Question about ammo?

[StSanta]

Well, the mine would cause less engine failure shots, but would take off far more of the stabs, wings and fuel tanks.

I would tade that for the occasional engine shot.

Plus, as HTC has pointed out, the Hispano guns in AH use a mixture of available ordnance. That's why they're good against both aircraft and tanks. So, it would be sensible to include the Mine into German guns.

Of course, allied fleires would not like that at all, since the gap they have on German guns would shrink a bit.

 .


------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

 Santa I apprecite your suport, but no baiting plz    Lets try to keep this a civilized discussion, so we can all see the MG151 have its full potential relized like the other cannon, and stop the whining over hispano cannons.  

thanks GRUNHERZ

[Hooligan]

Grunherz:

The point of Armor piercing shells is not to “cut a plane apart” but to kill the pilot or engine, or start a fire or set off an ammo box.  Unlike bombers, fighters don’t have redundant systems (i.e. only one engine and pilot).  A single hit on the right thing can kill the plane, as long as the round penetrates to it.  IMO APHE rounds should be the best anti-fighter round.  Its better to have an APHE round explode at the camshaft then to have an HE round explode at the surface of the engine.

Look at a cutout of any WWII fighter aircraft.  There is no component there that a Hispano APHE round cannot penetrate to and kill from any angle.  Something like 25% to 40% of the cross sectional area of a fighter from any angle contains a critical component that could be potentially taken out by a single HS APHE round.  Consider a Mine round verses the same targets.  It can only kill the targets if they are not protected by armor or armored glass, and if they are close to the skin of the aircraft where the round impacts.  IMO this is why the Germans included AP/I rounds in their belting, because there are a lot of critical components in a fighter that are far more susceptible to AP than HE rounds.  

The Germans probably used a smaller mix of Mine rounds in the West because Western fighters were much larger, sturdier and better armored than Soviet fighters.  When the Germans did expect to encounter Sturmoviks they used an AP heavy belting, see:  http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-fr.html .  Mine rounds were preferred against 4 engine bombers.  Mine rounds against bombers make sense because a single AP hit which would finish a fighter by killing the engine is not going to down a 4-engined bomber.  

Hooligan

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
Mine rounds were preferred against 4 engine bombers.  Mine rounds against bombers make sense because a single AP hit which would finish a fighter by killing the engine is not going to down a 4-engined bomber.  

Hooligan

Oh, nice.

Care to tell us, please, then, why are Hispanos way better bomber killers than mausers?

Because just now, they are.

And a HE mine 20mm round in the wing root of a mustang?...

Sure, it would be better to pierce it side to side and let a beautiful hole instead of a ripped wing, right?...

Higher speed+more HE+less AP=Better ballistics+More structural damages on less pings+less "point" damage (pilot, engine)

Please, Mine round for my 190.  

[Hooligan]

Ram Wrote:

 

Care to tell us, please, then, why are Hispanos way better bomber killers than Mausers.

Sure.  IMO there are a few issues.

HS rounds are much faster, they are easier to get on the target.

The last tests I saw of cannon lethality didn't show a great difference between HS and Mg151 rounds in lethality.  These were 1.02 tests and the difference between the Mg151 and HS has apparently narrowed since then.   http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/AHGun102.htm   If anything, the lethality tests would suggest that the Mg151s are too strong compared to Hispanos.

The damage model doesn't really model penetration.  Aircraft are mostly composed of structural elements.  When one of these elements takes sufficient damage, an aileron or wingtip (for example) comes off.  In the real world, a lot of aircraft caught on fire, lost wings when ammo boxes blew up, had hydraulic lines cut, etc... etc...  None of this happens in AH, and the differences between different types of shells just are not represented.

The HTC gun model probably produces its most realistic results when fighters are the targets.  And against fighters HS should be significantly more effective IMO.  A side effect is that this better effectiveness against fighters is carried over to bombers.

With a more sophisticated damage and gun model, I would certainly expect that Mg151s firing a Mine heavy mix of ammo would work better against bombers than Hispanos firing an ammo load intended to killing fighters.  If the Hispanos were firing an HE heavy mix, I'm not so sure, it could go either way.

You seem to think that a Mine heavy ammo mix would help German fighters in AH.  The Germans seemed to think that Mine heavy ammo mix was good for bombers, but that an AP/I, Mine, I mix was better if they might be shooting at fighters.  

Maybe HTC should modify the code so that Mg151s work better against bombers and worse against fighters.  Do you really want that?

Finally, why am I the only person actually presenting much data here?  If the German Mine rounds were really good for use against the predominate MA type targets (i.e. Western European and US fighters), surely one of you should be able to find some documentation supporting your position.

Hooligan

[RAM]

I still think that mine ammo would be better for ANYTHING in AH. See the 30mm, a couple of hits of THAT will kill a fighter, and was (is) only a big ammount of HE with no AP capability whatsoever.

Anyway you ask me if I want to see better antibomber damage or antifighter?...apart of the consideration I stated avobe, no, what I want is selectable ammo, just as you select bombs or drop tanks.
To be able to select your ammunition type in the hangar would be cool, IMO.

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

Hooligan a single mine shell would have much more destructive effect on a wing than a normal round, be it a bomber wing or fighter wing. Fighters only have armour for certain atreas, otherwise they couldnt fly. If the wingroot gets a mine round inside it it will get 4 times the explosive effect. As you correctly pointed out German ammo trends were to kill planes with explosive effect rather than Kenetic energy. Thats where we get the Mk108 from, it had terrible armor penetrating ability but it just blows everything to bits. A postwar british test fired 1 Mk108 shell at a Spitfire, the plane broke in two midway from cockpit to tail. HE effect is much better than Kenetic energy per given number of rounds, thats why cannon are better than MG overall. The 20mm mineshell will be better in AH vs both fighters and bombers. You say mineshells will work better against bombers than fighters, why is that? If anything bombers are tougher and have more armor than fighters, and have larger surfaces to absorb more damage. Cannon rounds depend on blast effect not cutting through components to kill, thats why the mineshell would be better, it has over 4 times the explosive power. Plus the mineshell has quite a higher (over 10%) muzzle velocity, that means a flatter firing arc with less bullet droop, and  needs less lead to hit, all better features vs manouvering targets like fighters.
Overall the mineshell is much better than the standard HE shell for all types of air targets and would make a fine addition to AH.

thanks GRUNHERZ

[minus]

Long live to the Mine shell Lw is not dead !
:0

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

HE kills by blowing up the structure of planes, not damaging engines or killing pilots by "cutting" thrugh them as is the priority in 50cals. More explosive means more destructive shell. Imagine this insert a regular 151 shell in the wing of a fighter, and then set it off. You get X damage. Then insert a mineshell with over 4 times the explosive power in another identical fighter's wing, then set it off. Will you not get a greater amount of damage from over 4 times the amount of explosive? The point is all the armor piercing a HE shell has to do is to get through the outer alluminum skin, and then detonate inside. It causes damage by bursting open the wing, due to the overpressure created by the explosion of the charge. Thats why the mineshell will be better vs all airtargets, bombers and fighters" than the standard HE shell.

thanks GRUNHERZ

[minus]

need some more INput this trehead  
 Lw pilots can u suport the Mine shell  to AH ?

[Hooligan]

Gunherz:

You know why I think APHE should be better against fighters.  And I know why you think Mine rounds should be better.  But...

The standard German belting in the West was 1 mine round in 3.  When they were expecting to shoot bombers they increased the ratio of Mine rounds.  That means that when they were shooting Western fighters they wanted a smaller proportion of Mine shells than for bombers.

We both have opinions about what should work best against fighters.  But the way the Germans belted ammo seems to support my opinion and not yours.  Do you have any documentation which would tend to support your opinion verses mine?  I would love to see whatever you have.

Hooligan

[minus]

so it looks like Lw pilots prefered hunting fighter in western front with He ammo what haz less damage and worse balistic , and tell me why ? becose they was stupid ?

[Vermillion]

StSanta wrote:

Plus, as HTC has pointed out, the Hispano guns in AH use a mixture of available ordnance

Once again, your misquoting HTC.

HTC pointed out that ALL guns in AH use a mixture of available ordinance. Not just the Hispanos.

Please stop intentionally misrepresenting the facts to back up your contentions. Your starting to sound like Fishu.

One fact that all you Luftwaffe guys are missing, is that the "mixed" ammunition of the MG151's may very well already include a mine shell component. No it obviously doesn't include an exclusively mine shell loadout, but then again it shouldn't.

The data from what tests that have been done in AH, show that the actual lethality of the German cannons is closer to the HS, than a pure HE or pure AP loadout (or even a mixed HE/AP loadout) would suggest.

When you get the guns on target, the MG151's are easily as deadly as the HS (both are actually overkill). Its just that the HS is ballistically superior to the MG151's and therefore are easier to hit with.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[bloom25]

Versus fighters HE and AP could be equally devestating.  Fighter planes have no redundant systems, cutting a single fuel line will down the plane.  AP rounds could easily kill the pilot, fuel tanks, ignite O2 bottles, hit ammo boxes (One of the heavily armored areas of the 190a8 is the 30mm ammo box.  They found these to be highly vulnerable.), destroy radiators, fuel/hydralic lines, engine block, etc.  HE rounds would simply shread the airframe, causing major damage to things like unarmored fuel tanks, control surfaces, and the aerodynamics of the airplane.

AP rounds would not be as effective for bombers.  They could easily destroy the engines, but there is more than one and they are armored.  (There are accounts of an RAF squadron expending 7000 rds of .303 on a Do17 during the BOB.  They failed to shoot down the plane.)  AP and MG bullets would probably pass harmlessly right through the fuselage without hitting anything vital.  An HE round impacting the same location would be a major hazard to the crew, along with punching a big hole in the airframe.  The HE round would be much less effective vs heavily armored aircraft like the IL2.

I find all of the cannons in AH to be very powerful, rarely does a fighter absorb more than 5 rounds.  (I'd say vs planes 30mm is the most damaging, followed by the HS, followed by the shvaks, then mg151, then ho99.)  This order seems realistic enough to me, but there is a large difference between the HS and other types of 20mm.  This is probably realistic, since the HS shell has both a higher velocity and greater mass.  Jamming isn't modelled in AH, this was a large problem with the HS as compared to the MG151.  My opinion (and only my opinion, I may be wrong) is that explosive effects are not modelled for the cannon.  If they were I would expect the MG151 to perform somewhat better.

I think it would be interesting to have an ammo type option in the hangar where you could pick between the most popular loadouts.  (Ie, 1 tracer, 1 mine, 2 ap.)

 



------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS

[GRUNHERZ]

Hi

Explosive effects are modeld by the cannon otherwise the 30mm would be useless. All Im asking for is that the HE 20mm shell we have now to be replaced by the mineshell. The MG151 seems only a bit better tan a 50 cal in killing, from my experience. I have no problems killing with 2 hispanos or 2 of the niki cannon, but 190s with 2 cannon seem very poor in comparison of destructive effect, even at close range where ballistic differences are minimal. Whatever the ammo mix in AH is for the Mg151 all asked for is that the mineshell replace the other HE shell. It seems the Hispano cannon has its "Best Possible" historic loadout, while the MG151 cannon does not. A 151 with best historic load of minehells vs the smaller capacity HE shell would go a log way in ending the Hispano whining.

thanks GRUNHERZ