Author Topic: .50 in aircraft  (Read 1293 times)

Offline BALSUR

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 110
.50 in aircraft
« on: October 18, 2004, 09:44:19 PM »
I've spent some time reseaching some information on the M2 .50 used in US aircraft. First off I want to say to HTC WTG it looks like you got this one right. Now, for everyone to understand this it will be detailed so if I sound as if I am going to indepth, sorry. The biggest thing you must remember when dealing with weapons and munitions is what you see in the movies is for the big screen. What we're talking about here is muzzle velocity. Due to the short barrels in the wings the ammunition cannot obtain full powder burn. So, your .50's and other "rifle" cartridges are only getting from 500 to 800 foot pounds. Most pistol cartridges achieve up to 1100 so, you can see where distance, accuracy and power is greatly reduced. When you use these calibers with proper barrel length you'll acheive the 2000+ you'd expect from them. This is partly why cannons became a must. Not because their ballistics where any better(only slightly, 1300 to 1800) but, because they were equiped with explosive charges. Airplanes that had weapons in the cowel or through the prop driveshaft faired better results due in fact to longer barrels and better ballistics.

             Using this knowledge and pilot experiences you'd want to get close and use shorter convergences. Shot placement is probly the biggest key. According the Luftwaffe reseachers all the rifle calibers to include the .50 would just punch little holes in the plane unless it hit the pilot or engines. The cannons were made to punch through and explode causing great damage. Thats why every german plane had a cannon.  Early in the war the British had a problem with their cannons. The fuzes weren't quite right the cannon shells would explode before or pass through and explode. So, they went to AP rounds  which meant they were back to shooting at the pilot or engine agian.

   Ok, now that I've opened this hornets nest have at it!

Offline JB73

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8780
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2004, 09:51:10 PM »
ok so you are saying that the .50's they have modeled are correct in AH?

i dont know what is right or what is wrong, but please don't say that the .50's only work shooting pilot or close range. (thats what i got from reading your post).


if that is what you are saying, then why can the .50's rip a plane up at 800+ yards in ah, but the cannons have such dispersment you will almost not get a hit at ranges above 500

sir, just trying to get what you are saying, because i dont think im reading it right
I don't know what to put here yet.

Offline BALSUR

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 110
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2004, 06:45:06 AM »
What I am saying is due to the fact that low muzzle velocity effects range, accuracy and power most ww2 vets would keep their convergences low and would wait until they were close before engaging.
           I know many people get kills and hits at 800 or even those magical few get 1000 meter kills. That I believe is part of the game and would be hard to model correctly. Take some time and look at old combat footage of ww2. Pilots didn't engage way out except on head on passes but that was because of the fast closing distance. The cannons would disperse even greater due to the greater density of the shell. They also had the fuze thing going on and 400 to 600 meters would be realistic. Alot of fuzes wouldn't ignite until it impacted the skin of the aircraft. This proved not to be the best for those ground folks so, Air burst fuzes were developed in which the shell would leave the barrel and arm itself after so many revolutions then travel farther and explode.

A goood movie with real footage is The Memphis Bell. They show a german plane behind a B17 and you can actually see the cannon explosion sprites in the B17.

Offline ra

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3569
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2004, 06:46:06 AM »
A .50 is not considered a rifle cartridge.  And I don't understand your comparison of aircraft machine guns to pistols.  But yes, cannons are way more effective than MGs.

Offline BALSUR

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 110
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2004, 07:27:00 AM »
The comparison is the foot pounds.

the .50 and other "rifle" caliber MG's were only hitting 500 to 800 and an average pistol cartridge can hit upto a 1100. No comparison just using an example of muzzle velocity.

The M2 is considered a heavy machine gun but, back in the day the .50 round was classed into rifle cartridges because it wasn't a cannon and didn't carry an explosive charge. It was an aircraft classification only.

Offline ra

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3569
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2004, 07:36:08 AM »
A foot pound is not a measure of muzzle velocity, and I don't think there is any type of ballistic measurement where a pistol would be greater than a .50, regardless of how short the .50 barrel is.

Offline Mak333

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
Re: .50 in aircraft
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2004, 07:37:11 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by BALSUR
Using this knowledge and pilot experiences you'd want to get close and use shorter convergences. Shot placement is probly the biggest key. According the Luftwaffe reseachers all the rifle calibers to include the .50 would just punch little holes in the plane unless it hit the pilot or engines. The cannons were made to punch through and explode causing great damage. Thats why every german plane had a cannon.  Early in the war the British had a problem with their cannons. The fuzes weren't quite right the cannon shells would explode before or pass through and explode. So, they went to AP rounds  which meant they were back to shooting at the pilot or engine agian.

   Ok, now that I've opened this hornets nest have at it!


HTC hasn't modelled the guns this accurate at all.  In some games I can understand the difference in damage do to power, but I do not think AH2 has reached this level of complexity yet.  A hit is a hit, its not scored any other way.  No matter if you shoot it from 2000 out, or 50 out, it does the same damage. - Do not quote me on this because I could be wrong, however I am pretty sure the game is not this complex...
Mak

Offline Fish323

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 66
      • http://www.bomberbarons.us
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2004, 07:55:38 AM »
QUOTE:"Take some time and look at old combat footage of ww2."

 The cameras used for these shots had zoom lenses on them. What you are seeing is at an average of 200yds. I dont know about you but my .50's in a pony are like spitwads even at point blank ranges. A Browning M2 could pierce an engine block at 1.5 and you're saying they wont shred a wing at 200. Okee Dokee

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2004, 09:27:10 AM »
Quote
I dont know about you but my .50's in a pony are like spitwads even at point blank ranges. A Browning M2 could pierce an engine block at 1.5 and you're saying they wont shred a wing at 200. Okee Dokee


 Depends.

 There's no way for one to tell the difference between 10 rounds landing on the target and 50 rounds landing on the target unless you run the film file in slowest of motions and actually count all the "layers" of overlapped hit sprites forming.

 I bet the number of successful hits at "point blank range" you claim is hardly as much as you think it is.

 Besides, four out of five major air-war combatants of WW2 concluding the 20mm was much more efficient weapon for A2A purposes should mean something.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2004, 10:03:02 AM »
.50 cal damage to a 190G-6:





Nice little holes.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2004, 10:08:05 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: Re: .50 in aircraft
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2004, 10:05:16 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mak333
HTC hasn't modelled the guns this accurate at all.  In some games I can understand the difference in damage do to power, but I do not think AH2 has reached this level of complexity yet.  A hit is a hit, its not scored any other way.  No matter if you shoot it from 2000 out, or 50 out, it does the same damage. - Do not quote me on this because I could be wrong, however I am pretty sure the game is not this complex...

You are incorrect and I'm quoting you on it ;).  Velocity plays a major role in how much damage a round does in AH and bullets lose velocity as the travel.  Many of us think it is playing too high a role in damage as looking at the MG/FF and Type 99 Model 1 when compared to the MG151/20 and the MG151/20 when compared to the Hispano Mk II.

Do some searches by posts made by Pyro and you should be able to find his explanations of how it works.

EDIT:

Kweassa,

Don't forget that the US Navy concluded the same thing.  IIRC AH's performance relationship between the Browning M2 .50 caliber and the M2/Hispano Mk II 20mm is based on the US Navy's finding that one Hispano was equal in firepower to three .50 calibers.  If I remember my RoF correctly, 10rps for the Hispano and 12.5rps for the .50 caliber, that would make one hit from a Hispano equal to 3.75 hits from the .50 cal, if the Navy was counting the effectiveness under the assumtion that all rounds hit.  If they were being more realistic and docking the cannon's performance due to the few rounds being put in the air resulting in lower chances of scoring hits then it would have to be more on the one hispano hit equaling five or six .50 caliber hits.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2004, 10:14:08 AM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12425
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2004, 12:17:44 PM »
Mak333, you are completely wrong.


HiTech

Offline TalonX

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1238
At the risk of science....
« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2004, 12:30:21 PM »
Velocity is measured in units of speed, eg.  feet/sec

Energy is measured in foot-pounds...   Muzzle energy is simply a function of weight and speed.

AHII has to model range for several factors - speed (including reducing with distance) to compute the time to get there, effects of air resistance and gravity, mass of the bullet (weight), and finally (as a function of mass and speed) energy delivered.

The energy delivered is what determines the damage.

I can drop a bullet on your foot and it might hurt a bit.  If I shoot you in the foot - well, ask Mak333 - I think he shot himself in the foot.



:aok
-TalonX

Forgotten, but back in the game.  :)

Offline Mak333

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #13 on: October 19, 2004, 03:24:46 PM »
Well thank you Hitech for letting me know :aok
Mak

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
.50 in aircraft
« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2004, 03:34:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
Mak333, you are completely wrong.


HiTech


LOL! that sure told you.

sit down and shut up. :D
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --