Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > Vehicle and Terrain threads

Vehicle and Terrain threads Discussions about environment and vehicles in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-29-2011, 01:23 PM
Hveding Hveding is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 120
Default

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 ^^

Last edited by Hveding; 06-29-2011 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-29-2011, 01:35 PM
VO101_Tom's Avatar
VO101_Tom VO101_Tom is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 799
Default

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.
__________________
| AFBs of CloD 2[/URL] |www.pumaszallas.hu

i7 7700K 4.8GHz, 32GB Ram 3GHz, MSI GTX 1070 8GB, 27' 1920x1080, W10/64, TrackIR 4Pro, G940
Cliffs of Dover Bugtracker site: share and vote issues here
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-01-2011, 03:42 AM
Cap'n Crunch Cap'n Crunch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 27
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-01-2011, 04:08 AM
Theshark888 Theshark888 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 102
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-01-2011, 03:47 PM
JG14_Jagr JG14_Jagr is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 433
Default

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.
__________________
MSI P67A-65D
Intel i5 2500K @ 4.2 Gig
8 Gigs Corsair DDR3 1600 RAM
XFX 6970 Video Card
Win7 64 Bit Home Ed
ATI 12.3 Driver Package
WD Caviar 7600 RPM HDD
ATI CCC at DEFAULT settings
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-01-2011, 06:32 PM
esmiol esmiol is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 208
Default

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?!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-01-2011, 06:33 PM
esmiol esmiol is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 208
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-02-2011, 12:13 PM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,715
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by esmiol View Post
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".
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-02-2011, 02:18 PM
Orpheus Orpheus is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cap'n Crunch View Post
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.
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!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-02-2011, 03:39 PM
JG5_emil's Avatar
JG5_emil JG5_emil is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigintwarrior View Post
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.

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.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.