tank main gun shooting planes down.

[grizz441]

The more important aspect of the argument isn't "if" it happened in real life but if it "could" have happened.  There are things that are done on a daily basis in aces high that never happened in real life. Did fighter pilots land 6 air to air victories in one sortie regularly or ever?  Did jets fly around NOE like a snake in the grass?  When the planes are free, no lives are lost, the rules of engagement change entirely.   

[WWhiskey]

Exactly!

[pervert]

The more important aspect of the argument isn't "if" it happened in real life but if it "could" have happened.  There are things that are done on a daily basis in aces high that never happened in real life. Did fighter pilots land 6 air to air victories in one sortie regularly or ever?  Did jets fly around NOE like a snake in the grass?  When the planes are free, no lives are lost, the rules of engagement change entirely.   

Thats fine if the "could" is modelled, can you imagine the tears if someone in say a storch was able to disable a tank's commander view by rear gunning him at the hatch? The reality is if the commander was modelled the way the views are presented in game he would be very vunerable even to something as lowly as a storch, even a bailed pilot could kill him with a 45!

[Megalodon]

It is not a perfect game,, best bet is to fight planes with planes and leave the tanks alone,, or accept the consequence of dieing every now and then and learning new tactics to keep from doing so,, the game is not like real life, things happen here that never happened in the real world or at least not on a common basis,, yet you get to try again here,, in real life, you die and that's all! no whining about getting ho'ed, no complaining about tanks firing main gun rounds at your AC

This debate has gone on for years, look at some past threads for more info!

 Don't bet on it

 The debate will have to go on because their is no proof this ever happened period!! You don't see tanks running around the battle field with Planes in their kill markings do you?

No officially recorded evidence from any country has been produced...to date .........So...in a game that is specific down to the skins, projectiles, turret timing,  trajectory, model and scale that is real and backed by facts, data, illustrations and history.....why would sufficient evidence not have to be produced that says as much for this action?

I don't get it and why do you fervently defend, with the lack of facts too back you up, when you know, if so, the possibilities were so minute?

 This is the part that blows me away <pun intended> not because Tanks can main gun folks in the damn game, its the double standard of accuracy (historicaly) that tweaks me on this subject.  

If this guy is shooting his 50 and gets strafed


 ..game over your dead..or you should be...... but in game you sit firing away then fire the main gun at the same time while turning the turret and adjusting elevation while communicating to all 3 positions at once.  




 
Out,

[WWhiskey]

But there are accounts of it happening, your disregard for them is no more or less important than my accepting that it did, I do however base my thought on the facts,
Fact 1,,, a large round fired from a gun hitting an Aircraft while in flight will destroy or disable it, that is undisputeble! The only thing left to figure out is how to make it happen !

[Tinkles]

Don't bet on it

 The debate will have to go on because their is no proof this ever happened period!! You don't see tanks running around the battle field with Planes in their kill markings do you?

No officially recorded evidence from any country has been produced...to date .........So...in a game that is specific down to the skins, projectiles, turret timing,  trajectory, model and scale that is real and backed by facts, data, illustrations and history.....why would sufficient evidence not have to be produced that says as much for this action?

I don't get it and why do you fervently defend, with the lack of facts too back you up, when you know, if so, the possibilities were so minute?

 This is the part that blows me away <pun intended> not because Tanks can main gun folks in the damn game, its the double standard of accuracy (historicaly) that tweaks me on this subject.  

If this guy is shooting his 50 and gets strafed
(Image removed from quote.)

 ..game over your dead..or you should be...... but in game you sit firing away then fire the main gun at the same time while turning the turret and adjusting elevation while communicating to all 3 positions at once.  

(Image removed from quote.)


 
Out,

If planes can interact and destroy tanks. Then the opposite must be true as well, otherwise you have a one-sided battle. And if you fly correctly, you don't have to worry of being one-shotted by enemy tanks.

[pervert]

I think he is and I'd bet ,,he's wrong,,HTC modeled,, or remodeled the main gun sights to more accurately represent the actual tanks a few years back,,  HLBLY's complaint is that the TC and gunner couldn't have a good enough communication ability to facilitate the turret following the commanders instruction to the letter as it is in game,,
There is no way to model the ability or inability of different tank crews,, some were good,, some were great, some just made it to the fight,,    I posted a picture of an external sight for the m4 a long time ago , it was for the commander to fire the main gun when the gunner couldn't see the target, so the commander could aim and fire the weapon ,
This debate has gone on for years, look at some past threads for more info!

This argument has no basis in reality, the commander as per the commander views in Aces High is not modelled, the hatch is quite clearly down and you cannot sustain commander dead as damage, thus losing your views, for something like say a Tiger you would have a few slits and certainly not the ability to look and track a plane from above.

The majority of the times I was main gunned was on the other side of the attack run diving nearly vertical on the target, so what they do is line up the back of the turret in the direction of the attack and press the trigger as you pass them, I doubt they even have time to look at the shot as it will maybe take 4-5 shots before they connect if they even do but I can hear the main gun shooting on each pass as my plane bottoms out of its dive.

It is certainly true that if I fly straight down a gun barrel and get shot its my own fault, and that constant practice argument holds weight there, but not with the method I have described above and that is the most common I run into.

[pervert]

If planes can interact and destroy tanks. Then the opposite must be true as well, otherwise you have a one-sided battle. And if you fly correctly, you don't have to worry of being one-shotted by enemy tanks.

This isn't the United Nations fair play committee, in real life tanks vs airpower is a no contest, I understand your point about concessions but honestly were will that all stop? With a new game just for tanks? This will appear rude although it is not intended as such, but why did you join a game called Aces High to sit in a tank?

[Chalenge]

Unteroffizeier Kramer in a Tiger I was being harassed repeatedly by a squadron of La7 fighters. When he finally had enough he fired at them with the main gun and on his second shot knocked the wing off of one La7.

Tigers in the Mud - Otto Carius.

[Megalodon]

But there are accounts of it happening, your disregard for them is no more or less important than my accepting that it did, I do however base my thought on the facts,
Fact 1,,, a large round fired from a gun hitting an Aircraft while in flight will destroy or disable it, that is undisputeble! The only thing left to figure out is how to make it happen !  

Yes, well you get your facts together ...we'll be waiting  



 

[WWhiskey]

An HE round detonating near a low flying AC would defenatly not be good for an aircraft! Either flying egress or ingress!,
most missile systems that detonate near an aircraft destroy them, that's how they are designed, HE blows up and planes die, if you fire an HE round into the ground near an aircraft as it flies by, why wouldn't the impact destroy it?
 Firing into the ground would also direct the blast upward more so than an airblast  so. Somewhere their should be a chart or graph to show the radius of a missile blast, it wouldn't be hard to figure out the blast radius of an HE round and it's similar effects on an AC

If you drop bombs to low from your plane, you blow yourself up, if that same explosion came from the barrel of a tank it wouldn't ?
-----------------------------------------------------
And megladon,,, they are already here,, challenge just posted one, but their are others In this forum, 
go find proof it's not possible,,, I'll be waiting!

[Megalodon]

Unteroffizeier Kramer in a Tiger I was being harassed repeatedly by a squadron of La7 fighters. When he finally had enough he fired at them with the main gun and on his second shot knocked the wing off of one La7.

Tigers in the Mud - Otto Carius.

Otto Carius Tiger in the mud is one possible instance that does not pan out with research. Far more likely Russian AC was destroyed by conventional AAA. Simply a case of a man claiming a kill that he did not make. Frequent occurrence in WWII.

AH Bulletin Board-- HillBilLee
 



 

[Megalodon]

An HE round detonating near a low flying AC would defenatly not be good for an aircraft! Either flying egress or ingress!,
most missile systems that detonate near an aircraft destroy them, that's how they are designed, HE blows up and planes die, if you fire an HE round into the ground near an aircraft as it flies by, why wouldn't the impact destroy it?
 Firing into the ground would also direct the blast upward more so than an airblast  so. Somewhere their should be a chart or graph to show the radius of a missile blast, it wouldn't be hard to figure out the blast radius of an HE round and it's similar effects on an AC

If you drop bombs to low from your plane, you blow yourself up, if that same explosion came from the barrel of a tank it wouldn't ?
-----------------------------------------------------
And megladon,,, they are already here,, challenge just posted one, but their are others In this forum, 
go find proof it's not possible,,, I'll be waiting!

 You go find it

[Chalenge]

I also did not mention the Russian M4A3-76 use of canister rounds to destroy Ju87s. The success of the Ju87 against the T-34s is one thing, but against canister its like shooting sparrows with a 12-gauge. The British had canister, the Americans used canister primarily against infantry, but if we wish for that then the Ju87s at 30 feet are going to have a real problem!

[Megalodon]

I also did not mention the Russian M4A3-76 use of canister rounds to destroy Ju87s. The success of the Ju87 against the T-34s is one thing, but against canister its like shooting sparrows with a 12-gauge. The British had canister, the Americans used canister primarily against infantry, but if we wish for that then the Ju87s at 30 feet are going to have a real problem!

 

Next thing you know you'll want fire    "we cant hit them because the mechanics of our tank won't let us ....So lets burn the witches in their planes"