Downing JU87's?

[Catseye]

Just an observation but I find the Stuka is difficult to shoot down. My loadout is 2xincendiary tracers and 6xarmor piercing.

I can saw the wings off larger bombers with relative ease and do tremendous other damage - but not the Stuka.

Is it just possible that the damage model is not up to snuff on this bird?

My understanding is that the Stuka was pretty easy game for the Hurri's.

Any comments?

Cheers

[JG14_Jagr]

Kill the crew and they go right down

[IceFire]

So I take it the engine and fuel tanks aren't as vulnerable in Cliffs as they were in IL-2 1946?

[III/JG11_Simmox]

yes well
Rudel probably wouldnt have racked up over 2500 missions if the stuka was a *Ronson*
he always praised his mighty steed,as being able to take alot of damage and still get him home.
then again,he was shot down a dozen times.heh

sinking the Marat must've been an incredible sight,let alone being the one responsible for it!
the story is quite a good one,and very lucky to actually have pulled it off.

[Catseye]

Originally Posted by IceFire

So I take it the engine and fuel tanks aren't as vulnerable in Cliffs as they were in IL-2 1946?

Not for me. I've tried different loadouts and so far no flaming birds. It looks like the AP really chews up the skin but getting to the engine from behind and damaging a wing spar is not easy. IMHO

If this is the A10 of WWII, I'm wondering how the Hurri's and Spit's managed to down so many?

Just a thought: I wonder if the statistics for downing the Stuka's in increased volume happened after the introduction of the Hispano 20 mm.?

But I do so love the damage on larger bombers. To me it is so similar to the camera footage shown so many times of BOB IRL.

Cheers

[addman]

Try to hit the radiator from behind/underneath, works in IL-2 1946. The IL-2 Sturmovik had the same weakness, hit that thing and you're set .

[SEE]

They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) and found that aiming for the fuel tanks by swooping under and upwards, chopping throttle, was the only way I could rupture them and ignite. Even then, it doesn't always work (in terms of 'flaming') , the AI drop so his rear gunner has you in his sights again but hit the engine from below and down they go. (De-Wilde and AP load out)

From what I have read, the Ju87 was withdrawn from operational use in the BoB due to high losses- something isn't right with the current damage modelling.

[Catseye]

[QUOTE=SEE;275241]They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) . . . .

What did you select for convergence?

I've tried to find out more info on the "DeWild", as an incendiary is it more effective than the tracer/incendiary?

Cheers

[BadAim]

Anything over 10% losses is considered high and would be unsustainable long term. That is shooting down one plane out of a formation of ten. I guess that would be possible with the present damage model.

[SEE]

[QUOTE=Catseye;275330]

Originally Posted by SEE

They are difficult to flame and the hardest I have come across. I was testing my convergence (absolutley critical) . . . .

What did you select for convergence?

I've tried to find out more info on the "DeWild", as an incendiary is it more effective than the tracer/incendiary?

Cheers

I prefer the 'De Wilde' with AP but generally, the ordinance for Allies is pretty weak as many RAF BoB vets testify in their memoirs.

I converge all my guns at 150m ( I say meters because I believe CoD uses metric). This places a Ju87 at around 2/3 the size of my gunsight ring for my optimum firing point. 200m distance and its a little over half the size.

However, getting a BF109 within 150m is another ball game - what works against a dawdling JU isn't necessarily the best all round setting. I wouldn't use anything higher than 200M with 0.303's , but thats me!