Changes to Bomber Survivability Feedback and Discussion

Adjusting the value of the- dude, all the numbers are right there lmfao, if i altered anything it would’ve been right there, reducing the tnt filler, changing the strength of the material, its literally all on the receipts here that I specifically didnt do that, because I too am curious of bomber durability and this has just been teaching me that I was right

You are past grasping for straws at this point man, you are genuinely completely out of arguments besides “Its AI hes cheating”

1 Like

I don’t think the air-2a genie is enough to clear out the mass raids of radioactive posting in this thread, the use of the thermonuclear sky scorcher is required

f106 advanced sky skorcher

Meanwhile, one almond consumes as much water as 30000 ChatGPT questions while it’s growing.

Sam Altman said this himself, I don’t know how true it is.

1, PROVE im altering the data then
2, SO alclad is 2024-T3, but now you’re saying the blenheim didnt use it? so doesnt that just loop back around to my original point of different materials different thickness and different strengths?

1 Like

Add nuclear air-to-air weapons for self-defence.

image

1 Like

Could genuinely start trolling by saying they made nuclear AAMs cause bombers werent dying to conventional weaponry

1 Like

the missile in the video is a classic falcon with an even smaller warhead (2.75lb HBX-1 vs 5lb HBX-3) (idk how to convert it to TNT too tho)

Thanks for posting that, it’s a good comparison to show that planes in WT are pretty fagile in general compared to other (arcade) sims

2 Likes

The fuselage itself would have broken apart.

Its guidance was very inaccurate. From this angle it’s pretty hard to notice how far away it was.


image

image

Yeah no.

IRL the missile crushes the bomber

In-game it misses the bomber because the missile homes in to a point above the fuselage

the sad part is that this is probably one of those game engine issues that gaijin isn’t fixing anytime soon

2 Likes

You are adjusting the values and making erroneous assumptions about the materials. Or moreover your council of AI’s has gotten itself into a hallucination loop.

This is a diagram of the skin thickness on the B-17. You have applied a value of 2mm as being representative of the average skin thickness of the B-17. There is not a single place in the wing where the skin is 2mm thick.

image

For the non-Americans out there…2mm converts to .079 inches.
The thickest place is .064 inches and the thinnest is .016 inches.
The average thickness is around .050 inches.

So he is over-stating the thickness of the skin by a factor of around 150% if we just use the ballpark average.

3 Likes

Gaijin doesn’t illustrate fragments really doing anything besides tearing structures apart because there was no real purpose to have incendiary effect on fragmentation.

Because, y’know. A few hits of high explosive fragmentation tore shit apart in-game.
Also, HE isn’t going to catch things on fire. that B-24 got smackaroo’ed dead in it’s fuel tanks and there wasn’t a ginormous plume of fire or anything.

But when forced to be realistic, you’re seeing a lot of the growing pains that’s happening now.

Wow the shit I bitched about on the .50’s thread is rearing it’s head in strange and novel ways! Who would’ve guessed!

they had 12.7cm guns but if I recall, those were destroyed early on and 75mm guns that were more or less just scaled down copies of the german 88mm.

3 Likes

Fuselage? Ill recalculate with 1.6mm, I knew it thinned out as it got away from the center, as ive stated before, but not to that degree. Now thats a genuine mistake

The fusalage of the B-17 didn’t “fall apart” when hit closer by that Nike Ajax you shared.


Several seconds after impact, the plane remains intact, albeit shredded, with no chance of recovery.

Two different angles give us a good idea of how close it was, but thanks for confirming you pulled 16 meters out of nowhere.


If this isn’t just a visual desync bug, then this is a different story.

do u think it works like this or something?
image

5 Likes

We already had a discussion about that very scenario, scroll up

That is generally how explosions work. They lose a lot of force quickly, especially at high altitudes.

Though I wouldn’t use the word “unaffected”.

1 Like

yeah really?

image
k found the fuselage, recalculating now