Originally posted by LLv34_Camouflage
Great films, thanks!
Please compare these two clips. Notice especially the relative size of the target and the shooting results.
http://mezek.valka.cz/texty/filmy/data/utok1.mpeg (1.2MB)
http://mezek.valka.cz/texty/filmy/data/utok2.mpeg (0.9MB)
In the first film, the shooting is "spray and pray", the target is only hit with two HE rounds, one in each wing. The size of the target is about three finger widths on my screen.
In the second film, the results are much better, with a good long burst landed in the cockpit area. The target is significantly closer, showing as six fingers wide on my screen. The results of the gunnery are stunningly better in this film.
Of course, pilot skills and all that make a huge difference, but just compare the dispersion. In the first film the rounds are all over the screen, in the second one the target is so close that a well aimed burst hits with deadly results. The closer the better.
The reality in AH is very different that what these films show.
Camo
Great Films. Would you care to venture to guess a hit percentage for both films?
For the first one I count about 30 tracers with about 4 hits for a percentage of around 7.5%. Of course this doesn't take into account the rounds inbetween tracers nor none HE hits. Still 7.5% is not very far of from MA average hit percentage.
Which brings me to another series of questions.
1. How many A2A kills occured during WW2?
2. How many A2A gun cam kills have you seen?
3. Is it possible that the gun cam footage you have seen, since it is entertainment, was selected for the level of visible violence?
4. If #3 is yes, would close in kills be preferable to long distance kills in regards to level of visible violence?
My point being that there were 10's of thousands more A2A kills during WW2 than any of us have seen footage of. Don't base reality on a small and biased sample.
F.
