Author Topic: Sea Level Acceleration Revised For 2.07 (Read 1926 times)

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #30 on:** May 18, 2006, 08:00:51 PM »

I've added the chart for lethality based on Hammer's hanger killing technique. I multiplied everything by 10 (so the US M2 is now 10 instead of 1 ... just because) and cross referenced with the load-outs as they usually appear in the MA.

For acceleration, the 100mph to 200mph number is probably meaningful as well - that's the range where you need the ability to close or break off.

hitech · « **Reply #31 on:** May 19, 2006, 09:21:50 AM »

Note: Lethality against buildings will not always be the same as against planes.

Pooface · « **Reply #32 on:** May 19, 2006, 09:58:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Note: Lethality against buildings will not always be the same as against planes.

yeah i thought so... especially the non-explosive rounds. i noticed that the 40mm on the hurri2d can take out about 5 planes at once lol, but take loads of rounds to take a building down. 50cals also, as convergence on buildings doesnt matter, as all over it's the same damage required to kill it, while on a plane you can aim for a wing or the like...

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #33 on:** May 19, 2006, 10:11:26 AM »

All true enough, and ballistics make a big difference on A2A effectiveness as well.

But the results came out feeling pretty close to the way things work in the MA and for the sake of comparing relative punch (which is all I'm after), I think it's a good first pass at it.

What I can also do is add a second plot for the calculated (the TW numbers) lethality and let people make up their own minds.

Sikboy · « **Reply #34 on:** May 19, 2006, 10:20:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I've added the chart for lethality based on Hammer's hanger killing technique. I multiplied everything by 10 (so the US M2 is now 10 instead of 1 ... just because) and cross referenced with the load-outs as they usually appear in the MA.

For acceleration, the 100mph to 200mph number is probably meaningful as well - that's the range where you need the ability to close or break off.

I have a map somewhere that has giant "Monoliths" on the end of a runway. It made things a lot easier for testing lethality against buildings. I'll see if I can dig that up.

-Sik

hammer · « **Reply #35 on:** May 19, 2006, 11:43:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Note: Lethality against buildings will not always be the same as against planes.

I figured as much, but since I couldn't get a plane to hold still in a position where I knew every round hit and since hits to different places have different effects anyway, I figured this was as good a measurement as I was going to get.

If you (HiTech) would care to provide more accurate data, I'm sure DoK and I would be glad to manipulate it.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #36 on:** May 19, 2006, 12:07:30 PM »

I can think of some reasons why HT wouldn't want to divulge the lethality and armor values in the game. Which is why I haven't pushed for it.

I think the rounds-to-kill-something approach is a good measure of what happens in the MA. Provided it's the same class of target as a plane ... or at least close enough.

And there's some things that the reader will just have to figure out - like that the lethality of kinetic rounds drops off at range - or that the odds of hitting a full-lethality burst from a N1K over 400yds ain't very good - and so on.

---- EDIT ----

Added the Tony Williams data to the lethality chart.

Still TBD:

- Hammer's speed/climb data under WEP
- MOSQ's accel, turn, and top speed data

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #37 on:** May 19, 2006, 09:43:06 PM »

( LINK )

OK ... I have Hammer's speed and climb data in ... MOSQ's accel and turn rate ... plus Hammer's and TW's lethality.

I decided to break out the speed/climob charts into MIL and WEP. Putting 8 plots on one graph was too confusing to look at, and you really want to compare WEP to WEP and MIL to MIL. Having them side by side shows where there are significant improvements well enough.

This could probably use more detailed turn rate info instead of just full-flaps. Turn-radius is probably as good a number to use as any as it's easy to visualize and newbies will understand what it means.

But I'm pretty happy with how this turned out. It's interesting to compare planes you fly with planes you face.

I want to tidy up the code some this weekend and then I'll release it. There may still be glitches in the data since I had to translate plane names more or less by hand to the standard ones I use internally.

-DoK

MOSQ · « **Reply #38 on:** May 19, 2006, 10:15:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
( LINK )

This could probably use more detailed turn rate info instead of just full-flaps. Turn-radius is probably as good a number to use as any as it's easy to visualize and newbies will understand what it means.

-DoK

I still have my No Flaps data, I just didn't send it to you. I can send it, but it's not the absolute max possible turn rate with no flaps. The max possible with no flaps is in a deep, shaking stall, and my no flaps data is just above that, right on the edge of when the shaking starts.

I didn't send it because when I though about it, it seemd to be useless in the game. Afterall if you're that slow and in a stall, you'll be hitting your flaps, so what difference does it make what your no flaps radius?DPS make?

The only use I see for it is a feel for how well your plane "naturally" turns without flaps which could be useful to know.

If you want the data for a No Flaps chart, I'll send it.

Good work on the charting tools.

Is there a way the user can select the order of the planes in the charts (the column order)?

And I think a white background on the charts would make them easier to read, the colored lines would be more apparent.

Also my Accell data is not Sea Level, it's at 500 FT. It makes a slight difference.

To make the speed and climb charts consistent with the java applet at Net Aces and the charts here on the HTC plane data pages I think you need to revese the X/Y axis, That is the speed is the X axis and the altitude is the Y axis. Same for the climb rate charts.

There's something wrong with the Spit 9 data. it goes off the chart.

The Ki-84 has a weird WEP speed chart.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #39 on:** May 19, 2006, 11:30:58 PM »

Spit and Ki are fixed .... just typos.

I don't know if it's possible to rotate the charts. I suppose I could flip the data around internally ... yuck.

Only issue with the full-flaps only turn data is that it doesn't convey the "normal" turning ability well. Especially with planes with Uberfplappen like the Corsair.

MOSQ · « **Reply #40 on:** May 20, 2006, 02:09:57 AM »

No Flaps OTW.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #41 on:** May 20, 2006, 11:38:21 AM »

Thanks. I've added that data, and also a comment about being sampled at 500ft.

The no-flaps turn rate is interesting - comparing the 38L, 51D, and 47N the turn-rate ranking inverts going from no flaps to full flaps.

-- edit --

I also flipped the CSS on the charts panel to be more light-on-dark for readability as suggested.

I'm still catching occasional data errors due to typos on my part, but everything else is looking OK.

MOSQ · « **Reply #42 on:** May 20, 2006, 01:09:20 PM »

Two more suggestions:

Add the 300 to 350 accel times. That really separates a lot of the planes.

Put the total time value on the top of the accel columns the same way you do on the flaps and lethality charts.

I like the white chart backgrounds, they are easier for my old eyes to see now.

It's looking great. This will be a good resource for the AH community.

Good work Dok

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #43 on:** May 20, 2006, 01:32:52 PM »

Yeah ... now that I have it as stacked columns I could add the 250-300 without it looking odd. I originally did it as a curve. My concern would be that it'd compress the lower number (150 to 200) so small on the plot that it was unreadable.

It can't put the total at the top of the column, it can only put in raw data values, not ones calculated on the fly.

Hopefully this will bring more people with data out of the woodwork too.

Murdr · « **Reply #44 on:** May 22, 2006, 02:55:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Note: Lethality against buildings will not always be the same as against planes.

Will take a hand a translating.... As modeled 1 .50 cal hitting a ground object will always do the same amount of damage. 1 .50 cal hitting a plane can vary in damage amount depending on velocity of impact.

I kind of like the "damage in pounds of ordinance" metrics for measuring a planes Weapon lethality:

Quote

Originally posted by scJazz
This update includes PT Boat's 37mm and 40mm guns as well as damage from Shore Batteries and Cruiser main guns.

Gun Type Dam in #
.303 Browning AC 0.296
.303 Browning GV 0.3125
7.6mm ShKAS 0.296
7.7mm Breda - SAFAT 0.28
7.7mm Type 97 0.296
7mm MG 17 0.3
.50 M2 AC 1.17
.50 M2 GV 1.25
12.7mm Breda - SAFAT 0.95
12.7mm Ho-103 0.998
12.7mm UBS 1.15
13mm MG 131 0.92
20mm B-20 3.47
20mm Hispano Mk II 4.03
20mm Hispano Mk V 3.94
20mm Ho-5 3.36
20mm M2 AC 4.03
20mm MG 151/20 3.55
20mm MG-FF 3.25
20mm ShVAK 3.47
20mm Type 99 Mk 1 3.42
20mm Type 99 Mk 2 3.85
23mm VYa 5.62
30mm Mk 108 11.63
37mm NS37 16.67
40mm Vickers S 13.89 *
37mm PT Boat 13.2
40mm PT Boat 15.6
37mm HE Ostwind 15.15 *
37mm AP 15.6 #1
37mm HE 31.2 #1
75mm AP 78.1 #1
75mm HE 156.2 #1
88mm AP 117.1 #1
88mm HE 234.3 #1
3.5" Rocket 140.0 #1
4.5" Rocket 93.0 #1
5" Rocket 156.0 #1
RS132 125.0 #1
RS82 93.0 #1
WGr21 200.0 #1
Shore Battery 250 - 500 #2
Cruiser Gun 250 - 500 #2

* The Vickers S and 37mm HE Ostwind are the only weapons I
am not 100% certain of the full series of tests had very
inequal results. The value shown is the maximum damage
inflicted per round. I suspect that the variance is caused
by a bug in the burst dispersion code.
#1 Testing for the GV main guns and rockets was different.
I fired 1 round into a hanger and constantly tweaked the
hanger's damage resistence until I found the maximum single
round damage.
#2 The Main Guns on the Cruisers fire 3 shells at a time
each shell does 250lbs to 500lbs of damage. If all 3 hit then the
target just took 750lbs to 1500lbs of damage. The damage is scaled by range 250lbs at maximum range, 500lbs at point blank, 390lbs at 6400 yards.
[/B]