Pilot Kills Significantly More Common

[JG1_Shadepiece]

It has come to my attention that pilots are dying at a significantly higher rate than a few months ago. The shift seems to have taken place after the crash landing update to the damage model. Now I would say that 7 to 8 out of every 10 kills or deaths I experience seems to be as a result of a pilot kill. Many of the people I fly with, and many others that I have seen talking about it on various discords seem to agree. Pilots are dying much easier than they used to. Not sure if this is a bug or intended, but it seems like this is the most common way kills are being scored recently, and it seems to be a far more common occurrence than it used to be.

 

Edit: For clarity this thread and complaint is specifically regarding gunfire killing pilots, and I am not addressing the ditching situation here.

Edited February 16, 2022 by ACG_Shadepiece

[SCG_motoadve]

On 2/13/2022 at 5:16 PM, ACG_Shadepiece said:

It has come to my attention that pilots are dying at a significantly higher rate than a few months ago. The shift seems to have taken place after the crash landing update to the damage model. Now I would say that 7 to 8 out of every 10 kills or deaths I experience seems to be as a result of a pilot kill. Many of the people I fly with, and many others that I have seen talking about it on various discords seem to agree. Pilots are dying much easier than they used to. Not sure if this is a bug or intended, but it seems like this is the most common way kills are being scored recently, and it seems to be a far more common occurrence than it used to be.

Way too many way too easy, most kills are pilot kills, you are right 7 or 8 out of 10 kills are pilot kills, its making the game a lot less interesting.

[messsucher]

They should be dying more, it was ridiculous before. You could smash the aircraft in any way and speed on the ground and walk away. You can't do that anymore, which is good.

[SCG_motoadve]

27 minutes ago, messsucher said:

They should be dying more, it was ridiculous before. You could smash the aircraft in any way and speed on the ground and walk away. You can't do that anymore, which is good.

Agree with you,  for ditching its true, here the OP is talking about pilot kills in combat.

[messsucher]

Whoooops, my bad, my apologies.

[Rache-der-Boote]

On 2/13/2022 at 8:16 PM, ACG_Shadepiece said:

Many of the people I fly with, and many others that I have seen talking about it on various discords seem to agree.

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Perhaps you could provide some evidence that would support this claim? If you're playing online, IL2Stats would be a great way to prove this. Look at the percentage of pilot kills before and after whichever patch you believe introduced this behavior.

[SCG_motoadve]

Online, first bullet kills happens way too often.

 

[Rache-der-Boote]

@SCG_motoadve A few thoughts:

1. This is anecdotal evidence. One clip does not substantiate the claim that pilots are dying at a significantly higher rate than "before". Please provide evidence that pilot kills are occurring more than they were before. IL2Stats is a great resource to use for this purpose.
2. At no point in that 30+ second clip did I see you check your six. How long was that P-51 behind you? Is it possible that he was there for awhile lining up for a perfect shot before pulling the trigger?
3. "First bullet kills"... how do you know it was the first bullet? Simply because it was the first one you heard hit your aircraft? Network latency could be a factor here.
4. You were in a high-G turn when you were pilot sniped. Judging by the flight path of the P-51 after you were killed, I suspect your canopy was very exposed in his gun reticle when he squeezed the trigger. In my opinion, there is a very high probability of getting pilot sniped in that scenario. 
5. One can avoid pilot snipes by simply bunting the nose downward in a 109 and "tail tanking" (despite the durability changes made a few patches ago). There are many examples in IL2Stats of 109s being struck with dozens of bullets (sometimes over a hundred) without the pilot being killed. I don't think this is correctly modeled - if anything, we should see more pilot kills in these scenarios. 

[86th_Buzzi]

Besides game data, what historical data do you have to back up your assertions that incoming gunfire is killing pilots too often? 

 

We're talking about aircraft made of aluminum, a steel engine, a plexiglass cockpit, and usually some small pieces of steel/ armored glass in front of and behind a pilot. What makes you think there was a low liklihood of pilots getting killed when their plane was hit by gunfire?

 

If you browse through pilot accounts there's an awfully high percentage of them that specifically mention things like "I saw no chute", "Pilot didn't get out", ect. Here's a link:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/combat-reports.html

 

While reading books about air combat, specifically of the 56th FG, Wolfpack Warriors by Roger Freeman, you find that many of the USAAF fighter pilots that were shot down in air combat were KIA. They got bounced and were never seen again.

 

One thing that seems to work for me in Il-2, as it did historically, is to bail out. Pilots that didn't want to die usually bailed out of damaged aircraft. 

 

Statements like "the game is less interesting" don't exactly cut it. I hope that's not the same methodology being applied when testing.

 

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Online, first bullet kills happens way too often.

 

acording to stats you were hit by 11x .50 AP 2 hitting pilot, should that not kill you ?

https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/1434291/?tour=41

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

#gitgud. Online, German pilots have enjoyed exaggerated survivability especially against 6-8 .50 cal machine guns. Meanwhile 2 MG13's explode P-47's and _51's. If/when they ever implement the "fuel system" and APIT German pilots will be dying from pk's while their plane is on fire.

While this is a movie it accurately represents what .50 does to meat and I would say the luxury sedan is a good representation of the armor protection afforded by 109's.

[-SF-Disarray]

I too would like to know what is wrong with the pilot being killed when hit with high velocity high caliber ammunition.

 

As an aside, it is interesting to me that in that sortie you managed to kill a plane with only 8 13mm HE rounds, seemingly from mechanical failure, but you getting zapped by a round built to kill tanks is the issue.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

I would like to add that we're talking about in-flight wounds here, which by their very nature should have a higher rate of mortality than if the same injury would occur on the ground. There's preciously little medical equipment onboard a fighter, it's generally at least a couple of minutes until you've landed and if you've had to ditch in the middle of nowhere, it can take hours for a doctor to arrive. A wound that would be survivable for an infantry soldier with a medic nearby could easily be deadly for a lone pilot 5000m up in the sky.

Edited February 20, 2022 by AEthelraedUnraed

[6./ZG26_Custard]

If the pilot is hit particularly with a large caliber round then he almost certainly is going to be incapacitated or dead unless by luck, a miracle occurs.

Having said that, ammunition seems to be ignoring spars, fuel tanks, systems, defections, tumbling and aerodynamic influences.

 

I remember reading somewhere that a .50 cal at 200 yards if firing at certain angles could not defeat the rear armour of a 109 if the fuel tank had more than 30% fuel in it (maybe someone can confirm this?) Not wanting to single out the .50 but it seems rounds are taking a direct line with none of the above consideration. Having flown online for years in ground attack aircraft, pilot kills have skyrocketed to the extreme.

Yes, maybe a false sense of security may have been the issue prior to the updates but also added to the pilot kills are the incredible exploding aircraft and the quite frankly useless gunners.

 

 

  

 

[PB0_Roll]

16 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

#gitgud. Online, German pilots have enjoyed exaggerated survivability especially against 6-8 .50 cal machine guns. Meanwhile 2 MG13's explode P-47's and _51's. If/when they ever implement the "fuel system" and APIT German pilots will be dying from pk's while their plane is on fire.

While this is a movie it accurately represents what .50 does to meat and I would say the luxury sedan is a good representation of the armor protection afforded by 109's.

Sedans are indeed very famous for having armored seats and headrests as standard build.

[CountZero]

14 hours ago, -SF-Disarray said:

I too would like to know what is wrong with the pilot being killed when hit with high velocity high caliber ammunition.

 

As an aside, it is interesting to me that in that sortie you managed to kill a plane with only 8 13mm HE rounds, seemingly from mechanical failure, but you getting zapped by a round built to kill tanks is the issue.

Was noticed that also ? , 11x .50 AP killing your airplane by pk is problem, but 8x 13 HE (that didnt even use HE ammo at that time historicly) downing enemy airplane is normal. I bet if pilot was not killed thouse 11 .50 would not even made any differance on airplane behavior... thats why if you have airplane with only .50 you aim for pilot or enemy engine, while if you have HE ammo you just spray and pray like shown in video as thats more then enough.

[MeoW.Scharfi]

 

[BCI-Nazgul]

On 2/13/2022 at 5:16 PM, ACG_Shadepiece said:

It has come to my attention that pilots are dying at a significantly higher rate than a few months ago. The shift seems to have taken place after the crash landing update to the damage model. Now I would say that 7 to 8 out of every 10 kills or deaths I experience seems to be as a result of a pilot kill. Many of the people I fly with, and many others that I have seen talking about it on various discords seem to agree. Pilots are dying much easier than they used to. Not sure if this is a bug or intended, but it seems like this is the most common way kills are being scored recently, and it seems to be a far more common occurrence than it used to be.

 

Edit: For clarity this thread and complaint is specifically regarding gunfire killing pilots, and I am not addressing the ditching situation here.

Maybe because the US .50s velocity has been adjusted to the correct amount?   That's most of the reason I'm sure.   There isn't much in a plane that can stop a round that is capable of penetrating 22mm+ of armor plate at close range.  If you built a plane that could stop that type of round consistently it wouldn't get off the ground.   Sure the pilots sometimes have armor plates behind their seats, but even if they are thick enough they only protect from one direction and angle.

 

It is really funny to me that people who mostly fly planes that can totally disable a US fighter with a single hit of even 13mm HE are complaining that US AP rounds kill their pilots too often now.   Even though US planes are firing literally hundreds of rounds of .50 in a single burst.   What do people expect?   The odds of a round hitting the cockpit are high when you have hundreds of chances.   Currently if you don't kill the pilot with .50 you have to get the engine.   Most of the time hits do nothing comparatively.   When the damage model was updated with HE effects and AP became nearly useless US flyers were told to "aim better".  Now when we "aim better" and hit the cockpit it's "not fair".   We still have documented cases of German planes requiring 150+ .50 hits to bring down.   But people complain about pilot PKs??

Edited February 21, 2022 by BCI-Nazgul

[354thFG_Rails]

Pilot kills have not skyrocketed. If you look at Finnish stats or even combat box you will see a slight 4-5% jump since they’ve adjusted the 50 cal ballistics and dispersion. Also it “feels” they don’t do anything to fuel, radiators or spars but they most certainly do. AP is going to do a better job at this than HE will. And taking into account that German ammo is 2 HE for every 1 AP round it’s not going to do as good of a job. It will however do massive aero damage with very little rounds hitting and will more than likely explode the plane or even knock the pilot unconscious with the shockwave damage. I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with what AP is now capable of doing. A small up tick in pk’s is nothing to cry foul about. I think the expectation needs to change. I do still think a DM tweak for all planes and ballistics will go a long way to improving the game even more. 

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Damn' that 8 years of feels sure has me fooled. 

[Rache-der-Boote]

On 2/20/2022 at 9:44 AM, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

ammunition seems to be ignoring spars, fuel tanks, systems, defections, tumbling and aerodynamic influences [...] Not wanting to single out the .50 but it seems rounds are taking a direct line with none of the above consideration.

 

This point was made ages ago in the many damage model threads on this forum. The way in which ballistic impact is calculated for armour piercing rounds doesn't seem to be modeled correctly for aircraft in this sim (maybe it's the same one used for tanks, buildings, etc). It's as though armour piercing rounds are overmatching anything they touch (passing like a hot knife through butter). I'm not convinced that creates more or less pilot kills, but it definitely affects aerodynamic penalty since armour piercing rounds create zero aero dynamic drag and high explosive rounds from heavy machine guns (not cannons!) make you lose 40+kph.

 

It's fun to see someone on the other side of the argument attempt to use the same ballistics evidence for their own devices. ?

Edited February 22, 2022 by perm
made a woopsie

[6./ZG26_Custard]

21 minutes ago, perm said:

It's fun to see someone on the other side of the argument attempt to use the same ballistics evidence for their own devices. ?

I'm not on the side of any argument other than to get things as realistic as possible ?.

What we are currently seeing as bomber pilots is an increase in pilot deaths, aircraft exploding at unprecedented levels and gunners that can't hit the broadside of a barn when flying straight and level with a fighter glued to the aircraft's six. Hey, maybe that is realistic, but who knows? 

I'm well aware of perceived (and real) problems with the damage model and it's limitations etc. With regards to AP rounds, I mentioned earlier in the thread about a report, I believe it was compiled by the RAF? In It, it stated that if a 109's fuel tank was 30% or more full then a. 50 cal round could not penetrate the armour of a 109 at 200 yards at certain angle. I'd be interested to see if anyone can confirm this? 

I genuinely want the most realistic experience possible but I'm completely aware that we are flying in a simulated "world" in simulated aircraft with the limitations of a software engine.  I hope that the devs will have a chance to look at ammunition and damage modelling because some times it "feels" like we are in a one step forward, two steps back scenario. 

 

 

[ACG_Cass]

39 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

In It, it stated that if a 109's fuel tank was 30% or more full then a. 50 cal round could not penetrate the armour of a 109 at 200 yards at certain angle. I'd be interested to see if anyone can confirm this? 

That sounds right from what I can remember. Large bodies of fluids are incredibly effective at stopping high speed bullets as they are able to dissipate the energy efficiently. In most scenarios where I've been pilot killed though, I'm turning, which means the fuel tank isn't going do anything.

 

I posted an RAF report that shows effect of aircraft skin on penetration. At very oblique angles it doesn't appear to have much effect, so at a dead 6 attack the round should still carry a lot of its penetration power.

 

(Keep in mind that is a test from 1941 with a much lower velocity 50 round than used in 43-45. Its also against RHA, not dural)

 

 

I don't see anything suspicious in terms of pilot kills and their frequency. There are a number of factors at play here.

 

1. IL2 Pilots stay in their cockpits way longer than any IRL pilot would. If a 110 had taken 30 rounds of 50 Cal and was streaming oil and coolant, the pilot would have been gone as quick as he could. That doesn't happen often in IL2.

 

2. We're lacking a lot of the dynamics at play in aerial combat. Engine torque is very limited, you don't have to factor in the wake of the plane you're following combined with 100 other things that are impossible to simulate mean the gunnery possible is much more accurate than it would have been IRL.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

29 minutes ago, ACG_Cass said:

There are a number of factors at play here.

I'd also add

3. Aircraft like the 110 the P-38 and the A-20, Ju 88 etc are exploding at ridiculous rates. 

4. Gunner have gone from ridiculous Supermen to "I can't hit much of anything these days". 

As mentioned before, it's understandable that it's almost impossible to put so many variables into a flight sim.

[ACG_Cass]

1 hour ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

3. Aircraft like the 110 the P-38 and the A-20, Ju 88 etc are exploding at ridiculous rates. 

4. Gunner have gone from ridiculous Supermen to "I can't hit much of anything these days". 

Completely agree. 

 

I don't get the force applied by the fuel explosions. I think a much more elegant solution would be to keep the fire effect but have them do the aero damage/part shedding without the plane being blown apart. The initial rupture would spill fuel into the air causing it to ignite rapidly, but not necessarily explose. It just doesn't make sense for fuel to cause that much force when it is in a small tank with very little air to react with. 

 

and the gunners are all over the shop at the moment. I've taken to just jumping in the back now rather than leaving it up to them. 

[354thFG_Rails]

A more realistic solution would be like you said, aero damage or even parts shedding. And on top of that making the pilot more panicked or something to make the stick force less and vision deteriorated. 

[BCI-Nazgul]

One thing I'd be greatly in favor of is pilots automatically bailing out of planes where there is fire in the cockpit.  It simply is not in human nature to stay in fire when there is any possible way to escape.  Obviously there are circumstances where it's impossible to bail, but other than those a cockpit fire should be an automatic bail out IMO.  Also, there is seems to be a problem with coolant leaks and oil leaks allowing planes to fly far too long before the engine seizes.  That directly affects the effectiveness of AP rounds which a pretty good at breaking raditators and oil systems.

Edited February 22, 2022 by BCI-Nazgul

[-SF-Disarray]

If an auto bail isn't on the cards, they could just make fire much more lethal, much more quickly. Fires in an enclosed space like a cockpit get very hot very quickly.

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

It should be this way. If you wait long enough for the fire to grow the chute should catch fire as well.

 

[JG1_Shadepiece]

If a pilot was hit by any of these ordinances it would be highly lethal, so that is not my complaint. I suspect there was a change to the hit-box of the pilot, or something that made pilot health more sensitive. Perhaps it was an unintended change after altering a different value.

 

#godspeedukraine

[Oyster_KAI]

Although pilot fatalities are currently too high after collisions.

But better than the previous Superman pilots.

The current landing gear is also as strong as titanium, which makes landing too easy.

In the game, I have seen someone landed at 160mi, with three big bounces,

the pilot was completely uninjured, and the landing gear was completely undamaged.

But if you don't lower the landing gear, even the smallest rate of descent will kill you in a forced landing...

 

[Giggles]

The Jabo upgrade kits make sense now. 

 

 

Thing is, ive done a very small amount of testing on it, and yes it kills pilots for things that SHOULDNT kill them.   Land any plane like you can see ww1 biplanes be landed online... and you   WILL    die   every time. 

 

But, hit your prop on a parked plane,  bounce and skid around and you only die 1 in 3 times.