Author Topic: Tracer Advantages (Read 2684 times)

Denholm · « **on:** December 11, 2006, 02:55:03 PM »

For a while since I learned that shooting a bullet into a tank of fuel WITHOUT a tracer would not cause a tank of fuel (Either full or half-full) to blow-up, I was wishing that tracers would have a particular advantage. As everyone knows (and if you don't, consider yourself mentally insane), tracers are flaming bullets. When fire meets a fuel tank it will ignite and blow-up.

This is why I was hoping that the tracers in the game would have more of an advantage. I was hoping that tracers would have a higher percentage rate of catching planes on fire, in-term making this game more interesting.

B@tfinkV · « **Reply #1 on:** December 11, 2006, 03:13:24 PM »

you know, i wouldnt go testing that theory out mate.....

sure there is more chance of a tracer round igniting a flamable source, but a normal round will cause sparks on the container/aircraft surface and will most likely ignite a tank of ether.

what i would like to see is droptank damage. blow a hole in thier drop tanks and it spews fire out. if they drop it in time they dont get burnt. we could then use DTs to bomb civillians.

Denholm · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2006, 08:49:07 AM »

I would actually test the as you call it "theory". Simply because I have a friend who's been shooting all types of firearms for 34 years now. He will tell you that you can NOT blow up a fuel tank using a non-tracer round. I didn't believe it myself, yet I'd rather believe someone who's been doing it than myself.

Rino · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2006, 09:22:12 AM »

Well if someone was hitting with tracers, it means they were probably
missing with alot of the rest of their rounds

Kweassa · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2006, 10:22:06 AM »

In order to make that possible in the game AH will have to stop using "generic" rounds and will have to model different types of ammunition per round fired according to historical belt composition.

Golfer · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:10:50 PM »

Tracers aren't flaming bullets, either.

Flaming projectiles kind of went out of style after Robin Hood's day when guns took over from bows and arrows.

MWL · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2006, 03:58:01 PM »

Greetings,

Ah yes. However, for .50 cal there was Ball, Tracer, Armor Percing, and Armor Percing Incendiary. What is modeled here? Ball/Tracer, AP/Tracer or APIT/Tracer?

Regards,

zorstorer · « **Reply #7 on:** December 13, 2006, 04:20:20 PM »

Ammo content for aces high has been averaged for the entire belt.

Meaning even if you had a plane with mine rounds, the over all average explosive power for a single round of ammo from that averaged belt would be much lower than that of the single mine round but slightly higher than that of an armor piercing round.

B@tfinkV · « **Reply #8 on:** December 13, 2006, 04:53:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Denholm
I would actually test the as you call it "theory". Simply because I have a friend who's been shooting all types of firearms for 34 years now. He will tell you that you can NOT blow up a fuel tank using a non-tracer round. I didn't believe it myself, yet I'd rather believe someone who's been doing it than myself.

wow, im surprised if thats true!

you mean to say there is 0% chance of igniting a tank of ether buy piercing it with a super-sonic chunk of lead?

i'll take your word for it as that guy has been shooting longer than ive been alive, but wow im still surprised and wouldnt be the one to test it.

Quote

Originally posted by Golfer
Tracers aren't flaming bullets, either.

Flaming projectiles kind of went out of style after Robin Hood's day when guns took over from bows and arrows.

lol not quite true. sure we dont use an oil soaked rag tied to a piece of wood anymore, but burning phosphorus bullets are still 'on fire', in essance. Flaming projectiles were often used right up in the 1900s, in some form or another. They even used a type of incendary round back in WW1 for shooting down observation balloons.

i seem to recall that there was a law of war that prosecuted any pilot who used these rounds for normal air to air combat, and you needed a special written order form to even be allowed to take them out of the armoury.

lol shooting these rounds at another pilot in air combat was considered 'poor form' back in these days, but throwing a grenade into a trench with 10 soldiers packed in was considered heroic...

that style of thinking all changed in 1939, surely. lol...

'herr Hans, take zis new gun on your plane, vun bullet vill blow an aircraft into tiny pieces and chop ze pilot in half.'

or

'hey Eddy, i don't think having six .50cal machine guns on a plane is enough man, lets make a bigger one with....like.... 8 guns and a watermelon load more bombs n stuff, that'd be killer, dude.'

'werd dude, none of those backward yuuropeans will think of putting 8 big f-off machineguns on one fighter plane, sweet, America is going to totaly own the next 500 years at least.'

Saxman · « **Reply #9 on:** December 13, 2006, 05:27:32 PM »

The Mythbusters went after the gas tank on a car with a variety of weapons (including some pretty high-powered rifles) and none of them were able to touch off the gas.

Traveler · « **Reply #10 on:** December 13, 2006, 07:40:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MWL
Greetings,

Ah yes. However, for .50 cal there was Ball, Tracer, Armor Percing, and Armor Percing Incendiary. What is modeled here? Ball/Tracer, AP/Tracer or APIT/Tracer?

Regards,

Has it almost right, Aircraft of WWII used Tracer rounds and AP Incendiary rounds, with a setup of 4 Incendiary rounds to one Tracer round on two guns with just Incendiary rounds on the remaining guns. Using the tracer rounds to adjust fire.

Debonair · « **Reply #11 on:** December 14, 2006, 12:10:21 AM »

i remember reading an anecdote about an erk in the RAF who was so confident a bullet wouldn't ignite a gas tank that he had a friend put a round into a full DT (or maybe it was a barrel) while he was standing on it.
and thats how he died
OMG pawned!!!:O

Ball · « **Reply #12 on:** December 14, 2006, 09:55:19 AM »

yah... explosive non tracer cannon rounds should just go right through fuel tankz and not exploded them.

Denholm · « **Reply #13 on:** December 15, 2006, 08:52:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saxman
The Mythbusters went after the gas tank on a car with a variety of weapons (including some pretty high-powered rifles) and none of them were able to touch off the gas.

Nice to hear someone else tell about the truth, and as for you ball, if it "explodes" inside a gas tank, you think it wouldn't have caused fire?

VVV · « **Reply #14 on:** December 15, 2006, 06:31:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by B@tfinkV
we could then use DTs to bomb civillians.