Bomber gunner.

That was a Pup, SIGGI, I think?
Your video shows well that fragile airframe of this plane.
And we tend to forget: those are heavy machine guns in these crates.
I could imagine, that these hits were quite severe - at least sounded like !

The only success I had in downing a two-seater, was diving from a higher altitude and distance right below the plane (a bit tricky, when he realises and curves away), were I then, with this speed and energy, could pull up almost vertically and shoot a devastating burst into his "belly";
then rolled and pulled down, headover, without coming in range of the gunner.
But I admit - I only got that manoeuver done once - as I said, it's tricky.

I've read somewhere, that the two-seaters were dangerous in fights, and that they were a major force in the early air battles, bringing many fighters down.
 
Olham54 said:
That was a Pup, SIGGI, I think?
Your video shows well that fragile airframe of this plane.
And we tend to forget: those are heavy machine guns in these crates.
I could imagine, that these hits were quite severe - at least sounded like !

The only success I had in downing a two-seater, was diving from a higher altitude and distance right below the plane (a bit tricky, when he realises and curves away), were I then, with this speed and energy, could pull up almost vertically and shoot a devastating burst into his "belly";
then rolled and pulled down, headover, without coming in range of the gunner.
But I admit - I only got that manoeuver done once - as I said, it's tricky.

I've read somewhere, that the two-seaters were dangerous in fights, and that they were a major force in the early air battles, bringing many fighters down.
Click to expand...

I believe "many fighters" made the mistake of a slow rear-quarter attack. A high-speed angled attack should confound the majority of gunners, the trade-off for them being the difficulty of the fighter to land enough hits to do significant damage.

As things stand now the fighter's only realistic option is to stay very well clear of anything with a free-mounted gun. As my video proves. I'm sure there were some gunners with that kind of monumental skill, but the vast majority would have been lucky to get a couple of hits through non-critical fabric under those circumstances. God knows I have to hose fighters down repeatedly with MY gun to get them down.

Watch the video. If one can't avoid significant harm by flying past a bomber like that, what chance attacking it in any manner that'll do it damage? As said, FIGHTERS have to be well hosed to bring them down, odd lucky occasion excepted, bombers need even more. How to do it? By vertical slashing passes? Head-ons? Knowing full well one is going to be shredded as one goes past anyway, no matter the curves and jinks one may throw. How many passes required to do sufficient damage? All while trying to avoid the return hits that seem to do massively disproportionate damage to ones own plane.

The Red Baron himself would not be able to bring down as many 2-seaters in OFF as he did in real life.
 
Seeing Winder's poll, they may be working on this question already.
But it must be very difficult to provide an AI for two-seaters, that shoots good enough, that it won't be brought down all the time; and on the other hand not so good, that you can't even try an approach.
I have great respect for the programmer's work on such an aspect.

Perhaps you should try some variations of attack in Quick flights, to find out, if it's really almost impossible? And perhaps with a more rugged plane, as the S.E.5a?
I'll try some more later, too.

I wish you good success.
 
Siggi said:
The Red Baron himself would not be able to bring down as many 2-seaters in OFF as he did in real life.
Click to expand...


Exactly.....and therein lies the difference old chap. That was real life....and he wouldn't have had the luxury of being able to come back for another crack at it. Fortunately, we do. It's sort of like the difference between a game of tennis and boxing. You don't "play" boxing.

Now my curiosity is aroused. I wonder just exactly how many of his kills were of the two seat variety? Think I'll do do some reading.


Cheers,

Parky
 
Managed to answer my own question. Interesting stuff....


1 Sept. 17, 1916 FE 2b near Cambrai
2 Sept. 23, 1916 Martinsyde G 100 Somme River
3 Sept. 30, 1916 FE 2b Fremicourt
4 Oct. 7, 1916 BE 12 Equancourt
5 Oct. 10, 1916 BE 12 Ypres
6 Oct. 16, 1916 BE 12 near Ypres
7 Nov. 3, 1916 FE 2b Loupart Wood
8 Nov. 9, 1916 Be 2c Beugny
9 Nov. 20, 1916 BE 12 Geudecourt
10 Nov. 20, 1916 FE 2b Geudecourt
11 Nov. 23, 1916 DH 2 Bapaume
12 Dec. 11, 1916 DH 2 Mercatel
13 Dec. 20, 1916 DH 2 Moncy-le-Preux
14 Dec. 20, 1916 FE 2b Moreuil
15 Dec. 27, 1916 FE 2b Ficheux
16 Jan. 4, 1917 Sopwith Pup Metz-en-Coutre
17 Jan. 23, 1917 FE 8 Lens
18 Jan. 24, 1917 FE 2b Vitry
19 Feb. 1, 1917 BE 2e Thelus
20 Feb. 14, 1917 BE 2d Loos
21 Feb. 14, 1917 BE 2d Mazingarbe
22 Mar. 4, 1917 Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter Acheville
23 Mar. 4, 1917 BE 2d Loos
24 Mar. 3, 1917 BE 2c Souchez
25 Mar. 9, 1917 DH 2 Bailleul
26 Mar. 11, 1917 BE 2d Vimy
27 Mar. 17, 1917 FE 2b Oppy
28 Mar. 17, 1917 BE 2c Vimy
29 Mar. 21, 1917 BE 2c La Neuville
30 Mar. 24, 1917 Spad VII Givenchy
31 Mar. 25, 1917 Nieuport 17 Tilloy
32 April 2, 1917 BE 2d Farbus
33 April 2, 1917 Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter Givenchy
34 April 3, 1917 FE 2d Lens
35 April 5, 1917 Bristol Fighter F 2a Lembras
36 April 5, 1917 Bristol Fighter F 2a Quincy
37 April 7, 1917 Nieuport 17 Mercatel
38 April 8, 1917 Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter Farbus
39 April 8, 1917 BE 2e Vimy
40 April 11, 1917 BE 2c Willerval
41 April 13, 1917 RE 8 Vitry
42 April 13, 1917 FE 2b Monchy
43 April 13, 1917 FE 2b Henin
44 April 14, 1917 Nieuport 17 Bois Bernard
45 April 16, 1917 BE 2c Bailleul
46 April 22, 1917 FE 2b Lagnicourt
47 April 23, 1917 BE 2e Mericourt
48 April 28, 1917 BE 2e Pelves
49 April 29, 1917 Spad VII Lecluse
50 April 29, 1917 FE 2b Inchy
51 April 29, 1917 BE 2d Roeux
52 April 29, 1917 Nieuport 17 Billy-Montigny
53 June 18, 1917 RE 8 Strugwe
54 June 23, 1917 Spad VII Ypres
55 June 26, 1917 RE 8 Keilbergmelen
56 June 25, 1917 RE 8 Le Bizet
57 July 2, 1917 RE 8 Deulemont
58 Aug. 16, 1917 Nieuport 17 Houthulster Wald
59 Aug. 26, 1917 Spad VII Poelcapelle
60 Sept. 2, 1917 RE 8 Zonebeke
61 Sept. 3, 1917 Sopwith Pup Bousbecque
62 Nov. 23, 1917 DH 5 Bourlon Wood
63 Nov. 30, 1917 SE 5a Moevres
64 Mar. 12, 1918 Bristol Fighter F 2b Nauroy
65 Mar. 13, 1918 Sopwith Camel Gonnelieu
66 Mar. 18, 1918 Sopwith Camel Andigny
67 Mar. 24, 1918 SE 5a Combles
68 Mar. 25, 1918 Sopwith Camel Contalmaison
69 Mar. 26, 1918 Sopwith Camel Contalmaison
70 Mar. 26, 1918 RE 8 Albert
71 Mar. 27, 1918 Sopwith Camel Aveluy
72 Mar. 27, 1918 Bristol Fighter F 2b Foucacourt
73 Mar. 27, 1918 Bristol Fighter F 2b Chuignolles
74 Mar. 28, 1918 Armstrong Whitworth FK 8 Mericourt
75 April 2, 1918 FE 8 Moreuil
76 April 6, 1918 Sopwith Camel Villers-Bretonneux
77 April 7, 1918 SE 5a Hangard
78 April 7, 1918 Spad VII Villers-Bretonneux
79 April 20, 1918 Sopwith Camel Bois-de-Hamel
80 April 20, 1918 Sopwith Camel Villers-Bretonneux
 
I make that 50 2-seaters.

Quite the arcade-shooter, the old Red Baron. :icon_lol: ;)
 
Yeah......I was a bit disappointed to see that as well. Kinda' takes the glow off doesn't it?? 80 fighters would have been much more impressive. Still a remarkable achievement though....no matter which way you slice it. Wish I could last more than 14 hours in a campaign...in a game...lol.
 
Parky said:
Yeah......I was a bit disappointed to see that as well. Kinda' takes the glow off doesn't it?? 80 fighters would have been much more impressive. Still a remarkable achievement though....no matter which way you slice it. Wish I could last more than 14 hours in a campaign...in a game...lol.
Click to expand...

Should be quite easy if you never meet any huns. I haven't yet and I'm on 12+ hours. :icon_lol:
 
Parky said:
Yeah......I was a bit disappointed to see that as well. Kinda' takes the glow off doesn't it?? 80 fighters would have been much more impressive. Still a remarkable achievement though....no matter which way you slice it. Wish I could last more than 14 hours in a campaign...in a game...lol.
Click to expand...

Most quoted by the "critics" of the Red Baron was that the majority of his kills were "defenseless" observation types. History has shown over and over that unescorted bomber and observer type aircraft were extremely vulnerable to attack from fighter aircraft. Lets face it, if 2 seaters were as good during WWI as they are in OFF, the powers that be would have stopped fighter production in favor of the FEs, Bristols and Hannovers. That being said it's an impossible task for the developers to balance the effectiveness of "otto". It's been the same in every sim that has ever had AI gunners.

Scott
 
Siggi said:
Should be quite easy if you never meet any huns. I haven't yet and I'm on 12+ hours. :icon_lol:
Click to expand...


Go strafe an enemy airfield or two....and have your C/O forward the details of your interment ceremony over to RNAS 8. Me and a couple of the lads'll come over to pay our respects;)

Cheers,

Parky
 
Dont you think that 2 seaters were a more important kill than a fighter?
one 2 seater could spell the dome of thousends of men by directing fire.
the baron knew is priorities...
 
Parky said:
Go strafe an enemy airfield or two....and have your C/O forward the details of your interment ceremony over to RNAS 8. Me and a couple of the lads'll come over to pay our respects;)

Cheers,

Parky
Click to expand...

Shall not.
 
Red-dog said:
Dont you think that 2 seaters were a more important kill than a fighter?
Click to expand...

Perhaps....but certainly nowhere near as glamorous, and sure as hell not anywhere near as dangerous as taking on an experienced pilot in a decent fighter plane.

Let me put it this way... If you were to shoot down Ed Mannock, Ray Collishaw or Billy Bishop, would it not be seen as a much more valuable contribution than shooting down a few observers??

And yes....the good ol' Baron knew his priorities, not the least of which was understanding the value of the element of surprise, and knowing how to stack the odds in favour of his own survival. Nothing wrong with that.....pretty sure I'd be inclined to take the same approach under similar circumstances.



Siggi said:
Shall not.
Click to expand...

Didn't think so. Smart man you are......lolol.


Cheers,

Parky
 
BTW good example there, the highest scoring Ace of the war, also whose main priority was to intercept incoming two seaters over German territory :). Many of us poor saps, would have been the guy who thought mmm 2 seaters here we go.. only to get a mouthful of lead and head downwards to join the other 3 week'ers :/
 
We play "WW1 air combat" - von Richthofen didn't. He was at war, and had orders. Two seaters were reconnaissance planes to take photographs. They were bombers to attack targets. And they were artillery guides.
They sure were a priority target to eliminate.

Off course not so glamorous from the gamer's point of view. But I've seen a documentary by the BBC, called "Decisive weapons". The one about Britains decisive weapon in WW2 was about the Hawker Hurricane - not the Spitfire!

We all would in a sim, prefer to down Messerschmidts with a beautiful Spit.
But it were the numerous Hurricane pilots, who diminished the incoming bombers. THEY saved factories, supplies, radar facilities, and not least: civilians lives.
They didn't get any of the glamour for just doing their duty.
 
Raoul Lufbery would probably disagree with some of you. Probably the best ace of the Lafayette Escadrille (17 victories), he lost his life attacking a two seater. Read James McCudden's (50+ victories) autobiography Flying Fury In many instances he actually abandoned his attack on a two seater if he found that the pilot was an old hand (the proper maneuvering gave the gunner a good shot at the attacker). If you read enough WW1 pilot biographies, you begin to understand that many pilots preferred to attack other fighters rather than 2 seaters. I hope BHAH isn't dumbed down to make arcade targets out of 2 seaters- in real life they were quite dangerous. Of course, planes like the RE-8 were a bit easier because the maneuverability was so poor (nicely modeled in OFF) that it was tough for the pilot to help the gunner. Some of the other 2-seaters (DFW, Sopwith Strutter) were quite maneuverable and not easy meat.
I worry about the results of Winders poll. If people are voting thinking that 2-seaters should be easy, then we won't get historical accuracy, we'll get 2-seaters modeled after the forum's misconceptions of them as cold turkey. I'de rather have Shredward's advice (the OFF historian) than a popular poll. The great thing about OFF is that it's currently the only WW1 airplane sim that is not arcade. Let's not turn it into one.
 
duck said:
Raoul Lufbery would probably disagree with some of you. Probably the best ace of the Lafayette Escadrille (17 victories), he lost his life attacking a two seater. Read James McCudden's (50+ victories) autobiography Flying Fury In many instances he actually abandoned his attack on a two seater if he found that the pilot was an old hand (the proper maneuvering gave the gunner a good shot at the attacker). If you read enough WW1 pilot biographies, you begin to understand that many pilots preferred to attack other fighters rather than 2 seaters. I hope BHAH isn't dumbed down to make arcade targets out of 2 seaters- in real life they were quite dangerous. Of course, planes like the RE-8 were a bit easier because the maneuverability was so poor (nicely modeled in OFF) that it was tough for the pilot to help the gunner. Some of the other 2-seaters (DFW, Sopwith Strutter) were quite maneuverable and not easy meat.
I worry about the results of Winders poll. If people are voting thinking that 2-seaters should be easy, then we won't get historical accuracy, we'll get 2-seaters modeled after the forum's misconceptions of them as cold turkey. I'de rather have Shredward's advice (the OFF historian) than a popular poll. The great thing about OFF is that it's currently the only WW1 airplane sim that is not arcade. Let's not turn it into one.
Click to expand...

If we can have a variety of gunner skills, as McCudden came across, from rookie to expert, I'd be happy to leave the gunners as they are. What's not realistic is to come across only those gunners who are able to hit one while both a/c are maneouvering violently. That kind of experience should be very much the exception, not the norm.
 
Today, I made an attack on two Sopwith Strutter, flying an Albatros D Va.
I followed them some 500 feet lower, until I was right underneath one, I pulled up, and fired, as the plane came into my gunsight. Then pushed down again, and repeated this several times.
Now:
1. the pilot was rather a rookie - he didn't do anything helpful for the gunner
2. the gunner could NOT shoot through the tail of the plane
3. the gunner's skills were mediocre - he hit me sometimes, but very little

Only when I went over the top (I had thought, gunner was dead) and pulled up right behind the plane, he shot into my engine, that began to smoke and didn't sound good any more (I like the Albatros engine sounds - almost elegant; but now you could hear, that it would soon burst. Big compliment to the sound man of the OFF Team - think, it's OvS?)

I followed the Strutter with my deadly wounded engine down and saw it crash. Then I chose the nearest clear green patch, and put her down there.
So; final judgement: if some made very dangerous experiences, and I made this one, I assume, the devs gave quite a range of "qualities" to the crews of 2seats. And for me, that would be okay and even great. We'll never know, when we come across them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top