Originally posted by Kweassa
Soda, the difference is significant.
It's like saying "the difference between a single MG151/20 and two Hispano MKII isn't that much" - which obviously in AH, is not true.
The Ho-5 cannon is practically the same thing as the Hispanos(with a little lighter shells I think). It's power and trajectory is one of the best in AH, though that fact isn't realized much since there's only one plane which uses that cannon. Quite different from the Type99 cannons, if that's what you were thinking.
The Ho-5 in AH has a muzzle velocity of around 700-730m/s and the damage was calculated at 3.36lbs/shell. The 12.7mm Ho-103 is around 760m/s at 0.998lbs/shell. Compared to the ShVAK, 860m/s and 3.47lbs/shell and the UBS, 860m/s and 1.15lb/shell. The MG151/20 was 710m/s (not M-Geschoss) and 3.55lbs/shell damage. The hispano was 880m/s and 4.03lb/shell damage, neither cannon really compares well to that, nor does the MG151/20.
That gives the ShVAK better muzzle velocity than the Ho-5 and slightly better damage. The UBS is very well matched to the ShVAK (has the same muzzle velocity) and is slightly superior to the Ho-103 in damage. The place where the firepower on the Ki-61 is better, in my mind, is the layout of the cannons in the fuselage (cowl) and the number of rounds/gun for the 12.7mm's (the aircraft both have 120 rounds/cannon but the Ki-61 has 80 rounds/gun more for the 12.7mm).
My point was though, the Yak9U is not really under-armed as compared to many aircraft. I do think the Ki-61 is more heavily armed but the Yak9U is not lacking. The Ho-5 is nothing like a hispano though, it is less "hispano-ish" than the ShVAK, but I think the cowl mounting gives more concentrated hits which gives the impression it might be superior. I have flown the Yak9U quite a bit and I find the guns an excellent match, the can very effectively deal with enemy aircraft and it's one of the few aircraft where the guns are matched ballistically well at shorter ranges that you can fire everything and expect hits.
