Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MjTalon on February 22, 2008, 05:04:55 PM
-
Alrighty, before the "click SEARCH" starts up, i'm just making a educated and curious question here. Now, firstly, how's everyone this evening :) , good? Good. :D
Just a question, i know the B17 is the toughest bomber we have in AH at the moment, but i'm curious is to why the wings rip apart so easily when nailed with 20mms? I can understand them coming apart with 30mm shells, but just a stray 20mm will take the wing completely off.
Also, shouldn't the 20mms shells at least take out a engine on the wings? I have not seen one attacker that attacked my b17s take out a engine, they take the wings completely off. Could it be possible to beef up the wing armor just a tad? I think the bomber had weak armor on it's wings, but this is just crazy! We should at least loose a few engines before the entire wings come clean off.
Just my thoughts though.:)
-
Believe 20 rounds of 20mm takes out a b17, 4 rounds of 30mm
not entirely sure if i remember where i got this, think it was adolf galland's book
anyone clarify?
-
Originally posted by Adonai
Believe 20 rounds of 20mm takes out a b17, 4 rounds of 30mm
not entirely sure if i remember where i got this, think it was adolf galland's book
anyone clarify?
Hell, no 109 will linger long enough behind me to fire 20 20mm cannon rounds :D . Now about those 30mm..... darn it :furious !
-
I regulaly take out flights of B17s with 50 cals...
I aim for unarmored places.
-
I thought I heard somewhere it was 5 30mm rounds would take out the wing of B17. But, I'm not sure.
-
Talon, I might be wrong on this (Widewing, correct me if I am, please) But the B-17 series, even through the G's, did not have external armor, per se.
Their toughness was through their design, and whatever the duralumin skin could offer. Because they were fairly large aircraft, they could withstand quite a bit of damage. But, in after-action photos, it would show.
Look at some here:http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm
-
Those are some amazing photos, thank you for posting the link Frode.
-
The B-17 didn't have "armor" per se. Its armor was empty space.
-
The B-17 has very limited amounts of armour. Most of that was armoured glass to make the gunners and pilots feel a bit better looking through armored glass. The only other parts that had any real "armour" were the fuel tanks, but that was more the quality of the fabrics and gels used to seal them. Some of the B-17's had aluminum shells over their oil tanks and some of the inboard fuel tanks as well. This was more designed for splinter protection that anything else.
The thing to keep in mind is that the B-17 fuselage was made up of aluminum sheet over thin stamped ribs, stringers, and longerons. The only real strength of the fuselage is in the bomb bay where a sort of "box" is made up of "square aluminum tube" that provides the main area of strength and support in the aircraft. Urchin mentions that "empty space" was like the armour on a 17 and he is very correct. The B-17 is an unpressurized aircraft and that helps in preventing the blow out associated with pressurization. The amount of space and redundancy in design allows for an amazing capacity to literally absorb massive amounts of damage. But, the B-17 is also fragile when it comes to it's control system, which is comprised of woven cables.
Anyways, sorry for the diatribe, I spent a lot of time rebuilding one years back and became very intimate with it's construction.
-
I spent a lot of time rebuilding one years back and became very intimate with it's construction. [/B]
YOU DID WHAT? :O
wow, tell us more. I want to know EVERYTHING! Consider writing a book, mate. I'm sure alot of aviation geeks would go for "Rebuilding the B-17. A personal love affair with the buff" :aok
-
Those photos prove that,.... to go up in one of these, more than once your kahoones are far too big to walk normally.
-
From http://www.stormbirds.com a picture of a hole in a b17 wing from 1 262 30mm round. (http://www.picburst.com/uploads/8912512997.jpg) (http://www.picburst.com)
-
After I got done with a walk thru of the Confederate Air Force B17,Sentimental Journey,all I could say was wow!There was no protection!I think the thing that amazed me most,was the ball turret.Just imagine being in that position for many hours.The other thing that struck me was the courage of those men.Mission after mission,and watching other bombers go down.Knowing that it could be their turn next.Yet they continued on.
IronDog
-
Lets see.....you can fly 3 forts at once and train up to 18 50cal MGs on one little fighter and you want to beef up the fort's armor so its even harder to shoot down?
:huh
-
(http://www.stelzriede.com/ms/photos/armor.jpg)
That's pretty much about it for crew protection.
-
Originally posted by Roundeye
Lets see.....you can fly 3 forts at once and train up to 18 50cal MGs on one little fighter and you want to beef up the fort's armor so its even harder to shoot down?
:huh
<-- I fly single formations sir. Better accuracy with one formation than spraying with 3. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
<-- I fly single formations sir. Better accuracy with one formation than spraying with 3. :rolleyes:
You are one of the few then, my friend. Most people take the flight of 3 which is a huge mistake for HT to allow IMO. I feel this way because you can only fly one fighter to attack them with. You can have up to 18 50's spraying you at once from 3 different targets commanded by one person:rolleyes: . It makes it almost suicidal for a lone fighter to attack them.
In the 2 1/2 years I have been on this game, the times I have wasted all 3 B-17s and made it home safely (by myself) I can count on one hand and those were likely noobs. You get a good experienced gunner in a flight of forts and you are in for a rough time. Many I have talked to will not even mess with them alone.
IMO, there are 3 types of people who will plunge right into a set of forts:
1. Experienced pilots with alot of E, usually flying a tough airplane with cannons.
2. Noobs (who suddenly find themselves in the tower)
3. People who are willing to die trying.
I fit in the #3 category. I'll never be seen in a "Aces of Aces High" video and I'm by no means new....I do accept that a nasty, flaming death is the likely outcome of bouncing a set.:)
-
Originally posted by Roundeye
You are one of the few then, my friend. Most people take the flight of 3 which is a huge mistake for HT to allow IMO. I feel this way because you can only fly one fighter to attack them with. You can have up to 18 50's spraying you at once from 3 different targets commanded by one person:rolleyes: . It makes it almost suicidal for a lone fighter to attack them.
Only if you do the same mistake as 90% of all AH2 fighter pilots: Attack from 6 oclock with only a tiny sped advantage.
Once you give up this kind of attacks, bombers are dead meat on the table. There are only very, very few dedicated buff gunners that are consitantly able to cope with slashing, off-angle attacks.
Calling for disabling buff formations is calling for rendering buffs useless in today's MA environment.
(BTW, your own K/D Tours 90-96:
vs B-17 3.6
vs B-24 5.0
vs B-26 8.3
vs Lancs 6.9
And you want them to fly without formations??? :D )
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Only if you do the same mistake as 90% of all AH2 fighter pilots: Attack from 6 oclock with only a tiny sped advantage.
Once you give up this kind of attacks, bombers are dead meat on the table. There are only very, very few dedicated buff gunners that are consitantly able to cope with slashing, off-angle attacks.
Calling for disabling buff formations is calling for rendering buffs useless in today's MA environment.
(BTW, your own K/D Tours 90-96:
vs B-17 3.6
vs B-24 5.0
vs B-26 8.3
vs Lancs 6.9
And you want them to fly without formations??? :D )
Agree with that. never never NEVER attack from 6 (at least dont stay there). I learned that early on. How I make my kills now are with the slashing, off-angle attacks with tons of E.
Those stats are mostly from killing one, two or sometimes all three in the formation and limping home trailing smoke, ditching from engine destruction or bailing from a plane with one wing (or before I bleed out from a wound :D ). I still rarely land all three kills of a formation.
Kill/death and kill/fly home are two very different animals.
I still fully expect something bad is going to happen every time I dive into a formation while solo. Thats ALOT of lead to fly into and it's being hurled toward your face and engine.....odds are if the guys even a decent shot, you ain't making it home with all three kills, at least from what I've seen. Maybe I just keep bouncing the good ones:lol
This is just the forts and sometimes the libs, mind you. I'm not that afraid of 26's or lancs.
-
2 ways to take out buffs without damage to oneself.
Come in high and fast aim for pilot or wing.
Ho, fly right at the buff and go for the pk.
Both have risks but work with little or no damage if your careful.
kc
-
I don't think it is the armor as much as the damage model. I fly B17s a LOT (my bomber of choice when I am comin' for your hangers...), and I notice that the wing damage always seems to be the same - either wing collapse or catastrophic fire. It does take a lot more to get to that point in a B17 vs most of the other bombers.
It would be nice if the B17s engine fire extinguishers worked (or at least had a % chance to work if activated by the pilot). The flight operating manual for B17s notes that there are 2 extinguisher charges per engine, to be used in conjunction with the fuel cutoff and closing the cowl flaps to smother the fire. Turning off the burning motor and then doing a .FIREBOTTLE 2 or something would be a bit more realistic (and enjoyable) to me.
If you look at the damage photos of B17s in action, it should take a LOT of damage before you get to wing collapse. They've got picture of wings hit by 88mm, and wings that had BOMBS DROPPED THROUGH THEM without collapse. If you don't hit the main spars, then all you are doing is punching holes and blowing off sheet metal. Fortunately for a lot of the boys flying 17s, you could blow off a lot and she would still bring you home.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
afaik an engine fire in a B-17 could be put out by nosing down and going in to a steep dive should everything else fail. It was even simulated on the Amiga sim back in the days.
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
It would be nice if the B17s engine fire extinguishers worked (or at least had a % chance to work if activated by the pilot). The flight operating manual for B17s notes that there are 2 extinguisher charges per engine, to be used in conjunction with the fuel cutoff and closing the cowl flaps to smother the fire.
There is a total of two extinguisher bottles for the entire system. One or both of those bottles can be directed to any of the engines. Those bottles were mounted in the fuselage just aft of the bottom crew entry hatch.
-
Only one problem. In AH your engines never catch fire its the wing fuel tanks that ignite here (although in RL the engines were more likely to be set ablaze).
:p :aok
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Only if you do the same mistake as 90% of all AH2 fighter pilots: Attack from 6 oclock with only a tiny sped advantage.
Once you give up this kind of attacks, bombers are dead meat on the table. There are only very, very few dedicated buff gunners that are consitantly able to cope with slashing, off-angle attacks.
Listen to Lusche. Having been on the recieving end of his guns, trust me, I know. ( bud.) :D
-
Towards the end of my bomber days the only attack profile I would have problems with is the overhead one. The exception would be a heavily cannoned 190 barreling at me with a ton of "E". Or a 262, tho strangely 262s didn't worry me all that much. Not as much as that 190 with all the cannon did. 190s are tougher. And Mossies even tougher.
The last few months I'd probably got aced, 3 bombers to no loss, 1 to 3 times a month. Thats in 1 on 1 fights. Every other time I'd usually be able to fly home in somthing while the enemy hit the chutes.
The last month I flew KI-67s a lot I had a better then 2k to every 1D ratio. To me it was the most survivable bomber cause of its speed. That and I found ways to get the top cannon involved in most attack angles.
I believe speed is the most important factor in bomber survivability. Speed forces an enemy to make mistakes or to get greedy. The speed of the KI forced a lot of guys to hang up sooner which made gunning from them easier. A lot of times I won due to an obviously skilled opponent running out of gas. There could be no other reason that someone would go from flying so skillfully to committing suicide like that.
-
Nothing wrong with attacking Buffs from the dead six......many of the other attacks are much too overrated......Really best to just comfortably line up on a bombers six get about 100 to 200 out before you start shooting....Finally if a few of you are attacking the same Buff best it you take turns.... one at a time so you don't acidently kill shoot yourself.
999000
-
Originally posted by 999000
Nothing wrong with attacking Buffs from the dead six......many of the other attacks are much too overrated......Really best to just comfortably line up on a bombers six get about 100 to 200 out before you start shooting....Finally if a few of you are attacking the same Buff best it you take turns.... one at a time so you don't acidently kill shoot yourself.
999000
Good tip's 999
:D :rofl :D