Review the B26 damage model.

[DmonSlyr]

I seem to recall that in his biography Adolf Galland rated the B-26 as the most difficult US bomber to bring down. It had the lowest loss rate of any US aircraft in the ETO, although this was in part likely due to the shorter missions it flew compared to the heavies.

In AH a cockpit shot from above is the weak spot on a B-26, but if you don't have the alt advantage required then concentrating fire on a wing tip is the next best bet.

My gramps had over 75 combat missions in the B26. One of his birds was named "Package for Adolf". I bet my gramps was rattling his cage!

The B26 is so hard to take down in AH. Its very hard to get out in front of them after you make a pass. It takes a tremendous amount of patients to get back out in front of it. I find its the most challenging bomber to take down.

[save]

The B26 wings where know to have very fragile wings, you can read about it :
http://www.aviation-history.com/martin/b26.html

from the link above :

"Not only did it have a different performance envelope from the Boeing B-17, it also proved that it was incapable of defending itself in the hostile European skies and highly vulnerable to flak."

In AH they borrowed  the Yak-3's  stalinwood for the wings and titanium for the fuselage.

[USCH]

take 2 people and go to the DA land a B26 by the tank spawn and shoot it with a jeep or sdk see what the damage really is Vs. what you think you shot in game in flight.

[save]

without a database for all the planes in the "durablity competition" comparison would not be  possible.

I have only one account, and limited time, and I rather play during that time, than perform static testings.

So a database with all planes with all parts is what's missing.

[Zimme83]

Have in mind that we dont have damage to the skin modeled. if the upper surface of the wing is damage the produced lift will decrease and this was probably an issue for the B-26 in ww2 due to the high wing loading.

Flak was a serious problem for the Marauder as it was for the same reason as the B-24 Liberator. Both aircraft had highly efficient airfoils and could not withstand much damage to the wings and continue to fly. In comparison, the wing B-17 Flying Fortress had a much lower wing loading than the B-24 and B-26. The extra wing area made the B-17 less efficient, but it was able withstand greater battle damage to the wings and still get its crews back home.

[alskahawk]

I can easily down an A20 with a 2 sec burst from an A8, (about the same as the Yak3  )
The B26 only looks irritated when you give it the same treatment.

 The last single B26 I shot down took about half my ammo. Compared to B17,B24, Lancasters which normally take about half to 3/4 for the formation. Hardly scientific but they seem to be as tough as IL 2s.

[lunatic1]

and if the bomber gunners in WWII were as accurate as they are in here a lot less bombers would have been lost.

[Ciaphas]

If the fighter cats could feel the physiological effects for just one sortie there would be fewer demi god like fighter jocks.

Meh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk