These aircraft are B17 or B24.
I find no reason to doubt the claim that it is a Bf 110 G-2 given that it’s the actual Germans saying so, rather than some random internet person.
Like it’s in the actual microfilm footage.
1 Like
Okay, please can you watch the other videos as well?
There are millions of different images lol
Oh duck i do same mistake Why am I even replying to you when there are dozens of images?
Fire needs to be reworked to be a more consistent mechanic for planes, it’s pretty much entirely random in WT and that’s not very good when you want to balance something around fire lol
EFS currently is extremely unreliable and traditional ways to deal with fire are gambles
There are many things that should be done to improve the damage model situation regarding planes, but a (what I would assume) rather simple step would be to change the RNG values of fire related mechanics to be more consitent.
I remain of the opinion that bombers being very tanky would be completely fine, if setting them on fire consistently results in gradual degradation of flight performance and durability.
1 Like
The best quality footage available of MK 108 in action is this one:
(Me 163 vs B-17)
You can clearly see:
-
3 hits on the left wing
-
1 hit on the right wing
-
1 hit on the horizontal stabilizer
-
1 hit on the tail cone
It probably took more hits, since the waist gunner and ball gunner were reported killed on this mission.
The B-17 (42-102609) made it back home safely despite the damage:
Following the standard belt composition, the three hits on the left wing could be from the Incendiary (since it’s the only type without a tracer variant), while the others were from the M-Geschoss (Notice how the hit on the right caused bulging, while the one on the left didn’t.)
Despite taking a 30mm hit right next to the spar root, there was no lethal damage. The truss-type spar design from the B-17 has a big advantage here: the overpressure wave just passes through the open spaces and dissipates throughout the whole wing instead of dumping all its force into it.
On the horizontal stabilizer, on the other hand, it did punch a hole through the spar, and despite the amount of skin torn away, it didn’t break off; the elevator even still appeared to be functional.
3 Likes
This is the specific one we are talking about. I want to kill off all the myths and misinformation that are associated with this specific piece of footage.
The other clips are mostly just 20mm and then the odd 30mm, and everyone agrees about those other pieces of footage, but this specific one has a lot of misinformation.
1 Like
I don’t think you noticed me already posting it.
I have the exact YouTube video. I have it burned into my memory from how many times I’ve seen it and the misinformation spread about it.
1 Like
We actually looked at this footage and compared it to my “wrong” equation and it ended up matching very closely to the calculated mk108 sized holes vs the visible holes left on this b17
This 3-5 mk108 to down a fortress claim thats been tossed around so much doesnt even mention WHERE its being shot, in the nose? Engines? 3-5 is not tearing a wing or tail off thats for damn sure
1 Like
Yeah, about that.
You don’t see how that’s an immediate problem? Because now you’re trying to make the claim that it’s actually 37mm hits, which would be even bigger.
We’ll see soon enough
Dude. The right trailing egde of the wing is bent upwards, what the hell caused that
That claim is for concentrated hits, you see it in the documents that FeetPics showed for the R4M video. So it’s not like the Me 163 footage where the Mk 108 shots are dispersed throughout the plane.
2 Likes
Concentrated hits WHERE and what was the “kill” result, structural breakup? Fires? Engines? Pilots turned to paste?
1 Like
Btw, why are everyone using the B-17, one of the most rigid bomber in WWII. Test fly with G4M1 and complain when it turn out to be as strong as B-17.
Simply put it the B-17 is one of the planes with the most possible information about it so it’s easy to make comparisons.
B17 was just like the most shot bomber of ww2, most data to look at, also the japanese burned most of their documents at the end of the war
I think they even think these images are AI-powered or something LOL They’re still denying it.
Oh no I do same mistake again I answered again, oh god I can’t control mysel
AI just gave me the tool to figure out how big the hole should be, and i took care to scale my red dots properly, which nobody has disputed that theyre undersized or oversized via pixel measurements
1 Like