Author Topic: The reason to Fix the diving heavies (Read 1251 times)

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #45 on:** October 15, 2004, 03:33:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bustr

Any chance of getting a perk cost assigned to choosing to fly your bomber as a formation? Or would that be the swan song of buff operations ever in AH??????

Seems the current gunnery model has made killing buffs a wee tad hazzardous.

I stopped bothering with attacking inbound bombers unless it was close to base and I had something with 4 20mm's. Anything else it was a waste of the time I spent to get where I was.

Last time I looked I saw all sides using Lancs and 17's this way - also for base defense ack-wagon formations. It's just stoopidly - I'll bet you dollars to donuts that if formations were turned off this stuff would tail off dramatically.

bustr · « **Reply #46 on:** October 15, 2004, 03:43:50 PM »

A small cost of 3-5 for a formation might work. If you are an average buff pilot it should be easy to keep your points up. The current reactions by the player base to changes like this would lead me to hesitate. A few years ago it may well have fostered a positive rivelry and espri de cor. Now I'm not sure what some players are using for brain fuel.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #47 on:** October 15, 2004, 03:49:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bustr
A small cost of 3-5 for a formation might work. If you are an average buff pilot it should be easy to keep your points up. The current reactions by the player base to changes like this would lead me to hesitate. A few years ago it may well have fostered a positive rivelry and espri de cor. Now I'm not sure what some players are using for brain fuel.

Well I actually overheard folks going on a NOE Lanc training mission last time I was on. Which more or less says it all.

Cobra412 · « **Reply #48 on:** October 17, 2004, 12:55:41 PM »

Krusty I'm curious about something. Why is it even modern fighter/bombers rely on a charge to seperate the weapon from the airframe?

No bomb bays here all external stores but they still require an explosive to force them away from the airframe.

TalonX · « **Reply #49 on:** October 19, 2004, 01:50:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty

No matter WHAT the bank, a bomb will fly straigt out of the bomb bay due to centrifugal forces on the bomb and centripetal forces on the aircraft (due to lift generated by the wings) so nix that idea.

While I won't argue your entire post, you are slightly off here. Only with pulling elevator can you credit centrifugal force with pulling the bombs out of the bomb bay. Imagine the bomber inverted, the bombs would sit in the bay until you pulled elevator (up) and the forces pulled the bombs clear.

In level flight, there is no centrifugal force. You can ignore the fact the plane is even flying (imagine the wings supported on posts).

So, what does it mean? It means that: 1. Gravity pulls the bombs clear 2. If the bomb can't get out due to interference (high angle of attack) then you have to pull up elevator to get the bombs to clear the bomb bay.

There is a maximum angle of attack for the bombs to clear on their own. (ie, without UP elevator)

Pongo · « **Reply #50 on:** October 21, 2004, 03:47:45 PM »

"No matter WHAT the bank, a bomb will fly straigt out of the bomb bay due to centrifugal forces on the bomb and centripetal forces on the aircraft (due to lift generated by the wings) so nix that idea.

"
I am not an mechanical or aeronautical engineer. But bomb shackels are rated for certain weights and loads. They work within those parameters. Increasing Gs doubles the weight on the shackle right? Was the shackle in a Lanc rated for the 3000 pound load that a 1000 pound bomb exerts at 3 gs? What about the 12000 pound load that a 4k bomb exerts under the same condition. Will the shackle release properly with that load on it? In a bomber with stacked bombs like the B17 will they all release?
Assuming yes is silly. The engineering needed to make it work at 3000 pounds at 3gs inverted is much much more then to drop them level at 1g.

They were made to work under certain conditions. Assuming that they would work under other conditions is what has led to the employment of bombers we see in AH2.

We do know that designing a heavy bomber that can also dive bomb was an engineering night mare that helped ruin the He177. Where the Germans just dumb and any heavy can dive bomb? Or is it just the pull out that is the engineering issue?

Tilt · « **Reply #51 on:** October 21, 2004, 04:43:07 PM »

I believe you can release bombs when inverted in AH.......given this I assume there is some point where the model departs from reality in this respect.............

There was a reason why dive bombing large formations was impractical.....(or else it would have been more common practice)...I would urge that it be found and modelled.

It may be just a part of a whole bigger requirement..............

GreenCloud · « **Reply #52 on:** October 21, 2004, 09:02:41 PM »

hmmbom shackle strengths..goo dpoint pong

woudl be funny as hell to see the dive bomn suiside cv dweebs have the boms tear thru there bombay doors

Pongo · « **Reply #53 on:** October 22, 2004, 12:34:38 PM »

I read the story on "dive bombing" buffs.
They were diving......600 feet! from 1000 to 400 ft.That is not a dive. that is like letting your plane drift down. They probably never even approached a 20 degree dive angle. The highest g load on the aircraft was at the pull up. Which was probably no more then any fast pull up. The bombs were droped at 1g.....

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #54 on:** October 22, 2004, 12:41:58 PM »

Yeah ... I made the same point about the shackles a couple months ago. Looking at some of the pictures, some of the shackle assemblies look like they pivot. So on negative G's the bombs would swing up and slam against the structure member the shackle is attached to. That can't be good for the ole warranty.