Gunnery woes - I think we are all feeling them at the moment

[Ack-Ack]

The only issue I have had with gunnery in AH3 was the lack of hit sprites, other than that I've found that my hit % has gone up in AH3.

[Gman]

IMO it's related to how the player views the screen, perhaps the FOV differences in AH3 is responsible, I'm not sure, but I DO know that I felt a lot of players once forced into AH3 (no Ah2 option, haha) would notice the gunnery had changed a lot.  For me, just increasing the amount of lead I put into shots seemed to bring my accuracy back - prior "holds" just weren't enough, and shots that looked "on" in AH2 just aren't in AH3.  Everyone will adjust in time I think, but there IS a difference in how the guns shoot/connect/etc.  I like it myself, it's just opinion, but I think that hitting at longer ranges is much more difficult, and probably represents what it was like in reality a touch better. 

[Dobs]

Question on gunnery from a noob.

Is the effect of yaw on gunnery programmed in here?

In real life, bullets only take 80% of the yaw input...

Reference from a more modern aircraft...but still valid..

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kwhapBgCtYbmFFOVRXNzlieWc/view?usp=sharing

[bustr]

I think the brighter hit sprites and tracers will help many get up to speed faster and learn to compensate if more lead is needed. I have noticed with testing, this could be only anecdotal, that G load is affecting your expected round trajectory more so than in AH2. Or more likely, it could simply be my new computer is showing me more than the previous 24 months testing alpha\beta. It reminds me more like an AAF pursuit curves chart I've read. 

[bustr]

Question on gunnery from a noob.

Is the effect of yaw on gunnery programmed in here?

In real life, bullets only take 80% of the yaw input...

Reference from a more modern aircraft...but still valid..

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kwhapBgCtYbmFFOVRXNzlieWc/view?usp=sharing

Reads like the firing solution problems for a side gunner in our bombers. You can see the same thing in the drone circle if you kick a slide as you shoot and watch your tracers. You can even see it flying level with the target up in front of you (.target range heading pitch). Just aim for one side or the other of the target, and induce a slide while pulling the trigger.

[FLS]

Question on gunnery from a noob.

Is the effect of yaw on gunnery programmed in here?

In real life, bullets only take 80% of the yaw input...

Reference from a more modern aircraft...but still valid..

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kwhapBgCtYbmFFOVRXNzlieWc/view?usp=sharing

The speed and direction of the aircraft is part of the ballistic model. You should be able to see that strafing the ground or water while skidding.

[thrila]

I haven't flown a great deal over the last few years but when i have flown my aim is fairly rusty when i fly.

I genuinely find that if apply twice as much lead than what i instinctively feel i need to apply my aim comes back fairly quickly.

A simple trick but it seems to work for me.

Also, i agree with some of the other posts here in regards to firing under g- try not to if you can.

[Dobs]

The speed and direction of the aircraft is part of the ballistic model. You should be able to see that strafing the ground or water while skidding.

So the gist of my question is, "does my sight lie to me in AHIII due to yaw"?  I think the answer I'm getting is "go try it and see".

Bustr--I agree with the effect of G on rounds being robust....never flew AH2, but from other sims it seems more "realistic"-- in that shooting under G is a hard thing to accomplish.

[FLS]

So the gist of my question is, "does my sight lie to me in AHIII due to yaw"?  I think the answer I'm getting is "go try it and see".

"
I thought the answer was "the ballistics are good and it should be obvious if you look at it".  Use the Me262 if you want the high speed test.

[Kingpin]

So the gist of my question is, "does my sight lie to me in AHIII due to yaw"?  I think the answer I'm getting is "go try it and see".

Dobs, I tested this in the F4U-1A at 300 IAS as well as in the Me 262 at 475 IAS.  I saw no skidding effect on the rounds (the rounds impacted the target exactly at the pipper when firing at convergence with a fair amount of skid -- starting with my nose left or right of the target and holding hard rudder into the target, steadying the pipper and firing.)

That said, Aces High does model the effect of air density on bullet drop, as can be seen by firing at a target at 1000 yards at sea level vs. at high alt.  Perhaps at higher speeds like the 400-500 kt mentioned in your modern example there might be a yawing effect, but I have not reproduced that yet.

Are you familiar with the .target command and the syntax for using it?  If not, I can elaborate if you would like to conduct your own tests.

The .target command is quite useful for discovering lots of nuances of the ballistics of various guns packages in AH.

[Dobs]

Dobs, I tested this in the F4U-1A at 300 IAS as well as in the Me 262 at 475 IAS.  I saw no skidding effect on the rounds (the rounds impacted the target exactly at the pipper when firing at convergence with a fair amount of skid -- starting with my nose left or right of the target and holding hard rudder into the target, steadying the pipper and firing.)

That said, Aces High does model the effect of air density on bullet drop, as can be seen by firing at a target at 1000 yards at sea level vs. at high alt.  Perhaps at higher speeds like the 400-500 kt mentioned in your modern example there might be a yawing effect, but I have not reproduced that yet.

Are you familiar with the .target command and the syntax for using it?  If not, I can elaborate if you would like to conduct your own tests.

The .target command is quite useful for discovering lots of nuances of the ballistics of various guns packages in AH.

Thank you Kingpin!  I would have been surprised if it was modeled as most don't know it exists.  In the world of tracer correction aiming, it is almost superfluous anyway. 

The driving force behind this was watching nose kicks to "throw" bullets your way....no yaw drag on the aircraft and seems to work:) 

[FLS]

Dobs, I tested this in the F4U-1A at 300 IAS as well as in the Me 262 at 475 IAS.  I saw no skidding effect on the rounds (the rounds impacted the target exactly at the pipper when firing at convergence with a fair amount of skid -- starting with my nose left or right of the target and holding hard rudder into the target, steadying the pipper and firing.)

That said, Aces High does model the effect of air density on bullet drop, as can be seen by firing at a target at 1000 yards at sea level vs. at high alt.  Perhaps at higher speeds like the 400-500 kt mentioned in your modern example there might be a yawing effect, but I have not reproduced that yet.

Are you familiar with the .target command and the syntax for using it?  If not, I can elaborate if you would like to conduct your own tests.

The .target command is quite useful for discovering lots of nuances of the ballistics of various guns packages in AH.

Did you try shooting at the ground instead of at a moving target?

You might want to use nose guns to avoid convergence range issues.

I'm thinking you tested the crosswind at the yaw angle and any effect is lost in the dispersion.

[Kingpin]

Thank you Kingpin!  I would have been surprised if it was modeled as most don't know it exists.  In the world of tracer correction aiming, it is almost superfluous anyway. 

I'm not quite ready to say it isn't modeled, just that there wasn't an observable effect for me at IAS of 300-450 mph.  There isn't a whole lot of shooting going on in AH at 500+ mph IAS with full rudder deflection, so I would say it's superfluous more for that reason.

The driving force behind this was watching nose kicks to "throw" bullets your way....no yaw drag on the aircraft and seems to work:)

While doing my testing, kicking and holding rudder to steady the pipper, there is a noticeable drop in air speed due to the yaw drag, especially when using full rudder deflection.  The 262 lost speed quickly and required some time to get back above 450 IAS to test again.  With a quick nose kick, and/or less than full rudder deflection, the drag effect is less noticeable, but it is modeled.

[Kingpin]

Did you try shooting at the ground instead of at a moving target?

No.  I felt shooting at the target while flying level would give me the most easily observable effect of yaw alone.

You might want to use nose guns to avoid convergence range issues.

I put the target at my convergence range for this reason.  I'll try it with a P-38 as well though to see if that makes a difference.

I'm thinking you tested the crosswind at the yaw angle and any effect is lost in the dispersion.

This is possible.  I intentionally tried to keep the dispersion as close to the the un-yawed pattern as I could.  Whenever I am doing ballistics testing, I carefully trim the plane to be level at the bulls-eye and fire a burst to see what the "normal" tightest dispersion pattern looks like at that range.  There is always some initial oscillation when yawing, so when testing I hold the rudder steady for a moment until the oscillation diminishes and and I fire, as this tends to yield a more "normal" bullet dispersion pattern.  This is a "trick" I try to use in combat as well -- kick, hold, fire -- instead of kick-and-fire, as less oscillation will yield a tighter dispersion pattern.

I'm no aerodynamics expert, but I think the biggest factors (of yaw effect on ballistics) would be the air speed and the range.  At WWII aircraft speeds (esp. while yawing) and WWII firing ranges, I simply think any effect is just negligible.

[bustr]

Sometime just linking directly gets and eyeball by Hitech.