#4571546 - 06/11/21 10:03 PM
Re: Witness
[Re: Wodin]
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,921
vonBaur
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,921
|
I've had confirmation based solely on ground witnesses. You just have to enter it into the body of the report, which I do in every claim. It usually goes something like, "Ground personnel at Riencourt airfield", "the balloon observer northeast of Bapaume", "Army troops near Lille", or some combination of the above "should be able to verify this". I'm also set on Easy claims. I can't guarantee it will work if it's set to Normal.
Your view outside the airplane is a single point in space (as it in inside, too, for that matter). Unless it's placed exactly at the point of convergence the bullets will appear to be getting farther apart. That's true even if they're still converging. Side note: I'd prefer that the guns were parallel. Very few aircraft had the guns set more than 18 inches (about 46 centimeters) apart. which means that if you miss your target (engine, gunner, pilot) with one, you'll more than likely hit it with the other. Consider how improbable would be the shot that scratched both shoulders, but didn't hit anything vital. I don't know if making the point of convergence adjustable is possible, but...well, we're getting into "wishlist" territory there, aren't we?
I could be wrong, but I think incendiary rounds are the default loadout.
SALUTE TO ALL!
|
|
|
#4571555 - 06/11/21 11:42 PM
Re: Witness
[Re: vonBaur]
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 867
catch
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 867
QLD, Australia
|
I've had confirmation based solely on ground witnesses. You just have to enter it into the body of the report, which I do in every claim. It usually goes something like, "Ground personnel at Riencourt airfield", "the balloon observer northeast of Bapaume", "Army troops near Lille", or some combination of the above "should be able to verify this". I'm also set on Easy claims. I can't guarantee it will work if it's set to Normal.
It very much relies on your relationship with the CO. In my case, Turdlington doesn't like me. I have filed claims (on easy) where my victory was in full view of a balloon observer, and said so. Rejected. I have filed claims where Mannock indicated my victory was a probable. Rejected. My advice. Brown-tongue the CO. Nothing else matters. And do not, under any circumstances, enter into a relationship with his daughter whilst on leave. Desirable as she may be.
|
|
|
#4571565 - 06/12/21 02:21 AM
Re: Witness
[Re: Wodin]
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,921
vonBaur
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,921
|
Nothing is guaranteed, of course. I shot one down that crashed within meters of my home airfield and just minutes after taking off, with the rest of the kette all around, and had it rejected. But I've had far more, over the course of multiple careers (not in BH&H II...still working my first pilot, knock wood), confirmed.
SALUTE TO ALL!
|
|
|
#4571784 - 06/14/21 10:51 PM
Re: Witness
[Re: AlbrechtKaseltzer]
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,426
Wodin
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,426
Liverpool
|
One time I was escorting a few Aviatiks and we got intercepted by two Nieuports on takeoff. I bailed everybody out, sending both Nieuports down in flames in front of like half my squadron DIRECTLY OVER OUR AIRFIELD.
When it came time to file the report, my squadron members were like "Uhhhhhh I didn't see anything...duuuuuude, why's there a wrecked Nieuport behind my tent?" Both claims rejected.
It's only 1916 yet somehow I got deployed with the world's first stoners! Hehe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|