Thoughts on "unreasonable" effectiveness of AP ammo at dewinging aircraft

[JaffaCake]

Based on what I know

 

* Aircraft consists of a collection of hitboxes that have health attributed to them

* After certain number of hits the part "dies", in the case of wings the entire chunk of the wing detaches from the aircraft

 

There was a lot of discussion about how AP is too good at dealing damage to the wings and causing them to come off, while logically you would think the AP round would make a nice pretty hole, unless it hits the wing spar.

 

* AP rounds could theoretically "de-wing" aircraft if the AP round hits the wingspar. There is little other structural weakpoints that AP round could significantly damage

* Current model does not provide a separate hitbox for the wingspar (am I correct?)

 

Therefore I guess what we observe is the following:

 

==> As long as AP round hits the wing section anywhere and at any angle, it will deal damage attributed towards "de-winging" the aircraft.

 

 

The side-effects that we then observe:

 

* Number of hits required to de-wing is the same and independent of the orientation of the wing.

 

 

==> You are more likely to de-wing by firing at the wing "top-down" because it has greater area so AP round will hit somewhere and that will count towards "spar-damage". While in reality spar would have approximately the same profile from any angle of the wing

 

 

So in general even if AP could de-wing an aircraft, because of the hitbox models (if I am correct) implementation the current situation is that you are more likely to dewing an aircraft if it is oriented in such a way that you have greater wing area visible to you - so higher chance to hit the wing.

 

If this is indeed true even without changing hitbox models it would make sense to introduce some compensation to the AP rounds hitting wings by reducing the damage dealt based on the angle of the wing - if you hit the wing from the front leading edge, it may only take 1 shot. While if you are firing at the wing from the top/bottom you may need 20-30 "wing-hits" to score a "spar-hit"...

 

I think what we have right now is something in the middle - AP rounds aren't too great at de-winging if you hit fair and square into the spar, but are too effective if you just shoot randomly into the wing, vertical to its surface.

 

[6./ZG26_Custard]

I remember over the course of the last few years we have had  a few in the community voice their displeasure that wings were not being shot off enough and that also aircraft didn't catch fire enough. Now we have the opposite of wings being shot off and aircraft catching fire with too much rapidity. 

 

We also have anecdotal and photographic evidence presented that aircraft "A" is the toughest SOB because we can see extreme damage caused to it, in photographs but the aircraft managed to make it back to base. 

 

There are lots of photos out there that show some extreme damage to all categories  of aircraft and its surprising that they survived, let alone made it back to base.

 

 

 

 

I think the most important thing to remember is we have just had a massive update and undoubtedly gremlins  creep in that need sorting. I am very confident that issues will be ironed out. 

I think its important to remember the sheer amount of work done and improvements that has been made by the development team, to create what in my humble opinion the best WWII combat simulation available. 

 

Lets try and have a bit of faith in the team because I''m sure we have many more wonderful surprises to come with continual improvements alone the way.

 

  

[PatrickAWlson]

What makes it complex is that sometimes planes went in with apparently less damage.  I think of the B-17 that lost a stabilizer and went in with the whole crew.  Between ballistics, forces from flight, alteration of forces when damage occurs, variations in damage based on angle, variations in wing design, variations based on ammo type ... there's just way more physics involved than I can get my head around  

 

[danielprates]

I should imagine there was a wide ramdomness as to how cripling damage actually was,  i.e.,  some moderatelly damaged planes would not survive whereas some extremelly damaged would make it. We see the photos of the survivors and think "oh my unbeleivable" but the ones that became a hole in the ground we have no pictures to compare.

 

Usually,  no structural element is redundant so any damage to anywhere in the plane could be potentially fatal,  depending on the luck of the crew (or lack of it). One single rib damaged in a wing could diminish the overall strenght of the wing and lead to a wing loss. Or not!

 

Anyway,  I think there is no hard rule here. There is no saying "A shot here/there absolutelly WILL or WILL NOT lead to wing loss". So to that effect,  I feel the game mimics that randomness quite well!

 

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by danielprates

[Jade_Monkey]

Since OP's main point is based on pure speculation (no matter how reasonable), i fear this thread is gonna create more misconceptions and confusion than actually help.

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, Jade_Monkey said:

Since OP's main point is based on pure speculation (no matter how reasonable), i fear this thread is gonna create more misconceptions and confusion than actually help.

 

Yep

[Bilbo_Baggins]

7 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

 

  

 

What the hell am I even looking at here with this Heinkel? What in hell happened to this machine- do you know the story?

 

Looks almost unreal since we see the machine still sitting on it's wheels.

Edited November 30, 2018 by Bilbo_Baggins

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

What the hell am I even looking at here with this Heinkel? What in hell happened to this machine- do you know the story?

 

Looks almost unreal since we see the machine still sitting on it's wheels.

It looks pretty bad but that just due to the angle of the camera. It looks like the elevator/horizontal stabalizer is whats heavily damaged, other than that not much else is damaged.

[migmadmarine]

51 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

It looks pretty bad but that just due to the angle of the camera. It looks like the elevator/horizontal stabalizer is whats heavily damaged, other than that not much else is damaged.

Oooooooh, that is the horizontal stab... Thought it was a gouge running along the whole side of the fusalage...

[Legioneod]

1 minute ago, thenorm said:

Oooooooh, that is the horizontal stab... Thought it was a gouge running along the whole side of the fusalage...

I thought the same thing as well until as took a closer look at the pic.

[unreasonable]

2 hours ago, Legioneod said:

I thought the same thing as well until as took a closer look at the pic.

 

Good point - it is like the duck-rabbit.

[Georgio]

Using the spit over the past week in a career and it's almost laughable how easily the .303's saw wings off, they're almost as powerful as the cannons in that respect.

Did one convoy protection mission last night and shot down 11 of 12 attackers with ease.

Cue medal mania...?

[Diggun]

Weird, I fly the Spit V. a lot, and find the .303's more of an irritant than anything else. Once I've used my 6 seconds of 20 mm squirt I'm generally looking for a sharp exit.

 

I know, 6 seconds of squirt doesn't sound like a lot. Not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean, right?

[PatrickAWlson]

15 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Weird, I fly the Spit V. a lot, and find the .303's more of an irritant than anything else. Once I've used my 6 seconds of 20 mm squirt I'm generally looking for a sharp exit.

 

I know, 6 seconds of squirt doesn't sound like a lot. Not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean, right?

 

Give me 4x 20mm with 500 rds any day ... size matters  

[Diggun]

On the flip side, whenever I get into a Spit IX, I feel like my squirt lasts all day.

 

Ooo errr.

[dburne]

19 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Weird, I fly the Spit V. a lot, and find the .303's more of an irritant than anything else. Once I've used my 6 seconds of 20 mm squirt I'm generally looking for a sharp exit.

 

I know, 6 seconds of squirt doesn't sound like a lot. Not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean, right?

 

Short bursts man short bursts lol.

 

I can usually use the MG to fire on bombers to get them to drop their bombs. 

[Jade_Monkey]

28 minutes ago, Georgio said:

Using the spit over the past week in a career and it's almost laughable how easily the .303's saw wings off, they're almost as powerful as the cannons in that respect.

Did one convoy protection mission last night and shot down 11 of 12 attackers with ease.

Cue medal mania...?

 

We must be playing different games. Would love to see footage of the .303 ripping wings left and right.

[unreasonable]

There is a convoy protection mission?

[II./JG77_Manu*]

AP in this game has always been too strong, HE has always been to weak.

Since the game started in Early Access, AP ammunition is a lot better in taking down aircraft then HE (or Minengeschoss). Hasn't been fixed so far.

This isn't a wing-exclusive problem

Edited November 30, 2018 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Diggun]

7 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

There is a convoy protection mission?

That is actually a very good point....

 

Plus 11 kills in a Spit V? I know one should never let the truth get in the way of a good story, but...

 

Are you telling me that you were in a 4G inverted dive with a MiG-28?

Edited November 30, 2018 by Diggun

[unreasonable]

Maybe Georgio was playing CloD....

[Diggun]

Or they mean like a truck convoy and we have got the wrong end of the stick & now look stoopid?

[wonders9]

11 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

AP in this game has always been too strong, HE has always been to weak.

Since the game started in Early Access, AP ammunition is a lot better in taking down aircraft then HE (or Minengeschoss). Hasn't been fixed so far.

This isn't a wing-exclusive problem

 

+1

[unreasonable]

4 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Or they mean like a truck convoy and we have got the wrong end of the stick & now look stoopid?

 

Rockin' through the night.....  Not worry, I am sure we are used to it by now.

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, unreasonable said:

There is a convoy protection mission?

 

Yes

[Georgio]

On 11/30/2018 at 1:16 PM, unreasonable said:

There is a convoy protection mission?

 

Yes, play a Kuban career and it comes up quite regularly along with quite frustrating convoy attack missions as well.

On 11/30/2018 at 1:26 PM, unreasonable said:

Maybe Georgio was playing CloD....

 

Haven't played Clod for years, much prefer this sim and DCS....?

On 11/30/2018 at 1:13 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

 

We must be playing different games. Would love to see footage of the .303 ripping wings left and right.

 

Set up a mission and try it, get 109's in a tight turn and a burst of .303's will cause the wing to fail every time.

Helps if it's around your convergence but still works if not.

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Every wing can break at three different points (at least with fighter planes). Root, middle section and the tip. I might conduct some tests concerning AP damage like i did with HE damage at some point.

[unreasonable]

Just for the youngsters:

 

 

[Jade_Monkey]

1 hour ago, Georgio said:

Set up a mission and try it, get 109's in a tight turn and a burst of .303's will cause the wing to fail every time.

Helps if it's around your convergence but still works if not.

 

No, how about you provide the evidence instead?

[Georgio]

2 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

No, how about you provide the evidence instead?

 

Not feeling the love here Jade.

I don't need to provide anything, either you believe me or you don't I'm easy either way.

2 hours ago, unreasonable said:

Just for the youngsters:

 

 

 

Great film...:D

[Jade_Monkey]

8 hours ago, Georgio said:

Not feeling the love here Jade.

I don't need to provide anything, either you believe me or you don't I'm easy either way.

 

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

 

Otherwise it's just a bunch of noise like half of the claims on this forum.

[Georgio]

12 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

Otherwise it's just a bunch of noise like half of the claims on this forum.

 

Maybe for you, but not for me as I've seen it first hand and you obviously haven't.

 

At first I just put it down to being near to the end of the war and the build quality going down...?

[JaffaCake]

I am thankful that in the new DM the angle of impact is now considered for calculation and AP is apparently no longer as effective as it used  to be. Still requires more testing, but my initial guess was correct!