Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lulu on January 01, 2013, 09:28:57 AM
-
A20, 109, seem to be indestructible.
Is it my impression only?
:salute
P.S.
I was diving on a20, in a pony 51, more then 400 mph. I fired ... A20 still there !
He turned, others fired on him. I got the kill. But I expected he exploded because
I put a lot's of bullets on him. But generally it's always the same story also when
i fire with spit cannons.
-
It is all about the amount of damage delivered to a particular area on a specific plane. Not all planes are the same, not all weapons are the same. Believe me when I say that sometimes it is frustrating, but the same thing goes for all of us.
-
The A20 takes a lot of damage. 109's, not as much but they're nimble birds so you have to get up close & personal.
-
The a20 can soak up well over 10 taters without any critical damage. The 109 - not so much.
IMO, the Jaks are pretty tough for their size.
-
It also depends on where you hit them. An A20 has lots of empty space inside, especially in AH where the gunner seats aren't manned. A 20 mm hole in the aluminum wall would only add ventilation without affecting maneuverability. The weakest parts in almost any plane would be the engine area and pilot, when looking at real warbirds. Debrody, I was with the group to see the Brewster IRL closely while it was restored. We found a bullethole in the rear and it looked as if the bullet had travelled through the empty space inside the plane until hitting the cast iron back rest armor, breaking it into two pieces. That was the biggest single damage in the whole fuselage, the crashing being caused by engine hits. Makes me wonder how the WW2 pilots could fatally hit anything without the self aiming armament we have today. The aluminum walls are just one step further from the canvas of WW1 planes, mostly there only for added aerodynamics.
-
The KI-84 seems to soak up a lot of damage. I shot 4 taters into a KI-84's wing today and nothing but a missing aileron and a flap no longer working. Makes me wonder what crazy stuff the Japanese put in that plane.
-
The P47 seems to be a bit more durable since the remodeling but that could be wishful thinking on my part.
Doggone 109's are just plain hard to catch still long enough to cut them up.
Least durable to me is P38 and most magnetic for collecting lead. It would be my number one plane if it didn't catch so much attention in a furbal. Got to love those twin engines.
-
The KI-84 seems to soak up a lot of damage. I shot 4 taters into a KI-84's wing today and nothing but a missing aileron and a flap no longer working. Makes me wonder what crazy stuff the Japanese put in that plane.
in sure you have vid of this.
-
A20, 109, seem to be indestructible.
Is it my impression only?
:salute
P.S.
I was diving on a20, in a pony 51, more then 400 mph. I fired ... A20 still there !
He turned, others fired on him. I got the kill. But I expected he exploded because
I put a lot's of bullets on him. But generally it's always the same story also when
i fire with spit cannons.
Problem is you were flying a 51...
-
:huh :huh :huh :rofl :rofl :rofl I was flying a Pony................says it all! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :lol :lol :lol :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
The aluminum walls are just one step further from the canvas of WW1 planes, mostly there only for added aerodynamics.
Not even close to being correct. The skin of nearly all the aircraft was vital to the strength of the structure. Google monocoque.
-
Not even close to being correct. The skin of nearly all the aircraft was vital to the strength of the structure. Google monocoque.
Done. Found this Aircraft Structure page (http://www.free-online-private-pilot-ground-school.com/aircraft-structure.html), which claims that true monocoque would be too heavy for planes, the solution being semi-monocoque. It also says that early aircraft designers began to enclose the truss members to streamline the airplane.
, making my WW1 statement correct.
Looks like my biggest mistake was the phrase "only for -- aerodynamics". Thanks for correction, and making me look for sound information and learn something. :salute
-
A20G, Ki84, any 'old modeling' planes including the Jak, Ju88, B26B, Lancasters etc....
-
The A20 takes a lot of damage. 109's, not as much but they're nimble birds so you have to get up close & personal.
target wing or engine and they go down as fast as anything else. Target the body and unless you get a lucky shot on the cockpit. All your doing is poking holes in a metal can. Eventually it will all add up to total structural failure but it takes alot more rounds. Though you may get some gunners
-
Not even close to being correct. The skin of nearly all the aircraft was vital to the strength of the structure. Google monocoque.
Ever actually touched and inspected the skin of a WWII bird?
Its about as thick as the metal in a Cambels soup can. and not nearly as stiff
-
There is no mystery to shooting any of the 'tough' airplanes down. Concentrated fire is better than bullets spread all over the aircraft.
-
There is no mystery to shooting any of the 'tough' airplanes down. Concentrated fire is better than bullets spread all over the aircraft.
Yanno. Its funny. after writing my last post about targeting an area of an aircraft I remember someone posting something similar when I was only here a year or so and thinking to myself. "Target the wing root? Hell Im happy if I can just hit the plane."
Funny how the game slows down for ya
-
109, seem to be indestructible.
109 gets a radiator hit or Pilot wound just by looking at it
-
Ever actually touched and inspected the skin of a WWII bird?
Its about as thick as the metal in a Cambels soup can. and not nearly as stiff
He flies them. fyi ;)
-
The KI-84 seems to soak up a lot of damage. I shot 4 taters into a KI-84's wing today and nothing but a missing aileron and a flap no longer working. Makes me wonder what crazy stuff the Japanese put in that plane.
The wing structure was very strong on the Ki-84 as it was a single structural piece incorporating a section of the fuselage, but I doubt in game it would weather 4 30-mm. Perhaps you were seeing MG pings.
What it makes up in structure it loses in pilot wounds, trust me :frown:
-
The wing structure was very strong on the Ki-84 as it was a single structural piece incorporating a section of the fuselage, but I doubt in game it would weather 4 30-mm. Perhaps you were seeing MG pings.
What it makes up in structure it loses in pilot wounds, trust me :frown:
I saw the 4 explosions of the taters. Both 20mm's were out. It was the first time I had seen a plane take more than 2 taters. Don't think it'd be the last time though.
-
I saw the 4 explosions of the taters. Both 20mm's were out. It was the first time I had seen a plane take more than 2 taters. Don't think it'd be the last time though.
Strange. I have a few hours in the Ki-84 and I've always lost a wing if I take an accurate 30-mm hit there.
-
Strange. I have a few hours in the Ki-84 and I've always lost a wing if I take an accurate 30-mm hit there.
Like I said, it was the first time iv'e ever seen any plane take more than 2 taters to the wing. I'm guessing lag had a good role in it but I still don't understand how it happened.
-
the 84 is by far one of the toughest fighters in the hanger.....by that I mean how much it can take, many times I have been surprised at how many rounds I took and was still flying.....but a couple taters and its done.....but 50's and20's if they are not hitting at convergence......
I so wish I had the film of me fighting 3 brews a yak and a spit.....after that I got a rage VOX pm about cheating.....killed them all except the Yak got away with a smoking engine.(I was shooting good that day :t)...
I was Pilot wounded...... missing an Aileron..gear was out...... gun was destroyed......and every piece of the plane that could take a bullet hole....had 2 in it.........yet I still flew away all enemy dead or wounded.....eventually running out of fuel and ditching.
not even the 47 can take that much.....I was turning extremely hard Lo on fuel....so I chalk it up to they mostly were not hitting at convergence.....
Fear the Hayate
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w246/fieldsofink/deathheadstrikesagain-1.jpg)
-
Ever actually touched and inspected the skin of a WWII bird?
Its about as thick as the metal in a Cambels soup can. and not nearly as stiff
I've got just over 600 hours flying the B-17 and B-24. Spent two years working on both of them...so yeah, I've touched a WWII airplane....probably more than you have. :D
FYI, the skin on my Cessna was thicker than a soup can.
-
the 84 is by far one of the toughest fighters in the hanger.....
To be fair Ink you don't look after yours either. Look at the state of it. Have you considered a respray? :old:
-
With hair like his? He'd lose a lot of street cred, man.
-
The A20 has to be the toughest plane in the game. The F6F too IMO. Always thought the 47s around here should take a little more damage then they do also.
-
To be fair Ink you don't look after yours either. Look at the state of it. Have you considered a respray? :old:
:D
-
maybe its time for the P47C to come along :noid
-
The KI-84 seems to soak up a lot of damage. I shot 4 taters into a KI-84's wing today and nothing but a missing aileron and a flap no longer working. Makes me wonder what crazy stuff the Japanese put in that plane.
flap hit, aileron hit, wingtip hit, wing hit. no mystery there, if you'd put 2 of them into the wing it would have fallen off.
-
I forgot one: the f6f ...
:salute
-
The A20 takes a lot of damage. 109's, not as much but they're nimble birds so you have to get up close & personal.
These issues generally revolve around being directly behind the 109s. They are such a low profile bird that you have to be hitting them directly and chances are, the pile it of the 109 does not particularly want to hold still for you to shoot at him. Shallow to wide deflection shots are the best where the 109 gives you full view of his top-down profile. If its a K4, you best kill him quick or:
1. If its a Muppet, your tracers will pizz him off and he'll turn around and kill you;
2. He'll take his speed and kill you later;
3. He'll slam the brakes on, you'll slide by and you'll die immediately.
Don't miss as the results are not fun. Thank you, carry on.
K4 HELPFUL HINT #129
-
These issues generally revolve around being directly behind the 109s. They are such a low profile bird that you have to be hitting them directly and chances are, the pile it of the 109 does not particularly want to hold still for you to shoot at him. Shallow to wide deflection shots are the best where the 109 gives you full view of his top-down profile. If its a K4, you best kill him quick or:
1. If its a Muppet, your tracers will pizz him off and he'll turn around and kill you;
2. He'll take his speed and kill you later;
3. He'll slam the brakes on, you'll slide by and you'll die immediately.
Don't miss as the results are not fun. Thank you, carry on.
K4 HELPFUL HINT #129
K4 is my top supplier of spuds :rolleyes: they die easyer then most other 09s
-
K4 is my top supplier of spuds :rolleyes: they die easyer then most other 09s
That's because your A20 looks like 300 pounds of poo stuffed into a 100 pound bag...and absorbs the taters just as well!
-
That's because your A20 looks like 300 pounds of poo stuffed into a 100 pound bag...and absorbs the taters just as well!
well yeah,its a flying tank :P
-
well yeah,its a flying tank :P
(http://i909.photobucket.com/albums/ac300/Changeup1/demotivational-posters-silver-lining.jpg)
-
"1. If its a Muppet, your tracers will pizz him off and he'll turn around and kill you;
2. He'll take his speed and kill you later;
3. He'll slam the brakes on, you'll slide by and you'll die immediately."
:rofl
:salute
-
As a flyer of the gun-mobile (A8) I find Yak9's are the most durable fighters in-game.
Most fighters including those mentioned above, die from a solid burst of 4*20mm and 2*13mm, but not the Yak.
They shrug and fly on, less a gear or an aileron.
God help us if we get this durability of a coming yak3, not only faster, but also more manoeuvrable.
Its the only fighter that can soak up close to a buff.
And btw , perk the 3-gun la7.
-
Done. Found this Aircraft Structure page (http://www.free-online-private-pilot-ground-school.com/aircraft-structure.html), which claims that true monocoque would be too heavy for planes, the solution being semi-monocoque. It also says that early , making my WW1 statement correct.
Looks like my biggest mistake was the phrase "only for -- aerodynamics". Thanks for correction, and making me look for sound information and learn something. :salute
:airplane: You sir, are correct, the only item in the world which is a true monocoque construction is an "EGG"!