Author Topic: Why do we have worthless equipment?  (Read 2112 times)

Offline NCLawman

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
M-8 Use
« Reply #15 on: April 29, 2006, 01:38:51 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Meatwad
I will defend the M-8. Tonight I took it from A18 to A19 and drive it on the field. There was a tiger sitting there so  I drive right up to it and start pegging it. About 7 rounds later I get the kill on it.

I also take it to TT for fun and also do pot shots at low level aircraft strafing me with the  37mm. I enjoy it



I will have to take your word for it.  I take an M-8 from time to time going for the mobility rather than brute force.  It is good for getting onto the enemy base and vulching planes trying to take off.  How you killed a tiger with it I will never know.  My last encounter with a tiger while in an M-8 resulted in a loss of ammo and eventually my gv.  I got position directly behind the tiger and had him dead to rights.  He tried running and started back toward his base.  I followed behind using my manueverability to my advantage was was firing repeatedly near point blank right into his rear (where I thought armor was softer.)  After about 12 to 15 hits directly on the rear of the tank, I figured, **lightbulb comes on** "must not be working".  So I continued to maneuver around the rear and side as the tiger fled and fired into tracks at near point blank range.  I must have hit the tracks at least 10 more times to no effect.  By this time the Tiger had managed to get back to his base border, where an auto field ack began firing and wiped me out with one ping.  He got the credit for the proxy kill.

So if there is a trick to using the M-8 for anything other than runway camping, I would sure like to know and would appreciate any hints. (besides don't drive one. LOL)

NCLawMan
Jeff / NCLawMan (in-game)


Those who contribute the least to society, expect the most from it.

Light travels faster than sound.  This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #16 on: April 29, 2006, 04:57:37 AM »
M8 is good for sneaking up on a Panzer and shooting him in the butt. One or two rounds will take out his turret. I would have to see film of a M8 killing a Tiger straight up before I believe it. No offense Meat.

Online Meatwad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12793
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #17 on: April 29, 2006, 07:13:02 AM »
I have to see if I got a film of it. I think what it was he despawned. I was pinging him and there were a  few other friendly panzers on the field.   No explosion, just dissapeared.      

He wasnt on concrete so maybe he just got unlucky and despawned and I just happen to get the kill
See Rule 19- Do not place sausage on pizza.
I am No-Sausage-On-Pizza-Wad.
Das Funkillah - I kill hangers, therefore I am a funkiller. Coming to a vulchfest near you.
You cant tie a loop around 400000 lbs of locomotive using a 2 foot rope - Drediock on fat women

Offline Hades55

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #18 on: April 29, 2006, 10:03:42 AM »
* The Ta-152 is a fantastic *

In AH is very unstable when in fact was the oposite.
Faster than tempest and better turning ability in the whole speed spectrum.
Just study his wing.

Here is a mess.  The Best WWII Fighter.

The final cut before the jets era.

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2006, 10:04:23 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Murdr
Actually I like the M8 for taking out campers with its quick R.O.F.


Maybe if the camper is a moron and sits within 50 yards of the spawn.  If he is smart and sits 1000 or so yards away, the M8 can't hurt him.  So you'll fire off 3 or 4 harmless shells if he misses with his first shot, maybe only 2 if he hits you with the first.

Offline B@tfinkV

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5751
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #20 on: April 29, 2006, 10:45:03 AM »
in the DA one time, Wolfala and myself did a little test. I sat on the runway in a tiger, and he tried to shoot me from 100 yrds range with the M8 AP rounds. after the entire magazine on the M8 was depleted i was missing both tracks and nothing more. then again the damage model is weaker in the DA.
 400 yrds on my tail, right where i want you... [/size]

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #21 on: April 29, 2006, 11:11:06 AM »
The M8 and the T-34 have no realistic chance at killing a Tiger.  Actually, the M8 doesn't have any chance at all, no matter what the range/angle.

The T-34 can kill a Tiger, if the Tiger sits absolutely still, and the T-34 gets inside of 100 yards and hits the exact same "face" of the turret 3 times.  If you are more than a couple degrees off 90 the shots will all ricochet off.  

The T-34 is another good example of a worthless piece of equipment that shouldn't have been introduced.

Offline Brenjen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2006, 11:21:49 AM »
I'm not going to re-hash the bug in detail but it's there & you can kill a tiger with a jeep. ( so an M-8 should work as well )

 I will add this though, I read somewhere when I was a kid of a Stuart light tank killing a Tiger with 37MM AP or HE ( don't remember which ) I'm sure he had to have been at optimal range for maximum velocity & kinetic energy, & I'm sure he hit a "sweet spot" like a hatch or something. It may have even been the WWII equivalent of an urban legend.

 One of my uncles ( my granny had 13 kids mostly boys who served in WWII & Korea ) who was in Korea said he had talked to some fellow marines who were tankers & there was a rumor among the tank crews of a Chinese sniper who would fire down the barrel of a tank when the breech was open & hit the HE shell to kill the crew.

 Now-now....settle down, before you fire off your flames I just want to add I don't believe any such thing ever happened. I wasn't there & have no idea, I know the snipers had everyone worried all the time, & apparently even the tank crews got in on the paranoia.

 I just mention this in passing because of pride, I had a great uncle in the Pacific in WWII who won two bronze stars & a silver star for bravery. What I really liked about that guy was he didn't clam up when you asked him about his experiences; he would talk for hours!:aok

*edited for spelling
« Last Edit: April 29, 2006, 11:23:55 AM by Brenjen »

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2006, 11:22:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hades55
* The Ta-152 is a fantastic *

In AH is very unstable when in fact was the oposite.
Faster than tempest and better turning ability in the whole speed spectrum.
Just study his wing.

Here is a mess.  The Best WWII Fighter.

The final cut before the jets era.


I disagree... At low level, where most of the combat takes place in the MA, the Ta 152H is out of its element. It's a high alt bird in an environment where low altitude performance is paramount. Within that context, the 152H is nearly useless.

If you're thinking about the Ta 152C, then we could say it would be competitive down low. But, none of those were produced beyond a handful of prototypes.

I agree with Urchin that the 152H is basically worthless for the MA. Especially since it's a one-dimensional aircraft, unlike the P-47N which is a also monster up high and a very capable fighter-bomber as well.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2006, 11:39:06 AM »
Yea, I've heard of the Stuart killing a Tiger as well, during the Battle of the Bulge.  

As far as I know, the Stuart disabled the engine, I'm not exactly certain how.  Maybe the Tiger had a grill or something on the back that the shell could've gone through.

Offline leitwolf

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 656
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2006, 03:09:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hades55
* The Ta-152 is a fantastic *

In AH is very unstable when in fact was the oposite.
Faster than tempest and better turning ability in the whole speed spectrum.
Just study his wing.

Here is a mess.  The Best WWII Fighter.

The final cut before the jets era.



The Ta-152H *is* faster than a Tempest. The only problem is that the altitude at which the 152 is faster is worthless in AH and the Temp's sweet spot is optimal for MA fights.

I'm curious tho.. where did you get the idea the 152 should be very stable?
The accounts i've read quote the stability as "acceptable" and in the context of the test report "acceptable" did sound like they actually meant "not very good".
veni, vidi, vulchi.

Offline Brenjen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2006, 03:40:18 PM »
It's meant for high altitude buff slaughtering & it's very good at it. I mean look at the thing; it's like a freakin u-2 with cannons. It's not meant for low alt turn fights...in that role it does suck.

Offline jaxxo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #27 on: April 29, 2006, 04:10:22 PM »
i like the ta152...i think its very stable  and does 300 mph nicely ..holding its e well at low alt...hell like 70 rounds of 30mm and 200 20mm? i guess its undermodeled as compared to rl but are any of the flight models realistic? its a picker though which bores me

Offline Bruno

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
      • http://4jg53.org
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #28 on: April 29, 2006, 04:30:01 PM »
[ANECDOTE ALERT]

Here's what Reschke writes about the Ta-152 in his book (p 21, chapter nine, 'Into action with the Ta-152'):

Quote
My initial impressions:

Acceleration was so great on take-off that one's body was pressed against the back of the seat.

The Ta lifted off after only a few hundred meters.

Initial climb rate was enormous.

I had never flown an aircraft with such a tremendous wingspan.

Control forces appeared to be good.

All-round view from and freedom of movement in the cockpit were also good.

The landing speed was rather lower and thus unfamiliar.


Quote
First Impressions of the Ta 152...

...Even when taxiing one got a sense of the tremendous power produced by the Jumo 213 E. Pushing the throttle forward resulted in tremendous acceleration which pressed one hard against the seat back. The force was such that pilots were hesistant to apply full power for the first few take-offs. The aircraft lifted off effortlessly at 210 km/h after a short take-off run. One scarcely noticed the retraction of the undercarriage and flaps. This was a big difference from other versions of the Fw 190, which sagged noticeably when the flaps were raised. The enormous thrust of the propeller with its broad 60cm blades and the great wingspan were positively noticeable. Rate of climb was 17.5 m/s to a height of 5,000 meters. It took twelve minutes to reach a height of 10,000 meters, which was equivalent to an average rate of climb of 14.2 m/s.

...At an altitude of 10,000 meters the Ta 152 reacted perfectly to control inputs, by comparison at that height the Fw 190A-8 was already unstable and reacted rather sluggishly to control inputs. Not until a height of 12,000 meters did one feel the that the limit of performance of had been reached.

During the conversion program comparison flights were carried out with the Gruppe's remaining Fw 190A-8s, with mock combats playing a prominent role. This provided an opportunity to test the performance capabilities of the Ta 152 and to see if this aircraft was really as good as was claimed. These mock combats repeatedly showed that the Ta 152 was much superior in a dogfight. Especially at heights from 6,000 to 8,000 meters, where most fighter combat took place, one had the impression that the Ta 152 could turn on the spot.


Combat with Tempests:

Quote
The Tempest was known as a very fast aircraft, with which the English had been able to catch and shoot down the V 1. In this engagement, however, speed played a less important role: at low level an aircraft's maneuverability was more important. As I approached, my opponent pulled up from a low level attack and I attacked out of a left hand turn.

Both pilots realized that this was a fight to the finish, and from the outset both used every tactical and piloting ploy in an attempt to gain an advantage. At that height neither could afford to make a mistake, and for the first time I was able to see what the Ta 152 could really do.

Twisting and turning, never more then 50 meters above the ground, I closed range on the Tempest. At no time did I get the feeling that my machine had reached the limit of its performance. The tempest pilot quite understandably had to undertake risky maneuvers to avoid a fatal burst from my guns. As my Ta 152 closed in on the Tempest, I could see it was on the verge of rolling the other way: an indication that it could not turn any tighter. The first burst from my guns struck the Tempest in the rear fuselage and tail. The Tempest pilot reacted by immediately flicking his aircraft into a right-hand turn, which increased my advantage even further. There was no escape for the Tempest now. I pressed the firing buttons again, but my guns remained silent. Recharging the them did no good: my guns refused to fire even a single shot. I can't remember whom I cursed at that moment. Luckily the Tempest pilot was unaware of my bad luck, for he had already had a sample. He continued to twist and turn, and I positioned my Ta 152 so that he always had a view pf my machines belly. Then came the moment when the Tempest went into a high-speed stall: it rolled left and crashed into a wood. This combat was certainly unique, having been played out at heights which were often just 10 meters above the trees and rooftops. Throughout I never had the feeling that my Ta 152 had reached its performance limit, instead it reacted to the slightest input control, even though we were practically at ground level.


Reschke also recounts combat over / near Berlin with Yak-9s. Reschke was able to out maneuver them and get behind them. He shot number 4 down. 2 Yak-9s escaped while Reschke engaged number one and shot it down as well stating: 'his Yak 9was hopelessly inferior to my Ta 152'. This was Reschke's last combat of the war.

[/ANECDOTE ALERT]

Offline Stang

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6121
Why do we have worthless equipment?
« Reply #29 on: April 29, 2006, 04:40:47 PM »
Sounds a lot like our 152.