Poor Gunnery

[Ack-Ack]

"Leading with your tracers"  is a term I borrowed from Ack-Ack's post, and then saw in yours as well.  In my mind, it isn't an accurate statement, but I just "went with the flow".

Speaking for me, leading with my tracers caused me to learn bad habit, namely not using my gunsight to aim.  Try hitting a moving object with a water hose and you can see what I mean by leading with tracers.  

By turning off my tracers, I was forced to use the gunsight to gauge proper lead on the target.  The result was that I was now aiming properly and my aim improved dramatically as a result.  

Here is an excellent article written by a former USAAF combat F4 Phantom II pilot and flight instructor (and former AH player) at SimHQ that goes into great detail on A2A gunnery.  

Air To Air Gunnery Revisited - Guns, Gunsights, and Convergence

Highly recommend reading it for new and veteran players alike.


ack-ack

[mtnman]

Speaking for me, leading with my tracers caused me to learn bad habit, namely not using my gunsight to aim.  

ack-ack

I wonder if part of our disparity is the nose-mounted guns vs the wing-mounts.  I generally ignore my gunsight, since it's only accurate if I'm level.  That effect would be more prevalent with wing-mounts than with nose-mounts.  It doesn't look like the article you linked to covers that aspect, but it looks like a great read otherwise.

The article seemed to be very useful for shots where the guy in front of you is flying a fairly predictable, fairly constant path.  And in all honesty, I'm using my sights on those shots...

But, I almost never fire my guns while flying level, so my gunsight is almost never really "spot-on".  I've actually used the little red dot sight for the last few years, since I generally ignore it anyway.  All of my attention is on the enemy plane; the tracers are on, but only come into play when I miss, and want to know why.  In snapshot shooting, at odd angles (sometimes even inverted) with rapid crossing shots, the gunsight is worthless.  In those type of shots, the bullets do not go where my gunsight would lead me to believe.

Part of that "ignoring my gunsight" also comes from the shotgun shooting I do.  Aiming with the sights is a great way to miss a moving target.

Judging by the guys I run into in the MA who have tracers OFF, the spray/pray thing isn't linked to having the tracers on.  The guys with the tracers off seem just as likely to do it, they just can't see where the bullets are going. 

Actually, maybe there is something to that idea after all.  A guy with tracers off is actually limited to "spray and pray", where with tracers you could "spray and adjust".

[boomerlu]

But, I almost never fire my guns while flying level, so my gunsight is almost never really "spot-on".  I've actually used the little red dot sight for the last few years, since I generally ignore it anyway.  All of my attention is on the enemy plane; the tracers are on, but only come into play when I miss, and want to know why.  In snapshot shooting, at odd angles (sometimes even inverted) with rapid crossing shots, the gunsight is worthless.  In those type of shots, the bullets do not go where my gunsight would lead me to believe.

In most situations the gunsight is never spot on. In fact (and I believe you know this already) it's only spot on while flying straight and level and your target is precisely at convergence.

Still it's a good guideline to approximately where your bullets should fly. It doesn't really lie, it tells a half-truth.

If you generally ignore your sight, how do you know where you should be shooting? I don't take my sight as "gospel" but at least I know within a few degrees where my bullets will fly. When you shoot, you must have your front view down solid with no side to side movement (ie from TrackIR or mouse look)?

I'm actually curious. I haven't checked your stats, but I trust what you say about your percentage. How exactly do you achieve those stats essentially ignoring the sight? Is this something I should try myself? I personally find it hard to judge lead on "under the nose shots", should I now be able to set my forward view so the "pilot's seat" is as high as possible so the sight isn't anywhere to be seen?

[boomerlu]

A little update:

Been flying tracers on again for about a week. Sometimes I catch myself slipping into old habits and firing "test bursts". However, if I simply force myself to, I "give my best" on each firing opportunity. What flying tracers off and subsequently discussing it here has done is made me recognize that I have these two different mindsets and allowed me to "pick" which one to use.

Also, I had a terrible slump the last two days. I've been trying out a new view system (mouse look, mouse in the left hand, mouse wheel for throttle, standard aircraft functions on joystick) and I finally figured out that the problem was I wasn't zooming (view zoom) properly. This made it so I couldn't accurately assess the enemy plane's attitude and intention before moving in for the shot. Once I corrected this, I found my rounds landing true more often.

Lessons learned:
1) It's possible to slip into old habits but once you know how to spot it, you can correct it.
2) Accurately assessing and predicting your opponent's actions are key components of effective gunnery.


Edit: one more note about something I just noticed:
Mtnman, since you like visual feedback so much, why not turn on some type more comprehensive gunsight? Experimenting in the offline practice, I've found that the amount your gunsight "lies" under G is pretty consistent, consistent enough that you can correlate the feel of your joystick with certain regions on your gunsight. Thus, you could essentially say to yourself "If I am pulling back this far on my joystick, my bullets will actually fly to the first circle on my gunsight (or the 5th marking on a LW revi style sight for example).

[Noah17]

Gentleman,

This is all great information and, thanks for the article Ack Ack.
I've turned my tracers back on and eliminated the damping and dead zone on my CH Combat Stick. It was set on the default levels that look like it had.....Maybe a 10% damp & 10% dead zone (that's a guess). It has reduced (not eliminated) the "nose bounce" when I'm trying to correct my aim.... Now I have the opportunity to improve my aim! I also found  that the throttle and rudder pedals had the same dead/damp zones. The aircraft is more responsive now (I fly mostly the F4U-1A).

Although my ACM has improved greatly; from reading the posts I realize I really have to get better and get in close. My hit % is only in the 2% range. I do actually like using the "zoom" feature but, I try not to use it unless I'm "saddled up."
I've heard conflicting views on the "zoom view" so not sure what to think there either but when I am in that situation it does seem to help.

I really didn't think that >10% hit's was possible............ Now I really have something to shoot for! LOL
Thanks again,
Noah17

[boomerlu]

I've heard conflicting views on the "zoom view" so not sure what to think there either but when I am in that situation it does seem to help.

It's simply a tradeoff. Worse area-wide SA for better information on whatever you're zoomed in on (target SA). I check six before my approach and check it again about 600-800 out. Then I zoom in. Yes it can mess with you, but personally I find the fact that I know in detail what my opponent is doing to be more than worth it.

So basically you use zoom when appropriate. I do NOT find it to be exclusively zoom or exclusively no zoom. I use zoom to:
1) Assess the situation from afar - is the bandit approaching me or is he flying right angles at me or something in between? I quickly zoom out after each assessment to regain area SA.
2) Assess the situation on my opponent in close while gunning for the shot. Again I zoom out for area SA before the pass and after the pass.

Anyways, I'm glad this helped. I find it odd though that eliminating the damping/dead zone reduced the bounce. I thought it'd be the other way around?

[Lusche]

On zoom: I use zoom quite a lot when shooting.
Howver, I would recommend using "standard" zoom until you think you have achieved some sort of "mastery". Frequent change of zoom level can make aiming more difficult, as your "mental image" has to adjust for the different levels of magnification on your screen (=having to lead seemingly more or less)


And to put things a bit into proportion: 2% hit percentage is by no way a good value, but a very common one, while only few players ever get to the pont when they are able to get consistently hit percentages  >10%. And, as already mentioned, it doesn't necessarily tells us much about efficiency. Alot depends on plane, armament, playing style. Taking a lot of long range high deflection shots in a typhoon may result in a much lower hit % than saddling up in a Hurricane I, while producing the same # of kills (You simply don't need that much hits when firing 20mm rounds instead of 303's)

[SPKmes]

I like it when lusche pulls out his graphs.......he's like batman with all his little gadgets 

[mtnman]

In most situations the gunsight is never spot on. In fact (and I believe you know this already) it's only spot on while flying straight and level and your target is precisely at convergence.

Still it's a good guideline to approximately where your bullets should fly. It doesn't really lie, it tells a half-truth.

If you generally ignore your sight, how do you know where you should be shooting? I don't take my sight as "gospel" but at least I know within a few degrees where my bullets will fly. When you shoot, you must have your front view down solid with no side to side movement (ie from TrackIR or mouse look)?

I'm actually curious. I haven't checked your stats, but I trust what you say about your percentage. How exactly do you achieve those stats essentially ignoring the sight? Is this something I should try myself? I personally find it hard to judge lead on "under the nose shots", should I now be able to set my forward view so the "pilot's seat" is as high as possible so the sight isn't anywhere to be seen?

I don't pay much attention to the sight, except on the "easy" shots- going away in a slight bank, "hanging" in front of me, etc.  Even then, I generally don't actively aim much with the sight, I just realize that the sight is actually happens to be lined up "for this shot, this time".  On many shots I may not even be able to see the target when I fire (he's under my nose), or I'll fire before he's even in my forward view enough to use the sight (crossing fast from the side, or overshooting me with a lot of speed).  Lots of shots are taken before he even enters my bulletproof glass although he's in my forward view.  He’s headed toward my sight, but not in it yet…

To say I essentially ignore the sight doesn't mean it isn't lined up correctly with the target- it has to be, or I'd miss.  It's a very similar feeling to when I shoot shotgun.  The gun is up to my shoulder, and the barrel is lined up with my eye, which means the bead is as well.  But I don't focus on the bead when I fire, my attention is riveted on the bird or clay target.

The vast majority of my shooting in AH is what I consider "shotgun style", with just a bit of "rifle style" thrown in here and there.  Those tracking shots where the enemy is flying a predictable path long enough for me to carefully line up my sights, decide the proper lead, and execute the shot are "rifle style" in my mind.  Other examples are the previously mentioned "hanging" shots.  On rifle-type shots, I look at the sight, and line it up with my target.  These type of shots occur probably 1 or 2 fights in 10 for me.

Most of my aerial gunnery has more in common with shotgunning (and in particular, skeet shooting and pass shooting), than it does with rifle shooting.  When using a shotgun correctly, the target is in crisp, attentive focus, and the gun (including the sights) is an indistinct blur.  Becoming distracted by the sights causes you to miss, because it draws your attention to the gun, and away from the target.  The gun should be a "vaguely outlined pointer", and all attention should be on the target, calculating its speed, angle, and the required lead.  In shotgunning, you make a conscious effort NOT to look at or focus on the sights, but instead, concentrate so hard on the target that you try to “read the writing” on it.  I use the same technique when I shoot aerial or running targets with a bow or rifle.

In shotgunning, ignoring the sights is, in essence, vital to a good score.

Care is taken to ensure that mounting the gun is done properly, without canting it, and so your eye lines up with the barrel.  I can close my eyes, mount my gun, and open my eyes, and it's mounted correctly every time.  That's the tough part in shotgunning.  Not having that "down pat" will cause serious issues.  That part is already taken care of in AH.

I transition that idea right into my shooting in AH.  Focus HARD on the target, and just try to forget about the sights at all.  Of course they're lined up with my eye, and will be lined up with the target, I just don’t actively pay attention to it.  If I give it a conscious thought, it’s to tell myself not to look at it.  Flying the plane just takes the place of swinging the shotgun.

I think this answers your question about the "more comprehensive gunsight" boomerlu?  The last thing I want is a sight that distracts me enough that I look at it!

Visual feedback by itself isn’t what I want/need.  I want the feedback of the tracers, but that doesn’t mean I want feedback from a more elaborate sight.  What could it possibly tell me that I don’t already know?  Range?  I have the icon counter, and fire on targets when they’re big enough to hit.  Bank angle?  I can see that…  And if the ground isn’t level (mountains…) or if no ground (or only ground) is visible, it won’t be accurate anyway.  Calculate lead?  LOL, nope!  Calculate angle-off?  I can already see that…  The tracers tell me RIGHT NOW where my judgment erred, and therefore gives me the answer I need to correct.  The sight doesn’t.  Even if it’s fancy.  If I aim high and miss, what does the sight tell me that I don’t already know.  Nothing…  I aimed high, and missed.  Conversely, if I aim high and miss, the tracers tell me where my judgment was off…  And it’s not like I have to go out and watch my tracers actively either.  I only pay attention to them when I need a question answered.

And again, using a sight like that would distract me and force me to switch my attention between the sight and the plane, comparing the relationship.  In my case, it would hurt me more than help me.  I know, because I went through the “looking for the best sight” phase in my early experience too.  I always ignored the one I think is best, because it wasn’t fancy enough.

Given the choice, if I had to use only one I'd keep the tracers and get rid of the sight.  For some reason, the 109K4 didn’t have a sight when I used it for training in the TA.  Not having the sight didn’t cause me any problems, even though I don’t think I’ve ever flown that plane in the MA.

Back in the days when I did ground attack, I did like some of the sights that supposedly helped with rockets, even though I never really felt they helped that much.

Zoom?  I seldom use it for shooting, but I often flicker it on/off when I want a better look at my opponent.  One time I'll use if for firing is on an opponent at D600, and running.  I don't like it on for shooting because it messes up my mental image of the correct lead for the shot.  With zoom on, I feel like I have enough lead, but I don't.  I might also use it on those "hanging" shots, where my opponent is against a background that makes it tough for me to see him.  He isn't moving much relative to me, so doesn't require much lead.  One of those "rifle-type" shots again...

[jdbecks]

Most of my shots are either deflection shots or snap shots, very rarely do I see my target or  if my hits land, I only know hes down when I either get the kill message or I change view and see him failing to the ground. However, when I do get get to see my target, I like to see my tracers so I can adjust my aim if I need any more lead..and I dont fire test shots. I find the tracers have really helped me with my deflection shots and will continue to use them, I have tried to switch them off but did not like it very much...They are very usefull especialy for the Luftwaffe planes as they planes have the worse balistics in the game.

[boomerlu]

I don't pay much attention to the sight, except on the "easy" shots- going away in a slight bank, "hanging" in front of me, etc.  Even then, I generally don't actively aim much with the sight, I just realize that the sight is actually happens to be lined up "for this shot, this time".  On many shots I may not even be able to see the target when I fire (he's under my nose), or I'll fire before he's even in my forward view enough to use the sight (crossing fast from the side, or overshooting me with a lot of speed).  Lots of shots are taken before he even enters my bulletproof glass although he's in my forward view.  He’s headed toward my sight, but not in it yet…

These tend to be my best shots as well. They are coming toward my sight from some angle and I just have a feeling that they will cross it. I do look at my sight to judge whether he will cross it though.

Care is taken to ensure that mounting the gun is done properly, without canting it, and so your eye lines up with the barrel.  I can close my eyes, mount my gun, and open my eyes, and it's mounted correctly every time.  That's the tough part in shotgunning.  Not having that "down pat" will cause serious issues. That part is already taken care of in AH.

This is what I'd like you to elaborate on a little bit more. What view system do you use?

I ask because I recently have tried out using mouse view because that allows me to focus on my target better. However, doing so disrupts the feeling of having the "plane = shotgun perfectly lined up with your eye level". If I completely ignore my gunsight, this becomes even worse.

I'm using a compromise between pure mouse look and snap views because of this problem. Typically I track the target until he will be completely in my forward view then engage forward view without mouse look for the shot.

I think this answers your question about the "more comprehensive gunsight" boomerlu?  The last thing I want is a sight that distracts me enough that I look at it!

Sure thing, you are good enough that something elaborate is just a distraction. But what if you were starting out and you wanted to have some relatively systematic way to keep track of how AoA affects the gunsight? How about then?

What could it possibly tell me that I don’t already know?

Where your rounds go at AoA, whether it's vertical AoA due to elevator input or horizontal AoA due to rudder yaw. That's the reason I mentioned it. Everything else you're absolutely right about - it's stuff you can get just by looking at your target and the lead you calculate "in your head" using what you've learned from practice.

[Ghosth]

First rule is there is no hard and fast rule, everyone is different.

Second rule is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But if it is broke, why not try something different.

Personally, for some shots they are a lot easier to make with tracers on.
However they do get between you and the target.
For myself, fancy gunsights,  or anything between my eyeball and the enemy is a distraction.

So I use a very simple dot sight. I've tweaked it over the years, made it bigger as my eyesight and reflex's deteriorate.

One way or another its your eyeball and brain that you train either way.
Either system can work with equal results. Leaving the choice down to personal preference.

When in doubt, go back to basics and rebuild. However if you've never really connected the dots, you really need to pick 1 system, 1 plane, 1 set of guns, and stick with it till you master it.

[mtnman]

Sorry, my falconry season has started, and I've been busy looking for a new "hunting partner" for this year.  It's been taking a lot of my time, so I haven't been checking in as often, or taken much time to respond.

Anyway... my view system-

I use an 8-way HAT switch for my views, with a separate button mapped for "Look Up".  The controller I use is a Saitek X52.  The HAT switch is mapped so pushing it forward gives me the "Look Up Front" view.  The rest are pretty self-explanatory.  I use the pinky (Shift) button as my Look Up button.  Pushing the HAT to the right looks right.  Squeezing the pinky switch allows me to look straight up.  Doing both at the same time allows me to look up and to the left at a 45 degree angle, etc...  All of these views are done with my right hand.

In addition to that,  I have a 4-way rocker switch on my throttle mapped to "Move Head L/R" just like the arrow keys do on the keyboard.  This is extremely handy for checking my six.  For my six-view, I adjust my head as far back away from the seat as possible, and as high up as possible, but I leave it centered.  When I check my six, I just hold the HAT switch back, and use the rocker to slide my head left or right as desired to see around the headrest/armor.  This rocker switch is on my throttle, and pulling it up or pushing it down also raises/lowers flaps.  My left index finger ALWAYS sits on this button.  I'm paranoid, and check my six every few seconds.

I use the "Snap Mode" View change mode (F7).

I have a key mapped to look down.  I sometimes use this to check oil level, etc, if needed.  Rarely used...

I have a button activated by my left thumb (on the throttle) to toggle zoom on/off.  I have a second HAT switch on the stick (activated with my left thumb) that zooms in/out, depending on whether I push it or pull it.

That's pretty much it as far as views go, at least for me.

I basically only fly fighters, and only shoot other planes.  Due to that, my system is geared for that.  My goal is to have every function I need available at my fingertips, in an intuitive location, so I never need to look away from the screen while fighting or let go of the stick or throttle to push a key or press a button.

There are other strategies for mapping views.  This is just how I like it set up.

[mtnman]

Sure thing, you are good enough that something elaborate is just a distraction. But what if you were starting out and you wanted to have some relatively systematic way to keep track of how AoA affects the gunsight? How about then?
Where your rounds go at AoA, whether it's vertical AoA due to elevator input or horizontal AoA due to rudder yaw. That's the reason I mentioned it. Everything else you're absolutely right about - it's stuff you can get just by looking at your target and the lead you calculate "in your head" using what you've learned from practice.

What I did, and still do once in a while, is just go shoot some stuff in the TA (the dot target) and see how things are effected.  Do it level, baked 45, banked 90, inverted, etc.  Shoot some drones with tracers on, and watch how things work.  Not just from the back, but from the front, top, bottom, sides, etc.  Film it, and watch the film.

There's no substitute for practice, and paying attention to what's going on.

Sorry, I have no recommendations for sights that will help you learn what you're asking.  Shooting at a target while banked 45 degrees isn't going to give the same results at 200yds as at 400...  Even if it did, the 400yd target might be going faster or slower, or climbing, or diving, or curving, or...

Or, you might be pulling 1.5G's, or 2G's or 0G's...

No matter what, you'll never have every scenario figured out, and automatically succeed.  That's where tracers are nice...

Some people will do things differently, and find other things work well for them.  Ack Ack obviously likes the sights, and no tracers, and it works for him...

[boomerlu]

Re: views thanks for the information. The main thing I'm curious about is how to achieve what you describe as "plane as gun" feeling where you know where it will shoot without looking at the sight. That's what you mean by "AH takes care of that" - with snap views, you have something consistent to work with.

Practicing, I'm finding I can kind of get that feeling, but I don't completely ignore my sight. I have a vague idea of where it is while focusing on the target. I'm aware of the sight enough that I'll know if the target will cross near it. Is this consistent with what you find?

After flying a bit, I find my observation of bullet path based on AoA to be overrated . When I'm flying in a combat situation, there's no way I'm going to be thinking about the AoA effect consciously enough to judge it from a gunsight.