Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
#4439504 - 09/18/18 10:34 AM Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
This is a fairly lengthy report on damage to US Aircraft, done post-war: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a800394.pdf. It's in PFD form, and takes some time to download, so be patient.

Next is a YouTube vid on the results of shooting a spitfire wing with a typical 30mm German aircraft cannon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoLLDi-M3fk Note the originating site linked within the video.

This Video discusses aircraft damage, both by flak, and aircraft. See within the vid the very interesting discussion, with pix, of the effective radii of various heavy flak projectiles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksQ...GPAano-epaDrByu1v15Y4i9ScBe&index=30

Lastly, there is this short video on the "Survival Bias" commonly encountered when assessing aircraft vulnerabilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3YQJ5DwTzM. The originator of this vid has a series of aircraft-related videos which very well might be of use to some here.

Feel free to post these links elsewhere, if you wish.

Last edited by RIBob; 09/18/18 01:14 PM.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4439514 - 09/18/18 12:39 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,554
VonBeerhofen Offline
3DZ Master/Campaign Designer
VonBeerhofen  Offline
3DZ Master/Campaign Designer
Hotshot

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 7,554
Zandvoort, N-H, Netherlands
Scary stuff there RiBob, I learned a lot from it, Thx. Here's some peculiar aircraft damage relating to hires airplanes in EAW, the top turret appears to be falling off the fuselage, smile Doesn't seem to be an uncommon happening when it's not properly bolted on, I've seen it with more planes in EAW. More impressive damage is when the props appear to have been hit, and the prop is kind of dangling or trying to hang on to the engine, but somehow mysteriously still works. Wide open gaps between the engine nacelles and the wings portray some serious damage modelling, probably inflicted by heavy cannon fire (I think). Did you know that sometimes the pilots can be seen to briefly open their windows or cockpits, to let some fresh air in and get rid of annoying smoke and fumes. EAW is a wonderfull game with many unexpected surprises. Hats off to those who came up with such innovative ideas, it must have been really hard to incorporate them.

[Linked Image]

VonBeerhofen


Last edited by Sandbagger; 09/18/18 03:05 PM.
#4439536 - 09/18/18 03:07 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,064
Sandbagger Offline
Hotshot
Sandbagger  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,064
Coningsby, Lincs, UK
One step too far VB - I've edited your last post due to you including a link to a private conversation between me and other members in another forum.
This infringement WILL be passed to SimHQ admin for further action.


[Linked Image]

Alienware Aurora R5
Windows 10 64 bit
Intel i7-6700K 4.2Ghz
Two GTX 1080 Foundations in SLI (8 Gig each)
32 Gig DDR4 2133Mhz
1TB SSD boot drive - 1TB SATA storage drive
5.1 Surround Sound
34" Dell Ultra Sharp U3415W (3440x 2440)
CH Pro-Pedals, Stick and Throttle
TrackIR-5 Pro
#4439572 - 09/18/18 05:30 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: Sandbagger]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
Content added to my original post.

I know nothing about VBH's alleged transgressions, but I hope that this thread will not be locked as a result. There might be some who find the links provided above interesting, and possibly useful.

Perhaps VBH got a little carried away, and made a mistake. As a Sr. Staff on AR15.com, I am frequently called-upon to "referee" disputes between Mods and Members over posts. FWIW, and admittedly not knowing the very relevant history, I doubt any ill-intent on his part.

Your forum, your call. The man on the spot is usually best able to decide.

Last edited by RIBob; 09/18/18 05:36 PM.
#4439574 - 09/18/18 05:46 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,122
MarkEAW Offline
Member
MarkEAW  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,122
That link was to a public forum Sandbagger (although now it suddenly requires a password). Who cares if Rotton got banned or goes winning to moderators. It just goes to show you that biased people continue to manipulate VBH activities. It just proves his point again.

VBH apparently is banned now from SimHQ forums , but he said he will continue EAWPRO development posts at CombatAce forum for now.
https://combatace.com/forums/forum/257-eaw-general-discussions/

#4439580 - 09/18/18 05:59 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: MarkEAW]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
I am ignorant about the history that this dispute has caused to re-surface.

Sufficient to say that I have an account at CombatAce, and use it regularly.

#4439595 - 09/18/18 07:26 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: MarkEAW]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Rotton50 Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Rotton50  Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Cape Charles, Virginia, USA
Originally Posted by MarkEAW
That link was to a public forum Sandbagger (although now it suddenly requires a password). Who cares if Rotton got banned or goes winning to moderators. It just goes to show you that biased people continue to manipulate VBH activities. It just proves his point again.

VBH apparently is banned now from SimHQ forums , but he said he will continue EAWPRO development posts at CombatAce forum for now.
https://combatace.com/forums/forum/257-eaw-general-discussions/





Well, I care that I got banned, so that's one.

FWIW, it was an inadvertent ban based on miscommunication.

As to your contentions about whining and bias, that is complete bunk.

The continuous attacks on other contributor's work is completely one sided. You can check the history. The only time other contributors point out a quality issue with someone's work is it it involves an error but not VBH.

For example, go back and take a look at his comments regarding my "empty F" procedure. You will notice that as many times as he attacked my abilities I did not attack his. I simply defended my efforts and pointed out his bad behavior.

That is poor forum etiquette, something he is now famous for and, for the record, this is his third ban here along with two at the GEN forum. The last one at the GEN was permanent.

That's a pretty blatant pattern of bad behavior.

Now, if you'd like to move forward with a renewal of that old time EAW spirit, I'd be happy to let bygones be bygones.


RiBob,

You are very late to the issue and you should stay out of it as you haven't a clue as to what's transpired here over the years. Again I refer to the banning history for anecdotal proof of who is the guilty party.


To everyone,

The ban is temporary. When the ban is up he will return and he will cause the same problems again.

I doubt the next ban will be as lenient.


Heck, even paranoids have enemies.
#4439604 - 09/18/18 08:24 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: Rotton50]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
Originally Posted by Rotton50
Originally Posted by MarkEAW
That link was to a public forum Sandbagger (although now it suddenly requires a password). Who cares if Rotton got banned or goes winning to moderators. It just goes to show you that biased people continue to manipulate VBH activities. It just proves his point again.

VBH apparently is banned now from SimHQ forums , but he said he will continue EAWPRO development posts at CombatAce forum for now.
https://combatace.com/forums/forum/257-eaw-general-discussions/





Well, I care that I got banned, so that's one.

FWIW, it was an inadvertent ban based on miscommunication.

As to your contentions about whining and bias, that is complete bunk.

The continuous attacks on other contributor's work is completely one sided. You can check the history. The only time other contributors point out a quality issue with someone's work is it it involves an error but not VBH.

For example, go back and take a look at his comments regarding my "empty F" procedure. You will notice that as many times as he attacked my abilities I did not attack his. I simply defended my efforts and pointed out his bad behavior.

That is poor forum etiquette, something he is now famous for and, for the record, this is his third ban here along with two at the GEN forum. The last one at the GEN was permanent.

That's a pretty blatant pattern of bad behavior.

Now, if you'd like to move forward with a renewal of that old time EAW spirit, I'd be happy to let bygones be bygones.


RiBob,

You are very late to the issue and you should stay out of it as you haven't a clue as to what's transpired here over the years. Again I refer to the banning history for anecdotal proof of who is the guilty party.


To everyone,

The ban is temporary. When the ban is up he will return and he will cause the same problems again.

I doubt the next ban will be as lenient.


Being someone who has been entrusted by Arfcom Admin to sanction and/or Ban site members for the last 17 years, I understand.

On Arfcom, whenever a "timeout" as we call it, or an outright ban, be it a time-limited Ban, or a Permaban, we Staff are required to post such in Staff forum for peer-review, with links to subject thread. It's cumbersome, but prevents some mistakes, and also deters sanctions from being imposed due to personal animosities. FWIW, Arfcom has, on site, perhaps 20K people at any given time. So, I have some experience during the last decade plus with dealing with "issues".

As to my "Staying out of it", when, may I ask, will I be treated as an adult? Your comment is needlessly patronizing, and offensive. I would "counsel" one of my Mods, or Staff if they said such to a Member of Arfcom. There are ways of getting one's point across that are not offensive.

#4439609 - 09/18/18 08:52 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Rotton50 Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Rotton50  Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Cape Charles, Virginia, USA
Seriously, what EXACTLY was patronizing or offensive?

I stated that you are new here, have no idea what went on in earlier times and it would be best to not enter the fray.

No name calling, nothing the least bit offensive in my language, no calls for you to MYOB.

Just a simple reminder that you should not comment until you know the facts, which you don't.

How that is patronizing or offensive is beyond me.




OTOH, your comment IS patronizing -

"I would "counsel" one of my Mods, or Staff if they said such to a Member of Arfcom. There are ways of getting one's point across that are not offensive."





Say, in some earlier thread didn't you mention you were a professional "compromise specialist" of some sort?


Heck, even paranoids have enemies.
#4439612 - 09/18/18 09:12 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: Rotton50]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
Originally Posted by Rotton50
Seriously, what EXACTLY was patronizing or offensive?

I stated that you are new here, have no idea what went on in earlier times and it would be best to not enter the fray.

No name calling, nothing the least bit offensive in my language, no calls for you to MYOB.

Just a simple reminder that you should not comment until you know the facts, which you don't.

How that is patronizing or offensive is beyond me.




OTOH, your comment IS patronizing -

"I would "counsel" one of my Mods, or Staff if they said such to a Member of Arfcom. There are ways of getting one's point across that are not offensive."





Say, in some earlier thread didn't you mention you were a professional "compromise specialist" of some sort?


No, don't recall saying exactly that, but perhaps you can search and reveal the statement you allege. I have learned to be a moderating influence. On Arfcom, You could insult me all day long, and it would simply be part of the job. Not so much here.

I thought it was sufficiently clear that I was addressing myself to Forum Moderator, and not to you, personally, although your subsequent comments confused me.. If I made a mistake in my general comments, I apologize for misdirecting them. It's been a long day.

I certainly do not apologize for remarking on the patronizing/insulting comments made in previous posts Granted, I may be ignorant, but I'm not stupid, and I resent being treated as such . Such comments serve to drive people away from this Forum, and certainly are not friendly.

In this case, you, being supposedly better informed, ought to try to educate me, as opposed to telling me to shut up. See the difference?
.
OTOH, how, exactly, do you know the "ban" is temporary?. In your immediately previous comments, you seem to be speaking as the Forum Moderator, without having the privilege of doing so.

Please explain how You presume to speak for Forum Moderator without having that position. Please do this so that all forum Members can better understand how things lie.

Needless to say, no disrespect is intended, just asking for clarification.

Last edited by RIBob; 09/18/18 09:44 PM.
#4439624 - 09/18/18 10:16 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Rotton50 Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Rotton50  Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Cape Charles, Virginia, USA
"No, don't recall saying exactly that, but perhaps you can search and reveal the statement you allege. I have learned to be a moderating influence. On Arfcom, You could insult me all day long, and it would simply be part of the job. Not so much here."

I don't recall the exact wording but I do remember you alluding to an ability to reach compromises. You reiterated it here in your comments regarding Arfcom. My point is that you have not done that in this thread.

That is not an insult, that is merely a fact.





"It was sufficiently clear that I was addressing myself to forum Moderator, and not to you, personally. If I made a mistake in my general comments, I apologize for misdirecting them;; It's been a long day."

It wasn't the least bit clear.




"I certainly do not apologize for remarking on the patronizing/insulting comments made in previous posts Granted, I may be ignorant, but I'm not stupid, and I resent being treated as such . Such comments serve to drive people away from this Forum, and certainly are not friendly."

I didn't ask for an apology, I merely pointed out a pot / kettle/ black situation. You have not been treated shoddily in any way.

If you want to be forum friends with people this is not the way to do it.




"In this case, you, being supposedly better informed, ought to try to educate me, as opposed to telling me to shut up. See the difference?"

I didn't tell you to shut up. I suggested that you shouldn't go off half cocked, usually pretty good advice here and in the real world and again, there's a patronizing tone in your words, not mine.

As to informing you of all the many, many episodes involving VBH I'd much rather NOT dredge up the past in public. If you are truly interested in learning the truth, use the search function. The fights go back as far as 2002-2003.
.




"OTOH, how, exactly, do you know the "ban" is temporary?. In your immediately previous comments, you seem to be speaking as the Forum Moderator, without having the privilege of doing so."

This is not the only venue for this latest VBH banning discussion. I thought to reveal that this isn't permanent so that his supporters might be less inclined to leave. Nothing nefarious, rather an attempt to cast some oil upon roiled waters.

If it didn't work, so be it.


Heck, even paranoids have enemies.
#4439632 - 09/18/18 11:50 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: Rotton50]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
Originally Posted by Rotton50
"No, don't recall saying exactly that, but perhaps you can search and reveal the statement you allege. I have learned to be a moderating influence. On Arfcom, You could insult me all day long, and it would simply be part of the job. Not so much here."

I don't recall the exact wording but I do remember you alluding to an ability to reach compromises. You reiterated it here in your comments regarding Arfcom. My point is that you have not done that in this thread.

That is not an insult, that is merely a fact.


Put up the exact quote. please, before you attempt to put words in my mouth.

Quote

"It was sufficiently clear that I was addressing myself to forum Moderator, and not to you, personally. If I made a mistake in my general comments, I apologize for misdirecting them;; It's been a long day."

It wasn't the least bit clear.


What I said, before you truncated my statement was: "I thought it was sufficiently clear that I was addressing myself to Forum Moderator, and not to you" Your truncation of my previous remark is self-serving, and some might say, disingenuous, at least. I leave it to others to judge.


Quote

"I certainly do not apologize for remarking on the patronizing/insulting comments made in previous posts Granted, I may be ignorant, but I'm not stupid, and I resent being treated as such . Such comments serve to drive people away from this Forum, and certainly are not friendly."

I didn't ask for an apology, I merely pointed out a pot / kettle/ black situation. You have not been treated shoddily in any way.

If you want to be forum friends with people this is not the way to do it.


It's not you that YOU should be asking for an apology, it's you that should be proffering such, on account of your previous comments..

Quote

"In this case, you, being supposedly better informed, ought to try to educate me, as opposed to telling me to shut up. See the difference?"

I didn't tell you to shut up. I suggested that you shouldn't go off half cocked, usually pretty good advice here and in the real world and again, there's a patronizing tone in your words, not mine.

As to informing you of all the many, many episodes involving VBH I'd much rather NOT dredge up the past in public. If you are truly interested in learning the truth, use the search function. The fights go back as far as 2002-2003.


Don't piss on my head and try to tell me it's raining. Please.

Quote

"OTOH, how, exactly, do you know the "ban" is temporary?. In your immediately previous comments, you seem to be speaking as the Forum Moderator, without having the privilege of doing so."

This is not the only venue for this latest VBH banning discussion. I thought to reveal that this isn't permanent so that his supporters might be less inclined to leave. Nothing nefarious, rather an attempt to cast some oil upon roiled waters.

If it didn't work, so be it.


You have evaded the point of my comment, and that is telling.

FWIW, I have been polite in all my posts on this Site, and suitably grateful for the very kind help I've received from some folks here.

That said, I will not be mis-quoted, nor will I accept being treated as a moron, child, or second-class member of this Forum. Is that perfectly clear?

#4439637 - 09/19/18 12:39 AM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Offline
Administrator
oldgrognard  Offline
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Oh my. This sort of a dust up in EAW is very disappointing. I guess it comes from very talented modders and skinners doing very laborious and painstaking work and feeling under appreciated if someone faults anything. This expands to people who are very interested because of their involvement with mods or the results of mods. Sometimes we see offense where none was meant.


I respect you all here at EAW even if I don’t spend a lot of time here. It is what first brought me to SimHQ. EAW still holds a very fond place in my gaming mind.

It’s like watching family or friends squabble. Can’t we all just get along ? soapbox


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
#4439643 - 09/19/18 01:28 AM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: oldgrognard]  
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
RIBob Offline
Member
RIBob  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 516
Originally Posted by oldgrognard
Oh my. This sort of a dust up in EAW is very disappointing. I guess it comes from very talented modders and skinners doing very laborious and painstaking work and feeling under appreciated if someone faults anything. This expands to people who are very interested because of their involvement with mods or the results of mods. Sometimes we see offense where none was meant.


I respect you all here at EAW even if I don’t spend a lot of time here. It is what first brought me to SimHQ. EAW still holds a very fond place in my gaming mind.

It’s like watching family or friends squabble. Can’t we all just get along ? soapbox


Concur with all you've said above. Most, if not all of the posters in this EAW forum are far advanced from me in terms of the sim itself, no doubt about it.
Always grateful for their kind help, which has always been forthcoming.

That said, I refuse to be insulted or diminished. It's not about the Sim, at that point, but about common decency and good manners.

I don't think that's asking too much.

Last edited by RIBob; 09/19/18 01:34 AM.
#4439645 - 09/19/18 01:31 AM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Rotton50 Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Rotton50  Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Cape Charles, Virginia, USA
Ribob,

Clearly you are looking for a fight and I won't take the bait.

Each response you've made has been amped up to another level and frankly it is puzzling.

I must point out that from the beginning I have encouraged you to ask questions, tried to make you feel welcome and never denigrated your newbie status.

Where this sudden animosity comes from I do not know.


Heck, even paranoids have enemies.
#4439729 - 09/19/18 03:12 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,064
Sandbagger Offline
Hotshot
Sandbagger  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,064
Coningsby, Lincs, UK
Once again, will members who have an issue PLEASE take it out of the forum and use PM's or even their emails.
Arguing to and fro defeats the object of 'moving on'.

'Ribrob' hoped that this thread would not locked - if this thread continious this way, it will be and the community loses out again.


[Linked Image]

Alienware Aurora R5
Windows 10 64 bit
Intel i7-6700K 4.2Ghz
Two GTX 1080 Foundations in SLI (8 Gig each)
32 Gig DDR4 2133Mhz
1TB SSD boot drive - 1TB SATA storage drive
5.1 Surround Sound
34" Dell Ultra Sharp U3415W (3440x 2440)
CH Pro-Pedals, Stick and Throttle
TrackIR-5 Pro
#4439730 - 09/19/18 03:19 PM Re: Interesting Info on Aircraft Damage [Re: RIBob]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Rotton50 Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Rotton50  Offline
3DZ / campaign designer
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,859
Cape Charles, Virginia, USA
Ok.


Heck, even paranoids have enemies.

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
CD WOFF
by Britisheh. 03/28/24 08:05 PM
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0