Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Urchin on September 13, 2001, 12:40:00 AM
-
Well, I corralled a fella (Redwolf, and a big <S> out to ya man :)) into helping me with my "study". We were both tired though, so we didn't get past the initial ten test run, which was 190A8 vs B17 (tail guns only). As a note, on the first run where I took 30 hits, I did NOT die. I flew past B17. I lost the engine, suffered a whole pile of damage, but the plane was still flyable. On 9 of the 10 attacks, the engine went about halfway through the "burst" I took (he was firing really short bursts to make sure every round hit, I'd lose the engine about halfway through, then lose a wing [7 of 10] or the tail [2 of 10].
Anyway, here is what we came up with for the results. These results were obtained by flying a 190A8 straight and level behind a B17 while the B17 fired only its tailguns. We obtained the number of rounds fired by checking the ammunition counter before and after every kill. He did miss with 1 or 2 rounds on perhaps half of the kills he said.
He started firing when I crossed d500- that may skew the results, we'll have to try different ranges.
26,29,27,22,32,30*,26,30,15,18.
Works out to an average of 22.5 .50 caliber rounds hitting to kill a 190A8, the "armored" "buff-killer" 190. That number is actually shockingly low to me, it usually sounds like more hits than that.
-
How did you fire only the tail guns?
-
From the six:
Easy shot. You have armor piercing bullets flying through your engine. Also, at that distance you can't really expect armoured glass to do much. Historically, the dead six approach would get you killed pretty quick.
-
popeye u can fire just the station you are at, or all guns. I have all when in buffs mapped to my trigger, and station on my b button
SKurj
-
Ya learn something new every day. Thanks, SKurj.
-
secondary fire button will fire only the turret/station you're in. Primary will fire all guns that can bear.
-
before u go making assumptions on armor
read this page. it states that armor
and armored glass was believed and exspected to stop 50 cal and 20mm rounds as close as
300 yards. and that estimate didnt account
for angled armor that reduced even more peneitration and the bullets hitting the planes skin, inner structures and such which reduce pen even more. http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-ar.html (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-ar.html)
whels
Originally posted by iculus:
From the six:
Easy shot. You have armor piercing bullets flying through your engine. Also, at that distance you can't really expect armoured glass to do much. Historically, the dead six approach would get you killed pretty quick.
-
Whells,
Are you saying the engine compartment of a 190 is armorplated in the front? I don't recall any armor in te leading edges of wings in that plane either.
I understand about the armored glass and about armoring the cockpit. Crew safety was an intent there. I don't recall any other plane other than the Stuirmovik to specifically armor the nose, engine compartment and cockpit area combined. Last I saw from looking at the plane thwe Soviets also didn't armor the wings like they did te forward fuselage.
I didn't see where taking 20 hits from a 50 cal in the engine or wing should not down a plane or cause significant damage. Especially if they are fairly concentrated area wise hits.
Having said that please be aware I don't think buff guns are something to take lightly in this game. I understand the intent to give, what are frequently lone players, a chance to survive to perform their mission. Don't mean I have to like it! :)
Mav
-
Actually yes, as far as I know the engine compartment WAS armored in the 190a8. I don't think it was a lot of armor, but I do think it was.
Actually, I want to do a number of things with this "study". I want to compare various buffs to see if the .50s are the same strength in all cases. I also want to compare various fighters to see how "durable" they are. It is actually my impression that the 109G10 is a lot more durable than the 190A8 is, at least when it comes to the .50s mounted on the B17. I have some small success in hunting B17s with the G10, I usually mount the 30mm and go up after them. I usually don't mount gondolas when I mount the 30mm. I usually get hit by B17s when I'm attacking them, and I usually survive- it seems like the 109G10 can take more hits from a B17 than a 190A8 can.
-
There was not a single piece of armor the Fw 190 (any variant) that would stop a .50 cal at close range. And the A-8 in AH is the standard model without any of the armor modifications. I'm not saying it's modeled right, just an FYI.
[ 09-13-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
Ummm sorry guys but your wrong.
The following documents are out of the Fw190A8 pilots manual and details the armor of the Fw190A8 and A8 Sturmbock.
Armor Layout & Location http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-armor-2.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-armor-2.jpg)
Armor Specifications http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-armor-1.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-armor-1.jpg)
From the diagram and table you will see that the only armor that protects the engine front is the ring around the outter edge protecting the oil cooler. It is 6.5 mm in thickness.
Both the Hispano 20mm and Browning .50 will easily penetrate that armor at normal engagement ranges.
Edit: hehe me and funked posted at the exact same time :)
[ 09-13-2001: Message edited by: Vermillion ]
-
Of course fighters that entered service during the war had the benefit of experience, which allowed a more efficient distribution of armour. The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 had a 13 mm plate to protect head and shoulders of the pilot, 8 mm seat armour, some 5 mm and 6 mm plate to fill in the gaps around the seat, and an armoured windscreen 50 mm thick. Armoured rings of 5.5 mm and 6.5 mm were installed around the lip of the engine cowling. An unique modification was the Fw 190A-8/R-8, modified to attack US heavy bombers from a close distance. Most fighters were protected only against from the rear and front. But the /R8 modification provided protection against fire from the sides as well, because this could be expected when the fighters got close in the bomber formations. The nose and headrest armour were made heavier, 30 mm armourglass was fitted to the side of the canopy, and 5 mm plate was installed at the sides of the cockpit and behind the instrument panel. The wing ammunition boxes for the 30 mm cannon were also protected, for any explosion of the ammunition would be fatal.
and
How effective was the armour? It's thickness varied from 8 mm to about 13 mm. The armour was certainly effective against rifle-calibre machineguns, but these weapons were increasingly replaced by far more powerful medium-calibre machineguns or by cannon. The American .50 AP M2 round, a projectile with a high muzzle velocity, was expected to penetrate 1 inch (24.5 mm) at 100 yards (91 mm) and the AP-I M8 round still 7/8 inch. However, such armour penetration figures are traditionally measured against a homogeneous "standard" plate, while the armour plate fitted to aircraft would be face-hardened plate of good quality, to achieve maximal protection for minimal weight. Also important was that before it could hit the armour, the projectile had to pass through the aircraft skin and maybe structural members, which would deflect it or slow it down and was likely to cause tumbling, which would considerable reduce armour penetration. In this way relatively thin plates could greatly increase the protection. Equipment in the aft fuselage could be carefully arrange so that the bullet would have to pass it first, before it could hit the pilot. Finally, typical firing distances were of the order of 300 yards. Most airforces seem to have felt that the armour of their fighters offered substantial protection against .50 and even 20 mm rounds.
The Spitfire F Mk.21, a late war model, was considered protected against German 20&nsbp;mm AP rounds in a 20 degrees cone from the rear, and against 13 mm rounds from the front. The US Navy expected fighters to carry armour able to stop a .50 rounds at 200 yards. Early in the war the relatively slow projectiles of the Type 99-1 cannon were often stopped by the armour of the F4F. Protection against US .50 rounds was the required standard for German fighters. Indeed it would not have made much sense for most German aircraft to carry armour that would not stop the .50 at combat distances, for this was the standard weapon of the USAAF, the enemy that was most often met in daylight combat.
Originally posted by Maverick:
Whells,
Are you saying the engine compartment of a 190 is armorplated in the front? I don't recall any armor in te leading edges of wings in that plane either.
I understand about the armored glass and about armoring the cockpit. Crew safety was an intent there. I don't recall any other plane other than the Stuirmovik to specifically armor the nose, engine compartment and cockpit area combined. Last I saw from looking at the plane thwe Soviets also didn't armor the wings like they did te forward fuselage.
I didn't see where taking 20 hits from a 50 cal in the engine or wing should not down a plane or cause significant damage. Especially if they are fairly concentrated area wise hits.
Having said that please be aware I don't think buff guns are something to take lightly in this game. I understand the intent to give, what are frequently lone players, a chance to survive to perform their mission. Don't mean I have to like it! :)
Mav
-
Oh yea before any of you USA 50cal deathstarlaser fanatics attack whels last post please take note that that info comes from your guys internet fighter info god "Joe Baugher"....
-
all this thickness of armor against 50 cal and cannon fire is all very interesting (really).but when you apply this to a game,where do you stop.we've all lost control surfaces but what about control cables something a spits humble 303's could sever. cannon and heavy mg rounds puncturing a fighter and hitting nothing vital still caused your plane to take on the handling qualities of a super mart shopping cart there seems to be many reasons for a plane to plummet earthwards small hles becoming larger caused by you doing 300 plus air disruption over frayed control surfaces setting up vibration,the recoil of quad 20's popping rivits from an already weakened plane.they can't all be included. :(
-
Our modest wish for the FW190 models is only the damage model of the M16.
Is that to much ?
;) ;) ;)
-
Grunherz, Baugher's web pages are taken, often almost verbatim, from books that many of us have in our libraries. They are just books written by authors. They don't get their knowledge from a divine source and they make mistakes.
I've been involved in discussions on this topic before, and it has been pretty clearly demonstrated to me (by guys using primary sources, scientific knowledge, etc) that none of the armor plate on the 190 was sufficient to stop a .50 cal at WWII engagement ranges. It's just not thick enough. So I can't agree with Whels.
Anyways we are hijacking Urchin's thread, which was a refreshing attempt to apply science to this kind of stuff. So I'll shut up now.
[ 09-14-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
I have died many times to buff guns. They are a squeak. But I have to say leave buff guns alone. They may or may not be accurate but its a gameplay issue, bigtime.
Olgzr
-
LOL Funked!
Is that the same scientific knowlege you guys used to prove that the Chog, P47D11 and Niki FMs were not wrong. Oh wait now HTC says niki chog and 47D11 FM are diddlyed up, but how can that be your "scientific knowlege" have been wrong. O O, guess its time to change that "factual" knowlege. Huh? :rolleyes:
Anyway recent developments in AH have shown me 99% of you self proclaimed AH all knowing experts dont know toejam and change your "facts" on a whim to suit your and HTCs changing ideas and implementatinos in AH.
Anyhow the LW figured out additonal armor on 190A8/R8 allowed them to come within very close range of bomber formations even from dead astern and survive. Yet none of that armor by your ideas is thick enough to stop the main 50cal defensive guns of US bombers.
It seems that history doesnt support your ideas. I guess the LW didnt have your first hand "scientific knowlege" of the US 50cals. I mean its not like they had AH arrogant USA fanatics' close and personal daily knowlege of the 50cal guns ability and what it did to their fighters. Certainly not, not possible they know anything not known by the AH fanatic USA guys.
Why dont you read whels post? It clearly says how the armor was effective even though its not literally thick enough in a 90degree best case non armor steel 50cal penetration ability under ideal circumstances.
The problem with you USA 50cal fanatics is very clear. You only look at 90degree hit figures on less than armor quality steel fired under ideal conditions at short ranges with absolutly no accounting for deflection or any other imperfect flight profile for the shells. No other circumstances that occured 100% of time in RL are ever considered by you whoopee fanatics.
Some of you people are so fanatic that you compare the WW2 50cal aircraft MG to custom made single shot 50cal sniper rifles and make staements that 50cals can kill out to
miles and miles and miles. Thats diddlying hillarius, really hillarious.
-
Sorry Urchin, I can't let this go unchecked. It's unfortunate your nice thread was defaced by the hijackers. :(
Is that the same scientific knowlege you guys used to prove that the Chog, P47D11 and Niki FMs were not wrong. Oh wait now HTC says niki chog and 47D11 FM are diddlyed up, but how can that be your "scientific knowlege" have been wrong. O O, guess its time to change that "factual" knowlege. Huh?
What on earth are you talking about? That's false. I've done no such thing. I did the only quantitative flight tests to date which showed a problem with the N1K2 flight model. You are lying or you have memory problems.
Anyway recent developments in AH have shown me 99% of you self proclaimed AH all knowing experts dont know toejam and change your "facts" on a whim to suit your and HTCs changing ideas and implementatinos in AH.
So I'm now changing facts to suit HTC's game? I'm part of some kind of apologist conspiracy for HTC? Why would I do something like that? I have an official relationship with only one flight sim company, and it's not HTC. What possible reason would I have to lie (that's what you are accusing me of BTW) in order to make the competition look good?
The problem with you USA 50cal fanatics...
I'm a USA fanatic now? That's funny. I'm in a POLISH squad. I've flown maybe 10 sorties in a US plane in the last 6 months. I've flown for the Axis in the last three major scenarios. But I'm a USA fanatic. Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmkay...
I only see one fanatic here. You can't attack facts so you attack people with lies and profanity. Real classy and real convincing. Why the moderators allow worms like you to crawl through here again and again I can not understand.
[ 09-14-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
[ 09-14-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
LOL Funked!
Is that the same scientific knowlege you guys used to prove that the Chog, P47D11 and Niki FMs were not wrong. Oh wait now HTC says niki chog and 47D11 FM are diddlyed up, but how can that be your "scientific knowlege" have been wrong. O O, guess its time to change that "factual" knowlege. Huh? :rolleyes:
Anyway recent developments in AH have shown me 99% of you self proclaimed AH all knowing experts dont know toejam and change your "facts" on a whim to suit your and HTCs changing ideas and implementatinos in AH.
Anyhow the LW figured out additonal armor on 190A8/R8 allowed them to come within very close range of bomber formations even from dead astern and survive. Yet none of that armor by your ideas is thick enough to stop the main 50cal defensive guns of US bombers.
It seems that history doesnt support your ideas. I guess the LW didnt have your first hand "scientific knowlege" of the US 50cals. I mean its not like they had AH arrogant USA fanatics' close and personal daily knowlege of the 50cal guns ability and what it did to their fighters. Certainly not, not possible they know anything not known by the AH fanatic USA guys.
Why dont you read whels post? It clearly says how the armor was effective even though its not literally thick enough in a 90degree best case non armor steel 50cal penetration ability under ideal circumstances.
The problem with you USA 50cal fanatics is very clear. You only look at 90degree hit figures on less than armor quality steel fired under ideal conditions at short ranges with absolutly no accounting for deflection or any other imperfect flight profile for the shells. No other circumstances that occured 100% of time in RL are ever considered by you whoopee fanatics.
Some of you people are so fanatic that you compare the WW2 50cal aircraft MG to custom made single shot 50cal sniper rifles and make staements that 50cals can kill out to
miles and miles and miles. Thats diddlying hillarius, really hillarious.
clueless is his name, spewing is his game.
-
Grunherz,
You need professional help. I hope you get it soon.
My post never said I was a 50 CAL fanatic. I am however rather well experianced with it and not in a single fire bolt action rifle that likely has a shorter barrel.
My question to whells was if the FW had armor to the front of the engine. He answered that is only has an armored ring around the leading edge of the cowl. That leaves virtually the entire fromtal area of the engine including the crankcase unarmored. Shells going in there are going to absolutely screw up the works.
The other qquestion was about the leading edgees of the wings. That was rather nicely answered with the diagram showing no leading edge armor.
The final question was about whether or not 20+ hits should not cause extensive damage or down the AC, particularly if concentrated in a small area like dead 6 attack on a buff. For that answer I guess I'll just have to rely on the numbers of FW's shot down. They were fanatics but I guess they didn't have your level of fanaticism to hold their planes together. :rolleyes:
Mav
Now if you cannot keep you comments on a reasonable civilized level just go totter off by yourself. You have already given me all I need to know about you.
-
Oh yea ppl who constantly quote best case data for the 50cal and ignore other real world info are not fanatics.
But I apologize for trying to reason with you fanatics. Sorry.
-
[ 09-14-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Some of you people are so fanatic that you compare the WW2 50cal aircraft MG to custom made single shot 50cal sniper rifles and make staements that 50cals can kill out to miles and miles and miles. Thats diddlying hillarius, really hillarious.
Are you talking to me?
Are you talking to ME?
Well, Grun, here's proof once again that while you can probably read, your comprehension is severely lacking.
I'd suggest you go back and read those posts again.. and again.. until you actually understand what was written.
...Oh, wait... you're not interested in what was actually said... you just want to spew some more.
Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt.
Drivel on, Grun.
-
Somebody mentioned that a 50 cal will go right threw the engine block of the 190 with AP rounds, atleast if I understood it right.
That is SOO wrong, there are about no rounds wich would penetrate the whole engine and go threw it, AP or no AP. The armored glass in the 190 was made specificly to stop MG and heavy MG (50 cal) fire from fairly close range, it deflected the shots thanks to a good angle and it consisted of 50mm armored glass. It DID in many caes stop the 50 cal bullets, even at close ranges. the 190 A8/R8, sturmbock version of the 190 A8, had extra armor (not more glass though) and it was used to fly in behind the bombers, quite slow, line up behind them and not fire untill the leader gave the command. They flew in V formation and they usually opened up at about 100-200 meters. The armored glass stopped bullets from hitting the pilot, the extra armored plates in the wings protected the guns, the extra armor around teh engine and around the cockpit stopped bullets from there (of course engine was vulnerable anyway, it was just a ring around it).
The Sturmbock squads usually didnt loose any planes in these attacksm when they did, they usually didn't lose more then 1 or 2.
Remember, they did this in group of about 9 planes, and they attacked 100+ B17's whom most, not all, were shooting at them.
-
Funny, it's always a deja vu when I read these threads with people arguing. The setting is always the same, only the roles, people and the topic of the argument change. Feels like I've been here before ;).
Of course I can't resist and have to participate in hijacking an otherwise very decent thread.
What I have in mind is that surely there must be 50 cal penetration numbers also for face hardened plate? Maybe different angles have also been tested? I did a quick search on the net but didn't find anything. I bet though that if such info exists then someone from this bb is bound to have it (or atleast have access to it) :)
-
You guys are aware that pyro already said that several planes engine damage models are being revised right? :)
(I know p38, 190d9, 109g10 are on that list for sure.)
As for my opinion, I think the 50 damage model is about right, but the dispersion is not great enough. If you just put single rounds around the engine it actually takes quite a bit of damage, but AH bombers almost always land 5 - 10 hits on the exact same spot. In AH I attack bombers everytime I see them. I've only died once to them in about 6 tours caused by them shooting me down (carbombing and vehicle bombings not counted), and that was a dead 6 attack that I was forced to make on a lanc with a spit 5. (Yes, I did kill him. ;) ) It's VERY VERY easy to kill bombers if you know how, they all have weak points. Lancs and B26s can be attacked from head on and below pretty easily. Forward beam attacks on lancs and b26s are also quite effective. B17s are tough, but I find diving from directly above and aiming for the wingroot or cockpit will kill them 90% of the time in one pass. Just yesterday I killed 2 lancs and a b26 in a single spit 5 sortie without altitude advantage without taking 1 single ping.