Just for the record, Spitfire...

[BnZs]

It is my PERCEPTION that P-47s are not at all hard to shoot down.

Here are what SEEM like the toughest plane to me.

#1. The Tempest/Typhoon. These are DEFINITELY at the top of my list. Except for their radiators, they just seem to absorb tons of damage.
#2. The F4F/FM2. This one makes a certain amount of sense.
#3. The Yaks
#4. The Hellcats.
#5. The Corsair.

Now, here are some of the odd points...the P-47 does not seem particularly hard to shoot down, nor particularly easy. The Corsair definitely seems to take abit more, which is just odd considering their relative sizes and construction.  The 109s appear to be about as tough as the 190s, if not actually more so, which is just odd.

However, without access to specific data about the damage modeling, this is all just perception and speculation.

[MachFly]

It is my PERCEPTION that P-47s are not at all hard to shoot down.

Here are what SEEM like the toughest plane to me.

#1. The Tempest/Typhoon. These are DEFINITELY at the top of my list. Except for their radiators, they just seem to absorb tons of damage.
#2. The F4F/FM2. This one makes a certain amount of sense.
#3. The Yaks
#4. The Hellcats.
#5. The Corsair.

Now, here are some of the odd points...the P-47 does not seem particularly hard to shoot down, nor particularly easy. The Corsair definitely seems to take abit more, which is just odd considering their relative sizes and construction.  The 109s appear to be about as tough as the 190s, if not actually more so, which is just odd.

However, without access to specific data about the damage modeling, this is all just perception and speculation.

I think it also has to do with the size, for example: the Yaks are hard to shoot down because they are small and the P-47s are easy because they are huge and you can't miss them.

[Ack-Ack]

No P-47 ever took anything close to the entire ammo load of an Fw190.

But since Thrash99 heard about the story of Johnson vs the FW 190, he probably believes that this was the norm for P-47s being able to take a punishment.

ack-ack

[THRASH99]

I have seen a photo of a Ju88 that was shot down by a single 20mm hit from a Spitfire, and not to the cockpit.

I'd like to see that if you could pull it up please.

[THRASH99]

But since Thrash99 heard about the story of Johnson vs the FW 190, he probably believes that this was the norm for P-47s being able to take a punishment.

ack-ack

I'm only saying that because if you look at that to the P-47 in AH, it dies pretty fast don't you think? I can't see a couple of 20s hitting the wing and snapping it in half or the entire part comes off, it would have to make a hole to what a 30mm does to do that, which it obviously can't do in that in a couple hits.

[JOACH1M]

Mach, I am at no Internet at my house (doing this from phone) and I cannot upload it as of now

[MachFly]

Mach, I am at no Internet at my house (doing this from phone) and I cannot upload it as of now

Thant's fine, when ever you get a chance.

Thanks again

[Guppy35]

Shaddup about Spitfires not being tough.  Like any bird it all depends on where you hit them.  Picture is worth 1000 words.  here's 12,000 words on Spitfire toughness.  Spit I, Spit IIb, Spit V, Spit IX, Spit XIV and Spit XVI all included.  Wings, fuselages, tails, elevators, horizontal tail plane etc.  Those aren't mosquito bites on those Spits that all brought thier pilot's home

[MachFly]

Shaddup about Spitfires not being tough.  Like any bird it all depends on where you hit them.  Picture is worth 1000 words.  here's 12,000 words on Spitfire toughness.  Spit I, Spit IIb, Spit V, Spit IX, Spit XIV and Spit XVI all included.  Wings, fuselages, tails, elevators, horizontal tail plane etc.  Those aren't mosquito bites on those Spits that all brought thier pilot's home

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Interesting
Thanks for posting

[nrshida]

Great pictures Guppy, many thanks for posting those. Looks to me like the AH's Spitfire damage model needs revising in the light of some of those pictures.

[Lepape2]

[..]
However, without access to specific data about the damage modeling, this is all just perception and speculation.

That specific data has got to be in the form of a programming language. Even if its spread over a couple thousand lines, I would still like to see it. It might be possible to translate it for everyone into a simple chart. But then again, that must be an industrical secret.

My only comment on the damage model is that wings are too fragile because no matter how strong it is, it will always come in 2 removable parts unlike the WW1 damage model. I removed a whole wing tip from planes by just shooting at the very last inch of their wing tip with 50 cals while it whould only remove a couple of rivets in real life.

As for the spitfire, I think its the easiest plane the shoot down in the game if the wings take the damage and you can actually make the shot. They are made of paper!

EDIT:
You guys realise the amount of whine and comments HiTech would recieve if they EVER even thought about remodeling the damage model? Think about it? (hint to the last GV change)

[Ack-Ack]

Great pictures Guppy, many thanks for posting those. Looks to me like the AH's Spitfire damage model needs revising in the light of some of those pictures.

No, those pictures don't mean the Spitfire needs to have its damage model looked at.

ack-ack

[nrshida]

No, those pictures don't mean the Spitfire needs to have its damage model looked at.

ack-ack

Well I am by no means a Spitfire expert, but simply observing the consequences of those presumably cannon round impacts, I do see one consistency in every wing shot; the main spar is untouched. I understand in the Spitfire the Main spar formed a D-shaped box with the relatively thick-skinned leading edge, as it was originally intended to be part of an evaporative cooling system?

Anyway, I would conjecture that you'd need to destroy that naturally strong structure for the wing to pop off like they do in Aces High. In one of those pictures the wing has lost a good deal of the skin both top and bottom, from right behind the main spar to the aileron, and apparently most of a rib too and he clearly got down safely, structure still hanging together.

I appreciate HTC must model the real damage by a discrete abstraction, but those aircraft got their pilot's home safely and look a lot tougher then the fragile sports cars as currently depicted in AH.

  to Reginald Mitchell I say.

[Motherland]

Those pictures are significant because under normal circumstances each one of those aircraft would have been lost, because they got lucky, not because the Spitfire would, on a regular basis, take multiple cannon shells to the wing and continue on without structural failure.

Pictures like that survive precisely because they are NOT a good indicator of how good an aircraft is at absorbing fire, just like the story about Johnson's P-47.

[nrshida]

How can we know what exactly the structural damage was to downed aircraft that lost a wing in flight for example? We don't have the other half to make a comparison with. Therefore, define normal circumstances.

Do you know if photo 8 also is of ZFP Guppy?