Bomber gun madness(Tony Williams please)

[F4UDOA]

Karnak, DavePT40,

I agree.

Hazed,

I agree, it's probably the F4U damage model. What I didn't mention is that I took up a FW190A5 to kill the bastage that got me. I got all three of them although I took many hits I was very careful. The FW190 seems a bit more robust. The P-38 by comparison takes as much lead as a Panzer.

rshubert,

I can quote you the name of the Japanese ace that made the statement about 30 cal ammo bouncing off. He was very specific about having to shoot at a certain angle to do damage.

Also the only fabric covered areas of an F4U are the control surfaces such as the ailerons, rudder and elavator. That's it. The main portion of the wing was stressed aluminum.

The main portion of the wing was rated for 7G's at 12,000LBS. If you are saying that it is even possible to hit the wing in the same spot on a moving target at 350MPH I think you are mistaken.

I do not have the composition of the wing spar right now but I will post it shortly.

BTW, a 30cal bullet at 300yards is good for sniping but not good for vehicles or hard targets. Certainly not damaging structures. I could build a weight bearing structure out of cardboard and you couldn't snap it in two pieces with .30cal.

BTW F4U's have been landed with 40 plus 20 mill holes.

[Urchin]

Yea, I've read about the .30s 'bouncing off' as well, can't remember where I read it.  I've also read that the F4F's were tough enough that even the A6M2's cannons sometimes wouldn't penetrate the armor around the pilot.  That seems to be modelled anyway, the F4F is second only to the P38 in toughness in this game.

[F4UDOA]

Urchin,

Funny thing about the P-38. In the same book where the bouncing bullets comment is made "Japanese Navy Aces of WW2" the comment is also made about the tail snapping off of the P-38 with just a couple of cannon hits.

That thing could get hit with a howitzer in here and still fly through it.

[Pongo]

Originally posted by F4UDOA
Urchin,

Funny thing about the P-38. In the same book where the bouncing bullets comment is made "Japanese Navy Aces of WW2" the comment is also made about the tail snapping off of the P-38 with just a couple of cannon hits.

That thing could get hit with a howitzer in here and still fly through it.

It had an icreadably weak tail for about a year then they changed it.

[Tony Williams]

A few comments.

I think it is entirely possibly that 30 hits from a rifle-calibre MG, all landing in the same place, will sever a wing spar. What I don't believe is that such accuracy was even remotely possible from a flexibly-mounted gun in aerial combat.  The shoot-down record of such weapons was frankly terrible, and only a tiny percentage of shots fired hit the aircraft at all, let alone in the same place on the plane.

As to the ability of RCMG bullets to penetrate an aircraft's alloy skin, this is from 'Flying Guns WW2', comparing the .303 with the 7.92mm AP:

"The test then changed to shooting at the rear of the long-suffering Bristol Blenheim at the same distance, involving penetrating the rear fuselage before reaching the 4 mm armour plate protecting the rear gunner, which was angled at 60º to the line of fire. The results in this case were reversed; 33% of the .303" rounds reached the armour and 6% penetrated it. In contrast, only 23% of the 7.92 mm bullets reached the armour, and just 1% penetrated. The British speculated that the degree of stability of the bullets (determined by the bullet design and the gun's rifling) might have accounted for these differences. "

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

[Vermillion]

I'm not sure what that Japanese ace saw, or thought he saw, but there is no WWII aircraft skin on earth that will stop a .30 cal bullet.  As Tony said, even the armor on aircraft frequently couldn't stop meager rifle caliber rounds.  Let alone, heavy MG's and cannon.

[Sakai]

Originally posted by Urchin
By the way, the Val and Kate have .50 caliber rear guns in AH, not .30 caliber.  They'll kill anyone dumb enough to run up their butt no problem, if they can shoot straight.

Is this accurate?  The Jap planes have .50s in Aces High?

Sakai

[rshubert]

Tony, I just don't know about those quoted penetration effects, and I wonder if "reaching the armor" had more to do with bullet path deflection after striking the skin.  I will set up a test with my .30-06 M-1 and 8mm mauser rifles this weekend, and get back to you about penetration of aluminum by a bullet that is a bit less energetic than a wartime .30-06 or .303 as well as some M2 ball and AP I have.  It may be interesting to see how much a bullet will deflect after passing through the "skin".  I don't have any T6 or armor plate to test, though.

I will state again that I think a lot of the damage actually comes from the aerodynamic effects of the torn aluminum torquing and stressing the wing structure.  We will have to look into how much of the strength of the wing is skin stiffness, how much is spar.

All in all, as long as the damage model is consistent over time, I think we can play it as it is.

[F4UDOA]

Tony,

I agree that the accuracy from 300yards from a moving platform to a moving target is just silly.

Also I have in AH flown the Hurri with 8 .303 and landing hundreds of hits with little to show.

I think this is probably closer to reality than 30 rounds taking off a wing at the fuselauge.

Sakai,

When are you usually online so we can test?

[rshubert]

I remember that the outer wing panels were fabric covered, and did a little research to verify it.  Here's a link.

http://www.f4ucorsair.com/tdata/history.htm

It states that the outer wing panels were fabric covered, aft of the spar.  That matches my memory.  Of course, the leading edge would be aluminum skinned.

Don't quote me on this, and I'll need to check, but I think that they went all-aluminum for the -4 and above.

[Batz]

BTW F4U's have been landed with 40 plus 20 mill holes.

That proves nothing. Until you examine the damage from all F4Us, those that were lost and those that made it back, you cant make any determination on "toughness". For all we know there could be many who were lost at sea with a few 30 cal hits.

Unfortunately theres no way to examine those that were lost at sea or impacted the ground. Using an example of a few miracle planes making it home prove nothing. There was one guy on the board who say p38s can flew through 109s and telephone poles. He uses 1 example to "prove" his point.

Sakai (the real one) preferred the mg to the cannon. No plane skin can stop a 7.92 round. But the bullets can be deflected depending on the angle they impact. Look at the f4f and f4u from the rear. One can imagine the upper fuselage being at an angle at which rounds glance off.

I agree that the accuracy from 300yards from a moving platform to a moving target is just silly.

This has been brought up many times in referrence to all bomber guns and gvs mgs in ah. Its been said 1000 times that its a gameplay decision. Bombers are generally easy kills. But even the weakest of them can bite ya if you dont make a proper attack.

[Soda]

30-50 hits from anything might be a lot if they were concentrated or got "lucky".  Doesn't sound unreasonable that an airframe under stress that was hit by that number of rounds might fail in some way.  Not saying that happened since there is nothing to back that up, but it sounds plausible.

A side note, I had noticed that the "ping" sounds were not always representative of real hits against formations of bombers.  The rounds from bombers effectively left all guns that were firing at the same time, and arrived at the same time.  Each ping might therefore represent a number of hits.  Combine that with the concentration at a convergence point (like D500-D650 that maybe bomber guys set) and you might actually be receiving 2-3 times the damage you expected.  I had a film of this at one point a couple of months back where a Ju-88 cut me to pieces.  Turned out when I spoke with the pilot that I'd received the majority of my hits at the instant I passed his convergence setting from 4+ guns firing and that's where my plane broke up.

-Soda
Aces High Trainer Corps.
The Assassins.

[F4UDOA]

Rshubert,

I think the text your reading from is from the XF4U-1.

Regardless the inner wing (from the wing fold in) joining to the fuselage is the area Im talking about. That area is where the pilot walkway was and was certainly not fabric. Also this is the are were the wing locking mechanism and landing gear are located. This area is loaded with heavy metal construction.

Here are some notes on construction from Americas Hundred Thousand.

1. A main wing spar.

2. Front and aft torque boxes "These boxes had metal skins which were .091 inches." from AHT

3. "A spar web made of heavy metal sheet reinforced by vertical stiffiners" from AHT.

4. This section also housed the landing gear, wing folding mechanism with supports for the outer wing and telescopic flaps which were metal covered. Also from AHT.

It should be noted that the same F4U-1 airframe had the structural integrity for 7Gs at 12,000lbs, carrier landings and 4,000lbs of bombs increased to 6,000lbs of bombs after WW2.

If you were making this arguement for a P-39 or another "empty wing" A/C I might say yes. But no way here. In fact I have never heard or read of a total wing failure in an F4U or F6F.

In Korea Capt. Jesse Folmer took a 37Mill shell from a Mig-15 and was left with a hole in his wing. He determined it was to unstable for a carrier landing so he water ditched but the A/C was intact and flyable.

If you want concrete numbers I can provide those as well.

From the Naval Historic Center

In WW2

F6F
66,530 Action sorties
553 A/C lost to NME AA
6,503 tons of ordinace dropped

F4U
64,051 Action Sorties
349 A/C lost to NME AA
15,621 tons of ordinace dropped

Over twice the amount of ordinance dropped and almost half the losses of the Grumman iron works.

 I don't think .30 cal fire was a great concern.

FYI I can email this document I quoted if you like.

[Sakai]

F4UDOA, as the Dauphin, ws overheard in the French camp at Agincourt:


SCENE VII. The French camp, near Agincourt:

Enter the Constable of France, the LORD RAMBURES, ORLEANS, DAUPHIN, with others
Constable
Tut! I have the best armour of the world. Would it were day!

ORLEANS
You have an excellent armour; but let my horse have his due.

Constable
It is the best horse of Europe.

ORLEANS
Will it never be morning?

DAUPHIN
My lord of Orleans, and my lord high constable, you
talk of horse and armour?

ORLEANS
You are as well provided of both as any prince in the world.

DAUPHIN
What a long night is this! I will not change my
horse with any that treads but on four pasterns.
Ca, ha! he bounds from the earth, as if his
entrails were hairs; le cheval volant, the Pegasus,
chez les narines de feu! When I bestride him, I
soar, I am a hawk: he trots the air; the earth
sings when he touches it; the basest horn of his
hoof is more musical than the pipe of Hermes.

ORLEANS
He's of the colour of the nutmeg.

DAUPHIN
And of the heat of the ginger. It is a beast for
Perseus: he is pure air and fire; and the dull
elements of earth and water never appear in him, but
only in Patient stillness while his rider mounts
him: he is indeed a horse; and all other jades you
may call beasts.

Constable
Indeed, my lord, it is a most absolute and excellent horse.

DAUPHIN
It is the prince of palfreys; his neigh is like the
bidding of a monarch and his countenance enforces homage.

ORLEANS
No more, cousin.

DAUPHIN
Nay, the man hath no wit that cannot, from the
rising of the lark to the lodging of the lamb, vary
deserved praise on my palfrey: it is a theme as
fluent as the sea: turn the sands into eloquent
tongues, and my horse is argument for them all:
'tis a subject for a sovereign to reason on, and for
a sovereign's sovereign to ride on; and for the
world, familiar to us and unknown to lay apart
their particular functions and wonder at him. I
once writ a sonnet in his praise and began thus:
'Wonder of nature,'--

ORLEANS
I have heard a sonnet begin so to one's mistress.

DAUPHIN
Then did they imitate that which I composed to my
courser, for my horse is my mistress.

ORLEANS
Your mistress bears well.

DAUPHIN
Me well; which is the prescript praise and
perfection of a good and particular mistress.

Constable
Nay, for methought yesterday your mistress shrewdly
shook your back.

DAUPHIN
So perhaps did yours.

Constable
Mine was not bridled.

DAUPHIN
O then belike she was old and gentle; and you rode,
like a kern of Ireland, your French hose off, and in
your straight strossers.

Constable
You have good judgment in horsemanship.

DAUPHIN
Be warned by me, then: they that ride so and ride
not warily, fall into foul bogs. I had rather have
my horse to my mistress.

Constable
I had as lief have my mistress a jade.

DAUPHIN
I tell thee, constable, my mistress wears his own hair.

Constable
I could make as true a boast as that, if I had a sow
to my mistress.

DAUPHIN
'Le chien est retourne a son propre vomissement, et
la truie lavee au bourbier;' thou makest use of any thing.

Constable
Yet do I not use my horse for my mistress, or any
such proverb so little kin to the purpose.

RAMBURES
My lord constable, the armour that I saw in your tent
to-night, are those stars or suns upon it?

Constable
Stars, my lord.

DAUPHIN
Some of them will fall to-morrow, I hope.

Constable
And yet my sky shall not want.

DAUPHIN
That may be, for you bear a many superfluously, and
'twere more honour some were away.

Constable
Even as your horse bears your praises; who would
trot as well, were some of your brags dismounted.

DAUPHIN
Would I were able to load him with his desert! Will
it never be day? I will trot to-morrow a mile, and
my way shall be paved with English faces.

Constable
I will not say so, for fear I should be faced out of
my way: but I would it were morning; for I would
fain be about the ears of the English.

RAMBURES
Who will go to hazard with me for twenty prisoners?

Constable
You must first go yourself to hazard, ere you have them.

DAUPHIN
'Tis midnight; I'll go arm myself.

Exit

ORLEANS
The Dauphin longs for morning.

RAMBURES
He longs to eat the English.

Constable
I think he will eat all he kills.

ORLEANS
By the white hand of my lady, he's a gallant prince.

Constable
Swear by her foot, that she may tread out the oath.

ORLEANS
He is simply the most active gentleman of France.

Constable
Doing is activity; and he will still be doing.

ORLEANS
He never did harm, that I heard of.

Constable
Nor will do none to-morrow: he will keep that good name still.

ORLEANS
I know him to be valiant.

Constable
I was told that by one that knows him better than
you.

ORLEANS
What's he?

Constable
Marry, he told me so himself; and he said he cared
not who knew it

ORLEANS
He needs not; it is no hidden virtue in him.

Constable
By my faith, sir, but it is; never any body saw it
but his lackey: 'tis a hooded valour; and when it
appears, it will bate.

ORLEANS
Ill will never said well.

Constable
I will cap that proverb with 'There is flattery in friendship.'

ORLEANS
And I will take up that with 'Give the devil his due.'

Constable
Well placed: there stands your friend for the
devil: have at the very eye of that proverb with 'A
pox of the devil.'

ORLEANS
You are the better at proverbs, by how much 'A
fool's bolt is soon shot.'

Constable
You have shot over.

ORLEANS
'Tis not the first time you were overshot.

Enter a Messenger

Messenger
My lord high constable, the English lie within
fifteen hundred paces of your tents.

Constable
Who hath measured the ground?

Messenger
The Lord Grandpre.

Constable
A valiant and most expert gentleman. Would it were
day! Alas, poor Harry of England! he longs not for
the dawning as we do.

ORLEANS
What a wretched and peevish fellow is this king of
England, to mope with his fat-brained followers so
far out of his knowledge!

Constable
If the English had any apprehension, they would run away.

ORLEANS
That they lack; for if their heads had any
intellectual armour, they could never wear such heavy
head-pieces.

RAMBURES
That island of England breeds very valiant
creatures; their mastiffs are of unmatchable courage.

ORLEANS
Foolish curs, that run winking into the mouth of a
Russian bear and have their heads crushed like
rotten apples! You may as well say, that's a
valiant flea that dare eat his breakfast on the lip of a lion.

Constable
Just, just; and the men do sympathize with the
mastiffs in robustious and rough coming on, leaving
their wits with their wives: and then give them
great meals of beef and iron and steel, they will
eat like wolves and fight like devils.

ORLEANS
Ay, but these English are shrewdly out of beef.

Constable
Then shall we find to-morrow they have only stomachs
to eat and none to fight. Now is it time to arm:
come, shall we about it?

ORLEANS
It is now two o'clock: but, let me see, by ten
We shall have each a hundred Englishmen.

Exeunt


Sakai

[rshubert]

Originally posted by F4UDOA
Rshubert,

I think the text your reading from is from the XF4U-1.

 

Nope.  I checked again, and the fabric covering stayed on until the F4U-5.  Nevertheless, I appreciate the info about the skin thickness.  It will help my tests this weekend.  I can get hold of some sheet aluminum 1/8" thick that will do nicely for penetration tests.

Don't think that I am going after the F4U in any way--I love that bird, and think it was one of the top two or three planes of all time.  It is tough, but I know it could be shot down.

I propose to test penetration and deflection at 90, 45, 30 and 15 degrees from the horizontal.  My guess is that I will be able to penetrate at all angles with ball ammo, but I won't predict what deflection will be.  I will set up a target 1 meter behind the test coupons to measure deflection angle.  At 90 degrees, there should be minimal deflection, and I will set up a piece of 1/4" steel to test penetration.  My experience in shooting tells me right now that the 1/4" steel is in serious danger.  Again, though, I don't have any t6 or rolled armor plate that thin to test against.  I have some 3/8" T6 steel silhouette targets, and have penetrated them with AP, but not with Ball.  I never knew how good the .30-06 AP was until then.

Testing will be done at 100 yds, since I can't shoot worth a damn beyond that with open sights anymore.  My eyes are getting as old as I am.  I'll post results Sunday night or Monday.

If you could get a drawing of the spar profile, I think we could test that, too.  I have a friend with a browning .30 1919A4, and we could actually build up a section then shoot the dickens out of it. .  I work at a steel mill, and can get tensile testing of the sections done before and after, to measure loss of strength.  It may not match the exact alloys used by Vought, but we could get a relative measure.

Sounds like a fun project.  I still say that the aerodynamic loads are what kills the plane after the wings get opened up to the wind at 300 mph