Burst Effect of AA artillery

[Bletchley 8]

Hello,

 

I have recently been looking into the bursting charges used in WWI AA rounds, and this has led me to wonder how this is modelled in OFF. Has the bursting effect (the blast) of AA shells been transferred directly from CFS3 to OFF, or were any "WWI" Shrapnel and HE rounds created for OFF? I have noticed that the AA near misses in OFF are frequently fatal, or appear to be so from my limited observation of the effects (can anybody else comment on this, from their own observations?). But historically, I think, there was a greater chance of non-fatal damage effects (particularly when Shrapnel rounds were being used). WWI HE rounds had a significantly lower blast effect than WWII HE rounds of the same weight or calibre, as the bursting charge was different.

 

Incidentally, I think I have now discoverred why British AA rounds burst with a white smoke, even after they changed from Shrapnel to HE - they probably used an Amatol HE filling, as against the TNT HE filling of the German AA rounds:

 

http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/other-wwi-aviation/48590-tnt-amatol-anti-aircraft-he-shells.html

 

Bletchley

[Creaghorn 10]

Hello,

 

I have recently been looking into the bursting charges used in WWI AA rounds, and this has led me to wonder how this is modelled in OFF. Has the bursting effect (the blast) of AA shells been transferred directly from CFS3 to OFF, or were any "WWI" Shrapnel and HE rounds created for OFF? I have noticed that the AA near misses in OFF are frequently fatal, or appear to be so from my limited observation of the effects (can anybody else comment on this, from their own observations?). But historically, I think, there was a greater chance of non-fatal damage effects (particularly when Shrapnel rounds were being used). WWI HE rounds had a significantly lower blast effect than WWII HE rounds of the same weight or calibre, as the bursting charge was different.

 

Incidentally, I think I have now discoverred why British AA rounds burst with a white smoke, even after they changed from Shrapnel to HE - they probably used an Amatol HE filling, as against the TNT HE filling of the German AA rounds:

 

http://www.theaerodr...-he-shells.html

 

Bletchley

 

that's what i observed also. IMHO the AA is too fatal. i rather think that shrapnelhits, as long not directly into engine or cockpit should rip canvas, splinter some wood etc., but not explode with all wings falling off burning all the way down.

[Hasse Wind 46]

There's also the fact that AA guns in WW1 were usually lighter than their WW2 counterparts. No major concentrations of 88's firing at enemy formations, for example. WW1 planes were slower and usually flew lower than WW2 aircraft, so there was less need for heavier guns.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we see some changes in P4.

[Olham 164]

Do we all observe different things to happen, depending on the speed of our CPUs, perhaps?

I cannot remember the last time I was seriously hit by AA shrapnell.

On one occasion, my tank was punctured, so I had to glide back over the lines.

On another, my engine got damaged, and I headed back and made it home.

I have been taken out completely by AA only once or twice in my whole flying time of Phase 3.

 

Now, I am almost only flying Albatros - a quite rugged aircraft. Maybe a Pup would show more

effect of damage, when AA granades exploded close to it?

[Hasse Wind 46]

I've very rarely lost a pilot to AA in OFF after the deadliness of its fire was lessened in one of the patches. But when I do, the explosion seems to always blow my plane to bits. Maybe it's just bad luck.

[Olham 164]

Hasse Wind: ...when I do, the explosion seems to always blow my plane to bits. Maybe it's just bad luck.

 

Not for the Crumpet gunner, Hasse Wind! Mmuahahahahaaaa!!!!

What aircraft do you fly mostly?

[Hasse Wind 46]

Hasse Wind: ...when I do, the explosion seems to always blow my plane to bits. Maybe it's just bad luck.

 

Not for the Crumpet gunner, Hasse Wind! Mmuahahahahaaaa!!!!

What aircraft do you fly mostly?

 

The last plane I lost to Archie was an Alb D.II, but that happened months ago. Since then, I've mostly been flying the DFW, the BE2 and RE8, with occasionaly flights in the SPADs and Albs. Hard to say which plane I've flown the most, though.

[Olham 164]

Twoseats like the DFW should be rugged enough to get through most of the Flak except a direct hit.

Julius Buckler had to fly with a photo recon observer for some weeks, and they seem to have been

"shipping" through all the Flak fire too without much worrying.

[carrick58 23]

:lol:I have lost three Airplanes to Archie. Albeit, with the lessen patch. Engine ( Spad),Bits and pieces Albatross, and Fuel N-17

However I was wondering if aircraft loss to Trees count as anti aircraft ?

Edited August 9, 2010 by carrick58

[RAF_Louvert 101]

.

 

Bletchley, the devs definitely tweaked down the AA in OFF. I found out just how much when I was setting up my MAW OFF configuration and forgot to swap out the weapons files. First flight over enemy installations and the sky was literally filled with AA and I was hit within 3 seconds, and my plane was vaporized! Tried it again about 6 more times before swapping the needed files, all with the same results. The longest I could survive in that sky was about 30 seconds, and every time I was hit by AA it did turn my plane into tiny little pieces.

 

.

[Olham 164]

Carrick: However I was wondering if aircraft loss to Trees count as anti aircraft ?

 

Well, if it was an "anti-aircraft tree", then it does.

And when you had to fly very low to escape AA, then you could say, yes, it does again.

Always sounds better to say: I was downed by AA - instead of: I crashed into a tree.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Olham

[Bletchley 8]

Thanks for the replies :)

 

I have no problem with the current AA settings - I know that the accuracy of the AA has been subject to quite a bit of change and is, I feel, just about right for most of the war when set to "Normal" (and if it isn't, we have the option of the "Easy" setting). It is just that I had observed this apparent tendency for AA rounds to rip aircraft apart with each hit/near miss, and it was this that led me to wonder if the blast effect of the AA rounds were still of WWII and not WWI strength.

 

But if other people are finding more varied damage effects, then this might not be so. On the other hand, if this is so, then this may be something that the developers might like to look into with Phase 4. Even if the CFS3 AA blast effect has been reduced for OFF, it may have been done in a generic way - making a distinction between Shrapnel and HE, if this is possible, might be a good development? The British continued to use Shrapnel as the weapon of choice for their AA ertillery well into 1916, despite evidence that it was less effective than HE. And when they switched from Shrapnel to HE, the Amatol 80:20 filling used in British munitions from 1917 onwards was probably rather more effective than the equivalent German TNT filling. So there is, I think, some historical evidence to support greater variety in AA artillery damage effects.

 

Bletchley