|
In my heart, everywhere is Canada.
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:It's not like a rifle couldn't shoot down a plane, if nothing else most planes didnt have armoured windscreens and a .303 through the pilot's skull would most likely prove efficacious. And, with the liquid-cooled engines used on most front-line aircraft in Europe in the first half of the war, a single bullet hit in the radiator, coolant pipes or expansion tank would put the aircraft into 'crisis' mode. It may not be much use in stopping a plane that's strafing you at that moment, but you're making the pilot immediately think 'poo poo, that gauge is shooting up the scale and there's glycol all over the windscreen. I've got a few minutes until the engine dies!' There were Spitfires that were forced down during the Dunkirk evacuation that had to land on the beach because they took a single rifle-calibre bullet to the cooling system, some from ground fire and some from enemy aircraft. I remember reading a USAAF document comparing the P-40 and the P-51/A-36 in the ground attack role, and concluded that the older one was worth keeping around in front-line service, partly because it suffered much lower rates of mechanical damage from ground fire. An analysis of the damage taken by returning aircraft showed that most took hits around the underside of the centre section. This was exactly where the P-51 had its radiator, plus the long pipes going to the engine, while the P-40 had its cooler group tucked up in its 'chin' at the front. The conclusion was that most soldiers firing from the ground didn't lead or elevate their shots enough so, aiming for the engine, their shots went behind and hit the middle, where the P-40 had its armoured and self-sealing fuel tank.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
In addition to the small chance of damaging or downing an airplane, it was probably good for morale and discipline to have a drill that wasn't "oh poo poo we're hosed oh poo poo everyone run oh poo poo oh gently caress oh god Nazi victory is certain"
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:hello old chap, precise rifle fire is exactly what's needed to give jerry planes the business Spike Milligan once downed a plane just by shouting at it quote:One freezing dawn we were awakened by a Lockheed Lightning repeatedly roaring over our camp. , probably.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 21:23
|
|
Oh god, I wonder if any of those Canadians died at Dieppe in those films 
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Oh god, I wonder if any of those Canadians died at Dieppe in those films Well. Can anyone tell what unit they are from? Don't know how easy to spot Canadian/Commonwealth unit badges are. Dieppe would be 2nd Canadian infantry. Though I'm not sure if regiments and such were often attached and detached from divisions in the Canadian army, so it's possible that knowing their regiment might be more useful if one really wanted to know... Randarkman fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I was gonna write pretty much exactly this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Oh god, I wonder if any of those Canadians died at Dieppe in those films My gut says it's more likely that unit was wiped out at Hong Kong
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 01:10
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Monocled Falcon posted:On the same topic, aren't modern day fighter pilots receiving like something like a 100 hours a year? Depends on which country you're talking about. Some receive a lot less, some a lot more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:The map I made a few weeks ago wasn't high enough resolution so I created this monster. What's the colored-in part representing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 09:07
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:The conclusion was that most soldiers firing from the ground didn't lead or elevate their shots enough so, aiming for the engine, their shots went behind and hit the middle, where the P-40 had its armoured and self-sealing fuel tank. You'd never think that a pilot would be happy to be hit in the drat fuel tank, but...
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 09:14
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:Depends on which country you're talking about. Some receive a lot less, some a lot more. It's also worth noting that simulators are a thing now, even if they're not a full substitute for the real thing. Russia and China in particular have big problems with getting their pilots enough flight time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
JcDent posted:You'd never think that a pilot would be happy to be hit in the drat fuel tank, but... Iirc Apache pilots also prefer taking small arms fire in the belly for the same reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
JcDent posted:You'd never think that a pilot would be happy to be hit in the drat fuel tank, but... I'd rather be leaking gas than leaking engine coolant, I'll say that much. It's the difference between "might not making it home" and "WILL NOT make it home".
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 09:28
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:Iirc Apache pilots also prefer taking small arms fire in the belly for the same reason. Apache's protection scheme is unsurprisingly very optimized against ground fire, and the forward/main fuel tank is actually a very important part of said scheme. It is kind of a minor engineering miracle in itself, it not only is very effective protection against ground fire, but also is crash-proof, and has a protection function for the crew in the event of a crash also.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 14:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/OnThisDayNYT/status/917004156006789120 The
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 14:46
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/OnThisDayNYT/status/917004156006789120 I saw an article a month or two ago about how the first kid born after 9/11 was going into boot camp.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Apache's protection scheme is unsurprisingly very optimized against ground fire, and the forward/main fuel tank is actually a very important part of said scheme. It is kind of a minor engineering miracle in itself, it not only is very effective protection against ground fire, but also is crash-proof, and has a protection function for the crew in the event of a crash also. Could you explain a bit more about it, please?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
 HK protestors continue to utilize medieval era siege weaponry. Once they get to trebuchets on the tech tree, the CPC better watch out Dunno why you'd put nails on the part that comes flying back towards you tho
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
I think those are cable ties.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
Age of Empires 4 looking good
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 16:34
|
|
|
One of the very reasons that radial engine planes like the Thunderbolt and the FW-190 were such darlings to ground attack squadrons was that ability of not having the engine immediately start seizing up once a single rifle round found its way into the radiator was, needless to say, pretty drat useful. (That and the engines ending up being some fairly decent improvised armor for the pilot as well, so much so that P-47 manuals outright list the engine as pilot protection next to the armor plates and bulletproof glass.) Either that or you just do what the Soviets did with the water cooled Il-2 and just cover the important bits all over with armor. Not the gunner though, his sacrifice is needed for the good of the Motherland 
Warad fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Oct 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Of all the things not protected on the Il-2 was the radiator.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 16:53
|
|
|
Warad posted:One of the very reasons that radial engine planes like the Thunderbolt and the FW-190 were such darlings to ground attack squadrons was that ability of not having the engine immediately start seizing up once a single rifle round found its way into the radiator was, needless to say, pretty drat useful. (That and the engines ending up being some fairly decent improvised armor for the pilot as well, so much so that P-47 manuals outright list the engine as pilot protection next to the armor plates and bulletproof glass.) Jobbo_Fett posted:Of all the things not protected on the Il-2 was the radiator. This was always the unfortunate compromise. In the 1930s/early 40s liquid-cooled engines offered a performance advantage on account of their smaller frontal area and potential for a more streamlined nose shape, while advances in coolant technology (glycol) and aerodynamics opened up the possibility for smaller and less 'draggy' radiators. But you can't escape that fact that radiators have to be a certain size that scales with power output and they work by being exposed to the airflow, which always comes with a drag penalty, however small, and you can't wall it up entirely behind armour because you have to pass air through it. There's really not a lot you can do about that - the P-40 (by chance, because it was effectively a V12 conversion of the P-36 so it made sense to pack all the new bits into the nose so both versions were identical from the firewall back) had its coolers relatively safe in the nose, while the Bf109 had a twin circuit with a shut-off valve so if one radiator and its piping was shot the pilot could shut it off and, at least, limp home on reduced power with the remaining one. Towards the end of the war advances in aerodynamics and turbo/supercharging started to tip the balance back in favour of the air-cooled engine. Most notably with the Fw190 and its very efficient engine cowling arrangement, but also the P-47 (which overcame the drag of its big engine mostly by being little more than flying turbocharger system with some guns on the front) and the Hawker Tempest/Fury. Air-cooled engines now had a much lower inherent drag penalty thanks to their more scientific cowlings, while liquid-cooled engines were being squeezed for more power, which meant they needed bigger radiators. There came a point when, what with the increasingly big radiators needed for a liquid-cooled engine and the improved aerodynamics of an air-cooled one, the advantage became minimal - you might as well cool the engine directly with cold air being blown over it by the prop and slipstream rather than extracting heat to a liquid coolant and pumping that coolant out to radiators to be cooled by the same prop/slipstream airflow. That the air-cooled engine was much, much more tolerant of minor hits was just another thing in its favour once the performance differences narrowed towards the end of the war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Of all the things not protected on the Il-2 was the radiator. Not nearly as much as the pilot sure, but even the first models had some plates around the external oil radiator, (at least until the Il-10 just got rid of it) while the liquid was tucked in with the fuel tanks under the cowling armor.  I mean yeah it's not really going to help from a direct bullet coming straight on but it's better than nothing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
JcDent posted:You'd never think that a pilot would be happy to be hit in the drat fuel tank, but... Liquid is remarkably good at stopping bullets
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
ChubbyChecker posted:Let's see what Wikipedia says: Depends on how you define “comfort.” A thin mattress stuffed with straw and a thick mattress stuffed with feathers are both the best thing the wealthy could get in different places and time periods, but of radically different comfort. I think medieval Europe would be the first time and place that the wealthy would be guaranteed to have a bed of the shape and comfort that we recognize today. The Early Modern period is when beds (rather than piling furs and blankets on the floor or a bench) would reach even farmers and start becoming the main place to sleep at home.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
JcDent posted:What's the colored-in part representing? I don't know, he died before I could ever ask him but my only guess is allied territory? You can see orange/red lines for various armies so I think they were filling things in as they go. Someone with more knowledge might be able to tell me if any of the lines or recon spots are accurate to the period.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
What submachine gun that can be field-stripped with only a bullet for a tool would USAAF student pilots have been taught to use in 1942?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 04:05
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:What submachine gun that can be field-stripped with only a bullet for a tool would USAAF student pilots have been taught to use in 1942? The Thompson? Some models can be stripped without even a bullet, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 04:22
|
|
|
Ooh, neat. For reference, and because I like the vernacular, the quote I want to understand more precisely is from a WAFS pilot, writing home about things she's learned: "Then we accumulate lessons in drill, manual of arms (with rifles) gas mask drill. Morse code, and even taking machine guns apart. [...] I can do a neat "present arms" or yank down a sub-machine gun using only a cartridge."
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Oct 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Warad posted:Not the gunner though, his sacrifice is needed for the good of the Motherland Look, if you're getting shot in the back from the air, your air cover hosed up and you're doomed. If you're getting shot in the back from the ground, your pilot and his buddies hosed up the bombing run, and you need to save unit cohesion by getting rid of vengeful gunners.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:I don't know, he died before I could ever ask him but my only guess is allied territory? You can see orange/red lines for various armies so I think they were filling things in as they go. Someone with more knowledge might be able to tell me if any of the lines or recon spots are accurate to the period.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 06:43
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Look, if you're getting shot in the back from the air, your air cover hosed up and you're doomed. You know, Il-2 gunners are often mentioned as the most infamous example as an instant death sentence but you don't hear much about gunners in Stukas or Japanese D3As, etc. There's a few stories of SBD gunners at least but nothing really about casualties. I can imagine they were in just as much danger, if not more so since even Il-2 gunners had as least a token armor plate directly in front of them. I have to ask if it was just more of a circumstancial issue (since Il-2 units would often find themselves having to fend off fighters alone) or since Il-2s were "tougher" than their peers they could get away with just losing a gunner while a Stuka, I can imagine, if the gunner went down, the whole plane probably was going down with him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 07:42
|
|
|
Warad posted:since Il-2s were "tougher" than their peers they could get away with just losing a gunner while a Stuka, I can imagine, if the gunner went down, the whole plane probably was going down with him. It's this, I think. Stukas can't operate without air superiority (and indeed didn't later in the Battle of Britain and later in the war in general because of losses) , Il-2s can.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 08:38
|
|
|
I wonder how much of it is also just due to the amount of planes/missions flown.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 08:45
|
|
|
The difference is that Il-2 gunners gained infamy by not being armoured at the start and the circumstances of their [Il-2s] use meant that combat losses were higher. You don't hear much about Stuka, SBD, or D3A gunners because not many, if at all, put pen to paper. I can't say I've deliberately looked for the stats on what gunner losses were for each nation in that regard, however. Didn't Rudel only have 2 or 3 gunners in his career?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 11:33
|
|
|
zoux posted:HK protestors continue to utilize medieval era siege weaponry. Once they get to trebuchets on the tech tree, the CPC better watch out Have we all read Rogue Male? It's a thriller written in the immediate run-up to the second world war, about a sportsman who tries and fails to kill a lightly-disguised Hitler. It's an interesting book for a number of reasons, not least because the narrator is very morally conflicted about the actual ethics of the assassination. For most of the book he denies his very personal motives, and tells himself he's just a sportsman looking for the ultimate challenge (to the extent that it's actually unclear if he even planned to pull the trigger, or if he just wanted to get the dictator in his sights). It's quite odd for a modern reader to have a sympathetic protagonist who thinks big game hunting is more moral than killing Hitler. Anyway, the action climax of the film is when the narrator is holed up in a bunker somewhere in rural England. He uses his knowledge of the classics to build a miniature roman ballista out of the hide and bones of a dead cat. There have been quite a few film adaptations, but as far as I know none of them took the body-horror cat-apault plot point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 12:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
Getting an interest in the Livonian Brothers of the Sword. Anyone here know more about them than can be readily googled? Some folks say they were a really rowdy bunch more into looting and killing each other and converts than killing the pagans, but others mention them as honorable and determined crusaders. Can y'all help me sort the wheat from the chaff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 12:54
|
|
