BK 3,7cm cannon

[Noir]

New gun in the game isn't it? That's not every day we get one

How does it fare up against the Vickers S and the NS37 ?

[Lusche]

In a nutshell: NS-37 is the superior gun, the BK 3,7 uses the superior ammo.
The NS-37 has the advantage of higher ROF, higher muzzle energy and much more ammo. The German Hartkern shell is much lighter and faster, should have a significantly higher penetration ability at optimum angles (but is quite sensitive to angle changes).

Unfortunately, unlike tank guns we don't get penetration data for airborne AT guns in AH. Anthony G. Wiliams gives a penetration of 48mm at 500m/90° for the NS-37, according to official German test data the BK 3,7 with Hartkern will penetrate 95mm at 600m/90° (at 100m that can go up to 140(!)mm)
In game the 40mm Vickers has in my experience about the same or slightly better penetration than the NS-37.

[Reaper90]

according to official German test data the BK 3,7 with Hartkern will penetrate 95mm at 600m/90° (at 100m that can go up to 140(!)mm)

 

[PR3D4TOR]

A King Tiger has 25-40 mm top armor. The Stuka-G is going to tear up tanks like nobody's business.

[Lusche]

A King Tiger has 25-40 mm top armor. The Stuka-G is going to tear up tanks like nobody's business.

Though both will meet very rarely in the long run, due to the high perked nature of the TII making it a base defender/concrete sitter and the slow speed of the Ju-87 keeping to base defense duties for the most part as well.
Of course, the other tanks will suffer from the BK 3.7, but then we already have 3 airborne guns capable of killing every common tank in the arsenal

[Pyro]

Attacking the top armor may not be the most effective attack profile.  The round performs poorly at strike angles over 20 degrees and loses energy very fast with range.  It will cut through a lot of armor at short range and a flat strike angle but that's not what you typically get when attacking down through the top.  I haven't really ran the numbers but my feel is that you'll probably be better off to go at the rear or sides and try to make your attack angle perpendicular to the armor angle.  Then wait until you're at close range to shoot, hopefully where you have your convergence set.

[Lusche]

Attacking the top armor may not be the most effective attack profile.  The round performs poorly at strike angles over 20 degrees and loses energy very fast with range.  It will cut through a lot of armor at short range and a flat strike angle but that's not what you typically get when attacking down through the top.  I haven't really ran the numbers but my feel is that you'll probably be better off to go at the rear or sides and try to make your attack angle perpendicular to the armor angle.  Then wait until you're at close range to shoot, hopefully where you have your convergence set.

Yayyyy... exactly what I was reasoning in that other thread 

[Rich52]

Attacking the top armor may not be the most effective attack profile.  The round performs poorly at strike angles over 20 degrees and loses energy very fast with range.  It will cut through a lot of armor at short range and a flat strike angle but that's not what you typically get when attacking down through the top.  I haven't really ran the numbers but my feel is that you'll probably be better off to go at the rear or sides and try to make your attack angle perpendicular to the armor angle.  Then wait until you're at close range to shoot, hopefully where you have your convergence set.

Unless theres an F3 view. Of course I'll be the only one in the game using it and everyone else will have warts and hair on their hands.

[morfiend]

  Rich,

  I'm not sure why you're hungup on this F3 issue but I for 1 cant see the gunsite from F3 view so it does me little good when shooting.  Sure you can shoot using F3 and put a mark on the monitor but I'd shoot you if you didnt that to my monitor!


  I'm glad Pyro made his comment,I plan on practicing with the stuka to see what works best as I'm bound to hear in the TA how the heck do you kill a tank with those guns. If I'm reading what Pyro says correctly,the angle of attack will depend greatly on the tank being attacked. Matching the angle of slope to appoarch at a pependicular attack angle and get in close?



   

[PR3D4TOR]

Next up: Plasma cannons!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IddYADdRG2E

[Ruah]

F3 view will turn it into the next IL2. . .IL2 lost the F3 view for a reason.

[Rich52]

A King Tiger has 25-40 mm top armor. The Stuka-G is going to tear up tanks like nobody's business.

As far as I know the Tiger-ll has 40mm armor on top only. The Tiger has weaker spots but not the ll. In the game, and not that I fly the thing much anymore, Ive found the Tiger-ll to be pretty impervious to the NS-37 cannons.

[Rich52]

F3 view will turn it into the next IL2. . .IL2 lost the F3 view for a reason.

Naw, much less ammo and no ords. Also not as tough against AA. Besides with the floor window F3 wont really matter. Ive done tests with the Stuka in the game flying clean with TrackIR. The dive window will allow excellent angles and the dive break will be an added plus. Even with the IL2, when I was able to achieve high angles thru F3, I'd only shoot 2 to 4 rounds a pass. Convergance set to 250 to 300 its devestating to top plate.

Rich,

  I'm not sure why you're hungup on this F3 issue but I for 1 cant see the gunsite from F3 view so it does me little good when shooting.  Sure you can shoot using F3 and put a mark on the monitor but I'd shoot you if you didnt that to my monitor!


  I'm glad Pyro made his comment,I plan on practicing with the stuka to see what works best as I'm bound to hear in the TA how the heck do you kill a tank with those guns. If I'm reading what Pyro says correctly,the angle of attack will depend greatly on the tank being attacked. Matching the angle of slope to appoarch at a pependicular attack angle and get in close?

Dont know exactly what your saying. I never shot guns when in F3, not against tanks, not against aircraft. Indeed I found the tactic silly and unworkable. The only thing I found unfair about removing F3 for the IL2 is because the bomber was singled out due to whining from the tank crowd. Had they taken F3 from ALL bombers/attackers it wouldnt have bothered me and I have no problem with lessening the distance GVs can be seen from the air. And then they added salt to the wound by tossing the bomber in the FHs too.

The whole charade of "the IL2 being a deadly fighter vs fighter due to F3" was just that. A charade! You gotta be a real shmuck to get shot down in a fighter by an IL2 F3 or not.

But Im past all that. It is what it is. The game has become another World of Tanks and AH is simply making their base happy. There were only a few IL2 specialists and we really had no voice.

[Karnak]

Ju87G-2 doesn't have a dive brake.

[SmokinLoon]

F3 view will turn it into the next IL2. . .IL2 lost the F3 view for a reason.

Only because it didnt need it in the first place.   

The Stuka G is NOT going to be any more of a force than the Hurricane IID.  Mark my word.