Tank poll

[hlbly]

Still have the problem of acquisition tell me how did you acquire the La7 ? You basically had a telepathically linked TC and Gunner who could compare notes in an instant . Try to acquire a landing airplane coming straight at you with a 13 power rifle scope , using only the scope . No Karnak you are right it is only unlikely . About the same chance as everyone on this bbs winning a megabucks jackpot 3 times . In Aces High it happens how often ? I watched a guy shoot down several planes last night including tracking shots .Not a lot of deflection but some . If it could be done why go to the trouble of building purpose built machines ?  How big a percentage of strafing runs do you think are made like the one you just described ? Shallow angle long approach ? I only noe Your turret makes it so you will always have a 0 deflection shot if you are the target . Surely if it is possible then the countless tanks that have been attacked by aircraft it has happened . There has to be a mention of it somewhere . If not from Datman's point of view then surely something from the pilots point of view . Training literature , debriefing on how so and so got it from this or that tank . Something . Look everyone that has spent any time in an AFV with a turret has tried . Have TC use his over ride to get you close and try to acquire the target . When you do have that super rare occasion you glimpse  a plane <never had it happen to me> . It is fleeting in the extreme . a black something in field of view for a small fraction of a second . You don't take long to quit trying . The only thing I can think of to correct this would be to have the gun move a few degrees/mils in both deflection and elevation when you jump from TC to Gunner . I know it can be done in here . I can prove it can and has been done . I have practical knowledge of the fact . I also have practical knowledge in the real world . It can't be done !!! Unfortunately I can't prove a negative . You are great at research show me one instance where it was tried . Karnak  basically I see your argument as this . I did it in AH2 so it is possible if not probable in RL .  If it is possible . Then it was tried . If it was tried very much , there is documentation on it . If it happened even a few times some type of training material on how it was done and what you need to learn to be able to do it too.

[Karnak]

I acquired the La-7 when he dropped into my gunsight's cross hairs while I was aiming at enemy tanks.  It was sorta hard to not notice the big 'ol La-7 filling the sight and blocking my view of the tanks I was engaged with.  I never saw him in any view other than from the gunsight.


Obviously this was a very specific situation and by no means a blanket whitewash of the problem of using the main guns against aircraft.

[MK-84]

Actually, in the case of the La-7 I didn't have to do any tracking at all.  He flew straight down the cross hairs.  I didn't move the gun at all from the position I had it in to use against the tanks I was fighting.  It doesn't matter how small the field of view was unless you're going to claim it is 0 degrees as he literally put himself in my sight and held himself there as he flew at me firing his 20mm cannons.  There was no lead to pull, I just put a 75mm AP round straight through his engine at a range of about 100 yards.

Don't mistake "extremely unlikely" for "impossible" as they are infinitely far apart.  The fact is that in the right circumstances it is possible, but generally requires significant assistance from the pilot of the aircraft.

And in AH the pilots frequently give us that assistance, then complain when they fly low, slow, and straight at a tank.

 

[Butcher]

I've shot down enough aircraft in GV's, a decent gunner will know the Arc and distance to fire, crossing shots are much much harder but not impossible.

Even shot down a Jug at 5-6k diving straight down on me, climbed a hill in a panther so my gun would fire straight upward, scored a hit at 1.5k.

[WWhiskey]

Germans flew high to keep from taking main gun shots from T-34's on the eastern front,,, or was it the other way around?  anyway there is another thread devoted to this and links to documents disproving the myth that it couldn't be done!
 now weather it was done or not is a different story, and yes the coordination between commander and gunner would have to be almost telepathic, but many in game fly strait and level right  down the barrel of a tank and then blow steam because they got killed?  if I go to the gunner position and it is full of b-17,,, all i have to do is pull the trigger!
 I can hit a moving tank at 4 k out on a hillside,,, why wouldn't I be able to hit a low flying, unwary pilot?

[100Coogn]

The Gv's are here for the Planes.

Very true.  Saved my tail more than once.   

Coogan

[R 105]

And in AH the pilots frequently give us that assistance, then complain when they fly low, slow, and straight at a tank.

 

I can just about grantee you I could put you in a WWII tank of your choice and fly a 747 straight at you at 500 feet and you would not only not hit it with the main gun you would not even find it in the sights. Think of it this way. Drill a small hole in a wall looking into another room placing you eye up to it like Norman Bates. All you will see is what pasts right in front of you and then only for a moment. Now let go one more step. Drill a hole in the side of a u-haul truck and have it drive over rough ground at 30mph while you try to pick out that 747 flying right at you. It is like driving a car looking through a paper towel tube. Shooting flying aircraft is gamey and should be done away with. Just make it so rounds don't hit flying planes kind of like the friendly collision model we have now.

[icepac]

I've killed a plane with every gun in the sim including the shore battery.

The one thing in common in all of the kills was the plane flying straight down the barrel.

You can't miss when the attacking pilot has zero skill.

[Karnak]

I can just about grantee you I could put you in a WWII tank of your choice and fly a 747 straight at you at 500 feet and you would not only not hit it with the main gun you would not even find it in the sights. Think of it this way. Drill a small hole in a wall looking into another room placing you eye up to it like Norman Bates. All you will see is what pasts right in front of you and then only for a moment. Now let go one more step. Drill a hole in the side of a u-haul truck and have it drive over rough ground at 30mph while you try to pick out that 747 flying right at you. It is like driving a car looking through a paper towel tube. Shooting flying aircraft is gamey and should be done away with. Just make it so rounds don't hit flying planes kind of like the friendly collision model we have now.

If you fly straight at the gunsight you will see it and that is what we are discussing here.  The gunsight does not have a magical "don't display aircraft in the field of view" effect.

[R 105]

If you fly straight at the gunsight you will see it and that is what we are discussing here.  The gunsight does not have a magical "don't display aircraft in the field of view" effect.

You guys with no real life military experience just don't get it. If tanks could shoot down aircraft with the main gun don't you think it would have happened by now? From 1916 to date. I am not talking about video games. It is like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle while sighting through a drinking straw from the trunk of a move car. What part of this don't you understand? I can't explain it any simpler than this.

[WWhiskey]

You guys with no real life military experience just don't get it. If tanks could shoot down aircraft with the main gun don't you think it would have happened by now? From 1916 to date. I am not talking about video games. It is like trying to shoot a flying bird with a rifle while sighting through a drinking straw from the trunk of a move car. What part of this don't you understand? I can't explain it any simpler than this.

How many of us do you think don't have military experiance?
I used to fly target drones for the US Army , we did infantry qualifacation for small arms all the way up to live fire missiles at Creete and everything in between, I've watched m-60 and M1 main guns track aircraft
I've read of the WW2 accounts of aircraft on the eastern front having to fly high to avoid main gun rounds and the tanks that would Park "gun up" to be able to fire on them , a new tactic at the time to stop the planes from coming in low to avoid detection for fear of getting hit by a main gun round, if I wasn't at work, I'd dig it up for you to read! If I can hit a plane on the ground, then I can hit it on the move, if I can hit it on the move, then there is no reason why I wouldn't be able to hit above the ground, if it is flying into the gun and I side of an arc that would prevent the round from going anywhere but strait, flat and true, and my gun sight is full of plane, it would be a physical impossibility to miss it!
If I were aiming at the 6th story of a building and 2k out and could hit it, there is no reason I couldn't hit it if it were moving 200 mph, strait at me, may e not the sixth floor but whatever part of the building is still infront of my gun when I fire, is going to get a round put thru it!

[titanic3]

Is there an actual picture of the view you would get looking through the main gunsight?

[hlbly]

How many of us do you think don't have military experiance?
I used to fly target drones for the US Army , we did infantry qualifacation for small arms all the way up to live fire missiles at Creete and everything in between, I've watched m-60 and M1 main guns track aircraft
I've read of the WW2 accounts of aircraft on the eastern front having to fly high to avoid main gun rounds and the tanks that would Park "gun up" to be able to fire on them , a new tactic at the time to stop the planes from coming in low to avoid detection for fear of getting hit by a main gun round, if I wasn't at work, I'd dig it up for you to read! If I can hit a plane on the ground, then I can hit it on the move, if I can hit it on the move, then there is no reason why I wouldn't be able to hit above the ground, if it is flying into the gun and I side of an arc that would prevent the round from going anywhere but strait, flat and true, and my gun sight is full of plane, it would be a physical impossibility to miss it!
If I were aiming at the 6th story of a building and 2k out and could hit it, there is no reason I couldn't hit it if it were moving 200 mph, strait at me, may e not the sixth floor but whatever part of the building is still infront of my gun when I fire, is going to get a round put thru it!

Show me where you have seen accounts of this on eastern front . Just show me, all of this I have read I have seen, not one source . Yes the main gun is the only large caliber cannon that doesn't need a fuse ? One source ?

[Butcher]

Show me where you have seen accounts of this on eastern front . Just show me, all of this I have read I have seen, not one source . Yes the main gun is the only large caliber cannon that doesn't need a fuse ? One source ?

Russian Guard unit that used M4's

- I do not know why, but a lot of tanks came with machine guns, and the other - no. This gun we used against aircraft against ground targets. Against aircraft used infrequently because the Germans, too, are not fools were bombed or from a height or a steep dive. The machine gun was good for 400-600 meters. The Germans bombed, probably, from 800 meters and above. He threw a bomb and quickly left. Try it, the dog Shoot down! So used, but inefficiently. We even used a gun against the airplane: you put the tank on the slope of the hill and shoot. But the overall impression - a good gun. These guns helped us a lot in the war with Japan - against suicide bombers. They fired so many guns that glowed and began to spit. I'm still sitting in the head piece of the anti-aircraft machine gun.

http://iremember.ru/tankisti/loza-dmitriy-fedorovich/stranitsa-3.html

[hlbly]

What gun is he referring too . I would prefer a source in a language I can read . You claim it was and can be done . Show me something in either German or English I can't read Russian . I really am not sure what gun he is talking about ? If it was US M4 is he stating M2 is only effective to 600 yards ? To illustrate my point about attacks against tanks . Here is a link , note shallow angle . Your source is claiming suicide bombers were common against Soviet tanks ? They don't even invade Manchuria until 2 days before Japan accepts terms of Potsdam ? He says they helped alot ? Really ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOn-Jt7J6Tk