until you get to high altitudes then you'll have to reduce to keep from overspeeding.

Edited by Legioneod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience with the Jug it's kinda mixed. I have had times where it stood intact after many 20mm rounds but sometimes I't fell for long bursts on the wings. 
How much sturdier could it be in RL? It needs to be sturdier?
I don't know but for sure it's an sturdy plane in Il-2 in comparision with Fws 190 and 109s.

 

Engine too, sometimes I managed to get more than 30minutes with damaged engine and other times one bullet and in 5 mins it was gone.

Edited by LF_Gallahad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One guy enters a close fight in a P47 with a MC202 , enters a spin with damaged wing, then gets shot at while spinning down and eventually loses the damaged wing?

 

Why should we really care about that?

 

As always hysteria comes from people getting shot down because lacking skill or making mistakes, then trying to do as if it all came because the wing, tail, modelling ,etc, because of ammo...

 

Red or Blue nothing new here...yawn....🤦‍♂️

 

So far i am under the impression® that the P47 is very well modelled, to me it seems much more resilient than the average fighter and performs much better than the previous IL2 version. A real joy to fly and to fight with.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Caudron431Rafale said:

One guy enters a close fight in a P47 with a MC202 , enters a spin with damaged wing, then gets shot at while spinning down and eventually loses the damaged wing?

 

Why should we really care about that?

 

As always hysteria comes from people getting shot down because lacking skill or making mistakes, then trying to do as if it all came because the wing, tail, modelling ,etc, because of ammo...

 

Red or Blue nothing new here...yawn....🤦‍♂️

 

So far i am under the impression® that the P47 is very well modelled, to me it seems much more resilient than the average fighter and performs much better than the previous IL2 version. A real joy to fly and to fight with.

 

Not just about that video or player skill, more than one player has been experiencing this, myself included. The problem isnt necessarily that machinguns take off the wing, the problem is how few rounds it actually takes to take it off.

 

This aint about making the P-47 super tough, it's about representing it correctly in-game.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd probably be better to test with turrets on the ground (He-111 has 20mm, 13mm, 7.92mm all at once) so you can guarantee hits

 

Personally, based on the fact that it happily carries so much ordnance and that it has 5 wing spars in each wing I don't see anything wrong with making it about as tough as the Il-2, structurally. So, survivable, but good shooting can still make it combat inoperable in short order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wings of Liberty started having some serious multiplayer problems for everyone on the server right now. You would strafe a target, it not blow up, and then fly around ready to pass again and then it would explode 10-15 seconds after the damage was done. Same for planes, shoot them with enough rounds for a crippling blow, nothing and then 10 seconds later and then they fall apart.

 

It seemed that for everyone, damage and shots fired were occurring very delayed. Server started to clear out as it was not really playable. Approximately 50-60 planes in game.

Edited by =EXPEND=Tripwire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

 

Not just about that video or player skill, more than one player has been experiencing this, myself included. The problem isnt necessarily that machinguns take off the wing, the problem is how few rounds it actually takes to take it off.

 

This aint about making the P-47 super tough, it's about representing it correctly in-game.

OK, then.

 

There is always a possibility that something could be modelled incorrectly or that the model would react in a way not predicted by the developper, and i have nothing against people studying this and making a constructive report to the devs, let me be clear about this. The best way to do it is making a topic to show the issue and to produce an analysis.

 

It is just that in this thread i would have prefered to see people focusing more on all the good things we got instead  of seeing the usual Schadenfreude, trolling, bad faith and ranting... These are the threads newcomers or interested people will read first, we have all a responsibility to show newcomers how good this sim is.  But sometimes i tend to forget how things go on the web... My bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers don't lie, guys.  I only read emotions here.  Waiting for scientific refutation :ph34r:.

 

The high G and jug heavy weight in combat maneuvers can easily finish off that damaged spar.

 

It already happened to me after being hit by ground fire and the wing slowly started to go up and detached from plane when my diving speed increased.  It was an amazing damage model demonstration. I feel sorry I hadn't recorded that. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, =EXPEND=Tripwire said:

Wings started having some serious multiplayer problems for everyone on the server right now. You would strafe a target, it not blow up, and then fly around ready to pass again and then it would explode 10-15 seconds after the damage was done. Same for planes, shoot them with enough rounds for a crippling blow, nothing and then 10 seconds later and then they fall apart.

 

It seemed that for everyone, damage and shots fired were occurring very delayed. Server started to clear out as it was not really playable. Approximately 50-60 planes in game.

 

We saw that also in attacking airplanes on it few min ago, delayed damage to them. 

I encounter that problems before update on that same mission, (posted here

and PM their admin on ts3 then ) and i think this is problem with that WoL mission as same problem on same mission is visable every time i play that mission in their server.

perevious mission run just fine in areas with loot of action and same number of ppl, and this one is mess.

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Caudron431Rafale said:

OK, then.

 

There is always a possibility that something could be modelled incorrectly or that the model would react in a way not predicted by the developper, and i have nothing against people studying this and making a constructive report to the devs, let me be clear about this. The best way to do it is making a topic to show the issue and to produce an analysis.

 

It is just that in this thread i would have prefered to see people focusing more on all the good things we got instead  of seeing the usual Schadenfreude, trolling, bad faith and ranting... These are the threads newcomers or interested people will read first, we have all a responsibility to show newcomers how good this sim is.  But sometimes i tend to forget how things go on the web... My bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree that this topic should have its own thread, but part of me is happy with criticism being kept to these update threads. Otherwise, every little criticism would have its own thread. As a new player would you rather have complaining mostly relegated to the update threads or dozens of threads about what people don’t like about this game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, =EXPEND=Tripwire said:

Wings of Liberty started having some serious multiplayer problems for everyone on the server right now. You would strafe a target, it not blow up, and then fly around ready to pass again and then it would explode 10-15 seconds after the damage was done. Same for planes, shoot them with enough rounds for a crippling blow, nothing and then 10 seconds later and then they fall apart.

 

It seemed that for everyone, damage and shots fired were occurring very delayed. Server started to clear out as it was not really playable. Approximately 50-60 planes in game.

Now that you mention this, I've experienced similar things on other servers as well. When getting shot at the damage is very delayed and I end up flying away only to disintegrate later like I hit a wall.

It acted like I was being shot at but there was no gunfire at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have a problem since the new update.

I just read the first 3 pages and have no time atm to read all current 14 here, so I am wonder if someone else has the same issues.

 

- all my ingame replays from previous update have now 0 engine sound and 0 gun/cannon sound.....thats not "nice"

- the ingame record function is not firing when I push L-CTRL + R, also rebinding and applying was not helping.

 

Steam says all my local files are ok. Any idea?

 

Greetings

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KG_S_Kalle_Kalutz82 said:

Well, I have a problem since the new update.

I just read the first 3 pages and have no time atm to read all current 14 here, so I am wonder if someone else has the same issues.

 

- all my ingame replays from previous update have now 0 engine sound and 0 gun/cannon sound.....thats not "nice"

- the ingame record function is not firing when I push L-CTRL + R, also rebinding and applying was not helping.

 

Steam says all my local files are ok. Any idea?

 

Greetings

 

 

I also lost the sound for all my old replays, but recording new ones works for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, KG_S_Kalle_Kalutz82 said:

Well, I have a problem since the new update.

I just read the first 3 pages and have no time atm to read all current 14 here, so I am wonder if someone else has the same issues.

 

- all my ingame replays from previous update have now 0 engine sound and 0 gun/cannon sound.....thats not "nice"

- the ingame record function is not firing when I push L-CTRL + R, also rebinding and applying was not helping.

 

Steam says all my local files are ok. Any idea?

 

Greetings

 

that's because every patch the old replays get messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

that's because every patch the old replays get messed up.

 

Yes, the major updates always do that, but I look at this as an opportunity to play this game more in order to make the new replays even better. It gives me new goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are my impressions of the P-47:

 

1. In order to be effective you have to utilize the aircraft's strengths: ground attack capabilities, dive speed, and high altitude performance. Getting into tight dogfights with 109's is a big no-no due its tendency to tip stall. Overall, I liken it to an FW-190 with worse agility, better durability, and better high-altitude performance.

 

2. The cockpit has the best visibility of any aircraft currently in the game.

 

3. The FM feels superb. You can really feel the weight and size of the aircraft while performing maneuvers.

 

4. Both the external and cockpit modeling are simply incredible. This is quite possibly the most detailed P-47 ever made in the history of flight sims. IL2-1946's P-47 is an utter joke compared to this one.

 

Can't wait for the P-51 :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the P-47's wing durability:

I used the same testing we used for Ivy's 20mm Bug Report, shooting at 100 static P-47s and counting how many German 20mm HE rounds it took to rip off the wing. On average it takes 5.67 +/- 2.02 hits (quite high dispersion) to cut off a P-47's wing, it's a very similar number to the IL-2 model 1942 (5.79 +/- 1.57)  and higher than other single engine fighters like the Bf 109 F-4 (4.39 +/-1.17) and Yak-1B (3.33 +/- 0.87).

Dispersion could be a problem... for example sometimes it can tank up to 10 hits, but some other times it can go off with just 3 hits. So you can see why sometimes ppl notice their plane gets destroyed easily.

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/22/2018 at 3:54 AM, Legioneod said:

Agreed, while I do understand cannons taking it out rather easily, machineguns shouldnt, irl it was nearly impossible to bring a Jug down by machinegun fire alone (look at johnsons P-47, hundreds of machingun holes and a few 20mm hits.)

 

wing offs should almost never happen due to machinegun fire yet it happens everytime in-game.

 

 

The problem imo is that I think the damage model uses a hp system to some degree, thats why mgs can take wings off very easily, when in reality you'd have to do significant damage to the spars in order to take the wing off.

 

This is the type of DM i'd like one day, yes it's from a different game but it would certainly make things more accurate imo.

  Reveal hidden contents

77b9b8a47b7b536693f2e2a0e6b14d3df42cb5bc

 

If I remember it correctly from book, Johnson was hit by 7,9 mm machine gun fire, not 13mm. It is huge difference. I might remembere it wrong though, book is great, everyone should read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Galgotin said:

If I remember it correctly from book, Johnson was hit by 7,9 mm machine gun fire, not 13mm. It is huge difference. I might remembere it wrong though, book is great, everyone should read it.

 

It was 7.92 mm fire. 

 

Johnson-damage-960_640.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it possibly be that some of those P47 damage photos were showing damage not from attacking aircraft but AA?

 

One needs to take into account trajectory of rounds doing the damage to ascertain the effect of the damage against critical stressed components as to whether the P47 will make it home or not.

 

Concentrated fire from the rear has more likelihood of compromising a wing spar than concentrated fire from the ground.  Just a thought. 🤗

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

It was 7.92 mm fire. 

 "When I was badly shot up on June 26, 1943, I had 21 20mm cannon shells in that airplane, and more than 200 7.92mm machine-gun bullets."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On another note: if you have not seen it yet, take a look at the Bf 109 G-14 (or K-4) and then the 190 A-8 in external view. You'll see a difference in the parachute each pilot carries. :)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all this talk of inaccurately modeled wing damage, I feel the engine damage model is an equally pressing matter. Regardless of power input, my engine seizes seconds after taking any sort of damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×