Question regarding the ease of shooting down Il2's

[Death1111]

Hello

 

I have a question regarding the dowing of Il2's in the game. I have read of the experiences of several German aces who described how difficult it was to bring down an Il2. Given they had so much armour plating you really had to hit the Il2 in the sweet spot to have any chance of bringing it down. Erich Hartmann mentioned in his final interview (I think it was his final one) that with the Il2 you had to hit it underneath in the oil cooler on the belly of the plane to have any hope of bringing it down (perhaps besides through the canopy).

 

Does anyone else feel it may be too easy to down an Il2 in this sim? I have taken down several with only machine gun fire and not cannon and with only short bursts. Was the Il2's engine compartment well armoured?

 

Feedback much appreciated.

[Finkeren]

I honestly have a feeling (and that's all it is, a "feeling") that it's a bit too easy to damage the IL-2's engine. Other than that, i don't think there's a problem. Almost all kills I get against Sturmovik that aren't engine kills involve damage to the wooden parts or control surfaces.

 

However, I tend to think that perhaps the Ju 87 is just a bit too hard to bring down. It is virtually impervious to fire from the Yaks light MGs.

[Lextor]

Flying IL-2 as a pilot I noticed how often I'm getting wounded when hit by bf109.. Like there is no armor at all. In LaGG i'm getting wounded less often..

[Brano]

Engine compartment has been protected by armored monocoque which was supposed to withstand fire from rifle calibre weapons from ground.Its original philosophy of deployment was to act against ground forces of enemy under total air supremacy of VVS.But we all know reality of 22.6.1941 when dreams of soviet generals became nightmare and there was no air supremacy of VVS till maybe early 1944.First models without rear gunner had tremendous losses.Why they installed him first as field modification and later as serial solution?Because it was a sitting duck without protection of rear hemisphere.As any other plane of such type.
 When you check pictures of the only flyable IL2, which has been restored recently in Russia,it had several shot-thru of this armored monocoque.

[Finkeren]

Losses of IL-2s were tremendous throughout the war, even after they became two-.seaters.

[taffy2jeffmorgan]

I read in a book, that German pilots where convinced that the IL-2 was built of concrete !!    it proved so hard to shoot down, but shoot them down they did, if you look at the kills made by some of the top pilots on the Eastern front they include many, many, IL-2's.

[Finkeren]

Subjective accounts are seldom reliable enough to built a flight sim on, though in some cases it's all we have to go by. However, the numbers don't lie: IL-2s were shot down in droves throughout the war, about half of them by fighters. 

[siipperi]

Or this is really relative thing. On other hand you have fighters that drop instantly when hitting with cannon, like a fly, but on otherhand you have heavily armored IL2s which can take a little bit more punishment... I for instance had 2 me109s on my tail about a minute (sure weren't best pilots but it looks like people still learning...) until they managed to drop me. Guys, even if real pilots said something doesn't always mean it must stay up in the sky even after multiple 20mm rounds are shot through the engine.

 

And I still think there is issue with too easily ripping off wings, so it might be part of the problem(?)

Edited April 7, 2014 by siipperi

[Georgio]

I actually survive longer in a LaGG than an IL-2 which shouldn't be the case. The wings of the IL-2 seem to be far too easily damaged, all the times I've been shot down it's been with one or two bursts and the wing is destroyed.

[SR-F_Winger]

dont forget that we all get to try and try and try over and over again and many of us are much better shots than the aces of the old times were since they had far less trys than we do. also they actually had to consider when to actually shoot while in our onlinematches people just hold the trigger until the plane burns or falls apart no matter if that last blow leaves them ammoless or not. Hitting the "refly" button is easy in a sim...

You cannot take such things into account in a sim. If you try anyways risk ending up like Warthunder.

Edited April 7, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[Tab]

Subjective accounts are seldom reliable enough to built a flight sim on, though in some cases it's all we have to go by. However, the numbers don't lie: IL-2s were shot down in droves throughout the war, about half of them by fighters. 

 

in 1941 68.7% of all il2 combat losses was due to AAA, in 1942 54.6%, in 1943 - 57.4%, 1944 - 67.2%, 1945 - 74%. Only lost aircraft were counted, where the loss reason was known for sure.

 

edit: source

Edited April 7, 2014 by Tab

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Well, the wings of the IL-2 were not armored so hitting them will bring it down fairly easy. Also even there is a big armor plate behind the cockpit and plating around engine if you shoot at the tail surfaces there are no armor plates protecting control surfaces = down it goes. Shooting from below to the belly = oil cooler busted and again flip flop. Maybe players should start realising that the IL-2 was NOT a mythical beast that could not be brought down at all. The hype and glamour IL-2 has got is only partially true even it's merits in combat are good. The armor was not very thick around the engine as it was in the rear bulkhead. Cockpit sides could be penetrated as easy as any other plane and could be done by 12.7mm MGs. Shredding the cockpit from above and behind sure caused penetration and pilot wounds.

 

 So in short. The rear armor plate behind cockpit, and later on behind the gunner, was thick stopping most ammo dead on. But if you shot past it there was nothing a .50cal, 15mm or 20mm could not penetrate and damage. Simple as that. And add to this the fact that virtual pilots have way more training than any WW2 pilot thus can shoot more accurately etc. And most importantly no fear of dying, just press Fly and go again..

Edited April 7, 2014 by LLv34_Flanker

[Sokol1]

 

il-2 need be easy to shoot down, or how the new (virtual) Luftwaffe pilots will feel the superiority of German aircraft?

 

 

Sokol1

[URUAker]

Subjective accounts are seldom reliable enough to built a flight sim on, though in some cases it's all we have to go by. However, the numbers don't lie: IL-2s were shot down in droves throughout the war, about half of them by fighters. 

 

This doesn´t say anything about how hard it was to shoot it down

[Brano]

 

1:13 and 2:32

 

...and 1:10 nice shot at yak flying radiators full open

...and 2:08 thats what I call rear gunner

Edited April 7, 2014 by Brano

[Finkeren]

This doesn´t say anything about how hard it was to shoot it down

Well, actually it does. When the average service life of an IL-2 was 25 missions (as it was in 1943) at a time when the VVS greatly outnumbered the Luftwaffe in almost all areas, that is a compelling case that it really wasn't that hard to bring down. Add to that the fact, that the majority of missions for the IL-2 were short (duration seldom over an hour) with only a very short time exposed to enemy action (targets were usually quite close to the front line)

 

I love the IL-2 as a plane, but its reputation as an almost invincible aircraft is undesserved.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Finkeren

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Sokoli1, Finns shot numerous IL-2's down flying Brewsters armed with 4 x 12.7mm machine guns Kyösti Karhila who was one of the few aces flying Bf109G-6/R6 (wing guns installed) said the 3 x 20mm thrashed the IL-2's in one pass. Easiest way was to thrash the cockpit from the side or above as even the 12.7mm MG was more than enough to tear through the cockpit side/top wall and kill the pilot, not to mention 20mm. The myth of IL-2 being impervious to almost any weapon is just that, an overblown myth. If you look at the charts where the armor thickness of IL-2 was posted, it was not more than a few millimeters at most except the bulkhead. 20mm penetrates over 1cm of armor. Enough to withstand handguns but not the onslaught of 12,7mm, 20mm or bigger. And as that pic shows, a few well placed hits can cripple a plane I prefer crippling the controls on them, hard to fly if elevator does not work

[Brano]

S!

 

 Sokoli1, Finns shot numerous IL-2's down flying Brewsters armed with 4 x 12.7mm machine guns Kyösti Karhila who was one of the few aces flying Bf109G-6/R6 (wing guns installed) said the 3 x 20mm thrashed the IL-2's in one pass. Easiest way was to thrash the cockpit from the side or above as even the 12.7mm MG was more than enough to tear through the cockpit side/top wall and kill the pilot, not to mention 20mm. The myth of IL-2 being impervious to almost any weapon is just that, an overblown myth. If you look at the charts where the armor thickness of IL-2 was posted, it was not more than a few millimeters at most except the bulkhead. 20mm penetrates over 1cm of armor. Enough to withstand handguns but not the onslaught of 12,7mm, 20mm or bigger. And as that pic shows, a few well placed hits can cripple a plane I prefer crippling the controls on them, hard to fly if elevator does not work

Amen