B-17 Burns Too Easily In Game?

[secretone]

Yes, well... again to be subjective, I would be extremely surprised if ANY wwii plane presented a "harder" target than the b-17. It first flew in 1935, a design far ahead of its time, and they had years to strengthen and toughen it making the F and especially the G versions reliable, heavily armed and durable. I doubt that even the newer and "sexier" b-29, rushed into service under the tightest deadlines, would have been as survivable over German skies and I am curious if those computer aimed remote control turrets were even half as effective in the real world as the dedicated manned guns on the b-17.

[panzer1b]

i dont believe this can be ever answered or made 100% accurate.

relying on historic data or pilot accounts is a bad idea as the number of people let alone ai which fly in a manner close to or even based upon history is very rare. especially in th eonline environment i rarely see anything like what would be described in mission reports or pilot accounts.

also relying on scientific data is not easy as we would have to actually get us some b17s or mock b17s and do live fire tests while the plane is at a realistic altitude and moving at b17 average speeds.

So unless someone has the money, resources, time, and somewhat of nothing better to do, then i cant say it will ever be possible to make a plane behave 100% realistically. Just get your crate in the air and shoot down some planes, instead of theorize about a neverending problem....

[Shardur]

Most digital pilots shoot better than real life pilots did (maybe because they aren't afraid for their lives?). While the average pilot in RL hit with about 2% of his bullets, digital pilots routinely hit with 10-20% of their bullets.

[Shardur]

Most digital pilots shoot better than real life pilots did (maybe because they aren't afraid for their lives?). While the average pilot in RL hit with about 2% of his bullets, digital pilots routinely hit with 10-20% of their bullets.