Guns in AH and real life

[Pongo]

Worse protuberances then caused on the spit? Was the Spit Vb a pig compared to the Va?
I know it would have been a struggle. But certainly they could have done it if the gun was as much a war winner as it is here. Or at least we would have a historical record of the lame attempts to do so? Or used it as a flak gun instead of the 151...
Were the germans incapable of shrinking the m2 into the m5 like the brits did?
Look at what they did to the poor FW to take on buffs.. and does it really make that much difference puting gondola M2s on a 109 instead of gondola 151s...Im not shure but I know which I would choose if the load out was available.



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

[funked]

Pongo read my email.......

[Hooligan]

Pongo:

As far as I can see there are three issues here:

1)  Ballistics/velocity:  The HS MkII is the clear winner.
2)  Reliability:  Not modeled in the game.  According to "The Machine Gun" by George Chinn, Navy Bureau of Ordnance. The British HS mkII was fairly reliable but not as good as the Mg151.  So undoubtedly the Mg151 suffers a little bit in relative effectiveness due to lack of reliability being modeled.
3)  Effectiveness of hits:  I have never seen any hard data on how many HS or Mg151 hits were required to kill a fighter, so it is kind of hard to draw much in the way of comparisons between how much damage the weapons do in AH compared to the real world.  It is at least possible to compare the weapons in the game however.  Has anybody gathered statistics on how many Mg151 hits and HS hits it takes to kill a fighter in the arena?  Maybe Mg151 rounds do more damage than HS rounds, but the worse ballistics and resulting fewer hits might cause a different perception.  The benefits of the tradeoff between penetration and explosive power are not necessarily clear.  Higher explosive power (German) causes more structural damage and weapons effectiveness decreases little with range.  High penetration rounds (Western Allies) have a much better chance to penetrate into the “vitals” of an aircraft, and their higher velocity gives them the added benefit of flatter trajectories and greater effective range.

Here are some comparisons of the Armament of the Spit-IXe firing 20mm HE/.50 AP/I and the A8 (2 cannon only) firing 20mm Mine/13mm AP/I.  Figures are calculated from the weapons muzzle velocity.

Weapon Set weight
FW-118Kg  Spit-160Kg

Projectiles / second
FW-46 Spit-46.7

Mass / Second
FW-2724g Spit-3744g

Energy / Second
FW-816KJ Spit-1499KJ

Combined Explosives and Incendiaries / Second
FW-382g Spit-252g

Penetration:
At 100m the .50 AP/I penetrates about 25mm or rolled homogeneous armor and the 131 AP/I penetrates about 17mm.

The Spitfire weapon set weighs about 35% more than the FW Set and by all measures except explosive/incendiary output the British gun set shows an advantage.  Unless one assumes that either the British or Germans didn’t know what they were doing, one would expect that the British weapon set would hit somewhat harder than the German set.

Hooligan

[Pongo]

Hooligan..did funked put you up to this?
What ROF did you use for the synced 151/20?
Is penetration a major factor? (pongo suspects minimal)
Isnt ROF a very signifigant accuracy improver vs manuvering fighters?
Against tanks and ground targets I concede that the HS is far supperior..Easier to hit at long range Penatration vital.
But even based on your numbers if it is more effecitve versus airframes then something is wrong with cannon damage resolution in AH.  The 151 for a given burst blows up more little bombs in the enemy plane. It was designed to do so.
Most all postwar cannon development maintained that priority.
I think that they did so because it is a more effecive way to destroy planes. AH should show that.
I would rate the two planes you mentioned as being very close in the game as well so I have no problem there. It is the 4 gun package of the HS that seems to tip the scales.

[Hooligan]

Pongo:

No funked did not put me up to anything.  I just tried to present some hard data so that we have a less subjective basis for discussion.

ROF for the synced 151 is 600.  This is the same as the ROF for the HS II so with your particular ride (A8 with 2 cannon) this is not a factor.

You wrote:  “Is penetration a major factor?”  Well I certainly think so (as did the US and British Air services).  If you look at a cut-away view of a single-engine fighter from any angle you will discover that something like 20%-40% of the cross-sectional area contains a critical component like the Pilot, fuel, engine, oxygen, ammo boxes etc…  Theoretically this means that just a few hits would be likely to disable a fighter if the rounds were sufficiently powerful to penetrate to the critical component.  Note that with bombers the equation changes somewhat.  Since they have multiple engines, pilots etc... they should be much harder to take down with a single hit in the right place.  It is probably not a coincidence that the air-force most interested in HE ammunition also had the responsibility of shooting down large numbers of 4-engine bombers.

In one of your prior posts you mentioned that the US was impressed with the Mg151.  This is true.  The US actually made a prototype of a .60 Cal (15mm) gun based on the Mg151.  The US Bureau of Ordnance was impressed with the firing mechanism but the US copy had very different ballistics.  It was designed for a Muzzle Velocity of 3500 ft/sec (1067 m/sec).  In the US Ordnance Bureau’s view the follow up weapon for the .50 BMG needed more velocity and penetration.  Of course they were designing this weapon for immediate use and they knew that they would primarily be shooting at enemy fighters, and not bombers.

As far as I can tell AH models APHE rounds for the Hispanos (i.e. they don’t bounce off of tanks).  These rounds can penetrate something like 40mm of armor at 100m.  If they hit a fighter at any practical range they are going to go all the way through the aircraft unless they are stopped by the engine, in which case that engine is probably toast.  It just shouldn’t take too many hits from them to kill a fighter.

I’m not sure I really understand the following comment you made:

“I would rate the two planes you mentioned as being very close in the game as well so I have no problem there. It is the 4 gun package of the HS that seems to tip the scales.”

It sounds like you are saying:  The relative effectiveness of 2 Hispanos vs. 2 Mg151 seems okay but the relative effectiveness of 4 Hispanos vs. 4 Mg151s does not.

This doesn’t make much sense to me.

Hooligan

[funked]

Pongo:  I didn't put him up to it.  He's got a nose for gunnery threads.  

Hooli:  I think Pongo means the package of:
2 x Hispano + 2 x Fifties
Vs.
2 x MG 151/20 + 2 x MG 131

All of ya:  
I think this bit here is the key:

Energy / Second
FW-816KJ Spit-1499KJ

Combined Explosives and Incendiaries / Second
FW-382g Spit-252g

How much should the sim weight the explosive power vs. the power from kinetic energy?  

Ya know that Wildbill fella has a T-28...

Didn't one of the Finnish WB guys have a collection of WW2 machine guns?

I'm thinking at the WBCon we oughta gas up the Trojan, load up the guns, and do us some "gunnery model verification"...

[crabofix]

 

Originally posted by Pongo:


crabo.
The Hispano is a french design.

[/B]

I still Belive hispano suiza is a swiss factory



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

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

[crabofix]

 

Originally posted by 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.

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

I might be on a bicycle, saying this: I still
belive there was some kind of mechanic sync in the 109 (The electric primer made it very easy to sync guns, later on.)
, wich made most 109 pilots to choose to not fly with gondolas.
I am pretty sure of reading  an interview with a famed 109 fighter pilot, sayng this.
I´ll try to find my sourse.

Tonite I shoot down lupo in a 205 from a 205 at the distance of 900 yards, with a short burst, my longst kill ever. My plane was armed with 151/20.

I would also like to thank you for the answers Hristos, well thought.

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

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

[BBGunn]

Hello St Santa:  I thought your question was a good one relative to the overly long kills possible in the simulated environment.  I have not been been able to play AH yet but in other sims long kills are possible that do not seem to reflect the real world.   The practical information from WW2 pilot biographies suggests that closer kills( around 100-200 yards) were the rule and long kills were an exception.  The enemy AC would have to fill or exceed the limits of the sight ring before firing would bring good results. I  think that the programers are probably doing their best to get the scale as close as they can but in my opinion after checking the relative sizes of wing spans of AC in the outside world the  size of the AC's in the sims should be different relative to the range.  That is, when the screen numbers say 100 yards it should be more like 150.    I know that the wider human field of view has been compressed onto the narrower field of the computer screen which makes objects smaller than they would appear outside but I still believe that the effectiveness of weaponry should be scaled down to better represent WW2 air combat scenarios.   In warbirds for example the defensive gunners on a B17 could fire at 1000yds and get hits when biographical/historical info suggest that real life gunners started getting hits at about 400 yds.  Anyway, the computer environment is different and one has to way the overall balance in kill ratios taking into consideration some of the variables mentioned above like lag but I would still opt for decreasing the weapons effectiveness at longer ranges.

[funked]

Hmmm plenty of kills 500 to 1000 yds in books I read.  There was Luftwaffe gun cam film posted on this board showing kills on bombers in that region also.

Also remember that because of net lag, the range of the enemy is usually shorter than what you see.  A good rule of thumb is 200 yds difference if he is behind you.  So if you see 700, it is probably more like 500 on his computer.  And his computer is the one computing bullet trajectory and velocity.

However I agree with the general idea that it is too easy to score hits at these ranges.


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

[Pongo]

Hooligan noticed.
"
It sounds like you are saying: The relative effectiveness of 2 Hispanos vs. 2 Mg151 seems okay but the relative effectiveness of 4 Hispanos vs. 4 Mg151s does not.

This doesn’t make much sense to me.
"
well it doesnt make much sence to me either! But I feel the majority of the problem with the HS becomes dominant when you have 4 of them.... I dont think that a different gun is being put on the 4 gun load outs...but it shure feels like different kettle of fish with 4 of em..

Your point on the vulnerable areas of a fighter and penetration is well made. I take it then that the 151 or any other 20mm except the soon to be inflicted MGFF had a problem getting its rounds into the interior of the AC? remember I am trying to make an over kill case here against the HS. So keep in mind that the added velocity and penetration of the HS vs the 151/20 has to be wasted for me to have an argument here....
If the 151 has enough velocity to accuratly deliver its round and enough kinetic energy to allow it to penetrate sheet aluminum and a wing spar, and fusing that lets it go boom effecivly on penatration.
Well thats the straw I keep poking funked with anyway....

[Hooligan]

20mm APHE AP/I etc.. rounds should have no problem penetrating but they carry less explosive than HE rounds.  The tradeoff is between HE rounds with a bigger boom or AP rounds with signigicant penetration.

Hooligan

[Pongo]

You think the 20mm mine round would have trouble getting into the internals of a fighter..  I bet it wouldnt.

[funked]

Sounds fine to me Pongo.

I have a feeling the HE for all the rounds is not creating much damage.  Lethality seems to be in order of KE ranking.

[Pongo]

I (subjectivly) aggree...
We can let this one lie I guess.