Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: NOD2000 on July 01, 2002, 06:45:24 PM
-
this just makes me think the duribility of the 17 in Ah..........
got this picture from a old book i have on B-17's
-
.
-
Guess they for got to tell the guys in the 17's over germany they weren't aloud to go down in one pass;)
I wonder how many 30mm hits a 262 could get on a b17 in one pass? How many 30mm hits could a b17 take and still stay in the air? I know they sometimes came back a flying wreck, but for each one that did how many didn't? The U.S. lost some where around 5,000 b17's in WWII, most in Europe.
I know they didn't always go down in one pass but sometimes they did.:)
regards,
Chris
-
Lots of buffs came back in rough shape, but many, many did not.
The Luftwaffe did a study once late in the war that indicated that 3 (three) properly placed 30mm shells could bring down any plane...including the 17. I don't have the info in front of me, but I suspect it was in the wing root area....30 mm is a pretty big shell and the 17 is not that heavily armored (I've flown in one several times as part of CAF)
LW
-
The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum has a fantastic wall-sized display of some of these badly damaged planes that made it back, most of them are 17s. Some of the damage has to be seen to be believed--entire nose sections gone, missing elevators and rudder (no chance of getting one of those home in AH) and one photo of a 17 with a car-sized hole through the fuselage. (One of my long-term scale model projects is to try and replicate one of these extreme-damage survivors).
But then in the display next to the 262 they have a video of early 262 flight tests, and one short fragment of gun camera from (presumably) a 262. But there's no mistaking the fact that you're seeing the effect of a 30mm shell. One round hits the left wing and blows an enormous hole, burning fuel begins to pour out before the film cuts off. That's one round. It's a sobering piece of footage that really helps to put those other photos of the ones that made it back in context.
-
Without having more than a highschool education I think you can sum up the results of the examples of the damage of B-17's who made it home in "amazing" condition as the law of averages.
You have a somewhat over engineered airplane and thousands of opportunities to damage it (someone said 5000 shot down) you are going to see instances where a plane unbelievably makes it home.
I think that the important thing to note is that this was definately the exception not the rule. Many many planes went down with far less damage.
-
Damage modelling's fine.
40k B-17s out maneuvering Ta-152H-1s is what pisses people off.
-
Not sure where I read it but the LW supposedly had surmised that it took an average of twenty 20mm shell hits to kill a four engine bomber .
-
Now that is what I call the results of a slashing attack.
F.
-
(shrugs) eh well i am just sayin............ i have been reading about the 17 for 12 years and have read many many many books on them..........
i do not go by luftwaffa results cuz they are known for boasting..........hell i've seen copies of files of 17's they thought went down but accually made it home............ or at last was able to ditch in the english channel but whent 100 - 200 miles just to get to it while the luft guys thought they were dead
i do not go by bombers results cuz they do not include those that ditched in the ocean and sometimes it didn't get put down if 3 or 4 bombers were late cuz they were runin off 2 eng's
i go by personal stories where they wrote home or told it to me or told a author....................... ...
i can name 2 pilots that came home with over 1,000 machine gun and canon holes in the plane and i can find thousands of names that made it home on a prayer...........
It just pisses me off so bad when i climb up to 15k mabey 10k and get hit by 1 20mm and my whole wings rips off......... and i have seen many gun cams on the 109's 190's etc etc etc etc and they show them taking beating after beating after beating after beating........... and no i am not a bad gunner or anything hell my high is 25 kills in the 26....... but i've just seen way to many instances on AH that my plane goes down under stupid cercumstances................ . oh yea my favorite is the mustang or p47 with the same D* .50's i got hit me mabey 10-15 times and end 3 & 4 are dead with no alerion or flap....... and if i hit him 10 - 15 times nothing bad happens to him...........
-
those were most likely rare instances. 1,000 MACHINE GUN and cannon shells. I find that believable, if the damage is spread about the whole buff. B-17s are fine, they take about the right amount of damage to bring down. Give it a stronger damage moddled, toss in it's high alt dogfighting ability plus it's turbolazers and you have a receipe for uberness.
-
I've made this argument myself before. Maybe I'm partial to the 17 and the 26 because they are my ride of choice. They just seem aweful fragile to me. Just once, I'd like to see someone put up some stats by Boeing as per the durability/survivability of the 17. If anyone knew how much this plane could take, it would be the manufacturer. But then, you could argue that Boeing would overstate the Durability of the A/C just to get or keep the military contract. Who knows.
And how many licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a toostie pop?
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
And how many licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a toostie pop?
the commercials claim 3 but i believe this is propaganda
-
Ever notice how durable buffs are when you're are trying to shoot them down ? Ever notice how fragile buffs are when you are the buff pilot ?
I think some of the reason why planes like the Il2 don't seem to live up to their real life reputation is that in AH every bullet that strikes a plane will do some damage to that plane . In WWII I imagine that many rifle calibre bullets would just penetrate through without doing much damage, or in the case of the Il2 just bounce off .
-
oh yea my favorite is the mustang or p47 with the same D* .50's i got hit me mabey 10-15 times and end 3 & 4 are dead with no alerion or flap....... and if i hit him 10 - 15 times nothing bad happens to him...........
Hmm... a standard 90 deg. dive on a b17 so only his top turret can fire yields this.
2x 50. cals firing at a fast diving enemy.
8x 50. cals firing at a huge target, in a concentrated area.
8x 50 cals win.
at the same time, a p47/mustang ie any plane that attacks a b17 from dead six is just plain stupid and dead.
The other thing you need to realize nod, is that just because u only hear 10 pings, doesnt mean thats only what hit you. Rates of fire on p47 is tremendous, therefore if you don't have a perfect connect, some of those pings might lump together to form "big pings"
-
Sometimes they seem tough, other times they go down on first pass.
Depends where you hit them.
I met a pilot named Zizouuu, he always manages to bring down a bomber with first pings. It is just great to watch !
-
Last week I was watching my favorite TV station, The History channel. On their program "history on film" they where playing "memphis belle". We all know that the movie is BASED on the real story but drifts away from it for the excitment quotion. Anyway, before the movie starts, they go oversome of the "historical facts" of the movie and the b-17. Out of over 8000 B17's stationed in England, only 2000 survived the war....hmmm that is a surval rate of 25%!!!!!
Just another little neat tidbit...the crew of the memphis belle was alive and saw the movie when it was released!!!
-
Wouldnt you just hate to be that tail gunner;)
-
Hits needed to shoot down four engined bomber. (Netw. Treffenanzahl). Made by studying gun camera footages and counting averages. 8. 2. 1945
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/koponen.lauri/njg_stat.jpg)
-
Originally posted by illo
Hits needed to shoot down four engined bomber. (Netw. Treffenanzahl). Made by studying gun camera footages and counting averages. 8. 2. 1945
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/koponen.lauri/njg_stat.jpg)
Info about MG 213/30? Seems terrifying. What airplanes use it weapon?
-
Now where did the MG 213 info come from ? AFAIK, they were only prototypes.
-
Yes, i think that is just estimate basing on other 20/30mm weapons.
Amount of explosive in its mineshell equals other mine rounds of same caliber.
MG 213 was only on some prototype aircrafts. Atleast 1 Ta-152 was equipped with Mg 213 revolver-cannons, which were the base for todays ADEN and DEFA cannons. There was many plans using this cannon on aircraft at design stage. As few examples Arado TEW 16/43-23(cancelled due to Ar234 production and design needs in 1944) and HO 13 B supersonic fighter (planned to be flying by mid-46).
-
I hope these show up...
If not go have a look at The Battle Damaged B17 Site (http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm) Because thats where I found them all.
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/nose/nose5.gif)
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/tail/stabil5.jpg)
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/tail/tail1.gif)
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/body/side1.gif)
Anyone ever dropped bombs on another Buff in here? Looks like there was more than 1 occasion where it happened in action.
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/tail/bombed_tail2.jpg)
Gatso
-
Originally posted by NOD2000
It just pisses me off so bad when i climb up to 15k mabey 10k and get hit by 1 20mm and my whole wings rips off......... and i have seen many gun cams on the 109's 190's etc etc etc etc and they show them taking beating after beating after beating after beating........... and no i am not a bad gunner or anything hell my high is 25 kills in the 26....... but i've just seen way to many instances on AH that my plane goes down under stupid cercumstances................ . oh yea my favorite is the mustang or p47 with the same D* .50's i got hit me mabey 10-15 times and end 3 & 4 are dead with no alerion or flap....... and if i hit him 10 - 15 times nothing bad happens to him...........
First of all Kronos is right about the number of pings being no way to judge how much damage you are taking. AH only approximates sound to actual damage, and at times lag can make that wildly inaccurate.
Secondly, the P47 is a fearsome weapon. Measured in weight of fire per second 8 50s put out an amount of lead roughly equivalent to a couple of 30mm shells. In a ground-strafing role p47s were known to overturn trains when hitting them along the side, and the recoil from the guns would often slow the plane up to 50mph on a prolonged burst.
Thirdly, there's a reason 1 pass kills are common in AH whereas they were much rarer (although not as rare as you may think) in real life, and it's got nothing to do with damage modelling, and everything to do with the entirely different conditions that prevail in the MA.
Fighters are, in the first place, usually attacking solo bombers, so they don't have to worry about the defensive fire from an entire formation. That means that you can hold your attack longer and put in a lot more lead than most LW pilots were able to do in a single pass. And in the second place, in AH you are usually attacking unescorted bombers; if you have no defending fighters to worry about you can take time to set up a much better attack angle, rather than having to take whatever was on offer when you arrived on the scene, as most LW pilots had to do.
Gatso, thanks for the tip for that battle damage site, just what I've been looking for for a scale model project.
-
These words may sound like this, but they aren't spelled but a certain way.
duribility = durability
luftwaffa = luftwaffe
mabey = maybe
cercumstances = circumstances
...and I will Bet Mr. Dolittle would appreciate if when you quote him you don't have people think he didn't know how to spell Japanese :) (japanise)
-
sorry man i am dyslexic...............can't help i can't spell right ok?
-
How much did do you think the average WWII fighter jock flying a p51 or P47 had total shooting his guns?
Remember, Yeager got 5 kills, got shot down, rejoined after 6 weeks, when he got back in the field he only had 6 missions where he even saw LW planes.
So Even if we are generous and give each pilot a half hour of actual shooting time.
Now how many hours do you have flying AH and how much shooting time have you accumulated? I have been flying for 6 + years ever since May of 96. How many hours do I have of trigger time? Has to be up in the DAYS now not hours.
We hone our skills WAY past what any normal fighter pilot in WWII ever had a chance to do.
Is it any wonder that a good pilot can make a b17 go down in one pass?
Plus when we hear ping ping ping do we break like a real pilot would have? Or continue our attack knowing that we just respawn again.
-
P47 fires 12 lbs of lead in one minute. One of the reasons I like the bird so much. :D
Also, with the oncoming 1.10, bomber strategy is going to change alot. I know I for one will have to come up with a new way to attack them, because coming down from atop won't work so well.
6x 50 cals does enough damage. :) Although, I expect they will have a convergence pattern much similar to wing mounted guns, prolly a little wider pattern.
-
Don't you mean 12lbs a second ?
-
In a ground-strafing role p47s were known to overturn trains when hitting them along the side,
Um, yeah... I don't suppose you would care to post a reference for that one would you? One of those nasty little laws of physics things that seem to get in the way of so many a good yarn would tells me that, since the .50 calibre rounds are not explosive, 50% of the force required to tip a train is also being applied to each wing of the P47 over the same period of time. (In reality it would be even worse since the transfer would not be 100% efficient. That is, some rounds will miss, some energy goes into heat, some rounds richocet, some go all the way trough.)
-
Browning .5" weighs 9.73g
M2 rate of fire 1200 rpm
So it adds up to 205.5lbs a minute or 3.4lbs a second, does that sound about right ?
-
it might be 12 lbs a second, (I know it was 12lbs, but cant remember if it was a second or a minute) i cant remember anymore, and cant find the references either.
And HFMudd, it .50 cals may not have been "explosive" as in cannon rounds, but they did have inciendery rounds. (Especially useful in the Pacific, since Japanese aircraft were for the most part weakly armoured.)
I have heard of them blowing trains off the track, but I can't find a reference for that either. I'll let Taiaha answer that one.
-
Kronos,
I've no doubt that a .50 could manage to do enough damage to a train or track to cause a train to derail. But the intent of the post that pegs my BS meter is pretty clearly that the force of the rounds push the train over.
Ignore the P47 for the moment and imagine a single Browning M2 HMG sitting on a tripod in a ground emplacement. Now imagine what would happen if, during the course of say a 5 second (long burst for a plane right?) burst it 1/8th of the energy required to push a train over.
-
Incidently, what sort of attacks would we do against multiple buff formations now?
Peel off like an onion?? HO the furthest left or right buff? Come screaming down from above and smash right through the middle of the "box"??
Would rockets have better chance to hit something now?
-
I completely believe that damage from .50's caused trains to derail.
Remember, a steam engine uses steam under very high pressure--probably around 180-220 PSI for the german locomotives then in use, possibly as high at 240 PSI.
You all know what happens when you shoot a pressurized air tank with a rifle....in the case of a steam engine, we're talking about a pressure tank 60 feet long (or more).
The force of the explosion from the steam loco's boiler is what was driving them off the track, not the bullets themselves.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Ghosth
How much did do you think the average WWII fighter jock flying a p51 or P47 had total shooting his guns?
Remember, Yeager got 5 kills,
This is a misleading example of gunnery prowess since two of those aircraft collided with each other during Yeager's attack. He was, however, credited with their destruction.
I would argue that AH pilots, on average, have much better gunnery skills than their WW2 counterparts. They are able to land more hits in a shorter amount of time. If the shooter is accurate, it may only take one pass to land enough hits to do severe or fatal damage.
I would also argue that bombers suffer fewer losses as they gain altitude and speed. A fast or maneuvering B-17 or Lanc at 30k+ can force their pursuers to commit an attack at the 6 o'clock position - the best place for an effective defense.
A low bomber is easily outperformed by a fighter (expecially one with good pilot) that can pick and choose the most effective attacks with minimum risk from defensive guns. The best bomber killers aim for the cockpit where a single volley of hits can take out the flight crew. Tough to do from a 6 o'clock attack and best done with a slashing frontal attack. Flying low makes a buff an easy target for a single pass kill.
Should the bombers be made tougher because poeple aren't flying them where they are least vulnerable? High and fast?
MiG
-
Most people want to believe that the LW shot down most of the bombers over Europe. This is not correct.
If memory serves correctly over 80% (could be 90%) of the bombers were lost do to AAA damage.
The German 88's were deadly.
-
Incidently, what sort of attacks would we do against multiple buff formations now?
Being a Bfg-110 fan. I can't wait to try out the ack rockets on the formations we will see.
-
Remember, a steam engine uses steam under very high pressure--probably around 180-220 PSI for the german locomotives then in use, possibly as high at 240 PSI.
Oh, it's more than just the pressure in the case of a boiler. Since the water in the boiler is being held at the pressures you mention above, the water temperature is considerably greater than 212 farenheit. Once the boiler fails that water is able to flash into steam which fills a volume far larger than the boiler itself. (I forget the actual expansion ratio.)
Be that as it may though, the origonal post above I took issue with was not that a 50 cal. could cause a train to derail, it was that the weight of fire from a P47 could PUSH a train over if it hit it in the side. That contention simply does not stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
(Sorry for the thread hijack everyone. I promise I will let this drop now.)