Yeah, I was thinking that.. Especially the one where the guy in the 110 just sits there, dead six off the b17 for like three minutes. Got me thinking how likely it was for turret gunners to be killed? Tail gunners specifically?
If I recall correctly, that bomber was being abandoned. It was by it's lonesome. The thing to note though is this; If you look closely, you will see the tail gunner firing on the 110 (there is a puff of smoke from the guns. Hard to see, but it is there). Eventually you see the gunner stop, either from being injured/killed and/or gun problems as you see the tail take a big hit. Not likely for him to leave his position at that time. The ball turret gun is pointed straight down, which if I recall correctly, is the position it would be in when the gunner gets in/out of the gun. So, chances are he wasn't in it when the 110 hits it.
The obvious difference is that our planes have "hp" for each part vs RL counters. If you put x rounds into a part, it will ALWAYS fail and fall off. In RL, if you put that same amount of that same ammo (or heavier) into that part, there is no guarantee that the part will fail, let alone fall off. Example: I recall someone say that when they put around 20(?) rounds of 20mm from a P-38 into the tail of a B-17, it will ALWAYS fall apart. This is simply not so in RL. It's highly unlikely that 20 or so rounds from a 20mm will cause the tail of a B-17 to fall apart. And If you look up photo's of damaged bombers, you will see damage those planes returned home with, that are simply IMPOSSIBLE for our bombers to suffer. We are shot down, period.
Wasn't the WWI Arena a test bed for a more detailed damage system? I THINK the reason it wasn't brought over to WW2 was that it was going to push requirements beyond a chunk of the player base, that and the necessity to update all planes to fly with the new damage system.
