Changes to Bomber Survivability Feedback and Discussion

If I put the wrong math equation into the computer and extrapolate an answer from there…then indeed it is wrong. And we can see that “your” math is wrong just based on real world testing results.

3 Likes

B-24 is close enough

A single hit on the wing root by AA instantly collapsed the entire wing root

image

Are you too going to pretend a missile with 40kg of just explosives, not counting fragmentation material, in its warhead should do “basically nothing” to a B-29?

Those are contact-fuzed. That particular Nike “missed” by ~16m.

Kh-29 and even 25 have a much larger warhead.
image

image

The largest warhead on something comparable is the Fakour-90 and Sedjeel at ~46kg but that isn’t very different from a Phoenix.

Uhuh, So prove how the math equation is wrong beyond just saying its “wrong” ;)

1 Like

Actually B24 is NOT close enough at all, the B24 was historically infamous for its high aspect ratio and much more stressed wing actually causing failures like that. Which is another point we already brought up, not ALL bombers are b17s. Some will be more fragile than others, we’ve simply been using the b17 and whatnot because that bomber was shot the most and also it just so happens to be in the test drive until recently

1 Like

Post the math first. Not just the AI output.

its too hard to think without ai for them

oh you’re still here?

1 Like

yes
i still exist
to the displeasure of you i hope

1 Like

cope

which still aren’t oneshotted by Falcons and their small 2.75lb/1.25kg warhead

Which still AREN’T oneshotted by 1.25kg? I see

1 Like

In the dev server. Reality disagrees.

1 Like

I don’t think anyone here is trying to genuinely say that a few 30mm or smaller rounds should take down a bomber (cause that’s dumb and shouldn’t be the case).

Atleast what I’m saying is that the bombers are unrealistically strong, and these changes will cause them to all go up in BR.

It’s the closest we have. Unless you want to fire Yassers or something at the wing of the aircraft.

I don’t think Gaijin makes any particular different to air burst and impact though besides fragmentation during surface damage easily.

This was ‘Brief’ the name of the B-24. It said this was the caroline raids, but they took place earlier. This was a different raid.

In the area it was flying at, 75mm AA guns were firing at them. I doubt the 25mm guns were going to be reaching that high.

It took a direct 75mm HE round right into it’s wing.

A round exploding directly from within the ‘center’ of the wing is going to be different than a proxy blast of fragments.

It’s likely that it’s partially the bombers are too over modeled, but also because missiles relied on proxy fuses to spread fragments to shred everything around it instead of just trying to blow things apart.

We just don’t have enough stuff inside the bomber to break.

Sparrow hitting a B-17.

I think this is where Gaijin needs to start adding more complex modules to vehicles.

Basically “It’s not worth it to blow the whole damn thing apart. Shred all the important bits or set it on fire.”

1 Like

A sparrow hit a b17 to the wing and the wing didnt come off, interesting

But yes we do need more modules to break

Meanwhile, in the dev server:

75mm HE shell directly impacted on wing root
image

image

image

Still flying fine!

Looks like an inert missile. It directly hit the B-17 and even kept flying through it.

image

3 Likes

mfw the HE shell hits the skin at the leading edge and goes off instead of a 75mm timed fuse shell genuinely getting inside the wing next to the spars and ACTUALLY blowing them to hell

1 Like

This shell has a 20cm fuse delay. When it explodes it is already inside the wing.

image

Spars on B-24 are right behind the leading edge as well. Cope more.
image

we already talked about fuse delay on HE not actually working bro. and you’re showing a picture of it literally blowing up right on the skin just showering the spar in fragments (fragments below 3g do nothing)

Gaijin should also model the fore and aft spars seperately

1 Like

image
image
image
image
image

Works just fine.

image
image
image

“nothing”:

5 Likes

I love that Gaijins attempt at a durability fix for bombers has exposed how bad the damage model for planes actually is and how bad missile warheads are modelled lol

1 Like