Malta

[Slayer]

AA was the main killer of planes in WW2....=/

In a documentary on bomber command they said AA was usually only to scare off the pilots, as they almost never downed one of the planes in the bomber waves over Germany.

Or did you mean fighter planes?

[VonMudra]

Then bomber command has their heads up their asses, or you've got bad sources.  AA killed almost 3 times the number of planes, in all circumstances, then enemy fighters.

[silian]

*cough* hypocrite *cough*

So it's alright for you to make a statement without backing it up with evidence, but when someone makes a counter argument, likewise without supporting evidence, it's not?

... Call yourself a history student.

[Lobo]

The problem with a Malta map is the insane work in statics just for one map, La Valetta is a very special place.

[AdamPA1006]

The problem with a Malta map is the insane work in statics just for one map, La Valetta is a very special place.

Oh. Well Crete is very fun for an airborne invasion map just very big. I hope there is in planning a smaller in terms of land mass airborne invasion map

[VonMudra]

*cough* hypocrite *cough*

So it's alright for you to make a statement without backing it up with evidence, but when someone makes a counter argument, likewise without supporting evidence, it's not?

... Call yourself a history student.

For instance, the book "Frozen Hell", on the winter war, specifically states that finnish airforce units shot down about 200 russian planes, while finnish AA guns got over 600.  Then, the mariana's turkey shoot, where over 600 jap planes were shot down:

http://www.vf31.com/sorties/marianas_turkey_shoot.html

"At 1047 hours the 11 Hellcats dove into a flight of over 50 Zero fighter planes which kept them busy until they had downed 22 of them, combined with the 6 earlier in the day the total shoot down for VF-31 was 28 enemy aircraft without a single loss.  For the day, 395 Japanese aircraft were shot down and only 20 US aircraft were lost in combat: 6 F6Fs, 10 SB2Cs and 4 TBMs."

Now, that is just one squadron, but in the first day of combat, they only shot down 28 japanese aircraft, while almost 400 were taken down in the day.  Now, consider the fact that there were only a few fighter squadrons, that's maybe 100 japanese planes, tops, destroyed in the first day, against 395 over all.  The others were taken down by ship AA guns.  To add on to that, in total, 400 of the 600 japanese planes destroyed in the entire battle were attributed to AA fire, not fighter pilot claims.

Finally, if you really want a source, its the many, many, many bomber crews who died over germany in late 1944 and 1945, long after the Luftwaffe had been chased from the skies, and posed almost a nil threat to the waves of B17s and B24s.

[Slayer]

Then bomber command has their heads up their asses, or you've got bad sources.  AA killed almost 3 times the number of planes, in all circumstances, then enemy fighters.

Well, it was a The War File documentary IIRC, and I always assumed they were informed well enough. In your examples, most p[lanes are fighters, though

[VonMudra]

Yes, now imagine the effects of AA on much larger, slower, lumbering targets.

Also, it is my feeling that bomber command was referring to the night terror bombings, in which AA from the germans was, obviously, much less dangerous, unless a plane was caught in the spotlight.  Still though, it did kill more brit bombers then the german night fighting force....  Either way, you should know to never, ever believe a documentary in which one nations says that the other nation's weapons were poor.  Its like the american propaganda film on the MG42, where they said that it was highly inaccurate.  My grandfather and I were once watching the history channel, and that came on.  He then went into a torrent of outrage, saying that he remembered seeing that film during training, and that lots of guys in his unit died because they thought that the MG42 was inaccurate.

[THeTA0123]

People are complaining bout the Bofors gun all the time, yet it was a very effective gun in WW2.It cutted the Luftwaffe and the Japanese airfleets.

It was also avaible in Quantities.The war would have been very diffrent if the germans builded their own Intermediate AA gun in quantities.They had one, The Flak 43 3.7CM, wich was twice as light as the Bofors, and had double the firing rate, but only around 1100 units where built( The gun itself was designed in 1935!!)   yet another fault by the Germans during the War.


But ye, a Malta would be cool.Would be a chance to see the Italian airforce doing their thing 

[Slayer]

Also, it is my feeling that bomber command was referring to the night terror bombings, in which AA from the germans was, obviously, much less dangerous, unless a plane was caught in the spotlight.  Still though, it did kill more brit bombers then the german night fighting force....

Now you mention it, yes, it was about the night bombing campaign (I watch way too many of these, sometimes I confuse 'em), but they mentioned planes being shot down more often by Me 110s than by AA.

Either way, you should know to never, ever believe a documentary in which one nations says that the other nation's weapons were poor.  Its like the american propaganda film on the MG42, where they said that it was highly inaccurate.  My grandfather and I were once watching the history channel, and that came on.  He then went into a torrent of outrage, saying that he remembered seeing that film during training, and that lots of guys in his unit died because they thought that the MG42 was inaccurate.

Indeed, I know, it's part of my job to be very critical towards sources (any sources). I wasn't saying the documentary I saw was correct, I juts noticed a difference in what you said and what the documentary said. Since I only know you from here and I only know The War File from what I have watched, I should be careful with both of you 

[Mspfc Doc DuFresne]

People are complaining bout the Bofors gun all the time, yet it was a very effective gun in WW2.It cutted the Luftwaffe and the Japanese airfleets.

It was also avaible in Quantities.The war would have been very diffrent if the germans builded their own Intermediate AA gun in quantities.They had one, The Flak 43 3.7CM, wich was twice as light as the Bofors, and had double the firing rate, but only around 1100 units where built( The gun itself was designed in 1935!!)   yet another fault by the Germans during the War.


But ye, a Malta would be cool.Would be a chance to see the Italian airforce doing their thing 

Well, here's the deal:

In FH1, imo, they made the Bofors horribly inaccurate, probably because it had originally been so devastating that they replaced accuracy with the demands of gameplay, but overcompensated. From what I've been hearing, the main complaint against FH2s Bofors is that it is, once again, too good, and sweeps any plane it catches from the sky. (rather like the ostwind in FH0.7, a Flak 43 on an armored chassis.)

[THeTA0123]

While planes could survive 20MM hits, i highly doubt that a Fighter plane can survive a direct hit off A bofors guns.For comparision, a German MK108 30MM gun of the german planes required only 4 hits to down a 4 engine bomber, and ONE hit was enough to bring down a fighter.

In FH1, planes where just To strong.People claim that FH2 AA guns are OP, but i believe it is equal now.

[NTH]

But ye, a Malta would be cool.Would be a chance to see the Italian airforce doing their thing 

Would be quite boring..... Italian bomberplane flies to Malta, sees heavy flak, drops bomb way to early, kills some unfortunate fishermen, flies home and eats pasta.

Malta by the way is very interesting to visit, take a tour around the Valleta Harbour and Sliema, it is riddeled with WWII history.

[THeTA0123]

But ye, a Malta would be cool.Would be a chance to see the Italian airforce doing their thing 

Would be quite boring..... Italian bomberplane flies to Malta, sees heavy flak, drops bomb way to early, kills some unfortunate fishermen, flies home and eats pasta.

Hahaha   reminds me of this 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwAP8UcX4sQ
I bet lots of HE111 pilots will be doing this once Battle of britian is included in the mere future 

[Schneider]

Well, here's the deal:

In FH1, imo, they made the Bofors horribly inaccurate, probably because it had originally been so devastating that they replaced accuracy with the demands of gameplay, but overcompensated. From what I've been hearing, the main complaint against FH2s Bofors is that it is, once again, too good, and sweeps any plane it catches from the sky. (rather like the ostwind in FH0.7, a Flak 43 on an armored chassis.)

Well, what annoys me isn't that the bofors is so good. What annoys me is that the german flak38 a.) obviously has neither a time nor proximation fuse b.) does SO much damage to the plane, that I could as well shoot it with my P08.
Seriously, I'm absolutely fine with the bofors being really good, but in a typical game situation, the flak38 sucks totally against it, way more than in FH1. I have the feeling that BF2s weird hit detection OR lag issues often lead to you thinking you hit the plane (see the explosion) but no damage is dealt, what doesn't happen with the bofors with its huge explosion and time fuse. Either way, the Flak38 ingame sucks, I think I brought down equally much planes with the twin mg34.