What was it really like?

[Badger]

OK...need some help from the WWII historian and plane trekkies....  

I fly and enjoy both WB and AH a lot.  As in WB, I've stopped flying the MA here recently, attending only the SEA or pseudo HA events.  I haven't flown MA in WB for almost 2 years.  The common result is that the gunnery engagements on receiving lead with reduced icons, tends to be very up close and personal.

I have noticed a distinct difference in the damage effects between AH and WB with this in-close shooting.  In AH, when I get banged (which is often), it only takes a few pings to completely devastate my plane and make it not flyable.  For example, most often a wing falls off or it simply explodes.  I do get lighter battle damage such as flaps, an aileron, a right or left elevator from time to time, but not as often as I see in WB.  In WB, there seems to be a lot more pings needed to knock me out of the sky and with the same amount of pings as I hear in AH.  I usually end up with a plane in WB that although hurt, is still capable of carrying on the fight.

For example, in the pseudo HA, I got bounced by a P51 (50 cals?)and took only a few hits, but my 190a8 simply lost a wing and I was toast.  Yesterday, I was flying squad practice in a 190a4 on WB with vadr's JG2 and "thmpr", an awesome JUG pilot, bounced us all with his wingman flying P47's (50 cals?).  He was at D2, D2, then D1 on my 6 and chewed me real good with a tremendous amount of pings as I rolled over and tried to split-s.  The pings were so many and so loud, it woke the dog up.  I thought my number was up, but as he climbed out, I checked damage and all I had was a missing left gear and no flaps.

I guess my question isn't about which is better, AH or WB as I could care less.  They are both games I really enjoy each of them for different reasons, but I did want to understand what the REAL combat experience was like with these types of planes.  On Pyro's advice in another thread, I ordered a "gun camera" video tape for viewing, but it hasn't arrived yet.

In the opinion of the students of the genre on here, what kind of damage did happen at these close up ranges with these types of planes and ammo?

Thanks for you feedback, much appreciated.

Regards,
Badger


[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 05-22-2000).]

[AKDejaVu]

The answer seems to be neither.

At some point, technology may be advanced enough to completely model aircraft with all of their components.. not just control surfaces.  You could actually model actuators, cables and such.  When that happens, you can take a simple entry point/trajectory and calculate damage.  Leaking hydraulic fluid, frayed cables, bent shafts, ruptured fuel lines and such would make damage modeling real.

Right now we are limited to 12-20 different types of failures.  This is true of both sims.  Real life was not limited.

Given my preference though.. I'd rather go with a more severe damage model than a lighter one.  I just can't believe alot of WWII pilots though "OK.. as long as this 51 only hits me 5-10 tims I'll be ok".

AKDejaVu

[Citabria]

Hours of boredome interupted by moments of sheer terror.

and damage to aluminum dosnt take many hits, these guys missed a lot more than they hit too.

that about sums it up.

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 05-22-2000).]

[Vermillion]

Badger, guns and their lethality within the context of aircraft, are something of a hobby for me, within my hobby  

Here's my theory (ie my opinon):

From what I can tell, if anything, both games don't treat the guns as lethal as they were in real life. (4 cannon birds aside)

When you watch the gun camera footage, you will notice that when a fighter is hit, it doesn't take much to cripple or destroy it.

This is why in real life pilots considered .50 cals "very lethal" or "more than adequate", and you would even see pilots removing 2 guns out of a 6 gun bank on P-51's to improve performance.

Same with 4 20mm cannon Hurricane's in the Med theater, they usually took 2 off immediately and didn't think twice about.

Why? Because if you weren't attacking 4 engine heavy bombers, x4 20mm was overkill, and why hurt your performance with the weight from all those guns and ammo, if it wasn't needed in most cases.

So very lethal guns is from what I can find quite realistic.

Like DejaVu said, pilots never flew with the philosophy of "well I know i can take a few hits from that Mustang, so I will..."

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 05-22-2000).]

[LLv34_Camouflage]

From the pilot stories I've read, I have drawn this conlusion: if you got into a favourable shooting position on bandits six, a short burst destroyed the plane.  Also snapshots with cannon or heavy mg's usually crippled the plane so bad that it had to disengage.

Indeed, in WB you have to put a huge amount of lead into a plane to bring it down.  In AH the situation is much better.  I fly my G-2 with 3x20mm and a short burst is almost always enough to get me the kill.

Camo

------------------
Camouflage
XO, Lentolaivue 34
 www.muodos.fi/LLv34

Brewster into AH!

"The really good pilots use their superior judgement to keep them out of situations
where they might be required to demonstrate their superior skill."

[blur]

I like the higher lethality of AH as it seems to agree with what I've seen of gun camera footage; a lot of shells going wide then a devastating explosion once the range is found.

Some very late war aircraft such as the F2G prototype and F8F were equipped with only four .50 cal. machine guns. So with all the experienced gained up that point it seems that this setup was found more than adequate, especially against Japanese a/c.

[Badger]

Thanks for the feedback.....

AKDejaVu...never thought about that point , but you're right about all of the equipment and feed lines throughout an aircraft.  I was just poking around in mine and yup, there sure is a ton of hardware and bailing wire.  I would bet even a 30 caliber through the right part of a plane could damage something strategic.  Maybe in our lifetime we'll see software simulations that can approach that kind of damage modeling.

Vermillion...didn't realize you studied this stuff as a hobby, now I know who to bug with those nagging questions.    What "gun camera" footage I have seen supports what you are saying and I suspected that, but I just wanted to confirm it as it's far outside my knowledge base.  I am looking forward to the VCR tape that Pyro referred to.

It does sound like AH is the closest to what happens in real life when someone starts pounding on your airframe.  On the other hand, the WB approach as purely a game design, permits a guy a chance to keep his bird flying for a fun factor, which has some merit for entertainment value.

PLEASE...don't anybody start dragging this thread around and turning into a "my dog's bigger than your dog" routine.  

Regards,
Badger


[This message has been edited by Badger (edited 05-22-2000).]

[Hangtime]

I concur with the above learned experten.

If anything; damage modeling/lethality is underdone in both sims.

Here in AH at least you get a much better shake on machine gun letlatality than over at brand W. (flew BrandW for many years) In real life, if a P47 hit yah with those 8 .50 cal MG's; you WOULD have been sawn in half..  

"There is no kill like a guns kill"

AH does it best.  

Hang

[Duckwing6]

and remember guys .. sometimes it only takes a 2lb Bird to bring an airplane down (waiting for HT to modell flocks of bird for low level runnstangs MUAHAHAHAH)

[Kats]

I did a study about a year ago that it would take an average 5 20mm rounds or 15 - 20 50 cal rounds to take out a figher, that is, force the bail. (not including magic bullets - ie: PK's, oxygen bottles etc.)

Having said that, the USN during the war did a study where they found that the highest % of losses were due to pilot kills.

I think if PK's were as prevalent in these sims as they were IRL, people would be in hysterics.

Anyhow, to answer you question, IMO lethalites are quite low but accuracy is quite high(kind of balances out it AH). What your seeing in those gun cam pics are chunks that come flying off the a/c after being hit. What your not seeing is that the plane is travelling at 300mph and once chunks start coming off, the whole ship disintagrates at that speed.

Why is accuracy high? Dunno, is wing flexing and barrel heating included in the dispersion code? The stability of the gun platform itself? Does firing long bursts as opposed to short bursts affect the dispersion?

I don't know, but I wouldn't really complain about the balance of accuracy and lethality in AH, it's not bad in the limited time I've played. Hits/kill don't look far off either.

[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 05-23-2000).]

[StSanta]

Wing flexing SOULD be modelled

Won't affect my 109G10 so I am *ALL* for it  



------------------
StSanta
II/JG2

[Citabria]

 


1 tought bird was the p47 though.
500lb bomb and the pilot walked away

[Daff]

"Having said that, the USN during the war did a study where they found that the highest % of losses were due to pilot kills."

Yups, and I still dont believe that number  
I think it was 70-odd%, but:
How did they figure out that a pilot was killed by gunfire?..especially the with the Navy...They examined the wrecks?..

I went through the losses of the 56th FG and 65% of those lost (Note lost, that includes collisions, crashes, etc), were KIA.

I'm tempted to believe the number is below 50%.

As for "how much does it take to down a fighter", well how long is a piece of string?.
There's several examples on both sides of planes taking an enormous amount of lead and yet fly home and planes barely getting hit and exploding,etc.
 I believe that AH is probably closer to "realistic" lethality, but gunnery is too easy making it too lethal.

Daff

------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group

[Ghosth]

Part of the reason I believe accuracy is so high here is training.

Consider the actuall amount of time the average US pilot actually spent shooting his guns in WWII. I bet most guys flying AH get more guns time in a week than they did the entire war!

It adds up  

[-sudz-]

Don't forget that in AH you can set the convergence on individual gun pairs.  I can't remember rightly but I don't believe that was available in WB (all gun convergence yes, but not individual pairs).

Even if the the pilot doesn't set the convergence him/herself the default is usually at 250, so I can believe a greater leathality is probable.

-sudz