Bomber external views

[Mister Fork]

Now that my setup has come and gone, I'd thought I'd ask the buff pilots who had to brave external views turned off.

To you brave buff pilots, could you please answer the following:

1. Your initial impression of no external views.

2. Did it improve the 'real' factor?

3. Were you able to effectively manage your buffs and hit targets?

[o0Stream140o]

Well Fork,
 My guys and I flew the B-17 on that thing we had going last thursday.  It was a different feel not being able to see the external views.  I think it did make it feel more real than if you could turn on externals.  We did evenutally hit our targets, but I think using them as we did in a pack rather than just that lonely buff pilot made it easier.  I think for the lone buff pilot would have a harder time to do it because his field of view is very limited.

[wombat]

1.Your initial impression of no external views.
Found it to be an inconvenience.  

2. Did it improve the 'real' factor?
No, not at all, examples:
•   After exiting the target area in an A-20 (low level strike against a vehicle base) I was jumped by an interceptor. I tried to extend a little before setting up the overshoot. To keep the interceptor from firing I was flying less than 25’ AGL in heavy relief. In order to check the range and closing speed of the fighter, I had to go to auto pilot to view from the rear gunner position (very risky at 25’ doing 300knts). I’m thinking in real life the rear gunner would use the intercom to update me with this info.
•   On one occasion I happen on to a C-47 while in a P-38. I was unseen by the pilot and moved in to less than 200 yards for the kill. In most cases a “goon” is an automatic kill, but with my poor marksmanship, if seen this guy may had a chance. I’m not sure what the normal crew arrangement on a C-47 is, but again I would think a crewman would intercom the pilot of any trouble, giving them time to evade.
•   I mostly fly B-26’s & B-17’s for level bombing at altitudes of 8K to 20K using the bombsight. I don’t feel it’s very real that to check the SA before calibration and bomb release I have to visit four gun positions, taking maybe 20 seconds, that’s before the 20 to 30 seconds to calibrate and the time needed for the final alignment for the release. My thinking is that a quick outside view before calibration and bomb release would emulate crewman providing the SA information via intercom.

3. Were you able to effectively manage your buffs and hit targets?
       Yes, I was successful in hitting my targets and defending the formations. All the B-17 sorties that week were flown at higher altitudes like 27k to 30k hitting targets like cities and factories. Only lost one drone that week from enemy action ( Storch demonstrating his skill on attacking bomber formations).  All other interceptors flew right up my “six” and I dispatched them promptly.
    I would like to say that this inconvenience did not reduce the number of bomber sorties flown by me (other than the time needed to climb out to 30k). I have talked to others who were not willing to deal with this, maybe reducing the overall use of bombers in CT. I hope this doesn’t become a permanent setting here in CT, but if so I’ll keep my trap shut and keep bringing the hurt.
1.   Your initial impression of no external views.

[PropNut]

Well my initial impression was that it took away from your bombing too much .  I found when flying the B17 that I spent so much time bouncing around all the guns that I sometimes missed my chance to drop on target .  As far as improving the "Real Factor" It was like flying a B17 full of drunk gunners where you had to do everyones job including the bomb cal and droping.... with the short con range and the 262s you had only 2 or 3 sec to even see a 262 comming up from the deck if you happen to be checking that gun.  To be more real you would get crew 6 calls because they were watching their little patch all the time  I think automated 6 calls and views limited to guns would make for a fun set-up for a single pilot...the only thing better would be having all guns manned by real gunners (like AW had)...then gun only views would be ok. Another thing that was un realistic is trying to make a rapid descent to keep the fighters from being under you . You could either be the pilot and descend without any info on how fast a con is approaching or jump to a gunners position and go level. In real combat a pilot could descend and the tail gunner could report as the con approached all at the same time. At any rate when i got tired of gun jumping I switched to AH2 Beta and flew with external views there now that 50 - 75 people fly there its getting better.  To me the external views are the best compromise we have untill Hitech works out something different.

[CurtissP-6EHawk]

You guys need to stop trying to bomb targets at 2,000 feet!

[PropNut]

Quote:
You guys need to stop trying to bomb targets at 2,000 feet!
    End Quote:

Hawk ...there is nothing wrong with low level bombing (when used with medium bombers like the B26 A20 etc)  it is a well known fact that alot of low level bombing was used in WW2.  I knew a WW2 vet. that was in on a lot of low level "skip bombing" and 75mm cannon work in the B25s .  As shown  durring the D-day invasion .  

The 386th Bomb Group (chosen by Eisenhower) was last to drop just 5 minutes ahead of the invading troops.  Carpet bombing using 100 lb bombs to tear up barbed wire defenses, explode land mines and create instant fox holes. Deep enough for the ground forces but not too deep to hamper tanks and landing vehicles.  290 Marauders dropped 550 tons of bombs with extremely accurate results.  All bombed below cloud cover from 1650 ft to 3,000 ft.  

  Anyway low level bombing is a valid tactic  that used the element of supprise  "And I know how you hate supprises "