Author Topic: Il2 Durability (Read 1006 times)

Wilbus · « **Reply #45 on:** October 20, 2002, 01:13:03 PM »

CC Kweassa, logic thing is mm, just a bti confused that the picture didn't say.

Now, obviously that armor protected pretty good, all around the airplane. It had lots of it. I just don't get why even a 30 cal can penetrate such armor shields and kill and engine with a single ping. The Il2 had 4mm forward engine Ring, which must quite obviously have protected from fire the size (ATLEAST) 30 cal. But it doesn't.

Innominate · « **Reply #46 on:** October 20, 2002, 01:19:43 PM »

The il2 DOES have the best protected engine in the game.

It took 7 rounds from an m3's .50 MG at 40 yards from directly in front to kill it.

Most planes took 4 rounds. A few took 5.

This is back to the issue of damage model, where everything simply has a HP counter that is decreased as it gets hit. So even .30's will kill anything, with enough shots.

Wilbus · « **Reply #47 on:** October 20, 2002, 01:56:08 PM »

If a single round don't penetrate the armor neither would 2000. Dammage modell needs some serious updating.

Angus · « **Reply #48 on:** October 21, 2002, 12:01:42 PM »

For the topic of this thread:
I have flown the Il-2 quite a bit recently, and come to like it very much. I have to complement HTC on their work there, and I doubt that either IL-2 durability or firepower could be tweaked anywhere without spreading the whole planeset on a wider scale.
(Which is, BTW, what I think that should be done;)
Anyway, I have found the IL-2 to be the most durable plane I ever flew, no matter whether I was being shot by GV's or planes, and also it packs quite a punch. I find no better plane to pop osties in than the Il-2. And scrambling from a capped airfield there is simply nothing better to survive in than the Il-2, it can take quite some bursts before going down, and even then, it may stick together.
Also, people often make the mistake of HOing an Il-2, and also underestimate its turning circle, - that brought quite a lot of meat on my butcher's table you know.

Wotan · « **Reply #49 on:** October 21, 2002, 12:49:53 PM »

Hmm then a8 has better armor then that.....

6.5mm oil cooler armor in the nose

Wilbus · « **Reply #50 on:** October 21, 2002, 12:58:45 PM »

What's even more interesting Wotan, is the Ta152H that had a total of 150 karmor around the Cockpit and Engine ALONE (not countring fuel tanks and such). The armored ring that protected the engine/radiator was upped to 15mm for instance, that 15mm ring is penetrated by a single 30 cal in AH.

HoHun · « **Reply #51 on:** October 21, 2002, 01:41:09 PM »

Hi Xjazz,

>Mr. Wind fly Brewster (4*0.5) till 1943 and then change to the Bf109G2/6.

Nevertheless, the text you referred to makes no mention of the Messerschmitt or its cannon armament. It does talk about the Brewster and its machine gun armament though. The division of the Soviet planes in aircraft "slower" and "faster" than the own aircraft certainly is not based on the Me 109G-2/G-6 either.

Accordingly, Wind's comments describe the difficulties of shooting down the Il-2 with 0.50" guns, not with 20 mm cannon.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Xjazz · « **Reply #52 on:** October 21, 2002, 02:17:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Xjazz,

Nevertheless, the text you referred to makes no mention of the Messerschmitt or its cannon armament. It does talk about the Brewster and its machine gun armament though. The division of the Soviet planes in aircraft "slower" and "faster" than the own aircraft certainly is not based on the Me 109G-2/G-6 either.

Accordingly, Wind's comments describe the difficulties of shooting down the Il-2 with 0.50" guns, not with 20 mm cannon.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Hi HoHun

You could be right but text mention 12.7mm which is .50Cal (imho) and other caliber not mentioned in Solo Fighting part.

Staga, Fishu, Camo or WMaker maybe could tell more if about this one.

Wmaker · « **Reply #53 on:** October 21, 2002, 05:30:03 PM »

Hiya Jazz and Hohun!

Hohun is correct on this one. Wind's LeLv 24 had not yet recieved 109s when he wrote this lecture in 1943 and he basically wrote it with Brewster in mind (based on his combat experiences in LeLv 24). Also that part about where/how to shoot an IL-2 IMO exactly decribes how machine guns should be used against it.

It's true though that many finnish 109 aces preferred to shoot into wing roots and said that in many instances the wing came off that way. The radiator was also a preffered target.