Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: chaser on December 13, 2011, 03:31:15 PM
-
I think HTC just posted a picture of it on FB. I can't tell with my phone though. Anyone?
-
Was just posting a topic on this (They also posted it via Twitter is why I saw it), glad I checked before hitting enter. :D
(http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/388585_336734186353682_199438643416571_1321907_1947500192_n.jpg)
-
I wonder if that is going to be manable or just auto?
-
Lusche is very curious about how that will be implemented... :old:
-
Lusche is very curious about how that will be implemented... :old:
Bring those B-29's back again. :D We can find out. :lol
-
The question is "Can I shoot tanks with it?"
-
This will be a very interesting update indeed...
-
Bring those B-29's back again. :D We can find out. :lol
Sorry, the lead bomber is still in hangar for extensive repairs... :old:
-
I wonder if that is going to be manable or just auto?
Looks like it's mannable based on the detail of the gun and the fact that they probabaly wouldn't be posting it otherwise. There's a refuelling spot behind it...
-
Did the 88's have proxy fuses, or were they strictly altitude "set" fuses. Anyone???
-
Did the 88's have proxy fuses, or were they strictly altitude "set" fuses. Anyone???
Set fuses, never proxy.
-
Did the 88's have proxy fuses, or were they strictly altitude "set" fuses. Anyone???
88's did *not* have any proxy fuzes.
-
Set fuses, never proxy.
Now that will be interesting as to how that will work on a manable gun? :headscratch:
-
Now that will be interesting as to how that will work on a manable gun? :headscratch:
This is exactly the thing I'm curious about.
The fuse was set to a specific time based on data received from either a (distant) radar unit, supplied by an optical rangefinder, or the guns were simply firing 'Sperrfeuer', creating a wall of fire at an ordered altitude.
-
Sighting and control Equipment (http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/88mm-antiaircraft-gun/german-artillery-fire-control-equipment.html)
-
YEAH! It's been a wish of mine for a long time to get manned 88mm guns in the game. Hoping now that one or two will be deployed in the towns as well for anti-GV work.
ack-ack
-
YEAH! It's been a wish of mine for a long time to get manned 88mm guns in the game. Hoping now that one or two will be deployed in the towns as well for anti-GV work.
ack-ack
Agreed, and I was just about to re-post my 88 thread in the wishlist, duel purpose 88mm guns for not only towns, but airfields, able to shoot down GV's as well as bombers (fighters will be next to impossible), although a vulcher might not have a good day.
Why a pair of 88's on a base and town? quite simple - a pair aimed towards an incoming GV spawn - where all you need is a single fighter bomber with a pair of rockets would eliminate the guns, far as the airfield is concerned - it gives some small ability to defend from high alt buffs.
I find bases way to arcade and easy to take, this gives some hope of defending.
-
The question is "Can I shoot tanks with it?"
looks like it from the mounting. hopefully that will be only thing it can kill :aok
-
looks like it from the mounting. hopefully that will be only thing it can kill :aok
has a armor plate in front of it for a reason... :D
-
yall thought Vilkas was bad before wait till he gets this :D
-
Wow! this looks like it's going to be a great update! :x
-
I find bases way to arcade and easy to take, this gives some hope of defending.
Of course you do...
*shakes head*
-
The question is "Can I shoot tanks with it?"
according to information Ive read they were used for both air and ground. at first it was just anti-aircraft later on is was mounted on a towable frame (half track would tow them) and became a very devastating tank killer.
http://www.achtungpanzer.com/88mm-flak-series-flugabwehrkanone.htm (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/88mm-flak-series-flugabwehrkanone.htm)
" German 88mm gun is probably the best known artillery piece of World War II. First time 88mm saw combat was in Spain during the Civil War in 1936, where it proved itself to be not only excellent anti-aircraft gun but also ideal tank killer due to its high muzzle velocity and efficient heavy projectile. It again proved to be an excellent anti-tank gun in France in 1940, especially against heavily armored French Char B1-bis heavy tanks and British Mk.II Matilda infantry tanks. By the time when it arrived in North Africa it was a feared tank killer, which could knock any Allied tank at distances well over 1000 meters. It again proved its reputation in Russia, where it was the only gun capable of dealing with Soviet T-34/76 medium tanks and KW-1 heavy tanks, before the arrival of heavier German tanks. 88mm Flak guns were also used as field artillery - e.g. during the Battle of the Bulge.The only problem with 88mm Flak series was its height and weight, which forced it in action to rely on its power and range rather than concealment. During the war 88mm Flak series guns were used aside of the German Army by Italy and captured examples were often used by the Allies including US Army in late 1944 in Western Europe. After the war many 88mm Flak series guns were used by many countries including former Yugoslavia and Denmark. "
-
Whats the ROF on that thing? The 37mm field gun can (and does :D) nail buffs out to 4.5k, maybe even farther. One hit from that sucker might bring the whole set down. :devil
-
according to information Ive read they were used for both air and ground. at first it was just anti-aircraft later on is was mounted on a towable frame (half track would tow them) and became a very devastating tank killer.
Zoom, I am well aware of how the 88 was utilized in real life. My question pertained to the functionality of the weapon in game.
Cool link BTW. :aok
-
Whats the ROF on that thing?
With a good crew about 15-20 rounds per minute
-
With a good crew about 15-20 rounds per minute
Nice. Going to be a fun new toy. :aok
-
Cool, another way to kill players without taking any risks or spend any time. When do we get a new true fighter airplane again?
-
Cool, another way to kill players without taking any risks or spend any time. When do we get a new true fighter airplane again?
You don't think the last two announcements promote combat? Weird, me either.
-
With all the complaints about CV ack (which I do not share in), I'm actually surprised that HTC would add another "puffy generator"
I would assume that it would work like our 5" guns...but who knows. I'm also curious as to how smoke grenades will be launched/dropped from the upcoming storch, both seem a total departure from what we're used to.
Manable 88's would be pretty useful defending revised strats... :noid
-
yall thought Vilkas was bad before wait till he gets this :D
(http://www.war44.com/misc/images/4/German_88mm.jpg)
A German 88 mm gun in the antitank role. Originally designed as anti-aircraft gun, it was also used as anti-tank gun
from early in the war, and fitted in tanks from 1942.
It's high velocity and flat trajectory made it greatly feared weapon.
It is my regret, that I was to young to be beside it ! :frown: Us young ones, only the pea shooters :cry
:old:....... :salute ... U ALL !!!
-
I am hoping HTC wont give it AP shells, that is what the 17 Pdr AT gun is for. Besides, the 17 Pdr has better AP performance any way.
Not that it matters now, but I vote to give it AA shot only. The 8.8cm Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 Gerillt (High Explosive Fragmentation) could reach up to 32,000 ft.
I wonder how the trajectory compares to the 5in guns we currently have in AH? I'm guessing quite a bit flatter.
-
Why not make it a duel purpose weapon as it was intended? instead of throwing 17lbers everywhere you can simply have 88s.
-
Why not make it a duel purpose weapon as it was intended? instead of throwing 17lbers everywhere you can simply have 88s.
I didnt think it was designed to be anything but an AA gun from the start? Obviously, it turned in to something far greater than "just an AA gun".
I think having it stationary at a field would lend more towards it being AA than dual purpose, but that is just me. Did all the units who deployed this weapon receive AP as well?
-
This sure is going to put a damper on things for the milkrunners that just want to fly around flattening towns.
-
This sure is going to put a damper on things for the milkrunners that just want to fly around flattening towns.
I haven't seen anything yet that would make me do such a prognosis.
Just for the record, I never ever have been shot down by a manned CV 5" cruising above 20k, and these do have proximity fuses even.
-
Now that will be interesting as to how that will work on a manable gun? :headscratch:
Warbirds used the mousewheel to scroll fuse distance. "uses"
-
I haven't seen anything yet that would make me do such a prognosis.
You don't think that 1 (maybe more) 88's spread around an airfield would give a bomber jock reason to pause and think about his route?
I know I would.
-
It would be very cool if they were manned by players and towable in the future, use an M3 or SdKfz 251 to tow them.
-
Pretty certain ManaWar is having a special moment to himself right about now :lol
-
Pretty certain ManaWar is having a special moment to himself right about now :lol
I was thinking the same thing. :lol
People are always looking for ways to stop the horde, well I say add more ack.
I'm currently reading "The Big Show". In it, the author describes the massive amounts of flak put up by the Germans. He even describes "ack lanes", which were setup on the runway approaches to allow aircraft to land without threat of vulching.
I am 100% on board with more anti-aircraft artillery in this game.
-
I'm concerned about the pilots out there that do not understand the idea of flying fast and high to avoid AAA, or perhaps maybe even go around it. or make it a priority to destroy it?
The same people that dive screaming into base ack and complain that I'm an ack hugger...will I now be just that 5k+ away from a base? ;)
-
scoring hits against a fast moving fighter that is constantly changing direction and alt while furballing/chasing down a runner with a gun that does not have proximity fuses but only a preset timer for alt/range a slow (compared to the 37mm) rate of fire and a slow traversing/tracking rate will be almost impossible. i think only the gamers that have figured out how to scam hits on fighters with tanks (very few individuals that i have heard of) may stand a chance, but other than that i dont see them being much of a "run to the ack" option.
-
Tankers are not "scamming hits" on enemy fighters.
If the fighter flies low on a direct attack approach right into your tank sites, that's not much of a scam, thats a silly attacker.
-
I'm currently reading "The Big Show". In it, the author describes the massive amounts of flak put up by the Germans. He even describes "ack lanes", which were setup on the runway approaches to allow aircraft to land without threat of vulching.
I am 100% on board with more anti-aircraft artillery in this game.
Pierre Clostermann would be the man and an excellent read.
-
I didnt think it was designed to be anything but an AA gun from the start? Obviously, it turned in to something far greater than "just an AA gun".
I think having it stationary at a field would lend more towards it being AA than dual purpose, but that is just me. Did all the units who deployed this weapon receive AP as well?
Early as 1940 it turned into an Anti Tank gun - being so early in the war, shouldn't it of been duel purpose or do we exclude it because it was "originally" designed as an AA gun? If so then we do we have modified aircraft that served throughout the war? Look at the P47 line, clearly a fighter from the start, but turned into a ground attack plane.
I would argue if the 88cm was turned Anti-tank late in the war, but being so early in the war, its almost a given it will be duel purpose, perhaps like a 5 inch gun, able to fire one way or the other.
Here's a posting of the earliest use of the 88cm as an Anti-tank weapon:
"or the 1940 Battle of France, the army was supported by eighty-eights deployed in twenty-four mixed flak battalions.[4] The eighty-eight was used against heavily armored tanks such as the Char B1 bis and Matilda II, whose frontal armour could not be penetrated by the light 3.7 cm anti-tank guns then available. The 88 was powerful enough to penetrate over 84 mm of armour at a range of 2 km,[7] making it an unparalleled anti-tank weapon during the early war, and still formidable against all but the heaviest tanks at the end of the war. Notably, Erwin Rommel's timely use of the gun to blunt the British counterattack at Arras ended any hope of a breakout from the blitzkrieg encirclement of May 1940. In the entire Battle of France, flak destroyed 152 tanks and 151 bunkers.[4]"
I can account one of rommel's books he used it exclusively as a bait weapon, sending tanks in then having them disengage and retreat - while the 8.8's were used in ambush.
-
looks like it from the mounting. hopefully that will be only thing it can kill
Based on the angle of the gun barrel, I'd say thats a big negatory :aok!
As to the 'concerns' about MrJellyfish inhabiting the guns, bear in mind that these are (or should be) manually fuzed. You will (or again, should) have to manually set the fuze for the desired range.
It will be a lot more difficult than many would expect I'm guessing. You'll have to simultaneously lead your target and adjust the range for where the target WILL be, rather than for where he IS. The actuall explosive charge will be smaller than our 5" guns as well, so you'll need to have it burst closer to still get a kill.
I hope that with the manned 17lbers and now FlaK 36's, we'll be able to get spawnable guns one day soon.
-
Tankers are not "scamming hits" on enemy fighters.
If the fighter flies low on a direct attack approach right into your tank sites, that's not much of a scam, thats a silly attacker.
there was a thread a while ago (no im not gunna waste my time hunting for it, if you wanna read it do the research) in which more than one person was discussing hitting fighters who were furballing near them with leading shots and in the back of climbing out fighters not just head on shots. they were essentially laughing at the fighter guys who were complaining about it and calling it gamey.
show me one reported and comfirmed instance in which a WWII tank crew claimed a kill on a fighter in the air with their main gun and i will never call it gamey again, but until this act can be supported with historical fact then it is just that gamey and scaming kills.
-
If you look at the picture, the gun shield has a nice little slot in it which would allow the gun to be able to aim at ground targets. Who knows if it will, and who knows what kind of ammo, but the model certain supports being trainable to ground level.
-
Burden of proof rests with the accuser FLOTSOM, not with the accused. And more to the point, we do all kinds of stuff with our aircraft that not only never happened, but would be anywhere between ineffective and suicidaly stupid in real life.
1) Find me some evidence of a single Il-2 taking out upwards of 6 panzers with guns alone (I've even seen upwards of 10) without being rearmed.
2) Find me evidence of pilots crashing their planes, and then taking off in another one mere seconds later.
3) Find me evidence of spitfire Mk I's flying combat missions against Ta-152's
4) Find me evidence of a glaring red icon floating above enemy aircraft in WWII.
Untill then, #1 is scamming kills off the GV's, #2 is scamming everybody, #3 is scamming perks off the Late-war flyers, and #4 is scamming an advantage off everybody.
Also, what would you propose to do, make planes invincible to shell fire? Show me 1 example of an aircraft surviving a direct hit from a 75mm HE round.
-
You don't think that 1 (maybe more) 88's spread around an airfield would give a bomber jock reason to pause and think about his route?
Sounds like fun! Bring it! :cool:
-
Burden of proof rests with the accuser FLOTSOM, not with the accused. And more to the point, we do all kinds of stuff with our aircraft that not only never happened, but would be anywhere between ineffective and suicidaly stupid in real life.
1) Find me some evidence of a single Il-2 taking out upwards of 6 panzers with guns alone (I've even seen upwards of 10) without being rearmed.
2) Find me evidence of pilots crashing their planes, and then taking off in another one mere seconds later.
3) Find me evidence of spitfire Mk I's flying combat missions against
4) Find me evidence of a glaring red icon floating above enemy aircraft in WWII.
My response would be learn how the game works, and work with what you have. I totally agree with...*cough* tank-ace :uhoh on this one. except for #3 pretty sure you didn't finish that one :D
Untill then, #1 is scamming kills off the GV's, #2 is scamming everybody, #3 is scamming perks off the Late-war flyers, and #4 is scamming an advantage off everybody.
Also, what would you propose to do, make planes invincible to shell fire? Show me 1 example of an aircraft surviving a direct hit from a 75mm HE round.
-
The question is "Can I shoot tanks with it?"
but will it blend?
-
Tankers are not "scamming hits" on enemy fighters.
If the fighter flies low on a direct attack approach right into your tank sites, that's not much of a scam, thats a silly attacker.
hit an IL-2 with 1 shot from 1.5k out with a T-34 while he was climbing...would never be able to do that again
-
tank, i wrote a nice argument to your response but because i dont feel like another endless agrument with an entire host of intardnetlings over a million million issues regarding the dynamics of a game and its requirements vs real life and what was and/or was not possible, i opted to erase it.
i will end my part of this by saying, you have fun downing planes with your main gun and i will continue to laugh ever time a gv'er whines on 200 about being lank-stuka'ed or spawn camped by bombers and jabo's or when i score a kill against a tank with any 20 or 30mm bird i might be flying.
gamey is gamey, i accept and understand that killing a tiger with 20 or 30mm guns is just that, gamey. if i can accept and acknowledge the truth of the situation why cant you? tracking and killing furballing fighters with the main gun of a tank is just like killing armored gv's with gamey.
respond if you want, i got nothing more to say to you on this matter.
-
tank, i wrote a nice argument to your response but because i dont feel like another endless agrument with an entire host of intardnetlings over a million million issues regarding the dynamics of a game and its requirements vs real life and what was and/or was not possible, i opted to erase it.
i will end my part of this by saying, you have fun downing planes with your main gun and i will continue to laugh ever time a gv'er whines on 200 about being lank-stuka'ed or spawn camped by bombers and jabo's or when i score a kill against a tank with any 20 or 30mm bird i might be flying.
gamey is gamey, i accept and understand that killing a tiger with 20 or 30mm guns is just that, gamey. if i can accept and acknowledge the truth of the situation why cant you? tracking and killing furballing fighters with the main gun of a tank is just like killing armored gv's with gamey.
respond if you want, i got nothing more to say to you on this matter.
If you're flying an aircraft and you get hit by a tank shell, you are doing it wrong.
Ignoring the proverbially 1 in a million chance, you as the pilot have complete and full control of where to fly, including into the sights of a tank. I will venture to add that it's fairly common to understand what a tank can, and can not aim at. So why put yourself in harms way? It is entirely avoidable.
The proof would be providing evidence that somehow it was essentially impossible to avoid cannon from a tank, and then making that repeatable.
-
gamey is gamey, i accept and understand that killing a tiger with 20 or 30mm guns is just that, gamey.
Not entirely gamey. During the Battle of the Bulge, a M8 Greyhound managed to sneak behind a Tiger and killed it with its 37mm cannon from less than 25 yards away.
ack-ack
-
Not entirely gamey. During the Battle of the Bulge, a M8 Greyhound managed to sneak behind a Tiger and killed it with its 37mm cannon from less than 25 yards away.
ack-ack
well thats a neat bit of history i never heard before. thanx ack!
-
Not entirely gamey. During the Battle of the Bulge, a M8 Greyhound managed to sneak behind a Tiger and killed it with its 37mm cannon from less than 25 yards away.
ack-ack
The Battle at St. Vith, Belgium, 17–23 December 1944: An Historical Example of Armor in the Defense
pp. 31-32 (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0ByG34sfo24C&lpg=PP1&ots=llVAtrwCsL&dq=The%20Battle%20at%20Saint%20Vith%20Belgium%2C%2017-23%20December%201944&pg=PA31#v=onepage&q&f=false)
wrongway
-
gamey is gamey, i accept and understand that killing a tiger with 20 or 30mm guns is just that, gamey. if i can accept and acknowledge the truth of the situation why cant you? tracking and killing furballing fighters with the main gun of a tank is just like killing armored gv's with gamey.
respond if you want, i got nothing more to say to you on this matter.
No. No it is not gamey. My Father, in the mid 90's was sationed at NTC as the OPFOR. He managed to climb a small hill during one of the simulated engagements and ended up with his BMP-2's (Modified M551 Sheridans) Pretty much Co-Alt with some attack helicopters on their way to the engagement, where his guys promptly opened up on them and knocked them out of the fight. There's alot more to that story but that's the short version.
A gun being able to track an aircraft is not gamey, if the aircraft is low enough, slow enough, or moving in the right direction a good gunner can and should be able to hit it.
Hell today I was knocked out two or three times because I was coming in too low on my attack runs by main gun rounds. It helped that the tanks were on a mountain that was about 1,000 feet above the base and the base itself was 4.5K off of sea level, making the climb rate of most attack aircraft abominable.
I try not to fly IL 2's because of that, but the damned Rooks kept knocking out A21's ordnance so my usual A20 wasn't available.
Hell, isn't it argued that a man on the ground with a rifle shot down the Red Baron? How inconceivable is it that a good tank gunner can shoot down a plane under the right conditions?
-
Oh just wait till I figure this gun out. :devil
-
always wanted an 88 on an AF
-
Artillererary!
Tow it! Tow it!
-
Better yet, get a bunch of artillererary together, and THEN tow it!
-
You don't think that 1 (maybe more) 88's spread around an airfield would give a bomber jock reason to pause and think about his route?
I know I would.
Not in the context of your initial statement:
This sure is going to put a damper on things for the milkrunners that just want to fly around flattening towns.
So far we have just seen a 88 on a field. That's gonna hardly deter town milk runners, as they do fly way too high and the town is often quite a bit away from the field anyway. Under the current system, even 5" with proxy fuses would fail to scare them off.
-
So far we have just seen a 88 on a field. That's gonna hardly deter town milk runners, as they do fly way too high and the town is often quite a bit away from the field anyway. Under the current system, even 5" with proxy fuses would fail to scare them off.
So you've never flown over an airfield on your way to hit a town? I know I have.
As far as them flying too high, surely you know that an 88 can reach quite far. With a trained gunner (assuming this is manned) the results will give many the bomber pilot cause for concern.
-
So you've never flown over an airfield on your way to hit a town? I know I have.
As far as them flying too high, surely you know that an 88 can reach quite far. With a trained gunner (assuming this is manned) the results will give many the bomber pilot cause for concern.
I have too, but if the airfield would become dangerous, I would simply avoid it.
And it's not because the 88 can't technically reach that far. It's because nobody will hit. Even the 5" manned guns on CVs have never ever managed to shoot me down at >20k. A typical town milkrunner altitude is way above that. A formation of bombers, flying perpendicular to the gunner in a distance of 1-2 miles at an unknown altitude (but somewhere around 25k)... that's an almost impossible target even if the gun had proxy fuses. It's just 1-3 very small dots without any indication of actual distance/altitude.
Sorry, but with the information we have now, it's in no way at all discouraging the proverbial 'town milker'. I certainly will be not. There would have to be a lot of additional changes to do so. They may come, but as for now... :airplane:
-
The German 88. Most feared multi-use weapon of WW2.
Now let's see how close those cv's will get :rock
Between SB's and 88's, I don't think cv jocks will be bringing them close to shore now.
:cheers: Oz
-
moin
this gun is not better as the gun of a Tiger so i think the cv will not have many trubbel with tham.
cu
-
Finally some flack on the fields! :cheers:
-
moin
this gun is not better as the gun of a Tiger so i think the cv will not have many trubbel with tham.
cu
good Moaning
(http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/Xtvm6xZSGCo/hqdefault.jpg)
-
The German 88. Most feared multi-use weapon of WW2.
Now let's see how close those cv's will get :rock
Between SB's and 88's, I don't think cv jocks will be bringing them close to shore now.
:cheers: Oz
Without a coordinated enemy offense, that may be true.
-
The 88 should die with a single rocket or burst of cannon fire. For those players with a mind to vulch it will become target no 1. Bear in mind it has a slow and predictable rate of fire so you should be able to evade its fire by changing course at the right time.
-
:aok :aok :aok :aok :aok Yes, welcome to the new kill club...muahahahahahaha :devil
-
No. No it is not gamey. My Father, in the mid 90's was sationed at NTC as the OPFOR. He managed to climb a small hill during one of the simulated engagements and ended up with his BMP-2's (Modified M551 Sheridans) Pretty much Co-Alt with some attack helicopters on their way to the engagement, where his guys promptly opened up on them and knocked them out of the fight. There's alot more to that story but that's the short version.
This came up a couple of years ago as well, at the time I posted an account from a Soviet veteran that was in command of a Guards tank regiment that was equipped with Lend-Lease Sherman tanks. The Soviet commander stated that they would park their Shermans on berms to allow them to fire on oncoming low flying German planes. He never said they hit anything but he did clearly state they did fire their main guns at low flying attackers. In Rudel's book, he mentions that he didn't like attacking Soviet Sherman units for this very reason in addition to the additional .50 cal guns the Shermans had for defense.
ack-ack
-
The German 88. Most feared multi-use weapon of WW2.
Did you know the Germans feared the multi-role US 90mm M2 AA gun as much as we feared the German 88mm?
ack-ack
-
I cannot imagine the line of reasoning that people have to say that this is going to stop bomber raids. It isn't a magic gun. Even if radar will now include altitude reporting, it will still be almost impossible to hit a bomber at altitude. In fact, I welcome the thing because people trying to shoot me down makes it more interesting.
-
Karnak, its just that (I think), they're fearing it WILL be a factor, and so they're trying to make it out to be bigger than it is.
True AKAK, but the 90mm wasn't as common as the 88 was, and it wasn't in use as early. As a result, it wasn't able to develop that legendary staus as some proverbial beast that stalks the battlefield.
-
True AKAK, but the 90mm wasn't as common as the 88 was, and it wasn't in use as early. As a result, it wasn't able to develop that legendary staus as some proverbial beast that stalks the battlefield.
The US 90mm M2 AA gun was just as common as the 88mm, and it had the same reputation amongst the Axis as the 88mm had with the Allies. The Germans hated it so much because there was very little audible warning and would often catch the German troops by surprise and left scrambling for cover as the M2 would pour in rapid direct fire on the German positions. Captured German POWs referred to the 90mm M2 as the "Ratschbum" due to the sounds of the incoming rounds on their positions.
Here is a M2 engaging attacking German troops and armor in Italy.
(http://www.antiaircraft.org/aaimages/90mm%20m2.jpg)
M2 position during the Battle of the Bulge.
(http://www.antiaircraft.org/aaimages/90mmat.jpg)
One major thing the 90mm M2 had on the 88mm...the ability to fire proximity fused rounds when it was finally authorized to use the rounds over mainland Europe.
ack-ack
-
If you want a towed 88 this is the one you want Gerat 42.
(http://www.afv-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/201077173717.jpg)
-
Hmmm... I thought the M2 (the one able to engage ground targets) didn't see widespread use untill mid 1943.
-
I have too, but if the airfield would become dangerous, I would simply avoid it.
This is precisely my point.
I've done the milk-run thing (as a way to pass time while sipping beers) and my method was to fly from Point A to Point B to Point C, with little to no deviation.
If I have to worry about some 88's lighting me up on my approach, I too will avoid the airfield. However, if I have to do too much maneuvering, I'll simply avoid the target completely or scrub the mission altogether.
I will then go sit in a gun position and practice shooting down high alt buffs while enjoying a cold brewskie or two.
:cheers:
:salute
-
Hmmm... I thought the M2 (the one able to engage ground targets) didn't see widespread use untill mid 1943.
When were the US in italy?
-
Maybe we can get it towed by a sdkfz. :)
-
When were the US in italy?
USA also played a large role in North Afrika, where Rommel's use of the gun contributed in large part to its reputation with the Allies.
When/where exactly it earned its fearsome reputation is harder to pinpoint, but North Afrika is undoubtably the front in which the Allies faced significant numbers of these guns defending from pre-prepared positions (which probably helped create the reputation it had, since they were less exposed than the attacking British tanks).
-
Did you know the Germans feared the multi-role US 90mm M2 AA gun as much as we feared the German 88mm?
ack-ack
Did not know that. Thanks.
:cheers: Oz
-
I think the only thing the 88mm is going to do is make the low level bomber blokes think twice. If anything, it is simply going to push the bombers a wee bit higher and perhaps stave off the dive bombers a bit, too. I dont know about anyone else but I find that it is much easier to shoot down enemy aircraft with the 5in naval guns proxy fuse vs the 40mm manned ack.
The thing we do not know is how HTC is going to work the fuse settings on the 88mm. If they make us dial it in prior to firing, that wont be so bad really. It will be similar to dialing in a German tank to the range you want, and once you have the range dialed in it is just a matter of fine adjustment.
-
Did the 88's have proxy fuses, or were they strictly altitude "set" fuses. Anyone???
from http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq96-1.htm
+++++
"...
British scientists were working on proximity fuze devices for rockets and bombs at least as early as 1939.
Captured documents indicate that German work on proximity fuze development had begun in the early 1930's,
and was still in process when hostilities ended in the European Theatre.
In brief, there is nothing unique about the 'idea' of a proximity fuze. The possibility that proximity fuzes
of various types might be feasible has been recognized for a long time. The American achievement,
accomplished by no other country, was the actual development of a proximity fuze that would function
and that could be manufactured by mass-production techniques.
..."
The "VT" or Radio Proximity Fuze: Supplemental Basic Information Prepared by Applied Physics Laboratory,
the Johns Hopkins University. (Silver Springs MD: The Laboratory, 1945)
+++++
"...
test firing of proximity fuzed 5"/38 projectiles against drones was carried out in August 1942
aboard the cruiser USS Cleveland [CL-55]. Results of this test were entirely satisfactory and
accordingly, full-scale production of proximity fuzes was initiated at the Crosley Corporation
in September 1942. Early production was plagued with numerous difficulties but satisfactory
material was finally produced. This fuze, which was designated the Mk 32, was delivered to
the Fleet during November and December 1942, and the first Japanese plane was shot down
with proximity fuzed projectiles by the cruiser USS Helena [CL-50] in January 1943.
..."
Dilley, N. E.
"Development of Proximity Fuzes (VT) for Projectiles - VT Fuzes MKS 32 to 60, Inclusive (General Description)."
chapter 1 of
The World War II Proximity Fuze: A Compilation of Naval Ordnance Reports by
the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. (Silver Spring MD: The Laboratory, 1950)
(http://www.history.navy.mil/pics/shell2.jpg)
-
The thing we do not know is how HTC is going to work the fuse settings on the 88mm. If they make us dial it in prior to firing, that wont be so bad really
What I could imagine... and note that I have absolutely no idea what HTC is really doing... well, what I could imagine as an easy "solution":
With the new icon system, give the 88 - and only this one - unlimited icon range. You can see the enemy planes, you get an icon ("12K"). And the fuse is set by time (perhaps mappable to any analog control axis). This would on one hand simulate radar or optical rangefinder data data, whole on the other hand it would still not be anywhere like "magic" hit probability. At long ranges you still don't have the exact range, and neither do you know the exact composition of vertical and horizontal distance vectors which has some influence on flight time. A very talented gunner with lots of practice may finally be able to pull of some amazing shots, the majority will not. (I can already see the "cheat!" whines coming :D)
But this way the gunner would have at least a chance to engage high flying targets, while not having to fall back on something like radar fused rounds. And, at least for me, that would add another new, interesting thing to learn :joystick:
-
iirc VT fuses were yet another developement based on the secret tech in Tizard's suitcase.
-
What I could imagine... and note that I have absolutely no idea what HTC is really doing... well, what I could imagine as an easy "solution":
With the new icon system, give the 88 - and only this one - unlimited icon range. You can see the enemy planes, you get an icon ("12K"). And the fuse is set by time (perhaps mappable to any analog control axis). This would on one hand simulate radar or optical rangefinder data data, whole on the other hand it would still not be anywhere like "magic" hit probability. (...)
But this way the gunner would have at least a chance to engage high flying targets, while not having to fall back on something like radar fused rounds. And, at least for me, that would add another new, interesting thing to learn :joystick:
Well, it seems it's almost that way, just max 12k icons instead of 'unlimited' :)
-
I played around with the 88 a little today and its sure not going to be the bomber destroyer some people thought it would be. Getting range and aim spot on is basically impossible at extreme ranges between 6-12K yds.
-
so this means we get more puffy ack?
-
so this means we get more puffy ack?
Yes, but very different from any we had before.
-
How many rounds were fired by flak for every bomber brought down over Germany?
-
How many rounds were fired by flak for every bomber brought down over Germany?
According to the comprehensive book on German heavy AA "Die schwere Flak 1939-1945" by Werner Müller:
16,000 rounds for the 88 Flak 36/37
8,500 rounds for the 88 Flak 41
-
So let's say that ingame they are even 10x better than real life. Very few guys are going to have the patience to fire that many rounds to take a level bomber down.
-
So let's say that ingame they are even 10x better than real life. Very few guys are going to have the patience to fire that many rounds to take a level bomber down.
In AH, most buffs fly considerably lower than in real life, and use very suicidal tactics. A formation B-17's that is passing over the town at 'realistic' 25,000 feet will be very, very difficult to hit from the airfield.
Quick & rough computation:
If the town is 5k yards away from the field and the bombers are at 24K feet... if directly over the town the icon range should be about 9.4k The rounds take about 21 seconds to get there, during that time a formation of B-17s will travel something like 2500 yards = ~ 100 plane lengths. And of course that 21 seconds means you would shoot when the bombers icon range would display a different readout than 9.4k. Also you would have to aim for a point way in front of the town, as the bomb release point is not directly over it and bombers often change course right after dropping the bombs.
Lots of variables, many guesstimates and enormous room for error. :old:
But stil: Given the laws of probability it's just a matter of time until such a thing happens - and we can already bet on how long it will take for the first "ridiciously overmodeled crap" whine to show up :D
-
But stil: Given the laws of probability it's just a matter of time until such a thing happens - and we can already bet on how long it will take for the first "ridiciously overmodeled crap" whine to show up :D
I, for one, will be greatly amused if I get hit. Even more so if it one shots my Mossie XVI that is moving at 380mph at 28,000ft. Should such an event occur I could no nothing other than congratulate the gunner on his excellent shot.
-
I was playing around with the 88flak last night in the beta, and shooting at some dots on the radar way inland. I maxed out the distance, and let the flak arch down towards the horizon in the direction I saw the dots.. And I saw someone comment that a few of those flak shells came really close and seemed quite deadly, wonder if they were speaking about MY flak shells?! If that were the case, then I can imagine how perfecting the aim in these guns may affect overall gameplay. Just imagine.. The dots were almost a sector away.. :O
-
I, for one, will be greatly amused if I get hit. Even more so if it one shots my Mossie XVI that is moving at 380mph at 28,000ft. Should such an event occur I could no nothing other than congratulate the gunner on his excellent shot.
When the new version goes live, I will deliberately fly over fields at 20k in my B-17 to see how it works out. :airplane:
-
When the new version goes live, I will deliberately fly over fields at 20k in my B-17 to see how it works out. :airplane:
Excellent, just let me know your speed as well and I will deliberately man one of the 88's :D
-
Lots of variables, many guesstimates and enormous room for error.
Sounds pretty accurate to me. If real world ack was as effective as it is in AH, all nations would have given up on level bombers in 1940.
- oldman
-
If real world ack was as effective as it is in AH, all nations would have given up on level bombers in 1940.
- oldman
If ack in AH was effective as it was in real life, no one would play Aces High. You are seriously kidding yourself if you actually believe acks in game are more effective than what they were in real life.
ack-ack
-
Sounds pretty accurate to me. If real world ack was as effective as it is in AH, all nations would have given up on level bombers in 1940.
- oldman
Did they fly the same suicidal way bombers and basically all other planes do fly here? ;)
-
It's manned and Anti aircraft, tanks
-
If ack in AH was effective as it was in real life, no one would play Aces High. You are seriously kidding yourself if you actually believe acks in game are more effective than what they were in real life.
ack-ack
I think hes talking about the 5" manned flack, which I would agree with. If the FlaK batteries protecting Germany were as effective as 5" is at protecting a ship from low level attack, we'd all be speaking German by now.
Of course the keyword is "low". Manned puffy isn't really that effective against high-alt bombers, since you can't see WHERE your shells are going, unless you're on target.
Then again, since our shells will burst regardless of if they pass nearby an enemy, we'll be able to more accurately adjust our lead.
-
If ack in AH was effective as it was in real life, no one would play Aces High. You are seriously kidding yourself if you actually believe acks in game are more effective than what they were in real life.
Geez, how can one seriously kid himself?
8th AF formations (and I'm sure the same was true for 15th AF) did not, could not, take evasive action once committed to their bomb runs. Most of them came out of the ack on the other side of the target. I don't believe that is so in AH.
- oldman
-
Geez, how can one seriously kid himself?
8th AF formations (and I'm sure the same was true for 15th AF) did not, could not, take evasive action once committed to their bomb runs. Most of them came out of the ack on the other side of the target. I don't believe that is so in AH.
- oldman
Only aircraft I ever lost to puffy ack in AH was a Bf109G-2. I've taken minor hits in bombers, but never even had system damage from puffy ack.
Why do you think that most bombers don't make it through the puffy ack in AH?
(I am speaking of the non-proximity fused puffy ack here)
-
Geez, how can one seriously kid himself?
8th AF formations (and I'm sure the same was true for 15th AF) did not, could not, take evasive action once committed to their bomb runs. Most of them came out of the ack on the other side of the target. I don't believe that is so in AH.
- oldman
You forget also, that hundreds of Flaks were shooting at hundreds of bombers, narrow that down its pretty accurate in Aces High - we are using very small numbers vs very few flak guns.
-
Geez, how can one seriously kid himself?
8th AF formations (and I'm sure the same was true for 15th AF) did not, could not, take evasive action once committed to their bomb runs. Most of them came out of the ack on the other side of the target. I don't believe that is so in AH.
- oldman
I don't remember ever being shot down in a bomber by CV puffy ack when flying >=20k. When attacking CV groups in bombers, I fly at 9-12k. At that altitude, losing a bomber due to auto puffy is quite rare, while I'm frequently being killed by manned 5" guns (which do have radar fuses, which Germany had not).
Only over the new strats I do get occasionally a critical hit, but rarely one that outright kills a drone. In 29's it's even better: I have made 12 missions to the strats in B-29s so far (all with formation) and haven't lost a bomber to puffy so far, the worst case was one oil hit with resulting loss of one engine.
And unless there will be some additions to fire control or gun placement beyond what we do have in beta, the field 88 will just be a minor annoyance to bomber operating at high altitude. However, Lancs passing over the base at 10K, which is quite the "standard" for AH, will get wiped out a lot if the 88's are still up.
-
I don't remember ever being shot down in a bomber by CV puffy ack when flying >=20k.
I stand corrected then.
- oldman
-
fwiw, fired at drones in 88's offline. i miss even with distance dialed in. anyone knocking them out of the sky?
-
fwiw, fired at drones in 88's offline. i miss even with distance dialed in. anyone knocking them out of the sky?
Range?
Enable the LCS and see where you are shooting versus where you should be shooting.
Messing around in Beta the other day, firing straight up @ 12k fuse setting, I noticed considerable "drop" before the AAA went PUFF between where I was "aiming" and where the shell was going off.
wrongway
-
fwiw, fired at drones in 88's offline. i miss even with distance dialed in. anyone knocking them out of the sky?
I was able to down the drones. Even got two with one shot.
-
:old: I cant wait! :devil :devil :devil :x