Guns in AH and real life

[StSanta]

Was shot down by a Spit in a 1v1 the other day. Admittedly, it was a great shot; I was extending at good speed, and got pinged from 650+ yards. Kudos for the pilot for pulling that off (cannot recall who it was, but please remind me if you read this).

Now, this has got me wondering a little about the relative strengths/weaknesses of the guns in AH. I personally do not think that one 650+ yards shot should take out both wings, both flaps, engine oil and stabilizers on a rugged plane like the 109G10. One ping, and there wasn't any lag worth speaking of before, during or after the fight, so I doubt that his FE differed much from mine.

Since I don't want to whine about what was a good shot, but educate myself instead, I'd like to ask the engineer guys in this community to break down the physics for me; I know it has to do with lethality (which a nose firing beast like the 109 has plenty of, landing all rounds in a relatively small area, assuming no deflection shot/high g maneuver. It also has something to do with muzzle velocity, rate of fire, type of warhead, convergence, weight of bullet and so forth.

I'm reasonably comfortable with physics, so if someone would take upon himself the task of stating the real life characteristics of the guns in AH, I would be delighted and appreciative.

I know that the LW guns were inferior in real life. How much varies depending on who you ask it seems, but there is some raw "objective" data out there that suggests that this is the case.

In the 109, I do not open up with guns until within 300 yards. Anything  farther than that, and I can hope only to damage the enemy, and that is if I am lucky.

The .50's and Hispanos sure are great. Flew the 51 the other night; compared to the 13mm's of the 109, they flew like laser beams and I greatly exaggerated the needed lead. Same with Hispanos. And the killing power! Absolutely stunning. I have new found respect for the makers of these very potent weapons. Then again, I have also newfound respect for the LW, who, it seems, used inferior planes with inferior guns, and still put up a hell of a fight.
So, if anyone would like to enlighen me, I would really appreciate it.


------------------
--
StSanta
II/JG2

[Ripsnort]

Nothing against Sis-fires  or F4U-1C's, but I usually take one up when the opposition is flying them heavily.  It's the only plane that I'm very successful in at 500+- 1000 yard shots.  Fire with Fire concept.  I'm not questioning the code of the guns, etc. simply just saying that if I want a string of 5-8 kills, I fly the F4U-1C.  If I want to kill from beyond 500 yards, the Spit is the bird I fly.

[Swoop]

ok, someone clear this up for me......


I thought the range markers in this sim were in feet......

if so then this spit shot you down at 1.9k (650 yards)

correct?

Swoop

[Rocket]

Swoop,
  It has been my understand that distance is in yardage.  1.9k = 1900yds.  

S!
Rocket

------------------
 
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________

 www.reddragons.de

[This message has been edited by Rocket (edited 05-02-2000).]

[funked]

Somebody needs to do some testing to find out how many hits it is taking to do damage.

I have a feeling this has more to do with ammo load and number of guns than the amount of damage per hit.

[Hooligan]

It’s rather odd to say that LW guns are inferior.  Compared to the Western Allied guns they are certainly lighter.  The guns on an A8 weigh about 200kg compared to about 180kg for the guns on a Mustang.  I doubt they could have shoe-horned 4 Hispanos and 2 .50 BMGs (260kg) into a FW without some big problems.

German guns also had better HE rounds.  The Western allied guns had better muzzle velocities and ballistic characteristics.  This gave them noticeably flatter trajectories and better armor piercing capabilities.  Which guns are "better" undoubtedly depend upon what your shooting at.

For a comparison of Mg151 and .50 BMG trajectories see  http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm  

Hooligan


[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 05-02-2000).]

[Ripsnort]

Thanks  for the link, Hooli, you gonna give  AH a 2 week trial and test them guns?  

------------------
Ripsnort(-rip1-)
I./JG2~Richthofen~
=CO=Panzer Group Afrika-15th Panzer division
JG2 Communications Officer
Aces High Training Corps
JG2 "Richthofen"
 
Too often, we lose sight of life's simple pleasures.  Remember, when
someone annoys you it takes 42 muscles in your face to frown, BUT, it
only takes 4 muscles to extend your arm, grasp the joystick button,
and shoot the sucker down!

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 05-02-2000).]

[Pongo]

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
It’s rather odd to say that LW guns are inferior.  Compared to the Western Allied guns they are certainly lighter.  The guns on an A8 weigh about 200kg compared to about 180kg for the guns on a Mustang.  I doubt they could have shoe-horned 4 Hispanos and 2 .50 BMGs (260kg) into a FW without some big problems.

German guns also had better HE rounds.  The Western allied guns had better muzzle velocities and ballistic characteristics.  This gave them noticeably flatter trajectories and better armor piercing capabilities.  Which guns are "better" undoubtedly depend upon what your shooting at.

For a comparison of Mg151 and .50 BMG trajectories see  http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm  

Hooligan


[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 05-02-2000).]

In this game it doesnt matter what you are shooting at.. the 50cal and the M2 Hispano are better...quite a bit better. then the 131-151/20..
If the mine round for the 151 has better fusing or explosive effects we dont see it here.
If the 151 was more reliable...we dont see it here.

[crabofix]

HISPANOS vs 151/20??

There´s a question I have been askin myself for a long time, reading and studying books about german Machinguns/Cannons.
They (germany) had the productionrights for the hispano, who is a swiss design, right? But they only used it as a groundgun (MG FF hispano?) What I mean is that, if the Hispano was that great, why didnt they use 2it, more? Why did t2hey spend so much money and time to devlope a "better" design and then use it?
Was it because the troubles they had with the sync. of the MG:s/Cannonsin the early 109 types?
After what I heard the "chain" of sync could be broken if you took the 109 into a high G 888turn, wich would result in:non of the guns could fire (if equipt with gondola guns)! Mechanic sync was replaced with electricprimersystem after a while.
I doubt that the LW, Who could have used hispanos, took a worse design and put it into the planes.
Heard also that the US was very intrested in the 151/20 design and where going to adopt it after the war.
I claim that the 151/20 must have had some kind of advantage compared to the Hispano design.
(yes I know that german Hispanos had a shorter caselenght than the brittish/Us ones)


About shooting, If you are turning infront of me within 500 yards, passing my sights, you are as good as dead. Flying straight the
dist. is 400. And I ashure you, I´m not spraying.
I get a little bit pissed when I see thoose
15-25 20mm (151/20) hit the HOG/spit and the guy is still flying. (rounds dosent explode or what?)
To be sure of him going down, a longer burst or a concentrated burst must be placed.
He , only need a 1-5 bullets to shoot me to peices.

I belive that the hispanos are modeled to have exploding bullets, while the 151/20, is just a "heavier" MG with solid bullets.



------------------

BORK,BORK,BORK!!!"
Crabofix <What happend?...:A stranger morgie turndee burndee ,flip flip flip flip flip flip>
Flygflottlj.19(Lento R5)"swedish Gladiators"

[leonid]

StSanta,

When you say you were pinged at 650yds, should I interpret that as you saw him on your 6 at 650yds when he fired?  If so, then the actual distance of your opponent, at least from his POV, was more like 350yds.  The explanation for this is due to the effect, netlag, or internet lag.  Views towards the rear are always longer than they seem.

------------------
leonid, Komandir
5 GIAP VVS RKKA

"Our cause is just.  The enemy will be crushed.  Victory will be ours."

[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 05-03-2000).]

[Hristo]

MG 151/20 superiority over Hispano is in better reliability, compact size, lighter weight, possibility of synchronization and better HE ammunition (for its relative size).


The MG 151/20 in 109 does not need synchronization - at all ! The hub cannon obviously doesn't need it, and the gondola cannons are placed outside of the propeller disc.

However, I believe I read that Hispano could never been effectively synchronized. Ever seen a Hispano firing through propeller disc ?

Also, I wouldn't blame ballistics. Take a look at rounds of MG 151/20 and Hispano. It should tell you enough. Hispano should be deadly at greater ranges than MG 151/20.

But what is different in real life are the icons. They extend the firing range at which AH pilots open fire. Do not tell me we hit because we have 10 times more gunnery practice than WW2 vets - fly without icons and tell me if you hit at 500+ yards. What WW2 pilot had enemy plane type icon with range markings and closure rate ?! They would wait to get much closer than usual AH Spit firing range of 500-700 yards.

At ranges of 200-300 yards MG 151/20 is just enough, while Hispano is an overkill.

IMO, MG 151/20 was well balanced weapon in real life, with effective range just about the usual range of when fire was opened. Hispano was an overkill - its effective range extended far outside of ranges where fire was opened. Unnecessary weight of gun and ammo, at the expense of ammo count.

This translates into unhistorical AH modeling of WW2 gunnery. Solution is simple - ICONS !

So we get to the real problem - how to limit AH firing ranges to the more historical ones ? It surely has to do much with icons.

P.S.
Yes, I lost parts numerous times to Spits firing outside 1000 yards, while Hogs shot me down at ranges of 1200 yards !!!

[StSanta]

Leonid, it is quite possible that lag caused it to look like 650 yards, but suggesting that one needs to add say 300 yards to the real distance at most times isn't really consistent with the lag I generally experience with my connection. Even though the server is across the atlantic, and there's a huge leap in lag (from 83ms to around 180ms), I don't think it would make that much of a difference.

If anything, it should be most noticeable at head ons, and I don't experience much lag there.

It is however a realistic possibility.



------------------
--
StSanta
II/JG2

[Vermillion]

Santa, your connection is only half of the path though. You may have a 80ms connect, but the other guy may have a 800ms connect.

Plus all shooting is computed on the Shooters Front End (FE), so its the distance he see's that counts, not what you see.

So sometimes strange net lag effects can occur even if you have the fastest of connects. Unfortunately its just the nature of internet gaming.  

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

[Pongo]

 

Originally posted by crabofix:
HISPANOS vs 151/20??

They (germany) had the productionrights for the hispano, who is a swiss design, right? But they only used it as a groundgun (MG FF hispano?) What I mean is that, if the Hispano was that great, why didnt they use 2it, more? Why did t2hey spend so much money and time to devlope a "better" design and then use it?

crabo.
the mgff-used on the 109E and the outer wings of the fw190a5 amongst others was a licensed orlikon design which is a swiss company. It is a quite inferior design of cannon. The Hispano is a french design.

But your point is still valid. Why with the factories in their hands since 1940 did the germans not make use of this superlative anti bomber gun in 1942-43. coulndt have adapted their planes too it? They adapted a spit to take a db605 for crisake...They adapted their SPGs to take russian guns. the 262 would have been way more useful with 3 or 4 (of the AH)hispanos in the nose. 3 guns with 250 rpg...centerline mounted....wow..
And while ungaingly the faring required to mount the M2 on the fw would have been simple and elligant compared to the mk103 mounting and ready 2 years earlier.

[funked]

Pongo, both the Fw 190 and the Me 109 were covered with blisters and bulges just to hold the standard armament.  Going to larger guns would have only made this worse.  All the protuberances on these planes, especially the 109 cause a lot more drag than people realize.

Plus the 190 in particular had a serious weight problem.  A heavier gun with heavier ammo would have meant a reduction in either the number of guns, the ammo load, or the range.  Most likely all of the above.