german 88 artillery misses
 

Hey!
Was trying out the "Full mission builder" i found out that the german 88 artillery cannon misses alot! I dont know if it is like this in the real world.. But the 88 cannon did not hit a singel plane that i put in the sky.. I placed about 50-100 German 88 cannons and 20 bomb plane, and all the plane got was just light damage.
Sorry for my bad English

-Patrick

The gunners maybe were family of Mr Magoo

They are all pretty useless , I have done a test and added like 100 AA guns on an airfield and had a flight fly over them and only a few got hit by some rounds. http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/543...060800002j.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

LOL - this is not Flak but some Tommy who engaged his hyperspace drive on the ground..! :D

Have you modified the skill of each gun?

I think it might be inaccurate, but not by much.

I've seen various threads in this forum bring up the topic of flak accuracy from time to time and the statistics quoted from historical sources were appalling.

Unless using radar directed guns with predictive flak laying or some sort of proximity fused shells (like the ones used by the UK against the V-1 bombs), on average it took a few hundred or even thousand flak shells to shoot down a single aircraft.

If you take into account that overflying a single flak covered target with one flight is something that takes very little time and the rate of fire on the bigger guns is slow, it might be the case that they can't put up enough shells in the air at the given time window to match that statistic.

I don't have any numbers mind you, just making an educated guess, but i feel it would be pretty hard to make flak dangerous in small concentrations without making it too uber in historically sized quantities.

I think that since the engine supports a lot of ground objects with minimal performance loss, the best way to get historical results would be to place a large enough amount of flak guns over a wider area.

But still there is potential to improve. We do have "sound detectors" for the AAA and we do have static range finders and predictors. Given the scripting stuff already there it would be possible to convert the range finders and predictors to AI-operated objects and combine them for AAA batteries to increase their accuracy.

British flack are better ? or its a trouble for all flack.

I don't know if you guys remember the 1st Gulf War. Baghdad had the heaviest concentration of AAA that had ever been placed in a city. They didn't hit anything.

That being said, it seems that flak was pretty ineffective till after '42, when both sided started tying them to radar. The Brits were suffering 1 in 10 losses to their nightbombers, but that also includes the nightfighters taking a bite out of them. American bomber pilots said that German flak was almost a carpet that they could get out and walk on.

From Wikipedia on Anti-aircraft -"Post-war analysis demonstrated that even with newest anti-aircraft systems employed by both sides, the vast majority of bombers reached their targets successfully, on the order of 90%."

From Wikipedia on 88mm Flak Gun-"Owing to the increase in U.S. and British bombing raids during 1943 and 1944, the majority of these guns were used in their original anti-aircraft role, now complemented by the formidable 12.8 cm FlaK 40 and 10.5 cm FlaK 39. There were complaints that, due to the apparent ineffectiveness of anti-aircraft defenses as a whole, the guns should be transferred from air defense units to anti-tank duties, but this politically unpopular move was never made."

Keep in mind that only 18,295 of the 88mm Flak gun were made. Consider that some were used as anti-tank guns and the rest were used to defend the entire Reich, from Norway to Africa, From France to Russia. Granted that the 88 was not the only flak gun. Still, as the most "famous", the numbers are much less than I expected.

Anyhow, I am not sure how this translates into a computer simulation, but it would seem that high-altitude flak is pretty innaccurate, and until you get to low-medium levels, where numerous smaller caliber guns were able to get in on the action, kills were few and far between.

It's not easy to hit a plane having even a machine gun rate of fire. Skip to 1:54.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR5Bt...ailpage#t=115s

Thank's for the help :) So it's just how the 88 cannon is in action..
But this Flak gun is alot better when it comes to precision. But it only do light damage to the plane.. Sometime it kills the pilot, sometimes the whole plane get shot down.. But only if i place a 300 of these at the ground ^^
http://0o2471.net//27955.jpg

According to the screenshots, slow bombers were flying in daytime, on a straight line, not too high (3000m?). What you said here is not one of the example which can be compared with this.

Milch differed radically from Hitler in his proposals for combating the
troublesome British bombing attacks by night. Hitler still believed in a strong
defence by flak and searchlights. The state secretary, although a former artillery
officer himself, was not enamoured of anti-aircraft artillery: he once calculated
that besides the huge and costly ground organization it had taken on average
2,313 rounds of heavy flak and 4,258 rounds of light flak to bring down each
aircraft they had claimed up to the end of November 1940

From The Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe, the biography of Milch. You can grab a free copy here, plenty of good stuff.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Milch/

He wasn't a big fan of flak or impressed with its results to cost ratio. Too much manpower and resources wasted, and they never at any time reduced enemy effectiveness below 90% efficiency in hitting their targets.

You have to remember the propaganda factor to the German public. For many of them this was the only thing seen that was fighting back against the devastating air raids. It also kept the heavy bombers above 25,000 feet which affected accuracy.

I remember seeing the stats for the amount of heavy flak rounds to bring down an aircraft, but they were much higher than what was stated---more like 10,000.

Using the laws of probability, I believe it was estimate that around 1 bomber should be shot down for every 800 or so 88mm shells fired. In 1944 based on the actual number of rounds used by the dedicated flak batteries and the numbers of actual bombers shot down it was found to be closer to 10,000 88 fired per bomber destroyed. Overall during the war the number was something like 18,000 per bomber destroyed.

Keep in mind that something like 25% of the B17's returning wopuld have some type of flak damage.. but that would include everything from mangled to a single pin hile in the skin.

Flak at low levels with 37mm/20mm/25mm class weapons was a lot more elthal because the lead compensation was far less complex and the hits were usually direct hits causing more damage.

i notice a problem with heavy flak... when they shoot. the bullet explose really too soon. i put 30 flak on a field and bomber passing at 3000meters.

only 3 black flocons at the altitude of bomber the other seems to explode below 2000meter...

i do the test again with bomber at 5000 meters.... all black flocons were at 3000 metter and none explode at 5000 meters.

in fact the probleme of the flak servant are they can't appreciate the high of plane :)

if only we can link static elevation tools with the flak... maybe we can...but how?!

another thing!

i put an hearing radar.... he turn to the direction of the plane he hear....but exept that... i still don't know what is the usefull of this unit....

we really miss info about the possibility of the FMB and the ground unit!

To have the range finder units (radar, acoustic locators, etc) guide the flak you need to "connect" them in the FMB. There's an option in the object properties named "set target" or something similar: click on it and you'll get a target cursor and a line extending from the range finder unit, just place it on a flak battery and click again.

Now the units should be "connected" and your range finders will give data to the flak. Also, you need to place an anti-aircraft AI. This is a pre-made C script that you just set on the map and adjust its radius to include all your flak units and maybe the rang finders too (they'll be close to each other anyway), but sadly i don't remember exactly where it can be found. I think it's in the object category "ai actor".

Can't contribute to the discussion here as when I put flak down in the mission editor it doesn't shoot, but just wanted to say thanks to Cap'n Crunch for linking that book - I'm reading it now and it's quite good. Cheers! :)

Exactly how I imagine how it would have been in real life. Everything I've read indicates high altitude flak being inaccurate but low level smaller calibre flak being nasty.

God forbid we get the uber accurate IL2 flak back.

i try to make what you said me but i have problem.

first even if i use acoustic locators in artillery or static. sometimes button target are present and sometimes there are not in the properties box. (bug?) and when they are present. i can link the accoustic to the IA object. but not to the flak canon.

We really really miss info about FMB :(

Hey, have any of you guys actually gotten the AA to work under a script together with range-finders and listening devices? Can you confirm this works? I know the searchlights work when you connect a generator and searchlight + add the script poweron.cpp

I would much appreciate if someone did the research :)

The end of the video when they shoot at the plane at night, epic, really pretty in a demented sort of way ;)

Even though they were on the wrong side it's good to see some are still around.

[you]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0aHnFo5CI8[/you]

nt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving

I wouldnt dl nor read anything from him. Greetz, Allons!