Author Topic: Give us AMRAAMS ... (Read 1103 times)

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #30 on:** January 23, 2002, 11:43:53 AM »

Why does the P47 take so much more damage than the 190?

I don't know Wilbus, and I take it you don't either. Other than you think they should take the same amount of damage.

Are you judging how many 20mm hits it took to destroy the 190's engine by visual or by audio? I know that neither are reliable.
-SW

Fatty · « **Reply #31 on:** January 23, 2002, 11:57:50 AM »

If your IL2 disintegrates, it's facing the wrong direction.

Haven't noticed any problem killing LA7s, but chutes have been a lot harder for about 6 versions now.

-ammo- · « **Reply #32 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:02:32 PM »

In my experience the LA7 seems amybe a tad bit tougher than others. But when i hit it good in a snapshot or solid tracking shot with my P-47 under 350 yds, then the thing comes apart or blows up. It doesnt seem as fragile as an IL2, I agree completely...whats is wrong with the DM of the IL2??

I contend that the P-38 is the "flying tank" IME. That thing gives me fits. i hit one with a solid snapshot and it flies off. I dont fly enough 30 MM birds to comment wil. Recently I have flown a few 262 sorties and that thing is brutal on Bombers. I get a couple of hits and the bomber falls apart. I hit a tiffy the other day, it blew up. I hit a pony, it blew up. that thing is fun:)

fd ski · « **Reply #33 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:02:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wilbus
B17's were sometimes knocked down from single 30mm hits in the rear fuselage, it took about 3-5 30mm hits on a B17 to bring it down, with 1 hit in the wing you could literly shave off the skin of the plane of bout 1/4 or 1/3 of the wing. Seriously doubt a fighter will take 3 of them before going down, this have happaned vs F6F for me aswell, F6F and La7's can take ALOT of dammage.

Funny... i remember hearing FIRST HAND from Franz Stigler at WB converntion answer to the same question... it was actually such a riot..

Question asked by a known LW pilot in WB community:
Sir, how many hits of 30mm cannons would it require to kill a B17

Answer:
7 to 9 in same area

You should have seen the faces of the waffels that day

Staga · « **Reply #34 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:28:22 PM »

Ski how do you comment pic I linked earlier in this topic?

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #35 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:40:55 PM »

A B17 isn't a Blenheim Staga.

I've seen several pictures of B17s that were visually less damaged from a 30mm hit, while having it's midsection crippled by an 88 but managed to fly to base.
-SW

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #36 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:58:07 PM »

1 - I have no problem at all killing spits If I manage to hit them.
2 - Dont talk about "others" killing with no problems, this will lead to nowhere, I also can talk about others having a lot of problems with the La.
3 - What you call "particular occurances" are common occurances to me. With this and the past tour I have 82 La7 kills, more than enough experiences to have a clear idea about how easy or hard is to cause damage to it (at least, with Mg151/20).
4 - Ok, that is just what I want, your personal experience. In your case, it is clear you dont find La7 harder to kill than anyother plane, even with short bursts (suppose you are not talking only about using hispanos).

Karnak · « **Reply #37 on:** January 23, 2002, 12:59:47 PM »

MANDOBLE,

About the Hispanos, read my account of my Tiffie vs La-7 encounter. The Hispanos don't do it either.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #38 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:04:20 PM »

Let's suppose I'm not talking about Hispanos.

Let's suppose I'm talking about MG151/20, MK108, and whatever cannons come loaded on the 205.

Let's pretend for a minute that while my hit % is low, I still hit what I aim for on a plane.

In my experience the only planes that have survived a direct 30mm hit to a vital part of the airplane (wing or tail structure), it went down. In my experience, with all planes, a sustained burst to the wing, engine, or tail will produce either a dead or disabled plane.

You are simply aiming for the wrong area, don't aim for the plane- aim for a part of the plane you know isn't heavily armored.

In the case of the Il-2, it's natural for it to fall apart if you hit it from above or behind. It's only heavily armored to the front and bottom. The radiator is still exposed though, and that was the way to down Il-2s after rear gunners were added in WWII.
-SW

Zippatuh · « **Reply #39 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:10:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Why does the P47 take so much more damage than the 190?

Regarding the damage that a P47 could take, I was watching something on Discovery Wings and they were profiling the “best” aircraft in certain periods. For the air to ground attack roll during WWII they picked the P47 as best in its class. They had a few interviews with actual 47 pilots. One was pretty interesting.

He was talking about attacking a train when on his dive the sides of boxcar opened up and what faced him was a 20mm AA gun. Long story short he didn’t pull off and took a round square in the engine. Terrible sound I think he said but it was still flying. He throttled back and was able to fly all the way back to base. The round chipped one of the blades and took out about 2 pistons but it made it back. Everyone was surprised.

On a side note there was also a 47 pilot who said they were given orders to fire in front of or behind German tanks when they were on paved roads. You see the armor underneath could be penetrated by the .50’s. I had to throw this in hehe. I’ve seen an argument about it in the past. Not that I totally agree that it would work, I’m just mentioning that it was said.

Zippatuh

mrfish · « **Reply #40 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:10:27 PM »

la7 fall apart pretty easy if you can actually get guns on em.

they are also great for shooting harmless burning wreckage after someone else has braved the guns as i found out today.

Staga · « **Reply #41 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:13:44 PM »

Just wondering...
if 30mm causes such structural damage to Blenheims fuselage where detonation wave has lots of space to expand what would it do if it hit the fighter with smaller fuselage ?
Blast would focus to smaller area thus increasing blast effect in nearby structures.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #42 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:18:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKSWulfe
You are simply aiming for the wrong area, don't aim for the plane- aim for a part of the plane you know isn't heavily armored.

Are you telling I was aiming at the wrong areas of these 113 La7 kills in 3 tours? Really? Really are you trying to say that? Do you really think that I need to be teached about where to aim to make a plane to explode????

Ok, lets be more DIRECT, how many La7 kills do you have to be so sure that it is as easy to kill as anyother plane? Of course, I'm only interested in the oppinion of people having really enough experience killing Las.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #43 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:30:58 PM »

You need experience killing them for it to be valid? Just because you've shot down 113 in 3 tours only means, you have shot down 113, NOT that you are shooting down the quickest and easiest way.

Kills of La7/Deaths By La7
Tour 22-24
Mandoble:
24: 38/5
23: 44/8
22: 31/7
Total: 113/16
7.0623 k/d

AKSWulfe
24: 2/0
23: 8/1
22: 10/3
Total: 20/3
6.66666666 k/d

Num of Hours flown in fighters
Mandoble:
24: 47hours
23: 54hours
22: 26hours
Total: 127hours

AKSWulfe:
24: 4hours
23: 8hours
22: 14 hours
Total: 26hours

Relative to you, I don't have the time... but that does not mean I don't have the experience to know where and what to aim for.
-SW

Lephturn · « **Reply #44 on:** January 23, 2002, 01:32:10 PM »

Hey Mand.... did you read my post above?

Just test it all ready. Anecdotal evidence is a complete waste of time, and you know it.

Until you test it and get SOME kind of data, you are just wasting everyone's time. Coming here and asking for more anecdotal evidence to support your anecdotal evidence is just silly. Please just do a quick bit of testing first before you bother posting.

Now back to your regularly scheduled pointless bickering.