RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/11/2016 11:13:48 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa_Protectorate
-> Administration, last section

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Kenya

In short: never transferred to or annexed by the UK, just governed/controlled as part of a lease agreement with the Sultan of Zanzibar.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 31

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/12/2016 2:38:01 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

BTW, related to original question, my other forum buddy Anthony Williams have great site:

http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Must read for everyone interested in these things.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 32

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/12/2016 7:40:17 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

BTW, related to original question, my other forum buddy Anthony Williams have great site:

http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Must read for everyone interested in these things.

Too many bloody penguins around here

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 33

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/12/2016 8:35:51 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

Look! There's one on the telly!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 34

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/15/2016 8:36:09 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: towtow59

I've seen Nates and Claudes shoot down P-40s before, and even B-17s(Rarely).

Actually , I tested Nates vs B-17 this April. Used Coral Sea scenario and DDB-C. Nate pilots were 80 experience, 70 air skill.
Ran 15 combats, watched all 15 combat animations.

Most hits suffered by one aircraft (displayed as "*" sign during combat animation)

Max * per one B-17: ****
Max * per one Nate: ****

Not a single B-17 was destroyed by Nates in air combat.

Quit testing after 15 combats.

(in reply to towtow59_MatrixForum)

Post #: 35

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/15/2016 9:37:17 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

quote:

ORIGINAL: towtow59

I've seen Nates and Claudes shoot down P-40s before, and even B-17s(Rarely).

Actually , I tested Nates vs B-17 this April. Used Coral Sea scenario and DDB-C. Nate pilots were 80 experience, 70 air skill.
Ran 15 combats, watched all 15 combat animations.

Most hits suffered by one aircraft (displayed as "*" sign during combat animation)

Max * per one B-17: ****
Max * per one Nate: ****

Not a single B-17 was destroyed by Nates in air combat.

Quit testing after 15 combats.

Does not sound like you proved the premise of the thread. Sounds more like you confirmed "really hard for Nate to destroy B-17". I am willing to say that because if they could get damaging hits then they could destroy one with enough hits.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 36

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/15/2016 9:46:39 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I guess if I had run 150 tests, I would have probably seen some destroyed B-17s. I just quit after 15 tests, cause it was a mind-numbing experience ( I did it in one go). I was looking for the damage limit on B-17 during the tests. Max I saw was **** message. Maybe when you get to ***** the aircraft is destroyed? I don't know, I gave up after 15 combat animations.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 7/15/2016 11:42:25 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 37

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/15/2016 4:43:39 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

The Nate (and all the other 2x7.7 armed Japanese planes like the early Oscars) are woefully underarmed to go up against anything with some structural durability. A 4-engine bomber would certainly qualify for that. Try replicating this setup (Nates vs B-17) in IL-2 or something similar, and I bet you'll find that the B-17s win all/most of those engagements, too.

Mike

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 38

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/17/2016 2:28:32 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I guess with a lucky shot you could kill the bomber's pilot. Could the glass nose of B-17 withstand 7.7mm MG bullets?

(in reply to Panther Bait)

Post #: 39

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/17/2016 4:55:45 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

I guess with a lucky shot you could kill the bomber's pilot. Could the glass nose of B-17 withstand 7.7mm MG bullets?

No, but his Zippo lighter will save him.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 40

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 7/17/2016 5:00:21 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

quote:

ORIGINAL: towtow59

I've seen Nates and Claudes shoot down P-40s before, and even B-17s(Rarely).

Actually , I tested Nates vs B-17 this April. Used Coral Sea scenario and DDB-C. Nate pilots were 80 experience, 70 air skill.
Ran 15 combats, watched all 15 combat animations.

Most hits suffered by one aircraft (displayed as "*" sign during combat animation)

Max * per one B-17: ****
Max * per one Nate: ****

Not a single B-17 was destroyed by Nates in air combat.

Quit testing after 15 combats.

That is really not sufficient as you are talking about one of the weakest armed fighters in the game trying to shoot down an armored bomber with one of the highest durability in the game. I wonder if there is any record of a Nate shooting down a B17 in real life. They were hard enough for zeros to shoot down. If you want to back up the common knowledge statement then you will really have to do a lot of testing. To be honest, I don't watch combat replays much any more so you may be correct. But without any sort of testing to back it up. Well....

As for B17s, the Japanese fighter arm was totally unprepared to deal with large bombers. Their training did not emphasize the tight formation tactics needed to shoot down well protected heavy aircraft. Part of the problem was the general lack of radios-a key element in successful group tactics. The Japanese relied on hand signals and once engaged, hand signals pretty much were useless. The Germans learned on the run and got pretty good at it. But they had better aircraft, more firepower and good radios. Yet, it was a very dangerous proposition for them. A flight of Nates attacking a bomber in random attacks would be like a bunch of horseflies trying to take down an elephant. The Nate was unarmored and using 30 cal MGs while the bomber was armored and using 50 caliber guns. That math just don't work.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 41

RE: IJA 7.7mm AAMG vs 7.7mm aircraft MG - 8/2/2016 6:51:57 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I sifted through my test notes and I had actually changed the Nates in my other tests to carry twelve (12) 7.7mm MG in F position. At first I tried IJA Hurricanes with 12 x 0.303mg but the aircraft would not attack the B-17s - it joined the bombers as their escort. Anwyway,I ran three tests of the buffed Nates against the B-17s and it was the same story.

Max hits durin one comabt on one B-17: ****
Max damage value after three missions on one B-17: 19

The interesting thing is that during combats several Nates disengaged with messages like "out of ammo/engine cutting out", thus diluting their upgraded firepower.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 42