Oh God; someone please fix this!

[Torquila]

The most rediculous thing ever; the tail guns on the 410 dont even shoot towards the center of the crosshair!

[Drano]

Torq I hate to break this to ya but that thing is nothing short of a target drone. Nothing you're gonna do to it from removing the tail guns to "fixing" them is gonna help. It is what it is amigo.

It does look pretty cool tho I'll admit, but then I have a bias towards twins.

[Torquila]

bro, if your front firing .50s wern't lined up with your crosshair and you wanted it fixed, I doubt you would see me here telling you that the p38s were withdrawn from europe cause they sucked and you shouldnt bother...

[Drano]

  So...it was some major game changer in RL and we've got it wrong here? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to have it in the AH stable. Never said anything like it should be withdrawn. But my saying "it is what it is" is the same as saying "it was what it was", which in RL was not much. I get that you dig the 410 but it was never some dogfighting machine in RL. It was a heavy fighter, intended to be an improvement/upgrade over the 110 which also had some major issues defending itself vs other fighters. This is well documented.

But then again, the RL A-20 wasn't used in fighter mode either (acrobatic maneuvers were actually on the "do not try this" list although pilots being what they are I'm sure some did whacky stuff in it from time to time). And we see it used quite differenty here (and with some success too) <points at Cobia  > most of the time.

Only reason I said anything is I've noticed a lot of posts from you in recent days regarding the 410 and I'm paraphrasing but they pretty much rhyme with "if it only had this" or "if it didn't have this" then......what   ? I mean how much better do you think this plane would be, say, if HTC made all the changes you might come up with? Seriously. That's the point I'm trying to get across.

As to the tail guns here's a thread posted by you in the wishlist asking they be removed: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,346334.0.html

Ya want em or not?

[Ack-Ack]

bro, if your front firing .50s wern't lined up with your crosshair and you wanted it fixed, I doubt you would see me here telling you that the p38s were withdrawn from europe cause they sucked and you shouldnt bother...

But the P-38s weren't withdrawn from Europe...

ack-ack

[Krusty]

Fellas, I'm a big fan of the 410 and I won't pretend it was a "game changer" or anything like that, but it is rather poorly treated in Aces High. Rear guns are useless almost entirely because of the poor aiming view given the rear gunner (the entire canopy framing is waaaaay off, makes it so you can't even see out the guns). If there's a verified issue with the gunsights being off, please don't deride reporting such a bug.


My first LWA Me410 sortie I nailed 2 and scared off a 3rd with my tail guns. First sortie ever. Can't be all that bad.

[Drano]

Yeah Krusty I remember your well put together post pointing out the problems with the rear view. The one with the 8x10 color glossy photographs and the paragragh on the back of each one.... . Nicely done. It almost seems like to make it work right you'd need to have at least two sets of home views in that rear compartment. It was a complicated system on the real plane too. I mean how else could ya get your head to lean on either side of the plane almost at the same time in order to use the sight? Has anyone tried it using TrackIR? Is it better with that? Only asking because it almost seems like that kind of view system, where you could "lean" like that, would work for it. I don't have TrackIR.

The closest similar arrangement we have is in the JU88--but that's two different gunner positions. So not really.

[Hazard69]

Not that Ive really ever flown the 410, but if gunsights are the issue, couldn't one assign gunsights to the left and right rear gunners which are customised to the account for the error as a interim workaround?

I imagine it'd be a much better way to get some bang out of that buck?

Just my $0.02 

[VonMessa]

Yeah Krusty I remember your well put together post pointing out the problems with the rear view. The one with the 8x10 color glossy photographs and the paragragh on the back of each one.... . Nicely done. It almost seems like to make it work right you'd need to have at least two sets of home views in that rear compartment. It was a complicated system on the real plane too. I mean how else could ya get your head to lean on either side of the plane almost at the same time in order to use the sight? Has anyone tried it using TrackIR? Is it better with that? Only asking because it almost seems like that kind of view system, where you could "lean" like that, would work for it. I don't have TrackIR.

The closest similar arrangement we have is in the JU88--but that's two different gunner positions. So not really.

You forgot to mention the circles and arrows and the fact that there were 27 of them...     

[Torquila]

That is an issue as well hazard, you cant use seperate gunsites for the rear gunners, all it does is invert the main gunsite.

[Krusty]

Moving your head to the gunsight wasn't a problem. The canopy was larger where the gunner's head would be. It was curved outwards and expanded.

As for using TIR: I don't have it but I have moved my head position all over those rear left and right gunner views. The problem is systemic. The fuselage curves inward on ours but the real thing was flat. The gunsights were able to look past the fuselage downards in the real thing but ours gets blocked by not only the fuselage but the window framing itself (which is wrong). The gunsights are too close, the fuselage curves wrong, the windows are wrong. Basically it needs an entire redo on HTCs part to fix the problems with the aft guns on the 410.

Don't hold your breath.   

[SmokinLoon]

I too have had good luck with the rear guns on the Me410.  I do not believe I've shot anyone down, but I've oiled plenty and forced many more to think twice about casually coming down on my six.  My favorite is to maneuver hard (NOT stick stir!!!) and watch that P51 just sit back and slow up with me, then I'll hop in to the rear guns while on low throttle and bloody his nose with a nice long burst of the dual 13mm's.  I do that in the Bf110G-2 as well, though it has 8mm's instead. 

I do not aim any different with the rear guns on the 410 than I do in the B17, I hit what I aim (and miss more often than not).   

[Torquila]

You will notice the distinct difference that the stream of bullets actually center well below the dot.

Try imaging a dot underneath it then account for drop, you will find hitting things much easier.

[Krusty]

At what distance? Guns are technically turret guns and are slaved to converge at 500 yards. Closer than this and they will be "lower" because the guns are much lower down the sides of the fuselage from the gunsight viewpoint.

Same thing happens on a P-51... Set your guns for 500 and try shooting a target at 200, you'll see the guns are way low and off-target. This doesn't mean they're not aligned, just that you're not at convergence distsance.

[Torquila]

I think I found the problem, the firing mechanism is upside-down.

Which would explain why it inverts the gunsite as well as firing down and away and not up and towards the gundot.

PS: I should have known, looking at those side turrets gunsites, HT probably put a positive convergance on them in that state which means the gun would align itself inverted. So "all he needs to do" is set it to a negative convergance as well (If technically possible in the game) to "uninvert" the currently inverted setting.