Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: titanic3 on June 10, 2007, 08:56:24 PM

Title: B17 armor
Post by: titanic3 on June 10, 2007, 08:56:24 PM
way way too much armor for the B17 in AH. earlier this morning, i flew a 109K and saw a lone B17, no formation, i fired 10 shots into that B17. YEs, it IS 30mm, it was the only thing i fired, i ran out of 13mm. the only thing the B17 lost was a rudder and 1 airleron. that ain't right. on my info, B17 takes only 5 shot of Mk108.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: nirvana on June 10, 2007, 09:00:27 PM
Were they absolutely in the same general area or spread out?  I've seen pictures of B17's missing half of the vertical stabilizer flying home, they were tough, giant masses.

See these (http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/fuselag2.htm) for examples of the damage they could take, especially take note of the picture of "General Ike" and the direct flak hit.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Blooz on June 10, 2007, 10:22:39 PM
It's not about armor.  It's about hitting the things that make the plane fly.

These planes are hollow shells in the fuselage area. In a real plane you'd have crew, cables, wires, hoses all kinds of stuff to help destroy the plane located the entire length of the fuselage but in the game you need to hit cockpits, engines or put alot of bullets into a small area of wing to get good results.

It's not so much how many hits you get as where they hit.

I've emptied entire ammo loads of P47 (3400 rds!) into bombers and not gotten so much as a fuel leak because I wasn't putting enough rounds in one spot to do much damage.

The Mk108 30mm is a great gun but you still need to hit the vital areas with it to get good results and with only 65 rounds to work with it's tough to do.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: weazely on June 10, 2007, 10:33:09 PM
hit heavy bombers such as the B24 and B17 in the beginning of the wing(the area wer the wing come together with the body):aok
Title: B17 armor
Post by: IMXLR8N on June 10, 2007, 11:39:53 PM
I honestly don't believe that any of the planes are modeled very accurately. The P-47s I feel come apart way too easily compared to real life where they ran into trees and took direct engine hits and still made it home with pistons poking out. But, you have to realize this is a game and if you had to empty two 109's worth of ammo to shoot a Jug down or have multiple direct hits from puffy ack to take out one B-17, I doubt that anyone would play.

This game is more about fun with some realism added to it. It's not real life.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Guppy35 on June 10, 2007, 11:42:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by IMXLR8N
I honestly don't believe that any of the planes are modeled very accurately. The P-47s I feel come apart way too easily compared to real life where they ran into trees and took direct engine hits and still made it home with pistons poking out. But, you have to realize this is a game and if you had to empty two 109's worth of ammo to shoot a Jug down or have multiple direct hits from puffy ack to take out one B-17, I doubt that anyone would play.

This game is more about fun with some realism added to it. It's not real life.


And you base this judgement about the work of HTC on?
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Motherland on June 10, 2007, 11:48:56 PM
As said before, it is not the armor, it is where you hit the bomber. Aiming for the fuselage is pretty worthless, as you can take of elevators and even stabilizers, but these kinds of hits dont happen very often and even if they do the plane is still flyable. I like to aim for one of the engines (usually engine #2, the one closest to the fuselage on the right side). Once an engine is out, it makes the plane very hard to fly, and eventually the fire will tear the whole wing off, making the plane impossible to fly. It  only takes a two or three thuds from the MK 108 to disable an engine or take of a wing. Though, even with only 3 engines, its still possible to fly a buff home, so try to take the wings off. And, of course, never come up behind it. Almost every B26 sortie I fly, I shoot down one or to idiots that come up behind my plane and try to shoot me down :lol . The most difficult shot, from a gunners perspective, is when the interceptor climbs or dives onto your bomber. And hit Lanc's and B26's from the belly, they have no ventral or ball turrets. So easy.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Benny Moore on June 11, 2007, 02:44:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Guppy35
And you base this judgement about the work of HTC on?


He's got a point.  Real Thunderbolts were known to even go into forests at 300 M.P.H. and have the fuselage still be intact.  The legendary P-47's duribility isn't quite so impressive in Aces High II (though still tough).
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Larry on June 11, 2007, 04:18:55 AM
These kids are just reading something on the intardnet then post it here because they think everything they read or see is true.

To the thread starter there is nothing wrong with bombers, the problem is your aiming. If no one is around to mess with me or the bombers I can take out a formation in three passes in a 109K with ammo left for fighters.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Kweassa on June 11, 2007, 04:46:29 AM
Legends are made of those who were lucky enough to come back alive.

 Count in the rest of the cases where planes that've been shot never came back home, and we soon realize why we call them "legends", not "reality".
Title: Re: B17 armor
Post by: MstWntd on June 11, 2007, 12:25:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
way way too much armor for the B17 in AH. earlier this morning, i flew a 109K and saw a lone B17, no formation, i fired 10 shots into that B17. YEs, it IS 30mm, it was the only thing i fired, i ran out of 13mm. the only thing the B17 lost was a rudder and 1 airleron. that ain't right. on my info, B17 takes only 5 shot of Mk108.


you fly in h2h dont you? maybe gun leathality was turned down
Title: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: titanic3 on June 11, 2007, 07:22:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Spikey
you fly in h2h dont you? maybe gun leathality was turned down



i do fly in H2H, but it was a very realistic arena, hosted by erojji. it was a Axis vs Allies: Phase 4. i was flying a 109G14 and saw the B17.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Larry on June 11, 2007, 07:36:54 PM
Never base your "opinion" from a H2H arena. Settings in there can be screwed with by people who know nothing of what they are doing.
Title: Re: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: SAS_KID on June 11, 2007, 11:43:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
i do fly in H2H, but it was a very realistic arena, hosted by erojji. it was a Axis vs Allies: Phase 4. i was flying a 109G14 and saw the B17.



Your first post says 109K4
Title: B17 armor
Post by: IMXLR8N on June 12, 2007, 12:41:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Guppy35
And you base this judgement about the work of HTC on?



I know this because I've talked face to face with several vets from WWII, both Axis and Allied. They all have stories of Jugs taking hits, plowing through trees, and even taking direct hits from 88's at point blank range and still coming back. Even pilots of other Allied aircraft would attest to the strength and survivability of the Jug. Now tell me when a Pony brushes you and your tail comes all the way off and a Lanc shoots your engine with those high powered .303's and you lose your entire engine, that this game is modeled true to life.

It's good and I love the game. Do I expect to fly an invincible plane around all night and rack up a million kills? No, what would be the fun in that and who would want to have to pump all the ammo they've got on board into one plane for 20 minutes? Not I.

This game is just that, a game. So those of you that take it so friggin' seriously, lighten up and go outside once in a while, you're missing an entire world out there.

:aok
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Kweassa on June 12, 2007, 01:58:26 AM
Quote
I know this because I've talked face to face with several vets from WWII, both Axis and Allied. They all have stories of Jugs taking hits, plowing through trees, and even taking direct hits from 88's at point blank range and still coming back.


 You're making it sound as if this community doesn't have people who talked to WW2 vets before. If getting to know a vet or two is to be a basis for determining the credibility of one's claim, then people like Guppy35 or WW is still way more credible than you - and I'd rather believe what they say (despite quite frequently being at opposite ends of dicussion, now and then). So cut the "I know because I've talk to vets" crap - noone is impressed.

 Rather, put your mind to common logic concerning the reality of these military machines, and we'll be well on our way in determining the truth behind some of the skeptical material vets are known to say. It's what we call "embellishment in anecdotes".

 For instance, someone with a sound mind would immediately realize a false claim for what it is - when he hears something like "taking direct hits from 88's at point blank range and still coming back."

 The standard equipment for us aviations fans is "a grain of salt", and we'd immediately translate the above claim as, "I've seen a plane survive a very close flak burst", instead of taking the claim literally at face value.

 I mean, do you even know how big a 88mm shell is, and what kind of damage it could do at "point blank"?



Quote
Even pilots of other Allied aircraft would attest to the strength and survivability of the Jug. Now tell me when a Pony brushes you and your tail comes all the way off and a Lanc shoots your engine with those high powered .303's and you lose your entire engine, that this game is modeled true to life.


 In "true to life", dead men don't tell tales. For every one lucky pilot who survived thanks to his proud Jug holding together in times of despair, there are about 10 more who lie dead in the National Cemetery, rest their souls. And that goes to every plane known during the Second World War as being tough and robust. A plane is only as tough as it can be.

 Just how "tough" do you think an aircraft of that era can be?

 A large and robust construction naturally warrants a considerable amount of endurance, especially against damages that may potentially cause catastrophic structural failures. However, in the end, all of those planes were covered with merely thin foil of a metal, enlaced with inner structures and spars, and jammed pack full of sensitive machinery that may prove to be fatal when damaged... and WW2 weaponery were especially designed to destroy those.

 Everytime a typical "50cal" debate comes to these threads and we have people saying a 50cal bullet can punch through an engine block in a firing range. Well, if that be true guess what a 12.7~13mm round can do to a Jug.

 The Jug is indeed a tough plane, many of its internal components are at least somewhat protected, the fuel tanks are self-sealing, rear pilot armour is placed, and a huge engine block protects the pilot from attacks from the front. However, it's not as if the entire plane is covered with armour. A machine gun will punch through most - if not all - of the inner components, and a 20mm will rip apart entire surfaces from the plane. Those weapons were specifically designed to kill planes, and ultimately no amount of "protection" will ever protect a plane exposed to enemy fire for a long time.

 
 A plane is only as tough as can be, and there is no such thing as an armor-clad fighter plane.
Title: Re: B17 armor
Post by: SteveBailey on June 12, 2007, 03:30:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
way way too much armor for the B17 in AH. earlier this morning, i flew a 109K and saw a lone B17, no formation, i fired 10 shots into that B17. YEs, it IS 30mm, it was the only thing i fired, i ran out of 13mm. the only thing the B17 lost was a rudder and 1 airleron. that ain't right. on my info, B17 takes only 5 shot of Mk108.


Wow, tough luck here.  Try downsizing to .50 cals, I'm 32-0 versus 4 engine buffs this tour in my fragile little mustang. a good pileit could do much better.  I hear just about every day that I suck at this game, imagine what a really good stick could do.


Steve
Title: B17 armor
Post by: DaddyAck on June 12, 2007, 05:06:26 AM
It only takes 2-3 well placed 30mm hits in the wing root to take out a 17. I have done it numerous times, the 30mm far exceeds the 20mm in taking out buffs in one pass. :aok
Title: B17 armor
Post by: MstWntd on June 12, 2007, 11:38:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by DaddyAck
It only takes 2-3 well placed 30mm hits in the wing root to take out a 17. I have done it numerous times, the 30mm far exceeds the 20mm in taking out buffs in one pass. :aok


Actually ive been buff killing with a Hurri IID (to no suprise)

dual 40mms are nice...bring the bird to 17K and chop throttle...
Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: MstWntd on June 12, 2007, 11:39:30 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SAS_KID
Your first post says 109K4


yeah that would make a big difference...
Title: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: macleod01 on June 12, 2007, 04:43:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SteveBailey
Wow, tough luck here.  Try downsizing to .50 cals, I'm 32-0 versus 4 engine buffs this tour in my fragile little mustang. a good pileit could do much better.  I hear just about every day that I suck at this game, imagine what a really good stick could do.


Steve


Ive managed to get multiple engine leaks with 8 303s! Nothing wrong with that damage model, part from maybe gets hurt TOO easily! I still had ammo left for fighters as well, had to break off due to getting pinged to bad!
Title: B17 armor
Post by: IMXLR8N on June 12, 2007, 07:29:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa
You're making it sound as if this community doesn't have people who talked to WW2 vets before. If getting to know a vet or two is to be a basis for determining the credibility of one's claim, then people like Guppy35 or WW is still way more credible than you - and I'd rather believe what they say (despite quite frequently being at opposite ends of dicussion, now and then). So cut the "I know because I've talk to vets" crap - noone is impressed.

I mean, do you even know how big a 88mm shell is, and what kind of damage it could do at "point blank"?



I'm referring to the fact that people say that these "Kids read anything on the intardnet" comment. And for your info, I'm a member to the B-17 Combat & Crewmen, so I've talked to several hundred vets buddy.


And yeah, an 88mm shell is 88mm in diameter. Thanks for the history lesson and I'll bow down to your almighty knowledge.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Larry on June 12, 2007, 08:12:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by IMXLR8N
I'm referring to the fact that people say that these "Kids read anything on the intardnet" comment. And for your info, I'm a member to the B-17 Combat & Crewmen, so I've talked to several hundred vets buddy.


And yeah, an 88mm shell is 88mm in diameter. Thanks for the history lesson and I'll bow down to your almighty knowledge.



Oh yeah thats "I a l33t squeaker, and I know everything" talk right there. NO aircraft can take a direct hit form a 88mm shell. Have you ever seen the footage of the B24s wing fold in half after a 88mm hits it?

The planes in this game can NEVER be 100% modeled (there is way to much inside the plane to model) but they are as close as you can get in a game.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Serenity on June 12, 2007, 10:42:25 PM
1) Youre not aiming in the right spot. Hit the number 2 or 3 engines.

2) The B-17 is one of the best aircraft ever invented. Dont be upset you got pwn3d by it. The B-17 is better than the Bf-109, so dont complain. And the Fortress had a reputation even better than the P-47 of coming back from some pretty nasty stuff.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: loser on June 13, 2007, 11:34:57 AM
From the site Nirvana linked to:

"A rocket fired by an enemy fighter inflicted this damage on The Sack, a B-17 of the 379th Group. A 14-inch fragment of the rocket tore the pants off of the turret gunner without hurting him."

See!!!! Flying without pants is historically realistic!
Title: B17 armor
Post by: hammer on June 13, 2007, 11:56:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by loser
From the site Nirvana linked to:

"A rocket fired by an enemy fighter inflicted this damage on The Sack, a B-17 of the 379th Group. A 14-inch fragment of the rocket tore the pants off of the turret gunner without hurting him."

See!!!! Flying without pants is historically realistic!


Finally! Validation for my techniques!  :rofl
Title: Re: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: Soulyss on June 13, 2007, 01:53:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
i do fly in H2H, but it was a very realistic arena, hosted by erojji. it was a Axis vs Allies: Phase 4. i was flying a 109G14 and saw the B17.


You should ask the host what his server settings were.  If your opinions are based on anicdotal evidence, how can you be sure that the host didn't read up on stories about the rugged nature of some of these aircraft and come to the conclusion that the gun lethality on it's default setting is too high?  I've seen threads here going back on forth about this gun is too strong, this gun is too weak.  It's an endless debate, as there is always going to be a measure of interpertation to the data at hand.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Kweassa on June 13, 2007, 06:38:53 PM
Quote
I'm referring to the fact that people say that these "Kids read anything on the intardnet" comment.


 Yes, and we're suspecting you're one of them - regardless of your actual age.

Quote
And for your info, I'm a member to the B-17 Combat & Crewmen, so I've talked to several hundred vets buddy.


 And I've cooked several hundred bowls of rice. Would that qualify me as an expert on how to model rice?

Quote
And yeah, an 88mm shell is 88mm in diameter. Thanks for the history lesson and I'll bow down to your almighty knowledge.


 Good. Make sure you maintain that attitude in the future.
Title: Re: Re: Re: B17 armor
Post by: 1K3 on June 13, 2007, 06:45:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
i do fly in H2H, but it was a very realistic arena, hosted by erojji. it was a Axis vs Allies: Phase 4. i was flying a 109G14 and saw the B17.


When was this?  I haven't hosted for a week.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Kev367th on June 13, 2007, 07:09:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Blooz
It's not about armor.  It's about hitting the things that make the plane fly.

These planes are hollow shells in the fuselage area. In a real plane you'd have crew, cables, wires, hoses all kinds of stuff to help destroy the plane located the entire length of the fuselage but in the game you need to hit cockpits, engines or put alot of bullets into a small area of wing to get good results.


Exactly.

Aim for either an engine or wingtip.

Until things such as hyd / oil / fuel lines, control runs etc are modelled hitting the fuselage is pretty well a waste of time.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: 1K3 on June 13, 2007, 09:05:52 PM
head-on is much more effective
Title: B17 armor
Post by: dedalos on June 15, 2007, 04:21:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by nirvana
Were they absolutely in the same general area or spread out?  


Well, he said 1 radder 1 aleron what do ya think?  :D  I bet half or more missed too :lol
Title: B17 armor
Post by: DaddyAck on June 16, 2007, 04:30:09 AM
I have smote many a b-17 with my beloved 109k,  Like I said come in fast and hard hitting in well placed 2 round bursts into the wing (preferably the roots, but hell with 30mm anywhere on the wing will do it).
:aok
Title: B17 armor
Post by: PanzerIV on June 17, 2007, 02:17:24 AM
ya know the B17 was concieved as a plane to patrol the coasts of the US rather than the bomber it is.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Serenity on June 17, 2007, 02:57:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by PanzerIV
ya know the B17 was concieved as a plane to patrol the coasts of the US rather than the bomber it is.


Ironically, I was litterally JUST reading the paragraph in 'The Mighty 8th" were it says that.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: Delirium on June 17, 2007, 06:07:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Benny Moore
He's got a point.  Real Thunderbolts were known to even go into forests at 300 M.P.H. and have the fuselage still be intact.  The legendary P-47's duribility isn't quite so impressive in Aces High II (though still tough).


A certain P47 was known for taking out someone's bathroom here in Connecticut by ramming the house.

I think you're forgetting one point however, in this game the majority are far more accurate than most WWII flyers were and that makes any comparison a moot point.
Title: B17 armor
Post by: PanzerIV on June 17, 2007, 11:57:29 AM
ya know pilots seem to be wounded easily in the F4U even though there is that chunk of steel making a wall between lead and man, and the F4U-1C seems to fall in half alot!
Ive flown the P47N and taken multiple hits from the 37mm AAguns and walked away, not everytime but its rugged compared to any other fighter.
Title: Re: B17 armor
Post by: Ace8765 on July 04, 2007, 03:15:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by titanic3
way way too much armor for the B17 in AH. earlier this morning, i flew a 109K and saw a lone B17, no formation, i fired 10 shots into that B17. YEs, it IS 30mm, it was the only thing i fired, i ran out of 13mm. the only thing the B17 lost was a rudder and 1 airleron. that ain't right. on my info, B17 takes only 5 shot of Mk108.




you only shot 10 rounds into the plane? of course its not going to do much damage

you need to hit it with alot more firepower
Title: B17 armor
Post by: kennyhayes on July 04, 2007, 09:24:34 PM
b17s take alot of damage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7QyvDkO0oQ&mode=related&search=
ops wrong one

here it is
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm


p.s. only i spell wrong
p.s.no2 sorry about vid did't know what i was thinking or did i:D
Title: B17 armor
Post by: DoLbY on July 05, 2007, 12:29:33 AM
I'll personally aim for the wings or engines; tricky to hit at times but effective even with .50s

I was looking all those pictures of those real B17s. Tough planes but still feel sorry for the poor guys inside.


Nads of steel on buff crews