Downing JU87's?

[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

[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!

[BlackbusheFlyer]

They do appear to be too tough, same with the 110's.. very hard to kill and when flown by the AI perform amazing feats of evasion. Find them much harder than 109's to bring down.

[Romanator21]

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.

Good point.

According to a cutaway image I have of the plane, the fuel tank is on the inboard part of the wing behind a thick spar. Maybe that's why you're having a hard time getting it from its six?