|
|
|
|
#1
06-06-2014, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
The B-17 had warren truss rather than spar. It was notoriously hard to bring down if trying to "saw the wing off." The B-24, with large spar, was more accommodating.
|
|
#2
06-06-2014, 10:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
06-07-2014, 03:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well... you may cut a B17's wing with 20mm fire from german planes, but this will require a Bf110, or a 190. Doing that with a 109 is absolute suicide. You really need to place a very good burst to acomplish that. It is better to just go for the fire. After they are on fire you may just choose another target.
I ratherly enjoy looking at the planes on fire those 20mm generate, but they go down slowly from it. Only when there is an explosion, and generally in the engines. Also, they need lots of impacts to start a fire. Self sealing tanks should work fine against machine guns, but against canons their efectiveness will be far less. One thing I will complain about bombers, it's the high life expectancy of gunners in ALL bombers. It wasn't like that a lot of patches away, but right now, killing a gunner, even on very exposed positions, is much more difficult than before.
|
|
#4
06-07-2014, 08:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Perhaps there could be some sort of tracking mechanism in the game that would register how close various .50 caliber and 20mm hits are to each other and only trigger the most catastrophic effects in big planes if there are sufficient hits within a certain radius. Quote:
Quote:
But, what I've notice in IL2 playing in Arcade mode, is that the "instant kill" locations on a human figure in the game are tiny. To get a "pilot kill" or "crew killed" result you have to get a head shot - right through the middle of the head. To get a pilot wounded/crew wounded result, you have to hit the torso. I haven't yet figured out the parameters for arm or leg hits, but I think that they only are triggered by hits to the thigh or upper arm. But, realistically, any hit by a .30 caliber fired from a MG through the neck or torso is likely to result in serious injury or death. Should the victim survive, they are also likely to have serious bleeding and are likely to quickly go into shock due to blood loss and pain. Functionally, that means they're dead, since they're out of combat. While modeling effects of gunshot wounds is tricky, as a very rough model, the farther you get from the heart and spine, the longer the victim has to survive. If TD wanted to make crew more vulnerable, they could expand the "instant kill" area for .30 caliber bullets to cover the entire head, all of the neck, and line down the torso centered on the spine and extending about 15 cm to each side. While not all of these hits will result in an "instant kill" functionally, the effects are the same. The exception is that there should be a small chance that rifle caliber bullet hits to the head not kill, but will result in unconsciousness for some period of time. This allows the game to model what happened to Saburo Sakai, and a few other extremely lucky but less famous pilots. But, if this option is implemented, the game would need to have some method of telling the player that the "black screen of death" just represents the pilot being knocked unconscious. ANY hit by a .50 caliber or larger bullet is likely to render a crewman non-functional, and is almost certainly going to result in immediate death or severe bleeding which quickly leads to death. One of the reasons that .50 caliber is preferred for sniper rifles these days is because just about any hit is likely to result in fatal injury. Likewise, it doesn't appear that gunners are rendered less effective by any sort of hit other than outright kills (although crew are vulnerable to bleeding. A few times, I've seen delayed "gunner down" messages when playing in arcade mode.) I hope I'm wrong, but it appears that the game engine ignores the effects of wounds to gunners, other than bleeding. Were the game to properly model arm wounds to gunners, gunners manning hand-held guns would have a very difficult time moving their guns around or holding them steady following an arm hit. Gunners manning turret guns would have difficulty elevating, turning or firing their guns based on which hand was hit. Leg hits wouldn't be as big a deal for gunners as for pilots, except: 1) gunners who have to stand or kneel to man their guns are effectively out of combat. 2) gunners who must use foot pedals to control a gun turret (e.g., the ball turret gunner on the B-17 or B-24) couldn't elevate or depress their guns. 3) Seated gunners who must use their legs to brace themselves in place would have a much more difficult time firing their guns. So, Aviar's comment that Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his role as Terminator, is manning all the guns isn't far off the mark!
|
|
#5
06-07-2014, 10:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I just wanted to point out that the B-17 and B-24 Sperry ball turret pedals didn't control the turret in the way you suggest. The left pedal moved and was used to adjust range to target, as indicated by the site reticule changing in width. The gunner moved his left foot to adjust the "uprights" as needed to keep the target wingspan framed as the enemy got closer. That "told" the computing sight the rate of closure. Using hand grips, the gunner also kept the target framed laterally, "telling" the computing sight how the target was moving left-to-right, etc. The site also received own-aircraft altitude, own-aircraft speed, and it's elevation and azimuth position with respect to own-aircraft.
The right pedal was a footrest. However, some turrets had a back-up foot switch to fire the guns when failures forced the gunner to disengage the drives and crank the turret by hand. I don't think the Sperry ball had that. Last edited by Buster_Dee; 06-07-2014 at 10:33 PM.
|
|
#7
06-08-2014, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pips, I wish I could give you something useful, but I'm just a modeler. Projects are alive and moving from what I can tell. The B-24D Monguse and I built seems in good shape now, but it requires some new tech due to the peculiarities of turbine-assisted supercharging and semi-automated mixture control found in US heavies. We had not crossed that bridge before. Computing gun and bomb sights have opened their own challenges.
Please bear with us.
|
|
#9
06-08-2014, 12:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Anyway, I also agree, B-17 and B-24, maybe even He-111 should be much harder to shoot down. In fact, they arent much more durable than La-5/7, and definitely less durable than IL-2!
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
