50 caliber range

[Serapis]

I've only been playing about a month, but in my 80 odd kills and 80 odd deaths I have yet to recall being killed, or hit with any frequency, by anybody at 800 yards. If it weren’t for these boards, I wouldn't even be aware of this as an issue.

When trying to clear a friendly's tail, or chasing a faster runner, I have fired at 700+ yards and get maybe 5% or less hits (Spit w/Hispanios and .50 cals) against a target flying straight and level with zero deflection (and likely no jinking on his/her part). As was the case in RL, I wait until I get within 400 yards now to save the Spit's short clip. I mean really, how common are these 800+ hits?

Given a typical engagement range of under 400 yards for all sides in WW2, the differences in velocity and tejectory between Luftwaffe planes and allied aircraft would likely not have been noticed by anyone at the time. The four 20mm and two mg's of the 190A series were certainly powerful enough to easily drop a fighter, even the Jug, at these ranges and was more than adequate against bombers and more deadly than most allied armaments.

In WW2, most of the "Experten" fired from closer than 400 yards (often much closer) and Hartmann used his eyesight to position for a surprise kill at 200 yards or less then disengage. I've also read comments from allied pilots along the lines of: "I fired from 600 yards, which was way too far, but surprisingly..." showing that while rare, occasionally luck rewarded a poor-percentage shooting solution. If there are people who consistently shoot very accurately at these ranges in AH (more than the occasional time that pisses off a type A personality far beyond what it should), I would suggest that while the weapons may be modeled correctly in AH the shooting skill compared to real life may not.

If you read enough on the topic, it becomes clear that gunnery training was not a universally high priority in WW2. The Experten in AH pull the trigger thousands of times more time than RL WW2 pilots, and there are likely a few long-range Michael Jordans and Tiger Woods flying around -- but again, not enough for me to notice so far and I've been shot down by some of the best as far as scores and rankings go    

Charon

[ 07-21-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]

[ispar]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Sancho at 30K its much more likely as the air is much thinner thus providing less drag.
As the Korean War moved fighting over 40,000ft long range shooting became more practical. But at standard WW2 alts, and even more so at the lower standard AH alts the current US .50 cal has some enhanced capabilities in long range shooting, especially so at lower alts that the real one didnt have. To be honest it doesnt really matter half of time, but when it does happend its especially annoying because its obviously inaccurate.

My personal view is that US .50 cal dont disperse enough at longer ranges. Basically seeing some of the guncam from both AA and AG firing it seems the real bullets wnt all over the place after a short distance. In AH they form a pretty solid pattern till they fall off. Im not sure if the guncam film showed only fighters with the "Box" disperesion pattern, but its not likely.

Anyway its nothing too drastic, but somehow it should be made to encourage the more historic 500yd firing rather than the 700-800 and sometimes longer firing that is quite common today.

Changing dispersion  at extreme ranges, introdice recoil and wing flexing, and maybe introducing barrel melting on all MG
to discourage long bursts.

These changes would both make it more realitic and give planes with centrally mounted guns some of the advantages they had in RL. Thus the 109, P38 Yak etc could be better gun platforms as they were said to be.

I donno, nothing too drasic I guess so plz dont bite my head off..  

Oooh, hoo-boy... I don't kmow anything about the drag issue, BUT - all that combat footage will not give you a good idea of where bullets went, for two reasons: 1) What you see are the tracers, which have a different flight path characteristics from normal rounds, and 2) The bullets that you see all over the place appear that way because of how much the camera is shaking, not the guns! What'dya think, that they mounted the Brownings in Jello or something? Come on!  .

[Maverick]

First off let me say I have "some" experiance with the 50 Cal. I spent over 10 years in an Armored unit and fired both the M2 and the tank mounted 50 that is on 60 class and M1 tanks. On a normal tank range the CLOSEST targets for the 50 were at least 500 meters away. The longest was 2000 meters. These were vehicles as the 50 is not a primary anti personell weapon on the tank. The coaxial mounted 30 cal was for troops.

The weapon is very accurate in timed or burst fire. A vehicle mounted weapon such as on a tank can maintain a sustainred burst on target far longer than a ground mount 50 using the pintle only. The reason is the tank uses the equivalent of a T&E (traverse and elevation) mechanism to hold the gun steady. A ground mount pintle only is simply a mount where the T&E gear is disconnected. You can see it where as soon as the gunner relaxes his hold or releases the gun the barrel immediately points up. This is NOT accurate for long rage shooting except for the first few rounds as the recoil is jarring the shooter. This situation is not the same as in the aircraft.

Sustained fire discipline calls for using bursts of fire at a target over a period of time. The typical burst is between 5 to 10 rounds, a long burst would be 25 or so. Remember the M2 in an infantry support role has an ammo can with less than 100 rounds in it. The tank mounted version in the M60 tank only held 85 rounds in the ammo tray. It was also time consuming to reload. Not something you want to do in the heat of battle.

A very important factor to consider on these weapons is that they are NOT CONSIDERED POINT or sniper weapons in normal use. If the weapon, 50 cal MG, was a true point weapon the chances of hitting at range with a plane would be drastically reduced. They are AREA weapons where a number of rounds will impact in the "beaten zone". This zone has a shape dependant on the circumstances of firing. In a ground environment and static target the beaten zone will be an eliptical circle. Think a circle stretched out in the direction of fire. This is the equivalent of a pattern from a very large shotgun. This dispersion from each gun would increase the hit probablity of a target by spreading the rounds out to cover the area the target is in. It does not mean more than a couple rounds may strike out of any  short burst. The dispersion of rounds is a factor both of the gun and ammo.

The gun does not return to battery in EXACTLY the same position as it was before the round fired. The ammo is also loaded with a bit of "slop" in the propellant loading. There is a bit of deviation in how much powder is in each shell. It is a SMALL deviation to be sure but it does insure that the rounds will disperse due to slight deviations in velocity. Please note that a competition grade weapon using carefully weighed charges of propellant ALSO have deviations in velocity up to 100+ FPS and show excellant accuracy to the limits of the cartidge and weapon. Of course the less variations the better the point accuracy.

Anyone saying that a plane firing the 50 should not hit at an extended range is not correct. It should hit but not with many rounds and likely not with significant damage, excepting the "lucky or golden bb".

The reason pilots wanted to get within a particular range was to insure a FATAL amount of damage was done as fast as possible to avoid the target having a chance to escape or turn on the attacker. There is also the inability of most people being able to apply the correct amount of windage and lead on the target to get a reasonable chance of hitting the target. In short, closer means less guessing and greater probability of multiple hits for a fatal amount of damage.

As a final note, I am still confused why players expect to "burn out, melt or warp" barrels in the guns with a long burst. In most of these planes a long burst would be about 3 seconds. At 350 rounds per minute that comes to about 5 - 6 rounds a second or 20 rounds for 3 seconds per gun. At high rate setting of fire for a M2 (450 to 500 RPM) it comes to a bit over 8 rounds per second or 24 rounds per gun at 3 second burst. Hardly a rate high enough to damage the barrels. Ever running an entire can (100 rounds) through the gun at once will not burn out the barrel. It will still be an effective area weapon. remember the normal number of 50's on an American plane was 6 guns. That means there are between 36 to 48 rounds per second going out depending on the fire rate selected on the guns.

Hosing out your ammo in bursts longer than 10 seconds of fire that burns up your ammo is not conducive to living. That would cause a serious depletion of a very limited ammo supply. No one is going to want to run his guns dry quickly as you don't know how long you will need to fight.

Mav

[funkedup]

Nice post Charon.

[Midnight]

I use my P-51D and gunsight to shoot up to 1k range for the sole purpose of getting a lucky ping to try and make a fleeing bandit turn and blow some E so I can catch him.

I use the primary pair of MGs for this wih a convergence of 425 yards. If you want to fly straight and level in front of me at 800 - 1000 yards, I WILL hit you. But, you would only be hit by 2 - 3 bullets (maybe) out of a burst of 15 bullets or so.

I have NEVER been able to produce significant damage at these ranges however.

The other thing that people are neglecting to talk about here is net lag. At high speeds, a plane you perceive at 1000 yards is probably closer to 800, if you see him at 800, he could be as close as 600, well within leathal range.

Anyway, if you change you flight path by just a couple degrees when you see the tracers coming, you can usually avoid the shots.

[Seeker]

Animal wounded my Tempest pilot in his 'Stang tonight at D1300 (my end).

Just saying....

[moose]

well, i know this is about .50cal but on my 109F4 I usually use the MGs at ranges of up to about 1k to try and get that lucky ping on an escaping target. 75% of the time as soon as they hear the ping sound, they start to turn and then they're all mine.

Never killed anyone at those ranges tho

[SageFIN]

Ok, maybe I'll tell a bit of my own experiences.

Umm. I will happily take any shots on maneuvering targets up to 600-700 yards or so, if flying a Chog or a P-47. I will shoot at more straight flying targets up to ranges of some 1k or so. It is feasible, even with tracers off but one must be fast and precise. The hispanos definitely pay off long range shooting and even the 50 cals can do decisive damage (destroyed elevator etc) with a good burst. Also, I've managed a good solid burst with the four Mg151's of the 190a8 to 650 yards. I took the shot on a level flying P-47 and the burst ripped a wing off it.

Generally I wouldn't recommend long range shooting if you don't have a plane with hispanos or 50 cals (the 23mm mounted on the Il-2 might be good too, dunno) and preferably a good amount of ammo to spare.

I have every gun in every plane set to convergence of 650 (with few exceptions: machineguns in the fw-series and other useless popguns). I suggest that you people try for example one of the P-47's and set all the guns to 650 convergence. Then practice against the offline drones for a good while, you will notice that you are able to hit them with good solid bursts from quite far.

I'll try to remember to take a film with some long range shooting (and hitting too  ) and post it here.

[StSanta]

I can hit out to d1.4 with .50's of the F6F  

At D700 I can easily destroy a target that does the usual mild evasive left/right turn thing.

If a target is stationary, I can sometimes hit it out to d700 with the 13mm on the G10. 750 with the 7.9mm's.

I'd give a few pints of beer for a .50 in LW planes  .