Jump to content
56RAF_Roblex

Bomber lethality

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

At the risk of starting another war :-),   I have been reading the book 'First Kills' which is the biography of Polish pilot Wladyslaw Gnyś  and found it interesting that his accounts of missions involving attacking bombers would seem to match quite closely our own so maybe 1C have the balance about right?   

Pretty much every attack on a bomber mentions himself or one of his colleagues coming away with a bloodied nose eg engine damage or airframe damage or shot down.   Sometimes the bomber goes down without damaging anyone, sometimes the bomber does enough damage to escape but generally it seems that if attacking a bomber (mosty JU88s, He11s etc in the book),  even if you are very careful you should expect to take some damage.   

 

I won't get into the argument about whether PE2s or JU88s are too lethal historically, I will just say that my experiences seem to match those in the book ie you can probably get a kill or two but there is a better than even chance that you will have to limp home or crash land soon after.   He was not trying to press an agenda or boost his ego, they were just casual comments made in descriptions of combat sorties.

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI-gunners in planes seem okay for the most part now, even tho sometimes, they do insane stuff (and most of those times, its those pe-2 gunners) but overall, its way better than, say, half a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I've read an interview with a German ace and he said attacking bombers was the worst, very difficult to attack them.

 

One thing I will say, if bombers are flying level they should be very dangerous, but it they are doing crazy maneuvers or tumbling to their death the gunners shouldn't be shooting or be very accurate at all.

Currently in game they can do crazy maneuver/high g turns and the gunners are still dead accurate for the most part.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to discuss the Historical lethality of gunners since there are countless situations that might lead to battle damage IRL.

 

But saying gunners in game right now are fine? I'm just gonna name few of the issues that comes on top of my head right now:

  • Being able to track the target with no LOS and accurately shot as soon it gets on LOS (i.e attacking a Stuka from below at >45° angle)
  • Being able to accurately return fire during maneuvers as if the gunners body and gun is a single piece with the aircraft
  • Being able to accurately return fire while the plane is being hit (20mm HE exploding at few centimeters of your stations should at least trow off your aim if not making you stop shoting altogether)
  • Excessive accuracy and/or reaction times in difficult conditions (i.e. high lateral closure rate, large distance up to 1.2 km)

Gunners were and should be dangerous, but they should not be Superhumans. Right now having an human crew of gunners instead of AIs puts you at a disadvantage. This issues can be easily replicated both being the fighter and trying to replicate the gunner superpowers.

 

I hope my observations are seen as constructive criticism and not hate.

Good carefully planed approaches on enemies bombers/attackers should be rewarded, bad approaches should be punished (as they already are now).

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto what Legioneod mentions about accuracy of gunners while pulling G as I cant remember if G effects are experienced by human gunners and perhaps AI are immune from it!? In addition it still amazes me how many Pk's the Pe-2 gunners get. Does anybody have any in game stats for this from any MP servers? 

Another point I dont understand is the elevator response in the Pe-2. I have read in a book that with female crews the elevators were that heavy the rear gunner would be required to assist during take off.

Therefore when it appears that a Pe-2 can pull those amazing tight elevator turns on the deck with those loadings, how high are the forces and did the Pe-2 have PFCUs or are the Pe-2 pilots currently all butch guys?  

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Therefore when it appears that a Pe-2 can pull those amazing tight elevator turns on the deck with those loadings, how high are the forces and did the Pe-2 have PFCUs or are the Pe-2 pilots currently all butch guys? "

 

Agree seems stick forces are way to light  and G limits not applicable to most of the bombers in the game. Its kind of ludicrous when you see an A20 easily start "BFMing" against fighter attacks... with gunners immune to the manoeuvers as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Haza said:

I have read in a book that with female crews the elevators were that heavy the rear gunner would be required to assist during take off.

Therefore when it appears that a Pe-2 can pull those amazing tight elevator turns on the deck with those loadings, how high are the forces and did the Pe-2 have PFCUs or are the Pe-2 pilots currently all butch guys?  

This is another one of those often repeated anecdotes, that makes pretty much no sense to me. 

 

Why would elevator stick forces be that strong during take off, where air speed is low, and you only really need the elevator to slightly increase AoA to fly the plane off the runway? 

 

This anecdote seems to perpetuate the myth, that you can "pull" a heavy aircraft into the air by pulling way back on the stick - in reality you can of course do no such thing, a fixed wing aircraft always flies off the runway. 

 

The only reason I could think of, that would make stick forces excessively strong during take off would be if the tailplane generated too much lift and lifted the tail so high, that the wings could not reach optimal AoA, but my guess is, that this would make the aircraft extremely nose-heavy in flight as well. 

 

The thing to remember about the Pe-2 is, that it was originally developed as a heavy fighter (similar to the Bf 110) and then as a dive bomber. If elevator forces had been extremely strong, that would have been completely uacceptable, and the design would have been scrapped right away. 

Edited by Finkeren
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Reckoner_ said:

Right now having an human crew of gunners instead of AIs puts you at a disadvantage.

 

 

In my opinion , this is explained by the clunky controls of gunners.

What i liked with the old il2 is that the gunners handling was just right. Too much "realism" made using gunner position a grind.

It looks more realistic, but it is obviously bad in terms of gameplay & handling (what is your opinion about that @Feathered_IV?)

This plus the fact that ia gunners spot enemy fighters at 1200 meters whereas human can spot bombers at 5 km.   

Share this post


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

This is another one of those often repeated anecdotes, that makes pretty much no sense to me. 

 

Why would elevator stick forces be that strong during take off, where air speed is low, and you only really need the elevator to slightly increase AoA to fly the plane off the runway? 

 

This anecdote seems to perpetuate the myth, that you can "pull" a heavy aircraft into the air by pulling way back on the stick - in reality you can of course do no such thing, a fixed wing aircraft always flies off the runway. 

 

The only reason I could think of, that would make stick forces excessively strong during take off would be if the tailplane generated too much lift and lifted the tail so high, that the wings could not reach optimal AoA, but my guess is, that this would make the aircraft extremely nose-heavy in flight as well. 

 

The thing to remember about the Pe-2 is, that it was originally developed as a heavy fighter (similar to the Bf 110) and then as a dive bomber. If elevator forces had been extremely strong, that would have been completely uacceptable, and the design would have been scrapped right away. 

 

Finkeren,

 

Conversely if the elevator controls were that light, potentially there would have been the issues of over-stress and perhaps breaking linkages etc and my question regarding PFCU's or indeed whether a force feed-back system was installed in this aircraft was a genuine question as I don't understand why the girls needed help during take off at those low speed/low force, yet diving around at high speed and high forces etc, (when in game) the things turns with relative ease and that was the point of my question.

 

However, like most things associated with WW2 VVS aircraft during that time, I find it very difficult to actually obtain any real factual information to compare the game with/to, apart from the historical hype.  There are a lot of things for me, with the VVS aircraft that doesn't make sense, but alas I've given up trying as without hard evidence nothing will change and rightly so!

 

Anyway, back to the OP discussion, watching a Pe-2 pulling tight turns (assuming high G turns) with smoke pouring out that obscures the Pe-2, yet the Pe-2 gunners can land hits with ease and accuracy perhaps for me, is the elephant in the room.  

 

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Legioneod said:

I've read an interview with a German ace and he said attacking bombers was the worst, very difficult to attack them.

 

One thing I will say, if bombers are flying level they should be very dangerous, but it they are doing crazy maneuvers or tumbling to their death the gunners shouldn't be shooting or be very accurate at all.

Currently in game they can do crazy maneuver/high g turns and the gunners are still dead accurate for the most part.

This is true. Problems with ai gunners is they are too accurate when affected to g force. My point of view is they make up for it by not give you a warning soon enough. Tracers fly around you already when they yell. I prefer cod gunners. They’re shit at shooting but warns you every time in good time. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I certainly remember reading a pilots memoirs where he got his first kill on a JU88 and decided to follow it as it spun to its death but was himself shot down by a gunner who had decided he was not going to escape so may as well keep firing 🙂

 

 

Nevertheless,  I agree that gunners should stop or at least be downgraded to novice level when subjected to heavy G.     My initial post though was simply about some peoples belief that killing bombers should be a walk in the park and nobody should get a scratch unless they were just very unlucky. and others who feel that bombers should be unassailable unless by multiple ineffectual passes over a long period. 

 

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the topic of bomber lethality features two bonded matters. One of the gunners` accuracy, second of bomber airframe sturdiness.

 

The thing that always struck me about shooting Peshkas is that there was little to no chance of killing it in one swift pass, unless I could by some small chance land a surgical several 20mm strike to one of its wings. That is pretty hard once you take into account closure rate and deadly gunner distance (about 150m) at which evasion is mandatory.

 

This is way, way easier to do against slower bombers such as Boston or DB3 or even heavily armored IL2 which I`d say have little less durability than Pe2. And maybe has little to do with not so perfect modelling of German HE shells.

 

Obviously taking gunpods and spraying away at convergence distance solves the issue pretty much everytime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to shoot down pe2 in qmb. My skill level in fighters is simply too bad to do that 90% of the times without a fatal injury to engine. But 90% of the times I got attacked in a pe 2 before. I got to bail out or emergency land. My best chance was to stay at 6000 meters and hope no one bothered to climb. Pe 2 got a better than fighter view for spotting. Staying high really give a advantage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

I tried to shoot down pe2 in qmb. My skill level in fighters is simply too bad to do that 90% of the times without a fatal injury to engine. But 90% of the times I got attacked in a pe 2 before. I got to bail out or emergency land. My best chance was to stay at 6000 meters and hope no one bothered to climb. Pe 2 got a better than fighter view for spotting. Staying high really give a advantage

Agreed. Every time I've been attacked in a Pe-2, my plane goes down. Often the first pass is eventually fatal even if I'm able to keep the plane in the air for a while. The Pe-2s legendary durability doesn't seem to help me much, and the gunners, while better than the Il-2s, haven't managed to kill most of my attackers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nil said:

In my opinion , this is explained by the clunky controls of gunners.

 

The only clunkiness I see is when wanting to quickly switching gun from the same station, like in the Ju-88. As for anything else I don't understand what you mean. Mouse aim is the standard when it comes to PC FPS and I think that it works quite well as it is now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reckoner_ Have you played the old IL2? for me the handling of gunner stations should be exactly as it was there.

In addition of what you just said of course (switching gun from the same station)

 

here is the gameplay I am talking about . It looks "gamey" but it is how it should be:

Instantly look on gunsight

No rotation speed restriction (except for motorized gun stations)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Haza said:

 

Conversely if the elevator controls were that light, potentially there would have been the issues of over-stress and perhaps breaking linkages etc and my question regarding PFCU's or indeed whether a force feed-back system was installed in this aircraft was a genuine question as I don't understand why the girls needed help during take off at those low speed/low force, yet diving around at high speed and high forces etc, (when in game) the things turns with relative ease and that was the point of my question.

 

 

My point was, that I think, that the story of the women pilots needing assistance to pull back the stick on take off is apocryphal. It's either extremely excaggerated or entirely fictional. If the elevators of the Pe-2 were that heavy on take off (a situation that normally doesn't involve heavy stick forces) then the design would never, ever have been accepted as a dive bomber. 

 

Anyway, back on topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Nil said:

Instantly look on gunsight

 

You have that as well in BoS by using the key commands to jump to a specific turret. I have a 10-key switchbox configured for 8 crew stations (the max number of turrets in any particular plane is 6 right now in the He 111 H-6, but hey, the last two may one day be needed), plus 1 for the command to move to the next crew position and 1 to jump directly back to the pilot's seat. That way, I can move to the navigator's position in planes like the He 111 and the Ju 88 without picking up the gun, which is very helpful when I just want to see the terrain through the bottom of the nose and then jump back to the pilot's seat. With that setup, I can also cycle through the other gun turrets if I'm not planning on using the gun in any particular turret.

Edited by LukeFF

Share this post


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

@Reckoner_ Have you played the old IL2? for me the handling of gunner stations should be exactly as it was there.

In addition of what you just said of course (switching gun from the same station)

 

here is the gameplay I am talking about . It looks "gamey" but it is how it should be:

Instantly look on gunsight

No rotation speed restriction (except for motorized gun stations)

 

Well how things should be depends entirely on what Devs wants. 

Devs restricted gun movement speed to simulate the real life physical [human] limitations required to move the gun, just like the restricted the speed at which you can pull the flight controls at high speed, and since this is a simulation title I support this choice. You might not like it and want a more arcade approach, but that's just your personal opinion.

 

As for the look around I agree that could be better. Currently when you are nested in the gun sight looking around with head-tracking feels sluggish and certainly can be improved. Also is not possible to look around when you are "eye balling" the gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LukeFF, Yes, but I was talking about gunsight and ready to move. On Bos it takes Two command input and wait some time which  the turret moves into to the neutral position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Finkeren said:

 

My point was, that I think, that the story of the women pilots needing assistance to pull back the stick on take off is apocryphal. It's either extremely excaggerated or entirely fictional. If the elevators of the Pe-2 were that heavy on take off (a situation that normally doesn't involve heavy stick forces) then the design would never, ever have been accepted as a dive bomber. 

 

Anyway, back on topic. 

I have only the magazine flypast as reference. But they stated that the controls was very hard. 

And the plane had in general bad flight characteristics in slow speed and hard turns. It was very seldom used as dive bombers the most produced type did not even have the air brakes. Pilots converting to TU2 witch is a longer version of same design. Said it was as day and night. They considered TU 2 as fantastic compared to PE 2. But again I have only one reference 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The women who flew the Pe-2 (A Dance With Death being my reference)  all said that the controls took extreme force.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

The women who flew the Pe-2 (A Dance With Death being my reference)  all said that the controls took extreme force.

 

 

Which is why they said, in order to offset the bad flight characteristics, they had to enlist the nation's most elite snipers for the rear gunner position.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The women who flew the Pe-2 (A Dance With Death being my reference)  all said that the controls took extreme force.

 

 

 

And so sometimes you have to wonder how, in this sim, the infamous Pe2 flips and flops around the sky like a ballerina, whilst the gunners (immune to G forces or enemy hits) continue to lay down their sniper fire. 

 

On MP there's a common tactic employed by many now for the Pe2's when under attack, which goes something like this: up down up down yank and wank on the stick. The elevator authority is insane. And whilst they're doing the bucking bronco, their gunners are carefully lining up your skull for that PK.

 

The devs need to sort this out. 

 

Regards

Edited by Bilbo_Baggins
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The women who flew the Pe-2 (A Dance With Death being my reference)  all said that the controls took extreme force.

 

 

And Winkle Brown also said it was one of the worst handling A/c he'd flown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

And so sometimes you have to wonder how, in this sim, the infamous Pe2 flips and flops around the sky like a ballerina, whilst the gunners (immune to G forces or enemy hits) continue to lay down their sniper fire. 

 

On MP there's a common tactic employed by many now for the Pe2's when under attack, which goes something like this: up down up down yank and wank on the stick. The elevator authority is insane. And whilst they're doing the bucking bronco, their gunners are carefully lining up your skull for that PK.

 

The devs need to sort this out. 

 

Regards

In fact hard controls is almost impossible to simulate.  And I think they managed to do it half way. It got as many quirks as a plane possible could. If you like to shoot down pe2 one should leave some features be so people fly them. This game got pretty awesome flight dynamics going. In my point of view that is. And I believe this is what make people love this game. So we should be careful what we ask for

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

Agreed. Every time I've been attacked in a Pe-2, my plane goes down. Often the first pass is eventually fatal even if I'm able to keep the plane in the air for a while. The Pe-2s legendary durability doesn't seem to help me much, and the gunners, while better than the Il-2s, haven't managed to kill most of my attackers. 

 

I think this is why these discussions keep coming up. Everyone remembers the negatives. 

 

Fighter pilots all recall the three times they get shot down out of ten attacks on the Pe-2, and assume the gunners are OP. 

 

Then the bomber pilots remember the seven times out of ten they got shot down in a Pe-2, and assume the fighter pilots are being unreasonable. 

 

In practice it’s probably just about even. As a bomber pilot maybe I’m biased but it’s far from being a game-breaking issue. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The women who flew the Pe-2 (A Dance With Death being my reference)  all said that the controls took extreme force.

 

 

 

makes sense, those big old control surfaces are surely going to be subject to a lot of wind resistance at speed. Elevator is probably very heavy when not moving too for the controls part of the pre flight check I imagine ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There are some fairly clear and obvious problems with the bomber gunnery in this game. Primarily when the bomber is turning and shooting at the same time. The gunners are also way too accurate at long ranges or when the enemy fighter is being evasive.

 

I have had Pe-2s shoot me down when I was almost 90 degrees above them and climbing away at high speed. That's some absurdly impressive dexterity on the gunners part. 

 

It would be one thing if we were talking hydraulically operated ball turrets in a B-17. But no pintle mounted MG should be as accurate as they are.

 

The bombers right now might as well have the radar aimed 20mm of the B-52 in the back. Who knew we never needed such a device, because the mere pintle mounted MG where the gunner doesn't really even have a sight picture was superior all along!

Edited by Fumes
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most disturbing thing is the continuous accurate fire even when multiple 20mm minengeschoss explode right at the tail, at the gunnerseat. Not only should it take all the visuals for a moment but eventually also killing the gunner or at least have an effect on his accuracy or stop him from shooting.

if you‘ve seen sheriffs latest video, the super slow mo he put in, this is just ridiculous.

it‘s not just about pe2s, but gunners in general i think

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yes, this one particular pass shows pretty much what is wrong with ai gunners. You've got a guy, just had at least 7 20mm shells exploding right next to him, not counting the AP shells if there was any, so a shell-shocked guy, in what is essentially a shaking, smoke-filled fuselage, accurately shoot at and hit a relatively fast-moving target that he couldn't possibly have previously seen.

 

So in those conditions, he visually acquired, aimed, shot at and hit a target in about half a second.

 

One could argue that Sheriff's pass was making it a bit easier for him in that particular case, but most of us know from experience that this happens at 500+ kph differences, and oblique angles. Add to that the gunners doing it under moderate to high Gs, and you've got the whole picture.

 

AI gunners are subpar when compared to most aspect of the game, and I hope, maybe with development of crew mechanics in Tank crew, they manage to rework that, adding more realistic suppression factors, G influence, time to aquire targets and so on.

Edited by Quinte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly are those gifs supposed to teach me? I see a fighter coming in from a very favorable position for the gunner, shooting a pe2 to pieces, but getting hit in the engine in the process. From the little I can see in this poor quality stuff the gunner can very well have hit the fighter before getting hit himself. Perhaps the gunner even died? I am not getting any real information. Maybe some high quality slowmo could show something - but these gifs are rather worthless in my humble opinion.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Quinte said:

One could argue that Sheriff's pass was making it a bit easier for him

 

2 minutes ago, Nocke said:

What exactly are those gifs supposed to teach me? I see a fighter coming in from a very favorable position for the gunner, shooting a pe2 to pieces, but getting hit in the engine in the process. From the little I can see in this poor quality stuff the gunner can very well have hit the fighter before getting hit himself. Perhaps the gunner even died? I am not getting any real information. Maybe some high quality slowmo could show something - but these gifs are rather worthless in my humble opinion.

 

Except it was the bottom gunner to actually hit him not the top gunner that had way more time on target.

 

You can increase the gif quality on the bottom right or check the original video here:

Spoiler

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point now, thx. That bottom gunner did indeed not have much time for aiming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially since it doesn‘t look like the belly gunners barrel is even looking at the focke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of hard to advise on this topic when OP doesn't indicate if he's attacking from dead 6, creeping up or making slashing attacks.  I always try to attack from high 2/10 oclock like the Germans adopted later in the war, never even see tracers.  Pursuing from 6 below is a totally different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Nocke said:

I see your point now, thx. That bottom gunner did indeed not have much time for aiming.


Regardless if it was the bottom gunner or not. The approach wasnt that gunner friendly for the top gunner. If you think about the fact that it is a moving gun platform the gunner is shooting from. Further more the plane gets hit through the entire ordeal.
I was coming in at high speed at a decent angle from the side. If you have ever played as a gunner manually you notice that following a fighter diving at you with that speed is hard. 

Just click through the videos in the opening post of the thread posted above and you will see that the gunners are a real problem in the game right now. It got worse for some reason.

 

Edited by DerSheriff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...