simple Lancstuka fix

[Motherland]

The Ju 88 was actually used as a dive-bomber as well as as a level bomber.

[RTHolmes]

the lanc is the main culprit due to its loadout (and i happened to have the docs handy), I'm pretty sure all bombers have limits so whatever was specified would do.

the B-25 limits are complex as you would expect, but it could be modelled as simply as required. the coad already knows which station and type of ord is being dropped so different angles for different stations/ords could be modelled.

[Karnak]

the lanc is the main culprit due to its loadout (and i happened to have the docs handy), I'm pretty sure all bombers have limits so whatever was specified would do.

The B-17 and B-24 would have harsher limits than the Lancaster as their bomb bays are short and deep whereas the Lancaster's is very long and shallow.

[frank3]

bombs released >30deg foul the airframe causing terminal damage.

problem solved

Great wish, finally an inovative idea

[Swatch]

Out of curiosity, why do you think dropping at those angles would foul the airframe.  Maybe at 90 degrees or 80 degrees, but not 30.

[frank3]

The bomb might hit the structure with its no-no spot, and cause an effect notorious for many bombs (explosion)

[RTHolmes]

Out of curiosity, why do you think dropping at those angles would foul the airframe.  Maybe at 90 degrees or 80 degrees, but not 30.

well the limits are there for a few different reasons, for wing hardpoints on twins the bombs might foul the props, release mechs may not work as designed causing the ords to tumble or jam in place. like karnak suggested some of the bomb bays are very "tall" - look at how they're stacked up inside a Havoc for example. airframe damage just looked like the most appropriate option from the AH damage model.

[Furball]

Am i naive to think that as long as the bomber aircraft pulls positive G at time of bomb drop, the bombs would come out of the racks?  I know from John Comer's book "Combat Crew", that even the G model B-17 would occasionally have problems with bombs getting stuck in the racks, do you think diving angle would make the bombs get stuck? 

As far as i know, the Ju-88 design was adapted to make it a dive bomber during the prototype stage, there wasn't a production model and then they suddenly thought "we should make this a dive bomber!".

I think it would be great if the limits on dive angle were placed on the allied 'heavies', because i think it would mean that the JU88 would rightfully take it's place as a great aircraft in AH, rather than suicide torp dropper as we have now.  I think the 88 is underutilised.

[waystin2]

JU88 Rocks!!!

[Swatch]

well the limits are there for a few different reasons, for wing hardpoints on twins the bombs might foul the props, release mechs may not work as designed causing the ords to tumble or jam in place. like karnak suggested some of the bomb bays are very "tall" - look at how they're stacked up inside a Havoc for example. airframe damage just looked like the most appropriate option from the AH damage model.

I figured that's what you were going for, but it occurred to me that if you're dive-bombing, the bombs will be moving at your same speed, and likely won't fall any faster than you flying toward the ground.  Release Mechanisms are a different cat to skin, but bombs definitely won't fall INTO the props, and are unlikely to fall toward the front of the aircraft at all.  That being said, proper (or should I say, improper) piloting could absolutely cause the bombs to go astray.  You're talking about quite a bit more extensive physics and damage modeling there I would guess.

[macerxgp]

While we're fixing the bombs, how about some better explosions and dust clouds? Don't tell me I'm the only one who thinks the "paper cutout" explosions are REALLY lame.

I know there's more I want, but I can't recall at the moment.

[frank3]

A good penalty for dropping bombs at improper angles, would be a damaged bomb-bay (would have to be modelled though). It seems to me instant death would be abit too much for that.

[SNIPER30]

Insert Quote
I like the idea of limiting the drop angle to what was really required for each aircraft. However, I can see it as a nightmare for HTC to implement due to a couple of different factors. Maybe when/if they redo the aircraft ordinance model it can be incorporated?

BTW here's a chart for the B-25C to give you an idea of the diving angles for each bomb point.

i am all for the 30 degree thing however if you look at the chart baumer put up i am also for the different tpyes of ord incendairy cluster bombs would be nice along with dept charges ....hint...hint(man i'm hungry think i'll go get myself a submarine samich) ,also if i'm in a osti,wirblewind or field gun and i shoot a bomber in the bomb bay with it's doors open and it still has bombs, it should explode