ME410 bk5 had 3 additional magazines can we have this?

[Citabria]

http://www.luftarchi...ate/waffen2.htm
 There they say the Bk5 had 22 shots (1 already loaded? compared to now) and 3 additional magazines! to be loaded by the radio operator!
 1+21+21+21       =64
 1+21+21+21+21 =85
22+22+22           =66
 22+22+22+22     =88

any combination of this many rounds would be nice.

[Zacherof]

All I can say is wow. Stray raiders beware 

[bustr]

This is not the most user friendly history site out there. You have to dig around even resizing the page to get at sub menus.

When you read the actual D. (Luft) T. 2410 A-1/U4 Teil 8A April 1944 manual, there are only 22 rounds carried onboard in a closed ring self feeding magazine. The navigator has no access to the weapons bay during flight.

http://www.luftarchiv.de/

The English translation of the german info for the BK5.

This cannon was designed from the CHP 39, for mounting in the me 410. The barrel, the CAP, pipe reverse and feeding the original tank weapon have been modified slightly for this purpose. In addition, an electrical trigger and the furnaces was installed. With an automatic charger to the rear part of the gun around built 22-shot magazine and the single and also fire could be shot. Travelling with 3 magazines, changed on the fly by the gunner, was intended for the me 410. The night Hunter pattern Ju 388 J-4 should take even a twin mounting the BK 5 in a tank under the fuselage. Also several were equipped with front workshops he 177 A-3/R1 with the BK 5, to their transport flights from Zaporozhe to Stalingrad and back to fight the enemy on the ground. Are used especially when using the so-called BK/M.Gr. notable successes achieved; so, for example, a group of 53 has me 410 A-1/U4, which were equipped per weapon with 36 shot fired with the BK 5 6 enemy flights during the period from 22 February to 11 April 1944 a total 129 units of B-17 "Fortress" bomber and 4 pieces of the B-24 "liberator" only 9 losses of own. At bottom shot attempts on one he 111 with the Spr.G "M" (0.350 kg) of explosive) the hull with a hit was decomposed into two parts. A hit was enough even for four-engine machines such as the killings of 9 "Fortress" bombers from half a mile away on 9 and 11 April 1944 proved. Data: Caliber 50 mm, Cadence 45 rounds/min, weight 540 kg and length 4342 mm

[jeffdn]

A hit was enough even for four-engine machines such as the killings of 9 "Fortress" bombers from half a mile away on 9 and 11 April 1944 proved. Data: Caliber 50 mm, Cadence 45 rounds/min, weight 540 kg and length 4342 mm

Talk about terrifying... flying in a formation, with planes flinging 50mm shells at you from beyond the range of your defensive guns. I do not envy those bomber boys, man. Yeesh. 

[Krusty]

Considering most B-17s and B-24s were flying slow enough for all Luftwaffe fighters to overtake them several times in the same engagement, get out in front of them, and then repeatedly HO them without spending an hour in a tail chase (like Aces High), the low speed and higher closure rate would make getting kills with a big gun easier.

However, historically speaking the BK5 jammed often. Usually after a handful of rounds. That left 410s with jammed guns to use their 20mm cannons to continue the attack. This is one reason that many BK5 craft were converted to 2x20mm, 4x20mm, or 2x30mm configurations -- the reliability was much better and made for better kills (in general) than the big gun.

They definitely did not have multiple magazines reloaded by the rear gunner, though, for the reasons already spelled out.

[Butcher]

Considering most B-17s and B-24s were flying slow enough for all Luftwaffe fighters to overtake them several times in the same engagement, get out in front of them, and then repeatedly HO them without spending an hour in a tail chase (like Aces High), the low speed and higher closure rate would make getting kills with a big gun easier.

However, historically speaking the BK5 jammed often. Usually after a handful of rounds. That left 410s with jammed guns to use their 20mm cannons to continue the attack. This is one reason that many BK5 craft were converted to 2x20mm, 4x20mm, or 2x30mm configurations -- the reliability was much better and made for better kills (in general) than the big gun.

They definitely did not have multiple magazines reloaded by the rear gunner, though, for the reasons already spelled out.

Unfortunately Aces High is still "Arcade" in a sense that B-17s can climb above 30,000 ft while flying faster then recommended speed. Sad part is being in a scenario or FSO and having buffs doing that, I don't even bother to engage and just land.

[bustr]

As our tanks can skeet shoot I16 on the fly probably as a concession to keep the tank crowd here and not at WoT. Our bombers probably can fly at those speeds to keep buff pilots in the game.

What would happen one year in SEA during Der Gross Slong, if the CM asked all bombers to fly at historical speeds and alts?

And I read some early development info on the BK5 for the 410, and it wasn't feasible with the fuselage versus the compact size fit of the modified BK5 to have manual change out magazines. In the end the closed ring was the only way to get the thing to fit and work.

[Krusty]

Not to mention the entire underside of pilot and gunner areas were armored, and you could not just reach down into the bomb bay. The roof of the bomb bay was a load bearing structure, and is where most of the bomb racks attached, so it was structurally sound.

It would be like saying you reach through a closed window to adjust the side view mirror on your car. Just can't be done without major damage

[bozon]

As our tanks can skeet shoot I16 on the fly probably as a concession to keep the tank crowd here and not at WoT. Our bombers probably can fly at those speeds to keep buff pilots in the game.

That is a very demeaning comment towards the buff and GV players.
Unfortunately it is true.

AH has 3 "sim" standards: one for fighters in which HTC does the best it can to produce the most accurate flight model and physics. The second is for bombers with many concessions regarding maneuvering and especially bombing accuracy. The third is for GV that has almost no physical modeling and a "no cockpit" (aka commander) view for driving and shooting.

[save]

Unfortunately Aces High is still "Arcade" in a sense that B-17s can climb above 30,000 ft while flying faster then recommended speed. Sad part is being in a scenario or FSO and having buffs doing that, I don't even bother to engage and just land.

The solution would be to have 7 drones for each buff forcing them to fly at x speed to keep drones, each set of 8 buffs would be closer to RL, at the same time creaing the 3-800% more allied planes than LW. Meeting a 8-set buff formation would be a formidable foe in itself, flying in combat boxes of 5 real pilots would be a whopping 40 planes to counter. some "adjustments" to 1.5k ranged .50 cal poses a problem that can be sorted out, RL bombers opened up at 800 yards and did markedly low numbers kills compared with escorts, again in RL. Many landing LW planes looked like junk
after a buff-hunt, but where easily patched up.

[jeffdn]

The solution would be to have 7 drones for each buff forcing them to fly at x speed to keep drones, each set of 8 buffs would be closer to RL, at the same time creaing the 3-800% more allied planes than LW. Meeting a 8-set buff formation would be a formidable foe in itself, flying in combat boxes of 5 real pilots would be a whopping 40 planes to counter. some "adjustments" to 1.5k ranged .50 cal poses a problem that can be sorted out, RL bombers opened up at 800 yards and did markedly low numbers kills compared with escorts, again in RL. Many landing LW planes looked like junk
after a buff-hunt, but where easily patched up.

Speaking as a dedicated bomber hunter, that would be awesome.

[gyrene81]

Unfortunately Aces High is still "Arcade" in a sense that B-17s can climb above 30,000 ft while flying faster then recommended speed. Sad part is being in a scenario or FSO and having buffs doing that, I don't even bother to engage and just land.

ah bombers are not flying "faster than recommended speed", it's just faster than they would if they had to maintain position in a large formation and didn't have the precision bombing capability that exists...if the real life bombers could hit an aircraft hangar from 30,000ft with precision while maintaining a tight 100+ plane formation flying at full speed, they would have done it.

[Krusty]

They are not flying simply slow enough to stay in formation.. No. That's misleading and inaccurate. They were flying barely above stall speeds at those alts. It was so bad that the flexible Davis Wing on the B-24s warped and flapped around, creating nasty handling characteristics. You could NOT hold the B-24 steady at 30K alts, and instead all formations had to BREAK UP to fly up there, otherwise they would (and did) skid sideways and crash into their wingmen. They had to spread out because there was literally no control over the planes up that high. It was no surprise to see a B-24 simply flip onto its back, according to one pilot's recounting. The thin air and the warping wings meant B-24s had to fly lower. That wasn't an issue, though, since 30K sorties were the rare of the bunch. In an entire big mission the very few rare planes flew at 30K. Most down between 20 and 25k, and the low boxes down to as low as 15k.

There were far more heavy and medium bombers flying below 20K in WW2 than we have flying over 30K in FSOs and events. How's that for realism?

Not to mention the fact that bombers cruised through the thick of combat on max cruise settings. Fuel was more important than speed. Even on short hops just across the channel to targets in France, bombers topped the tanks off.

Fuel was life, and they cruised to and from the target, even while being attacked by enemy fighters. They didn't just notch the throttle down a tad to stay in formation like scenarios do.

Those B17s in WW2 were flying closer to 150 TAS whereas Aces High's are around 300 TAS most cases.

[Lusche]

They are not flying simply slow enough to stay in formation.. No. That's misleading and inaccurate. They were flying barely above stall speeds at those alts. It was so bad that the flexible Davis Wing on the B-24s warped and flapped around, creating nasty handling characteristics. You could NOT hold the B-24 steady at 30K alts, and instead all formations had to BREAK UP to fly up there, otherwise they would (and did) skid sideways and crash into their wingmen. They had to spread out because there was literally no control over the planes up that high. It was no surprise to see a B-24 simply flip onto its back, according to one pilot's recounting. The thin air and the warping wings meant B-24s had to fly lower. That wasn't an issue, though, since 30K sorties were the rare of the bunch. In an entire big mission the very few rare planes flew at 30K. Most down between 20 and 25k, and the low boxes down to as low as 15k.

For the record, 30K sorties for the B-24s are extremely rare in AH as well. You know, I hunt buffs up there a lot, in Ta 152H and Me 163, and usually the end of the flagpole is at 27k max for the B-24. I remember only on or two missions where I encountered 24's above that in the past months. Quite different from B-17s and 29s which I do actually find to fly up to about 32k (17, though it's not the norm even at the strats) and above (29).

[bustr]

That is a very demeaning comment towards the buff and GV players.
Unfortunately it is true.

Want me to lie about it then??

By the way I will demean the fighter pilots also for you if you like.

Bf109 and Ta152 cannons inserted into the hollow tube between the cylinder banks had no "up deflection" as is modeled in our game. Only the Revi LoS was tilted down to compensate for the round leaving the muzzle inline with the engine to a point either at 700m for 20mm or 400m for 30mm. Hood MG and gondola guns were adjusted to the Revi LoS down angle.

Yak 20mm and larger cannon were bolted down to the top of the engine inline with the engine center line while the barrel passed through the hollow HUB of the reduction gear housing. The ShVAK 20mm round's ballistics was such it dropped inside of 8 to10 inches low at 200m. Effectively flat shooting. Even the NS-37 had enough velocity to effectively shoot flat to 200m. The PBP LoS was tilted to intersect down at 200m with a standardized mark on the back of a prop blade for rezeroing before each sortie. The 37mm T9 cannon and 20mm in the P39 followed this same restriction.

Hitech has made shooting HUB cannons a teensie bit player friendly. I doubt any player sets their HUB cannon to 150 for the thrill of the more realistic experience. Especially among our highly talented Yak, 109, K4 and Ta152 community. It's not like the have the spray ability of the Mossi or the P47. Yet now if they want to accomplish what their Russian and German ace hero's did a bit more closely. They know pulling their HUB cannon into 150 will place similar restrictions on their talent as the real hero's had to overcome. Maybe an historic realism achievement could be created to test their abilities based on the 150 more realistic convergence in HUB mounted cannon.

So bozon have I been demeaning enough for you with this truth?