Do you mean flew threw your shots? Cause I don’t recall Planes having feet. I know they are based on birds but they only have wheels made of rubber at best.
Are you not aware of the term, “walking your shots”?
You aim AT the target, or at a guesstimated lead. You fire a shot burst and gently increase/decrease your lead to catch them in your stream of fire.
Still nothing after months about the Strv 103 TT versions not getting full gun depression unlike the prem version despite them being identical aside from armor. Seriously i get that gaijin would avoid touching the strv 103’s to avoid breaking the hull aiming more since they cant seem to ever fix it but can we get any word on whether it actually plans to be adressed cause its not missing just a few degrees its missing quite a bit.
so if you have AH-1W (with 20mm gun) vs Mi-35M (with 23mm gun) firing guns at each other, Mi-35 can easily shred Cobra’s avionics, but Cobra can’t even scratch avionics of Mi-35
or Shilka & M163 firing at helicopter … Shilka can shred avionics, M163 can’t touch avionics at all
weapon controls, weapons guidance, MFD/HUD, sensors, RWR, NVD/thermals … all those are functions linked to avionics. And now Gaijin has decided to basically implement invulnerability cheat (even if just partial one) into the game and make it so certain vehicles/weapons can easily cripple almost entire functionality of helicopter disabling it with just a glancing hit, while other vehicles/weapons can’t damage helicopter avionics functions at all regardless of how much ammo they pump into the heli and need to go for full destruction
this has to be a joke …
I don’t hold the trigger done, i’m always leading my shots.
Idk what this “Walking fire” is. Cause it doesn’t exist in planes, perhaps for infantry fighting tanks but not aircraft.
It very much exists in planes.
Here’s an example:
Target is in reticle, fire a burst and gently pull lead. It doesn’t hit. Pull more lead and fire another burst, walking my rounds onto the target.
Edit: Found a wiki article on it - Walking your fire - Wikipedia
The source cited.
It’s mentioned on 2014 warthunder forums:
The video he links:
Yeah, im not calling that walking unless it has legs.
Your refusal to use terminology a lot of people use and make it a point of contention is a truly fascinating behaviour. It is worthy of an anthropological study, might even earn a nobel prize for whoever brings it to publication.
If you can find me a historical source where that term was used be my guest, however, I’m not going to use it cause I’ve never met anyone who used it. We all know it as leading your shots, nothing more and nothing less. It also makes zero sense, your leading your shots to the target, your not “Walking” your shots which one is both silly and confusing as heck.
“”The most familiar is the ubiquitous unguided munition, which basically traverses a ballistic trajectory and has limited precision, suffering the vagaries of ballistic dispersion and related effects such as surface winds. To compensate for these errors, visual observers or "spotters are used to observe where an initial round impacts then issue correction commands to the shooter to “walk” the impact points of successive rounds onto the target. An added benefit of visual targeting is target ID and immediate BDA.””
Page 42. Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Integrated Fire Support in ... - Google Books
Are the Devs going to reduce the score amount for events? 45K is a lot for those of us who have a life.
Not to mention, the mega nerf to Sim air, which took 4-6 hrs straight to get 45k score, now that will be far longer unless you play an OP, or meta vehicle, and screws the rest of them.
38K or 40K would be much more favorable.
So long spading tech tree vehicles in sim during events.
Your source is referring to artillery, which requires an observer. Not aircrafts.
Players have pointed this out to Gaijin numerous times, on just about every single event post, and I don’t believe Gaijin has ever once addressed it. Same with $75 vehicle packs. Your message most likely went directly into the digital shredder.
2 Likes
Aircrafts have tracers. You observe tracers falling short, so you walk your shots by increasing your lead.
It’s slang. It’s not official terminology. It’s used by machingunners IRL. It’s used by IL-2 players, warthunder players going back to 2014. It’s used by youtube guides on BFM/gunnery/ACM.
I stopped doing that years ago. I can fire with just stealth belts. So even if it is slang rather than official terminology still not gonna use it. To be quite frank i find the term within the context a bit idiotic. If your trying to explain to folks how to aim telling em to walk their shots is gonna just make it more confusing, you call it leading your shots and its easier to understand without 15 extra questions and 2 migraines.
I don’t see how it is “more confusing.”
Leading your shots is the physical concept (you need to shoot in front/have positive angle off) to hit a moving target at a non-zero aspect with no bullet drop.
How you achieve leading your shot is either use of a gunsight, instinct or walking your fire in using tracers (you hit short and increase lead). To me, it makes self-evident sense that “tracers slowly and gently moving closer to a point” is a form of walking.
Shaw spells it out in detail:
from Robert L Shaw’s “Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering.”
Mate, look from a person who lacks experience and doesn’t know of these terms.
If you’re trying to explain or teach them how to shoot, trying to use the term walk is just going to be confusing.
Lead->Aim
Walk->Walking->With legs.
Walking/Lead.
One makes no sense within the context.
I legitimately have a condition known for being very literal minded, and the concept of walking does not get associated with legs at all for me. I don’t see why it does for you.
For me walking means gradual, slow movement as opposed to jerky, sudden ones.
Maybe it’s because of my interests and jargon I’m exposed to (computers, chemistry, physics).
Mate, you said it again: “I”. With that, I’m done trying to respond.