HagarTheHorrible Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 I think it would be beneficial to have a DM for the headrest in the 109. At the moment the benefits of not having the headrest out way the disadvantage of having it fitted. If, however, it could be demonstrated to be of some use then the decision might not be quite so clear cut. Having the headrest show impact damage that might have otherwise have resulted in pilot death might do this.
1CGS LukeFF Posted May 5, 2014 1CGS Posted May 5, 2014 How do you know that the headrest currently doesn't have a damage model?
Cybermat47 Posted May 5, 2014 Posted May 5, 2014 How do you know that the headrest currently doesn't have a damage model? That's a good point.
ImPeRaToR Posted May 5, 2014 Posted May 5, 2014 IIRC the (rear) pilot armor in the 109 and 190 only protected from normal rifles rounds, not the UB or the shvak. Not sure about 20mm HE rounds but even those might be too powerful.
Cybermat47 Posted May 5, 2014 Posted May 5, 2014 IIRC the (rear) pilot armor in the 109 and 190 only protected from normal rifles rounds, not the UB or the shvak. Not sure about 20mm HE rounds but even those might be too powerful. So we really should remove the headrest, DM or not
Kurfurst Posted May 5, 2014 Posted May 5, 2014 IIRC the (rear) pilot armor in the 109 and 190 only protected from normal rifles rounds, not the UB or the shvak. Not sure about 20mm HE rounds but even those might be too powerful. It was 10 mm in thickness, so it would definietely protect you from 7,62 mm rounds from practically any range and angle, including AP rounds. Now, the 12,7mm rounds of the UB are a bit more messy with regards of brain matter all over the cocpit, but it would still depend a lot on range and impact angle and, more importantly, what structures (fuselage, alloy bulkhead) the round would go through first. Even the 8 mm backplate was considered largely proof against 12,7 mm AP from the Browning M2, where the round would have to go through the fuselage, the alloy armor and below the fuel line in the fuel tank first. 1
HagarTheHorrible Posted May 6, 2014 Author Posted May 6, 2014 I'm surprised that there isn't more discussion about this. It's a major tactical element for the 109. As it stands, having the armoured glass or armoured headrest fitted, is just a waste of a good view. Nobody in their right mind would disadvantage themselves in such a way unless they could see a positive benefit. Who here can put there hand on their heart and say "Gosh, wasn't it lucky I had that armoured plate fitted, if it wasn't there my head would have been taken clean off, old boy !" A simple deformation or damage decal to headrest or starring to the armoured glass might suffice, at least we would then have some idea of it's efficacy, or not.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now