Rear Gunner Questions

[Wayfarer 5]

I recently 'transferred' my pilot to RFC5, which is equipped with RE8s (having come to the point where RFC2 would have received FK8s). This is the first time I have had a rear gun and I've only flown two missions with it so far.

A lone Albatros followed us and began to make attacks on me even though I was in front of the rest of the flight. I thought the other flight members might fire at it but I didn't see that happen. Husbanding my AA damaged engine, I tried selecting the Albatros on the TAC and pressing 'A' a number of times for flight members to attack but there appeared to be no response from them.

 

I realise that I don't even know if that command works with two seaters or, if it does, does it take the form of the observers firing or will they manoeuvre to bring the forward guns to bear?

I'm also not sure if my observer will open fire of his own accord, or do I always have to switch positions to take the gun over?

[Hasse Wind 46]

I'm not sure the attack command works for aircraft designated as bombers. But your rear gunner will open fire of his own accord, so you don't have to worry about that.

 

I always try to maintain a tight formation (by pressing R regularly) so that all the gunners can support each other effectively. They can be pretty devastating against enemy aircraft, if you are lucky.

[77Scout 3]

Not sure why none of the rear gunners were firing at your pursuing Albatros. Normally they will.

 

Your rear gunner should fire of his own accord. You don't have to switch positions unless you want to. I rarely switch because the AI gunner is better than I am.

 

I suspect telling your RE8 wingmates to 'attack' an aircraft will elicit no response, as they are are not a 'fighter bomber' designation in CSF3. I think the 'attack' command would only work on ground targets, assuming you are leading the flight and your flight is suitably armed.

[Olham 164]

The commands, I think, work only for the flight leader.

The only command that might work for all, would be "Help!" - I would try that one.

[Bullethead 12]

The activity of AI gunners depends entirely on workshop settings. If you have it set on realistic, they will begin to track targets at about 250 yards and will open fire at about 200 yards. With this setting, they ignore targets further away.

 

On top of this, however, is the field of fire of a given gun. If the target is outside the field of fire, the gunner will ignore it. In OFF, most gunners have unrealistically limited fields of fire. In the typical 2-seater, the field of fire is as follows:

• Horizontal: about 180^ arc centered on the tail
• Vertical: From level to about 45^ above the tail

In real life, most rear gunners could fire steeply downwards to the sides of the fuselage, forward between the wings, and the full upper hemisphere except where the upper wing and prop were in the way. The difference between this and what's in OFF makes 2-seaters MUCH more vulnerable than they really were because the planes in the formation cannot support each other, either due to range or limited arc of fire.

 

HOWEVER, in ocmpensation, AI scouts aren't very aggressive in attacking 2-seater formations. In general, scouts will make 1 all-out attack pass from whatever angle they 1st appear from. This will often do terrible damage because it's usually from the gunners' blindspot. If you survive this, however, you're perfectly safe because after this the scouts will no longer attack. Instead, they'll meekly follow along behind just out of range and not shooting themselves. Periodically, one of them might make a show of climbing up and diving down from your high 4 or 8 while the rest keep following, but this this lone high-side attack is always just a feint, broken off before the scout comes into range or fires himself. So just ignore it. And meanwhile, as long as you've got a flight of scouts following you, other enemy flights will totally ignore you.

 

The problem is, enemy scouts will only follow you so far before they get bored and leave. This varies considerably--sometimes they'll follow you all the way home, sometimes they break off almost immediately. Once your followers desert you, the next enemy flight to come along will attack, and the process will repeat. The initial attack of any enemy flight being very deadly, the worst-case scenario is meeting a succession of flights with short attention spans, so you're subjected to a series of initial attacks. The best-case scenario is to be attacked early on by a flight with a long attention span, which will follow you to the target and back across the lines before breaking off near your airfield.

 

Note, however, that all the above ONLY applies if your 2-seater flight maintains formation. Any plane that leaves formation for whatever reason is immediately swarmed by erstwhile peaceful followers. What seems to trigger this feeding frenzy is getting some distance away from the rest of the flight, either from engine damage, missing a turn, or taking individual evasive action. So the best thing for a 2-seater flight leader is to cruise along, make VERY gentle waypoint turns, and to ignore all enemies except those making their 1st attack. And even in the latter case, just jink a little, not a lot, or you'll be considered "out of formation" and swarmed.

 

For the most part, it's easy to survive fighters as a 2-seater flight leader. Just take off, trim out, and make sure your guys stay close by making gentle turns and using the "Reform" command throughout every turn you make. The main wildcard is flak, but this tends to hit the guys behind you more than the leader, unless you're doing low-level work down in the deadly AAMGs, which tend to fixate on the leading plane.

 

The only real problem with fighters, assuming you survive the initial pass, is if they follow you all the way home. When your formation necessarily breaks up for landing, they'll be all over you. So if you're worried about this, fly home over every friendly flak concentration you see on the map, and don't hesitate to fly wall past your airfield, all the way to England if need be, in hopes the enemy will eventually break off.

 

 

[Wayfarer 5]

Thanks for your replies everyone. There's a lot of useful information there. I hadn't realised how limited AI field of fire was, for instance.

 

I had been using both 'R' and 'H' to keep formation and had been pleased at how well the flight had stuck with me. Unfortunately, however, I had a fuel leak and it was just hitting the red as I got near enough to make an approach for the nearest friendly airfield. So I made a break for it and, sure enough, that was when our pursuer attacked.

 

As there was no sign of the remaining three members of the Albatros flight, it is possible that they were fired at by other flight members, but I didn't see it.

 

 

[33LIMA 972]

Re 2-seater fields of fire, I may be mixing up my sims but I have a fairly clear recollection of an OFF Strutter rear gunner firing as I approached from below (about 30 degrees depression) in an Albatros and seeing the tracers pass close by me, to the extent it was like they had a Gotha-style trapdoor or tunnel. I remember thinking, 'I know you can do a lot with a Scarff ring, but this is ridiculous!'

[Olham 164]

Well, I don't know where you were compared to this drawing, but I remember that I had

similar thoughts during attacks on R.E.8s, LIMA.

But look at this drawing: I have painted the rear downward angles of fire in there, after

the Scarf Ring was moved to the outer positions (red dots).

You see, that the guy - if he was agile and good at his job - could cover the WHOLE rear

downward field of fire - because the tail section of the R.E.8 is really slim and perfectly

built for exactly that.

 

 

[33LIMA 972]

Yeah, it's not been my experience either, Olham, that 'many' OFF observers' can't depress their weapons and engage. You think you've seen it happen with RE8s (glad to hear it, that's what I'm flying now!), I think I've seen it with Strutters. Must fly a few QCs against F2Bs, CLIIs and DFWs, to see if they are limited in this way.

[themightysrc 5]

As a Brisfit pilot, I'm slighly amazed to read BH's conclusions on the field of fire for rear gunners. I'm sure there are many variables, but I can attest that Vic's observer has been pretty handy with his Lewises, and that includes pointing practically forward to engage a German aircraft.

 

Now it's quite possible - I haven't checked - that RFC12 changed from 'bomber' to 'fighter/bomber' which might change the dynamic somewhat, and it's possible that Brisfits, being what they are, don't follow the 'rules' outlined. I'm not making a judgement nor casting aspersions on BH's post. I'm simply stating that observers in Brisfits (at least) are pretty aggressive and will swing through nearly 360 degrees to geet a hit.

 

Would that my observer in the RE8 had been quite so active!

[33LIMA 972]

Well on the basis only of one or two QCs against some 2-seaters, all I went up against do indeed seem to have very little depression on the rear guns. I did get some firing at me below horizontal, from where I could just see the undersides of their wings, but anything beyond that they did not engage and reverted to facing aft. Tried this with the DFW, Hannover, F2B and the RE8, same result. It was hard to be sure as the CFS3 QC dogfight option has the 2-seaters stunting and it was hard to formate just behind and below to one side where the gunner should have been able to engage. But with the Hannover in particular I was able to formate on him for quite a while behind, below and to port or starboard and he did not fire, even tho I tried to give him a decent target, but at few degrees depression. I appreciate with the Parabellum, to use it properly you should have the butt in your shoulder so would have to stand tall or stand on something with that high-sided Hannover cockpit in particular. But even so, it was used for ground attack!

[DukeIronHand 8]

As a Brisfit pilot, I'm slighly amazed to read BH's conclusions on the field of fire for rear gunners. I'm sure there are many variables, but I can attest that Vic's observer has been pretty handy with his Lewises, and that includes pointing practically forward to engage a German aircraft.

 

I am going to have to go with themightysrc on this one.

 

Granted I do not have hundreds of hours attacking two-seaters but their Field of Fire does not seem to be lacking in my experience.

 

And when in formation they all engage without hesitation. I was once trying to be clever and come low and under the tail of a RE8 and he engaged me just fine - in fact he appeared to be shooting through his tail planes! All the while his flightmates were potting away at me also.

Sop/1 1/2's also do not show timidity or Field of Fire issues! They engage just how I would expect them too.

I have not seen any lack of return fire when I am lower than them, especially with the RE8's as mentioned above. They were all higher than me and blazing away happily.

 

The only two-seater which I find to be "easy meat" are the BE2c's; just like in real life I guess. I have shot down a lot of them (being a 1917 campaign guy) and I don't remember any return fire at all from the observers. There are, perhaps, some Field of Fire issues here.

 

I wonder If some of this has to do with which aircraft is the players (human controlled). Someone stated earlier that the AI fighters essentially ignored everyone else in the formation and attacked only him?

And AI observers apparently have no problem trying to shoot down attacking human controlled planes.

 

Is the AI perhaps keying off of which aircraft is human controlled and somehow ignoring fellow AI planes or reacting less aggressively?

 

 

EDIT: As a further thought I wonder if the file designating the two-seaters as "bombers" is making them act, and fly, like B-17's ala CFS3?

Wonder if a file change of all two-seaters to "fighter-bombers" would perhaps make them behave more like we would think an RE8 getting the crap shot outta it would act? An attempt at maneuver or the observer acting more aggressively, i.e., fly more "realistically?

Edited October 12, 2011 by DukeIronHand

[Herr Prop-Wasche 7]

EDIT: As a further thought I wonder if the file designating the two-seaters as "bombers" is making them act, and fly, like B-17's ala CFS3?

Wonder if a file change of all two-seaters to "fighter-bombers" would perhaps make them behave more like we would think an RE8 getting the crap shot outta it would act? An attempt at maneuver or the observer acting more aggressively, i.e., fly more "realistically?

Not a bad question, there, Duke, although I'm pretty sure the devs have already tried changing the designation of two-seaters to fighter-bomber. Still, might be worth a look and is easy enough to change in the .xdp file.

Edited October 12, 2011 by Herr Prop-Wasche

[33LIMA 972]

I am going to have to go with themightysrc on this one.

 

Granted I do not have hundreds of hours attacking two-seaters but their Field of Fire does not seem to be lacking in my experience.

 

And when in formation they all engage without hesitation. I was once trying to be clever and come low and under the tail of a RE8 and he engaged me just fine - in fact he appeared to be shooting through his tail planes! All the while his flightmates were potting away at me also.

Sop/1 1/2's also do not show timidity or Field of Fire issues! They engage just how I would expect them too.

I have not seen any lack of return fire when I am lower than them, especially with the RE8's as mentioned above. They were all higher than me and blazing away happily.

 

The only two-seater which I find to be "easy meat" are the BE2c's; just like in real life I guess. I have shot down a lot of them (being a 1917 campaign guy) and I don't remember any return fire at all from the observers. There are, perhaps, some Field of Fire issues here.

 

I wonder If some of this has to do with which aircraft is the players (human controlled). Someone stated earlier that the AI fighters essentially ignored everyone else in the formation and attacked only him?

And AI observers apparently have no problem trying to shoot down attacking human controlled planes.

 

Is the AI perhaps keying off of which aircraft is human controlled and somehow ignoring fellow AI planes or reacting less aggressively?

 

 

EDIT: As a further thought I wonder if the file designating the two-seaters as "bombers" is making them act, and fly, like B-17's ala CFS3?

Wonder if a file change of all two-seaters to "fighter-bombers" would perhaps make them behave more like we would think an RE8 getting the crap shot outta it would act? An attempt at maneuver or the observer acting more aggressively, i.e., fly more "realistically?

 

Interesting discussion, this.

 

I had very much the same impression - of adequate fields of fire - as mightysrc and Hasse, tho my recent (very limited) Workshop-CFS3-QC tests seemed to point the other way. So now I'm left wondering. But I do remember with total certainty attacking formations of Strutter 2-seaters in several missions, from about 20 degrees or more below the formation and getting very thoroughly shot at by the observers of my target and his flight-mates, while they were still flying level; their fields of fire were at least adequate. So they can shoot low, in at least some circumstances and/or planes.

 

Re the BE2c, as the OFF BE has that fixed forward-firing Lewis (thru the prop disc- unsynchronised? - a very rare mounting in real life) I would expect no return fire to the rear, and don't remember receiving any when attacking BE2s, either, so it's the mounting not the field of fire that's the blocker, for the BE.

[TaillyHo 2]

I am going to have to go with themightysrc on this one.

 

Granted I do not have hundreds of hours attacking two-seaters but their Field of Fire does not seem to be lacking in my experience.

 

And when in formation they all engage without hesitation. I was once trying to be clever and come low and under the tail of a RE8 and he engaged me just fine - in fact he appeared to be shooting through his tail planes! All the while his flightmates were potting away at me also.

Sop/1 1/2's also do not show timidity or Field of Fire issues! They engage just how I would expect them too.

I have not seen any lack of return fire when I am lower than them, especially with the RE8's as mentioned above. They were all higher than me and blazing away happily.

 

The only two-seater which I find to be "easy meat" are the BE2c's; just like in real life I guess. I have shot down a lot of them (being a 1917 campaign guy) and I don't remember any return fire at all from the observers. There are, perhaps, some Field of Fire issues here.

 

I wonder If some of this has to do with which aircraft is the players (human controlled). Someone stated earlier that the AI fighters essentially ignored everyone else in the formation and attacked only him?

And AI observers apparently have no problem trying to shoot down attacking human controlled planes.

 

Is the AI perhaps keying off of which aircraft is human controlled and somehow ignoring fellow AI planes or reacting less aggressively?

 

B.E2 observers do not have guns, my friend. The only gun is a fixed forward firing pilot-controlled Lewis, so you can attack from almost any point on the compass other than directly in front of a Bee, safe in the knowledge it cannot fire back! Same applies to the single-seat Strutter B1 (which is equally helpless as an opponent).

 

On the discussion about what AI observer/gunners can and can't do - let's be clear about when we are talking about these guys in a plane you are flying; and when we're talking about gunnery performance in an AI-flown opponent. I suspect we are not comparing apples with apples here.

[DukeIronHand 8]

B.E2 observers do not have guns, my friend. The only gun is a fixed forward firing pilot-controlled Lewis, so you can attack from almost any point on the compass other than directly in front of a Bee, safe in the knowledge it cannot fire back! Same applies to the single-seat Strutter B1 (which is equally helpless as an opponent).

 

Doh! You are correct Sir. I had read this before and I forgot. Of course that then begs the question: Why do they not have guns? They certainly did in real life.

 

 

On the discussion about what AI observer/gunners can and can't do - let's be clear about when we are talking about these guys in a plane you are flying; and when we're talking about gunnery performance in an AI-flown opponent. I suspect we are not comparing apples with apples here.

 

Are you saying the AI gunners act differently when flying wit a human pilot?

[TaillyHo 2]

Doh! You are correct Sir. I had read this before and I forgot. Of course that then begs the question: Why do they not have guns? They certainly did in real life.

 

Are you saying the AI gunners act differently when flying wit a human pilot?

 

They did, but not in OFF (P3). However, in P4 much has changed in this regard ...

 

I think there are parameters around what an AI gunner does in a human piloted craft (that is what Bullethead goes into some detail on) as opposed to observable behaviour by AI flown 2-seaters with respect to how and where their gunners shoot.

 

To use the Fee as an example - when I am flying it, my obs/gunner rarely fires the rear-facing Lewis and when he does, fires very sparingly and rarely hits anything! However, flying my Albatros, I have attacked Fees from directly behind (same level) and been fired upon from my target craft! (Quite unrealistic, of course, because not only does the rear gun not fire at that angle - but if it did, it would have to by-pass the pilot (as it's mounted forward of the pilot's cockpit) engine housing, and would have to fire through the propeller arc of the 'pusher' engine!!).

 

Similarly I concur with your views on the handiness of the rear gunner in AI-flown Strutters, but having campaigned one myself for quite some time, I found my rear-gunner far less imaginative in terms of his range. On ocassions when I'd used up all my bullets, I had to be quite specific about where I placed my craft if I wanted him to fire a burst at an opponent. If I wanted him to fire at an EA below, I'd have to put our kite in a sufficiently banked turn and then he'd fire 'sideways' (as it were) at it.

[DukeIronHand 8]

Your observation about the difference in the AI gunner between an AI flown plane and a human one is interesting.

 

One would think that the AI routine for both would be the same unless this is another example of an AI "cheat", when both pilot and the observer are AI, to make up for programming limitations.

This is not unknown in some flight sims but I do not know about OFF. Clearly I hope this is not the case being an OFF geek.

 

My only experience, so far, with an AI observer has been in my Br/F2b campaign.

I am too busy flying during a fight but, via sound anyway, my AI gunner stays quite active and always seems to be shooting.

 

Hmmm...is the Brisfit coded, in the files, as a fighter or fighter-bomber? I forget which file to look at.

[+Polovski 414]

It doesn't "cheat" in that way and as far as I know uses the same code for gunners aiming if you are in the craft as pilot or not, but as many didn't like the fact that gunners could shoot down through their own tail we had to limit it some (was a poll at some point I think). So it is what it is.

 

AI isn't clever like a human we take so much for granted that a human does, but when you come to make a computer think or behave like a human it's very difficult and detailed. There usually no "ooo there's a tail in the way and it's mine, perhaps I'd better not shoot it off".

 

There's so much to it when you delve in (BH will know this I am sure).

 

Anyway just a note P4 is a whole different ball game ...

[Olham 164]

Anyway just a note P4 is a whole different ball game ...

A ball game??? ?

I had always been thinking, that you guys make another WW1 air combat sim?!?!?

Edited October 13, 2011 by Olham

[Hasse Wind 46]

A WW1 ball game? Well, at least there are no vuvuzelas!

[+Polovski 414]

Lol Olham, we are full of surprises eh?

[DukeIronHand 8]

I gotta say P4 is sounding like some WW1 aerial "Manna from Heaven".

 

Hopefully I won't be in heaven by the time its gets here.

 

When and where can I pre-order P4 and the numerous plane packs?

 

[Olham 164]

Lol Olham, we are full of surprises eh?

Yeah, indeed!

In the context of ball games, the word "skinning" is getting a completely different context!?

[Bullethead 12]

Are you saying the AI gunners act differently when flying wit a human pilot?

 

Yes. And it's not just your own gunner. All gunners in the rest of your flight act just like your own, and this is usually entirely different from a flight that has no human in any seat anywhere in it. I didn't get into this in my previous post because the question was why a human's gunners didn't shoot in a particular situation. So I explained how AI gunners in a human flight behave and said nothing about AI-only flights. But now that this subject is under discussion, I'll talk about it.

 

The primary difference between human-tainted gunners and otherwise is in arc of fire. AI-only gunners USUALLY (but not always) have a MUCH bigger field of fire. sometimes it's actually smaller. I too can attest to receiving gunner fire from under enemy tails, from between the wings in the forward hemisphere, and from practically above the enemy. However, each time this has happened to me, I've done my next hop in that same type of 2-seater, jumped in the back, and been totally unable to move the guns any more than mentioned in my previous post: No depression at all, elevation limited to about 45^, and not quite a 180^ arc to the rear. There are a couple exceptions. IIRC, a human can also traverse Brisfit guns 360^, and can elevate a Fee's nose gun to about 85^ while the AI is stuck with 45^.

 

I remember a long time ago there was considerably noise in this forum than AI 2-seaters were too easy to kill because they're gunners were practically ineffective. At that time, IIRC AI gunners had the same limits as humans--you never saw front hemisphere or under-tail shots from them, and the pilots never took any notice of you at all. Then we got a patch and suddenly gunners were shooting over more of the sky and pilots were taking some limited evasion action. I don't know why these changes in gunner arcs weren't applied to human-crewed planes (and flights), but that's the way things are.

 

While I'm very happy to hear that gunners in P4 will be different, I don't expect we'll ever be completely satisfied with how gunners work. I mean, we're never satisfied with anything . But the subject is more complex than we probably give it credit for. Right now we're concerned mostly with fields of fire. OK, those get fixed, but then somebody will say that the slipstream above a given speed, or the G-forces during a maneuver, would have prevented the gunner shooting in a given direction or even at all. And what about the aerodynamic effects on the plane itself as the gunner alternately squats low and stands tall in the airstream? So then we'll have to hunt down old Viet Nam door gunners for their opinions on those subjects, and they won't agree, so the argument will go on .