P-38 Durability

[falle96]

I'm kind of surprised about reports of the 110 being made of glass wings. I've gone up against them a few times and I've never managed to saw a wing off. Fires, sure, and I've knocked out some elevators, but I've not seen a 110 completely disassemble. I guess the MiG-3 doesn't quite have the right armament for the effect?

[Fern]

2 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

I am trying to understand, by looking at the picture, if he landed this plane or if he is looking at a plane that crashed or belly-landed. 

 

According to the source, he flew it home 700 miles.

[danielprates]

38 minutes ago, Fern said:

 

According to the source, he flew it home 700 miles.

 

Wow!

[PatrickAWlson]

On 2/2/2020 at 9:31 AM, HerrBree said:

^^ thats not what happens. What happens is most player see very clear 30mm hits followed by maybe a small leak if they are lucky and no change in flight characteristics.

Complete hyperbole. When I hit a wing tip with a 30mm cannon, I expect total destruction of that wing tip. When i score a direct hit  on the rudder or elevator of an enemy plane. I expect total destruction of the rudder or elevator. Currently that happens maybe 2/3 of the time. Ive never once seen anybody post anything close to what you are suggesting people are saying.

 

 

There was some good commentary on the 30mm round in a different thread.  A hit with 30mm may result in the destruction of the surface that it hits, or it may not.  If the 30mm penetrates and explodes in a confined space the damage will be enormous.  If it explodes in a more open space the damage might be less.  If it doesn't penetrate at all the damage could be like a small grenade going off outside the plane - not good but maybe survivable.   

 

I have no idea how sophisticated the ballistics and DM are to calculate a perfect recreation of a 30mm striking a plane.  There are a lot of variables and, this being a $100 computer game, I suspect that the simulation is not perfect.  

 

Back to the P-38 tearing in half ... that looks kind of silly.  Still, I wonder.  What would happen if the wing gave way at the root near the nacelle?  I suppose it would tear off everything to the tail and cause the plane to disintegrate.   Not sure how probable that kind of damage is.  Is there a fuel tank there that could explode if a 20mm or 30mm went off inside?

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

Back to the P-38 tearing in half ... that looks kind of silly.  Still, I wonder.  What would happen if the wing gave way at the root near the nacelle?  I suppose it would tear off everything to the tail and cause the plane to disintegrate.   Not sure how probable that kind of damage is.  Is there a fuel tank there that could explode if a 20mm or 30mm went off inside?

 

Looks like. Im thinking this might potentially put the whole debate to rest? How likely is it that the fuel would ignite if a 13, 20, or 30 went off in or very close to the tank?

 

 

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

6 hours ago, FarflungWanderer said:

I'm kind of surprised about reports of the 110 being made of glass wings. I've gone up against them a few times and I've never managed to saw a wing off. Fires, sure, and I've knocked out some elevators, but I've not seen a 110 completely disassemble. I guess the MiG-3 doesn't quite have the right armament for the effect?

 

A high amount of light machine gun right at the wing root should do it.  Try an I-16 with ShKas only (no cannon) and pour fire into them.  Once you get used to what the correct shot looks like, you can move to better planes with more firepower but lower rate of fire. 

 

Also, if you want engine fires, hit the engine from underneath where the main oil pan would be.  

Edited February 4, 2020 by Mobile_BBQ

[unreasonable]

2 hours ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Looks like. Im thinking this might potentially put the whole debate to rest? How likely is it that the fuel would ignite if a 13, 20, or 30 went off in or very close to the tank?

 

Not as likely as one might think. You can set off TNT charges inside fuel tanks without getting fires, while surface fires are easily blown out by the wind.

 

A number of things have to happen to get fuel tank fires or explosions: the tank has to be penetrated and not self seal, the round go off in exactly the right place, the fuel air mix and temperature to be right, HE is much less effective than incendiaries etc.  Full report includes some information on P-38s as it happens. It does not reduce to one easy number,  but well worth a read. 

 

 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a800109.pdf

[MikhaVT]

I'm not sure as to the thickness of the metal used for construction, but here are pictures of the main spar for the P-38. 

Close up on the spar/center section. on the right you can see the spar and its pin attachments for the engine. The spar is forward on this section. The spar would be mounted just between the main and reserve tanks. 

 

This is a wild guess, but maybe rounds are entering the spar through holes, and then detonating inside? To do this they would have to fly through the main fuel tank though.

[CIA_Yankee_]

The only real issue with the P-38 is the fragility of the elevator. Any hit will make the whole thing pop off and result in a kill. 

 

I believe this is due to how the game implements control surface damage: past a certain threshold, the whole surface is counted as destroyed and is severed. The problem is that when that control surface is a large target AND is the only such surface, this automatically results in a kill with very little chance of survival.

 

By comparison, every other plane except the P-38 possesses TWO elevators, so while shooting one off is almost certainly a mission kill, it is not instant death and there is always the possibility to react and escape or even keep fighting. But in the case of the P-38, losing that one surface is fatal, and its durability also appears to be extremely low for a surface this size (though I wouldn't be surprised if bombers have a similar issue with their large surfaces, but it's not as critical as they have another one on the other side of the plane).

 

As such, the solution probably should be one of the below:

 

1- Increase the durability of the elevator so it doesn't pop off on the slightest hit. This is a large, reinforced surface that can bear pretty large pressures. I'm pretty sure it wasn't built to snap off so easily.

 

2- Update the model so that the elevator is composed of two sections that move as one. That way, if it takes damage only half of it pops off instead of losing the whole thing.

 

3- The ideal solution, but likely the hardest: improve the DM so include more effective partial control surface damage, that can have bits ripped off without losing the whole thing.

 

Thank you.

[Panzerlang]

On 2/3/2020 at 6:17 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

Bombers were larger and much easier to hit, especially considering the slow rate of fire of the Mk. 108.  Also the bombers had a large interior volume which gave the 30mm mine shell a better chance of working as it was designed.

 

No one is saying that Allied aircraft should never be shot down, or have catastrophic failures, but it certainly should not happen as often as it does in the sim, and this goes for the Axis planes as well.

 

The expectation that every "kill" should be fit for a Hollywood SFX sequence is just flat out wrong.

I agree and would go so far as to say if it was a choice between what we have now and one of no wing failures or ailerons and elevators coming off at all, I'd choose the latter. But, ideally, somewhere between those two with the slider a good way towards the latter. Sometimes it's like LEGO up there.

 

[SCG_motoadve]

Lego is right.

 

[69th_Panp]

On 2/3/2020 at 7:06 PM, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Looks like. Im thinking this might potentially put the whole debate to rest? How likely is it that the fuel would ignite if a 13, 20, or 30 went off in or very close to the tank?

 

 

That is not any more relevant than any other fuel tank in any other plane in this sim.
If this was so then EVERY aircraft in here would break apart like the P38 as it is now!

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

13 hours ago, 69th_Panp said:

That is not any more relevant than any other fuel tank in any other plane in this sim.
If this was so then EVERY aircraft in here would break apart like the P38 as it is now!

 

But not every aircraft is getting hit with large cannon shells with HE filler. And it doesn't happen every single time it's hit either.

[Bremspropeller]

7 hours ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

But not every aircraft is getting hit with large cannon shells with HE filler. And it doesn't happen every single time it's hit either.

 

That's true! The other two cases are killing the pilot and - more commonly - effing up the elevator-controls.

[Lusekofte]

I find the engines remarkably robust. My problem flying it is the fact that no matter how I fly there always a patient LW 109 pilot waiting for a easy kill.  They take you after the bomb drop and care not for objective. Only for easiest possible kill. 
I believe we cannot build a aircraft taking gameplay into consideration. 30 mm in the hands of a camper with patience  is lethal no matter what DM a plane got. I do not fly late war too much, because of this. Early war make more sense flying underdog planes and mostly disregarding hard engine limits the dm works with the calibers thrown at you

[NIK14]

On 2/3/2020 at 6:32 PM, J3Hetzer said:

So the airframe of a bomber reacts differently to the airframe of a fighter. Probably good that Yeager wasn't in the engineering dept.

 

I see you're not a mechanical engineer...

A bomber is not built to manage the same G-loads as a fighter. It's supposed to be as light as possible to accommodate a massive payload.

The P-38 was a fighter. That means stringers and spars are packed tighter to cope with high G's. Very simple.

[69th_Panp]

18 hours ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

But not every aircraft is getting hit with large cannon shells with HE filler. And it doesn't happen every single time it's hit either.

Well how about a cannon shell or tracer round into one of these tanks ?

Don't see this one falling apart like a clown car after a wreck with all the parts spilling out. 

 

Here are some others for your consideration 

Not trying to be a butt here, just pointing out the facts as they are 

Edited February 11, 2020 by 69th_Panp

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

2 hours ago, 69th_Panp said:

Well how about a cannon shell or tracer round into one of these tanks ?

Don't see this one falling apart like a clown car after a wreck with all the parts spilling out. 

 

Here are some others for your consideration 

Not trying to be a butt here, just pointing out the facts as they are 

 

Go on in SP and see what happens when you pour HE cannon shells into those fuel tanks. Then compare it to when you hit it with 50BMG. You folks sure do overestimate the destructive potential of 50BMG to a disproportionately large degree when compared with HE cannon shells. 

[69th_Panp]

Have you shot a 50 cal in real life ?

I have 

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

2 hours ago, 69th_Panp said:

Have you shot a 50 cal in real life ?

I have 

 

You're very stunning and brave! What does this have to do with anything? 

 

I take the 50BMG out at least once a month. Valley Ordinance Works XF-50. Friend brings out the M99 occasionally as well. 

[Bremspropeller]

3 hours ago, 69th_Panp said:

Have you shot a 50 cal in real life ?

 

Have you been hit with a 50 in real life, too?

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

On 2/3/2020 at 10:24 AM, danielprates said:

 

I am trying to understand, by looking at the picture, if he landed this plane or if he is looking at a plane that crashed or belly-landed. 

If that plane is sitting on its wheels, the pilot is standing on something.

 

 

When we are done discussion the P-38 DM, we should take a look at the Skyhawk's DM.  It should not be able to hit a cable, rip off half the wing and keep flying.  I can find numerous examples of Cessnas of all types hitting cables and crashing.

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by HeavyCavalrySgt
For clarity

[Bremspropeller]

That's not half the wing.

[BlitzPig_EL]

As a Curtiss man I must protest anything being made by Cessna being called a "hawk" of any kind.

"Chicken" would be far more appropriate.

 

Good DAY sir!

[Ribbon]

I've got hit by ju88 rear gunner last night, first few hits and my p38 was in pieces, falling out of the sky.

This plane needs DM revision ASAP!

[Cpt_Siddy]

3 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

I've got hit by ju88 rear gunner last night, first few hits and my p38 was in pieces, falling out of the sky.

This plane needs DM revision ASAP!

 

Nah, man, you just got hit in load bearing elements :^)