Ho-5 Projectile Strength

[MachFly]

I'm trying to find out the projectile strength of the Ho-5 cannon (the one on the Ki-84). Most of the guns in the game are listed on the Trainer Corps site (http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/), but the Ho-5 is not on the list.
Would really apriciate it if someone could find out it's strength or explain me how to test for it.

Thanks

[Soulyss]

Not sure how it stands as modeled in AH, but Anthony Williams has some data on it.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/index.htm

Direct article link, I read elsewhere on the website that the HO-5 was a 20x94 round.
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

[MachFly]

Thanks

Will start reading it.

[TheRapier]

Rene Francillon's book, Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War has an armament section at the end of the book that is very useful.

http://www.amazon.com/Japanese-Aircraft-Pacific-Rene-Francillon/dp/087021313X

[SmokinLoon]

You will find much of the information outdated, missing, and even a few tidbits incorrect at the AH Trainer's website.

Aces High Stats (damage)

Japan    20mm    Type 99 Mk I   HE   3.42
Japan    20mm    Type 99 Mk II   HE   3.85
Japan    20mm    Ho-5            HE   3.35

I tested and verified all three myself.  Of course, RoF and trajectory minimizes any damage differences.

FWIW, I have tested each and every .50cal and higher weapon in AH since the first of the year, including the new British rocket damage, 28cm rocket (from the SdKfz 251), new 4.5in rocket damage, etc, etc.  I have it all.  I've offered it to the AH Trainers to use and post the data as they wish on the website but it has fallen on deaf ears.  I'm under the impression that others have tried to help update the information but to no avail.  

Anyone else know how much difference the damage is between the Hispano Mk II and Mk V versions?    

[MachFly]

You will find much of the information outdated, missing, and even a few tidbits incorrect at the AH Trainer's website.

Aces High Stats (damage)

Japan    20mm    Type 99 Mk I   HE   3.42
Japan    20mm    Type 99 Mk II   HE   3.85
Japan    20mm    Ho-5            HE   3.35

I tested and verified all three myself.  Of course, RoF and trajectory minimizes any damage differences.

FWIW, I have tested each and every .50cal and higher weapon in AH since the first of the year, including the new British rocket damage, 28cm rocket (from the SdKfz 251), new 4.5in rocket damage, etc, etc.  I have it all.  I've offered it to the AH Trainers to use and post the data as they wish on the website but it has fallen on deaf ears.  I'm under the impression that others have tried to help update the information but to no avail.  

Anyone else know how much difference the damage is between the Hispano Mk II and Mk V versions?    

Thanks



How do you test for it? I wonted to do the tests myself but could not figure out a way.

[SmokinLoon]

Thanks



How do you test for it? I wonted to do the tests myself but could not figure out a way.

You're welcome.

If you go in to the offline mode, you can set the hardness of objects to what you want and simply start testing that way.  Options-->Arena Setup--->Objects.  From there, you will learn the ways of the Force.  

If you PM me your email, I will send you a nice spreadsheet with all the weapon damages on it and save you some time and effort, I've left none of the weapons out.  The only thing I did not test and update from the listing on the AH Trainer's website is the .30 caliber MG's.  They are all too close in damage to hardly mention the differences, the rate of fire of the MG's would factor in more so than the actual damage each separate caliber.  

[MachFly]

PM send

Thanks

[Urchin]

I believe I have read in the past that damage to ground objects doesn't necessarily correlate with damage to airplanes.

[Lusche]

I believe I have read in the past that damage to ground objects doesn't necessarily correlate with damage to airplanes.

Mainly because unlike against ground structures, the loss of velocity (and therefore kinetic energy) is a factor. (And that's why cannon rounds are superior at long ranges).
But for close ranges, the relative numbers found by shooting at structures do match quite well the relative strengths of the projectiles when shooting at planes. I once did test several guns against several different bombers and the results I found were completely in line with the projectile strength numbers on that table over there on the trainer's website.

[SmokinLoon]

I believe I have read in the past that damage to ground objects doesn't necessarily correlate with damage to airplanes.

That is very true.  I just tried to look up an old thread of mine dealing with weapon damages and Hitech himself popped in and said "damage to others is completely different than damage to objects".  Couldn't find it for the direct quote.

As Looshy suggested, the difference in an AP projectile relying on kinetic energy to do its damage is completely different than a HE (or frangible) warhead that explodes or shatters on impact regardless of its velocity.