Why is it that bombers ARE SO EASY to get shot down?

[Karnak]

Howitzer,

Only the guns that can bear in the direction the gunner is pointing and have no part of the bomber blocking their line of fire will actually fire.  In addition the convergence is hard set to 500 yards, so unless the fighter is very close to 500 yards the bullets from the drone bombers will never hit,  You greatly exagerate the difficulty involved for the fighters.


Hoarach,

Well, the N1K2 has mid range muzzle velocity and the Type 99 Model 2s that it and the A6M5b carry are the second hardest hitting 20mm cannon in AH, only slightly less than the Hispano Mk II/M2 20mm.  The only low velocity 20mm cannon in AH are the MG/FF on the Bf109E-4, Bf110C-4b, outer guns of the Fw190A-5 and the Type 99 Model 1s on the A6M2 and those do hit substantially lighter.

Originally posted by Ted Strykker
And you have too factor in some of those 262's had the Bk Mk 50.

1 Hit from that weapon and most planes were toast.

Only one or two Me262s had the BK50 and it was an unsuccessful experiment.  They only had a couple of sorties total.  It is not really worth considering when looking at Me262 armament.

[stantond]

Bomber MG lethality is increased (x1.5) above the same MG lethality in a fighter! So, in a three plane B17 formation with only the top six turret guns is the equivalent of 9 guns.   That same 50 cal BMG in an aircraft has a reduced lethality. Unless hit in the wing root, wing tip, pilot wound/kill, or engine fire, 2600 rounds of 50 cal can go into a bomber and it still fly with no effect!  I know this because I have done it!  Also, unless the fighter attacks from above using a non-tracking shot he will die quickly against an experienced bomber pilot.   How much more of an advantage do you want?

If this thread isn't a troll, it should be!


Regards,

Malta

[Stang]

Since when are buff guns jacked up to 1.5x lethality?

[Oleg]

Originally posted by Schutt
You ever flew a 109 with 30mm canon?

I can assure you its not easy hitting bombers with it... at least not for me. I manage to shoot 65 rounds past a bomber, eaven from close in a lot of times.

I prefer Yak9T if i want big gun.
Sure, you need try hard to shot down bombers with 30/37mm. With 12/20mm guns that is much easier for me.

btw, real 30mm MK 108 gun's effective range was 100m approximately.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Stang
Since when are buff guns jacked up to 1.5x lethality?

They aren't.  That is another myth that refuses to die.  Bomber guns are exactly the same as the guns(of the same type) that are on a fighter.  A B-17's guns are the same as a P-51s guns and a Ki-67's guns are the same as a Ki-84's guns.

The fact that you are running head on into the bullet tends to make them a bit more lethal, but so do bullets fired from a fighter in an HO.

[ghi]

Originally posted by Oleg
I prefer Yak9T if i want big gun.
Sure, you need try hard to shot down bombers with 30/37mm. With 12/20mm guns that is much easier for me.

btw, real 30mm MK 108 gun's effective range was 100m approximately.

imop,109G10 with 30mm+2x20mm is the best  bomber killer(not talking about jets),
Yes,yak 9T blow them up much eassy with 37mm,but is too slow, low amo,poor climb rate , you can't catch bombers at 20k+, maybe if you have alt.   G10 is fast, +best climb rate you can make passes,
I climb 1-2 k over formation, get speed and hit them from above in spiral dive, Few rounds at the point where wings are atatched to fuselage ignite the fuel tanks, extend climb and get ready for another pass .

I do bombing also, soo think like the bomber pilot,=>
 if the formation is close to the tgt , let's say,CV,base....., he must be in F6 calibration, doesn't have time for gunning, unless has guner, than i take risk park my 109 behind  and blast them

[stantond]

Now that you mention it, I think the difference in lethality does come from going into the guns, head on.  Getting pinged aft of the 9-3 o'clock position does little damage.  Although, the bomber 50 cal range is still 1000+ yards.  Either way, the bombers have an advantage over the attacking fighter (with the same guns) in gun lethality.  

Has anyone ever downed a bomber by knocking out its horizontal or vertical stabilizer?  The last time I did that was 2 or 3 years ago in AH1 when the pilot was (obviously) afk.  Fighter planes, on the other hand, loose those parts with one ping.  My point being, bombers are not easy to kill.



Regards,

Malta

[hubsonfire]

I try, when I have the time to setup a decent attack on bombers, shoot for the wing roots on everything, and the tail assemblies on anything that doesn't provide a good shot from above.

It's not an everyday occurence, but I have cut the tails off the b26, 24, and lancs (coalt attacks from either side). I still think the wing root provides the best chance of a kill though. I'm with Ghi on plane choice as well.

Bombers are not necessarily easy to shoot down, so much as most bomber pilots don't put themselves in an advantageous position (normally low alt, tracers on, flying through a large fight etc.).

[Karnak]

I remember doing a test with J_A_B and one of the things we tested was durability.

It took 17 hits from the P-38's M2 20mm cannon at short range to remove the B-17G's tail, 14 for the Lancaster's, 3 for the Mosquito's, 2 for the Bf110G-2 and, if I recall, 2 for the P-51D.


I have seen a photo of a Ju-88's tail that was shot down by one Hispano II hit from a Spitfire that jammed the elevators.  The damage didn't look that severe, but it was enough.

[mora]

Remember that the Blenheim is very small and has a very light structure. I suspect that the P-47 could sustain much more 30mm hits than a Blenheim.

[jpeg]

Please stop trying to spread this fudd!!

HTC has repeatdly posted that buff guns are no different. Here are two threads alone

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134823&highlight=bomber

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=134769

Here is quote from hitech

"I repeat again the buff guns are no different than any other gun of the same type. Does that make it clear enough humble. "

Originally posted by stantond
Bomber MG lethality is increased (x1.5) above the same MG lethality in a fighter! So, in a three plane B17 formation with only the top six turret guns is the equivalent of 9 guns.   That same 50 cal BMG in an aircraft has a reduced lethality. Unless hit in the wing root, wing tip, pilot wound/kill, or engine fire, 2600 rounds of 50 cal can go into a bomber and it still fly with no effect!  I know this because I have done it!  Also, unless the fighter attacks from above using a non-tracking shot he will die quickly against an experienced bomber pilot.   How much more of an advantage do you want?

If this thread isn't a troll, it should be!


Regards,

Malta

[Karnak]

Originally posted by mora
Remember that the Blenheim is very small and has a very light structure. I suspect that the P-47 could sustain much more 30mm hits than a Blenheim.

Probably not.  A 30mm hit is going to down any single engined fighter that does not get extremely luck.

Due to the way that it does damage it would probably have almost exactly the same effect on a P-47 as it does on a Blenheim as they are very similar in size.

[Siaf__csf]

If buff guns are no different, how could a B24 kill a manned ack with 2 pings from the gunners where P40N with its 8 .50 couldn't kill one with 2+ second burst?

Baloney.

[Jnuk]

oh now dont start this again.

[hubsonfire]

The answer's easy. The 47 didn't hit it. The 24 did.