Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: t001001001

I've been reading this bbs for years.  I've seen mdeihl waste hours of his life calmly explaining his arguments.  He's a good man and knows what he's talking about.  His posts are always interesting.  I enjoy reading them.

Terminus, you suck cocks don't you?  I've seen you bashing everyone, even ppl who are new and just asking a question.  On and on w/ ur stupid nonsense.  Ur a dick.  I bet ppl who know you hate you.

A good reason why this thread should have been locked long ago. I am getting very tired of reading so many posts filled with personal insults, and this one goes way too far.
Doesn't this forum have any moderators?

Hey all,

Since I really wanted to have some souces on that ballistics issue between fighter and bomber I started a search on the subject.

Here's one which discusses fighter gunnery in some detail (the book is probably known to some?):
http://www.demovfw.com/firstfighterwing ... vering.pdf (starts right with chaper 1)

Much more on bomber gunnery (training):
http://www.bomberlegends.com/pdf/BL_Mag ... yTrain.pdf
http://www.jcs-group.com/military/war19 ... unner.html
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/VI/ ... ml#page572

Comparing all sources it seems to me fighter pilots had at least one main advantage (mentioned before!); their guns were generally firing much more in their direction of flight than turret guns in bombers. Yes, their plane was moving a lot as well, complication firing resolutions, but bomber gunners had to deal with sideways firing which was hard to compensate for. It was compensated for . . . ! And it of course helped that the bomber wasn't jinking through the air like mad. But somehow managing a quick and effective firing solution when firing (partly) sideways at a fast manoevering fighter is witchcraft, pure experience/skill or perhaps sheer luck. Are their any trustworthy figures on how much fighters were shot down by heavy bombers and v.v.? Preferably on the ETO?

I also found it enlightening to read that tracer fire was not helpfull in telling the real trajectory of firing since the tracer bullets were lighter (hollow filled with incendiary). That was mentioned before as well, but new to me. It's in those sources I included.

Happy reading,

Jaroen.

The fighters had the same problem as the B-17 and other turret gunners with respect to lateral motion. The problem came when the fighters had to turn with the bomber in order to keep the bomber where they wanted it to be relative to their point of aim.

The moment the fighter starts to roll, pitch, or yaw, ALL of that "advantage" is gone. And it can't NOT roll or pitch or yaw if it wants to keep the bomber in its sights. Roll was a particular problem.

Anyhow, the sources are useful. Thanks for putting them all in one place.

ORIGINAL: t001001001

I've been reading this bbs for years.  I've seen mdeihl waste hours of his life calmly explaining his arguments.  He's a good man and knows what he's talking about.  His posts are always interesting.  I enjoy reading them.

Terminus, you suck cocks don't you?  I've seen you bashing everyone, even ppl who are new and just asking a question.  On and on w/ ur stupid nonsense.  Ur a dick.  I bet ppl who know you hate you.

If this is your way of asking for a date, I'm already spoken for. Sorry...

[X(]

Not at all. I was just pointing out that ur a dick. Just in case anyone didn't already know.

You're proud of it are you? What a shock.

No need to close the thread. I've said my piece. Continue on w/ the regular programming. Sorry guys.

ORIGINAL: t001001001

Not at all. I was just pointing out that ur a dick. Just in case anyone didn't already know.

You're proud of it are you? What a shock.

No need to close the thread. I've said my piece. Continue on w/ the regular programming. Sorry guys.

There is EVERY need to close this thread! Lock it! Scrub it! Fumigate it! [:@]

Should just cut everything past the first 2 pages and give everyone involved a weeks ban.

t001001001, you've got a warning, only because this is the first time I've seen you break the forum rules. No personal attacks, you came very close to an immediate ban because you kept it up.

mdiehl, you seem to overreact to criticism as well and jump right to personal attacks. You also get a warning. Please tone it down and keep it civil.

Nemo, while your tone was civil, psychoanalyzing other posters on a public forum is always going to offend the person you are doing this to. In effect, this is a personal attack so you also get a warning. Please refrain from that in the future.

Thread locked. Some very interesting information here though. Feel free to open a new thread on this topic if you wish, but leave the personal attacks behind.

Just to be clear, a warning means that if you break the forum rules again, you get a ban for a while.

Regards,

- Erik