Aircraft durability

[Hooligan]

Brady:

I'm glad you are sharing your information in these discussions  .  In this particular case I just wanted to add some more information that I had and that apparently you did not.

I believe that early British usage of ball and AP ammo was a result of production and supply difficulties and not of preference.  More details are available in the excellent book:  "Guns of the Royal Airforce" (the source for my 50/50 AP/I HE/I statement), but my copy is currently out on loan so I can't really check it now  .

As far as picking our own ammo loads:  I have no doubt that it will come eventually and be very cool.  However currently the damage model is not sophisticaed enough to support it.  I don't believe that penetration is really modelled and I certainly haven't seen any indication that most of the internal components of an aircraft (hydrallics for example) are in the damage map.

Jochen:

Fighter aircraft were compactly constructed with many components crowded into a relatively small area.  Literally every one of these components is necessary for the proper functioning of the aircraft so damage to any of them is highly undesireable.  From any angle, 1/3 or more of the hits will be pointed at a component that if damaged, might cripple the aircraft (such as the pilot, engine, fuel, ammunition etc...).  Armor piercing rounds not only serve the purpose of defeating pilot or engine armor, but of ensuring that the round penetrates far enough to damage any of a number of internal components.  It is my understanding that pure AP rounds were quite rare by the end of the war.  By this time, almost all rounds had some incendiary or explosive content.  Thus a machine gun round which damaged the engine might also start a fire.  FYI in the study "Aircraft vulnerability in WWII" by the Rand Corp. the 2 leading killers of single engine aircraft were pilot/cockpit hits and fire.

Hooligan

[Jimdandy]

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
Brady:

I'm glad you are sharing your information in these discussions   .  In this particular case I just wanted to add some more information that I had and that apparently you did not.

I believe that early British usage of ball and AP ammo was a result of production and supply difficulties and not of preference.  More details are available in the excellent book:  "Guns of the Royal Airforce" (the source for my 50/50 AP/I HE/I statement), but my copy is currently out on loan so I can't really check it now   .

As far as picking our own ammo loads:  I have no doubt that it will come eventually and be very cool.  However currently the damage model is not sophisticaed enough to support it.  I don't believe that penetration is really modelled and I certainly haven't seen any indication that most of the internal components of an aircraft (hydrallics for example) are in the damage map.

Jochen:

Fighter aircraft were compactly constructed with many components crowded into a relatively small area.  Literally every one of these components is necessary for the proper functioning of the aircraft so damage to any of them is highly undesireable.  From any angle, 1/3 or more of the hits will be pointed at a component that if damaged, might cripple the aircraft (such as the pilot, engine, fuel, ammunition etc...).  Armor piercing rounds not only serve the purpose of defeating pilot or engine armor, but of ensuring that the round penetrates far enough to damage any of a number of internal components.  It is my understanding that pure AP rounds were quite rare by the end of the war.  By this time, almost all rounds had some incendiary or explosive content.  Thus a machine gun round which damaged the engine might also start a fire.  FYI in the study "Aircraft vulnerability in WWII" by the Rand Corp. the 2 leading killers of single engine aircraft were pilot/cockpit hits and fire.

Hooligan

That sounds like it matches the model we have fairly well. Like you say it's not a detailed model but it's effect is the same. The only thing I'm not seeing on here for damage is oil on the windscreen. Flames and smoke out of the engine cowling and in the cockpit would be neat also. I had an old flight sim called Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. It had oil accumulate on the windscreen and smoke and flames out of the engine cowling. It was tuff landing with your windscreen covered with oil. I'm sure in the future we will see a lot of this stuff added. Thanks for the info on the ammo load out. It sounds like they could load with whatever they wanted as long as it was available.

[Sorrow[S=A]]

An almost instant change would be to expand the damage areas on the tail to split all the stabs in half. Thus you would have a front, rear and elevator /rudder. This would probably cut the instant kill capability of the 20mm by 1/3 right off the bat. Right now once the 20mm chops it's way through the elevator/rudder the next 1 chops the stab right off. With 3 areas you would see more planes taking damage and still being flyable especially in the case of long range cannon shots.

[Jimdandy]

 

Originally posted by Sorrow[S=A]:
An almost instant change would be to expand the damage areas on the tail to split all the stabs in half. Thus you would have a front, rear and elevator /rudder. This would probably cut the instant kill capability of the 20mm by 1/3 right off the bat. Right now once the 20mm chops it's way through the elevator/rudder the next 1 chops the stab right off. With 3 areas you would see more planes taking damage and still being flyable especially in the case of long range cannon shots.

There's an idea.  

[Jigster]

   

Note the date on the side of the Spit. Also note the bundle of Hispano rounds on the wing and how they are marked.

Here's a Hurricane IIC @ November '44. Note the round types via markings.

   

 

------------------
     
33rd FW www.33rd.org



[This message has been edited by Jigster (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Buzzbait]

S! all

A survey was done after the war which concluded that most of the damage done by aircraft fired rounds was due to kinetic energy.  As someone has mentioned, a 20mm round will go right through a wing before exploding unless it hits a major spar.  There are many anecdotal acounts by pilots who were wounded by Cannon rounds going through the outer skin of an aircraft and exploding in the fuselage or cockpit.  20mm Cannon rounds were very effective when they hit a solid heavy target which slowed or stopped them.  But otherwise, the explosive force was wasted.  They were more effective proportionately against Bombers and other larger aircraft than Fighters.  A 30mm cannon round however, has so much kinetic force, that almost anything it hit was badly messed up.

[Tyro48]

You must remember that the rudder and horizontal stab of a B17 was covered with cloth not aluminum, so it did tend to get pretty tore up but was also easily repaired.

Secondly you have to factor in where rounds are hitting and what kind of stress that area is carring, thats why the Aces always tried to hit the wing roots if they had a good shot at them, hitting the wing root at close range even with 50's tended to cause the wing to just fold up, in addition 50's could saw a wing off with their rate of fire while 20mm relied upon kinetic energy impact and the following explosion because their rate of fire was slower than that of the 50 cals, and with luck hitting a fuel bladder with API or 20mm would just ruin the pilots whole day, so its a matter of what ya hit how long and hard ya hit it, remember E=MV  the closer you are the more damage you do.

What would also effect game play that isnt modeled at least I dont think it is, would be the effect of a round entry point and exit point and what this does to flight dynamics, any of you who have done any hunting can attest to the difference between and entry and exit hole, put this on the skin of an aircraft and every round you take dings your flight dynamics, if you have taken 50 rounds to the wing root a loop or hard wing over would not be advised so now your ACM options are starting to go down etc.

[Sorrow[S=A]]

Tyro what B-17 are YOU looking at?
All those that saw service had stressed aluminum skin coverings. The one in question was hit by 1 (one) 20mm shell that peeled the vertical stab open like a fruit.

[Maverick]

One thing keeps being missed here about impacts of ordinance on aircraft. In most cases the impact is not at 90 degrees from the gun. The target is being hit by a grazing type of impact. That would tend to make an elongated hole rather than a circular one. This makes a larger hole and stretches it to the point where the round gets past the skin. Once the skin is broken it is also subject to wind damage as it is peeled or pushed by air passage as it continues to fly (or fall) after being hit. The most likely to be damaged by the wind is the fabric covering that was still being used on the elevator and rudders on many aircraft.

Mav

[Toad]

Battle damaged B-17's?

Glad you asked!      

Go here:
 http://www.ixpres.com/ag1caf/B-17/


...and these photos were taken AFTER they returned to base. Trust me, you'll see some overmodeled B-17's.

 


    "Hang the Expense Again III" was seen heavily damaged, going down over France. The pilot, however, was able to bring  it out of a dive and struggled back to his home field.  The blast damage blew the tail gunner out of the aircraft but he survived the incident.
SOURCE: Flying Forts by Martin Caiden, additional material by Ray Cary

     

This ball turret shows the effect of a 20mm shell which exploded against the faceplate. The gunner was wounded, but survived the jarring blast. Was this a HO??  
Text and photo source: Air Classics magazine, July 1972

Sorry about the edits. Took a while to remember how to do a pic.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 01-16-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 01-16-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 01-16-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 01-16-2001).]

[flakbait]

Jimdandy,

Yep, each round fired has the penetration and ballistics of an AP round along with the HE round explosive content. So you get an "illegal" round being fired. AP shells would just punch holes in things; not very effective against fighters unless you're a good shot. HE rounds impact then explode, causing more damage per strike. An AP shell might punch a clean hole in a wing, but an HE round would blow a nice-sized chunk out of it. The Hispanos are firing both types of ammo, but the effects are combined into a single round.


-----------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School
"During the Battle of Britain the question 'fighter or fighter-bomber?'
had been decided once and for all: The fighter can only be used as a bomb carrier
with lasting effect when sufficient air superiority has been won." Adolph Galland
 

[Vermillion]

 

The Hispanos are firing both types of ammo, but the effects are combined into a single round.

For the @*##$@@%!!!!! 4,829th time Every Gun  in Aces High is modeled this way. NOT just the HISPANO

You guys keep making it sound as if its wrong because its only the hispano that has this advantage. Not true, they all have this.




------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[Jimdandy]

   

Originally posted by Vermillion:
For the @*##$@@%!!!!! 4,829th time Every Gun  in Aces High is modeled this way. NOT just the HISPANO

You guys keep making it sound as if its wrong because its only the hispano that has this advantage. Not true, they all have this.

Well if every fu&^(^$ gun is modeled this way then non have an advantage over the other. So it comes down to the plane being so popular as they have said. It doesn't hurt that it carries a lot of rounds too. At any rate this has been an informative fu%$*(% post.     Just ribbing you Verm.    

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 01-17-2001).]

[Graywolf]

 

Originally posted by F4UDOA:


1. The Typhoon is one of the best air to air vehicles in AH. However IRL it was all but removed from the air to air role until it's successor, the Tempest was brought into service.

This is misleading. IN the ETO most of the air-to-air action took place at high altitude, 30,000 ft was not an uncommon altitude. IN the Aces High Main Arena most engagements are below 10,000 ft.

Fuel a Typhoon up fully, take it to 25,000 ft and see how it handles. You'll soon realise that the Aces High Typhoon would have just as poor a record if used at this altitude...

All IMO of course  




------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>

[MiG Eater]

 

Originally posted by Tyro48:
You must remember that the rudder and horizontal stab of a B17 was covered with cloth not aluminum

The elevator control surface had fabric covering, not the whole horz stab.  The ailerons were covered in fabric as well.  

How many here know that a good deal of an early F4U's outer wing panels were covered in fabric?  

MiG