Author Topic: PLS HT look into Breda MG modelling! (Read 3913 times)

Vermillion · « **Reply #45 on:** January 23, 2002, 02:06:06 PM »

Ah! Then I would heartily agree

12.7mm MG's over a 7.7mm light MG any day of the week.

Was just sharing the info that the Italian 7.7mm was acutally the same round as the British .303 Which I didn't know until I read it yesterday, while looking up the info for LUPO.

LUPO · « **Reply #46 on:** January 23, 2002, 06:38:50 PM »

Tks Vermillion to share infos.
Tomorrow (jan 24, GMT+1) I sould have some new infos about Breda 12,7 and some interesting pics too. Of course I'll post it here.
Learning quite a lot thanks to this thread...

Anyway I'm not sure that HT will appreciate the effort giving to me a positive answer about what I'm asking for...

Tony Williams · « **Reply #47 on:** January 24, 2002, 01:51:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vermillion
Was just sharing the info that the Italian 7.7mm was acutally the same round as the British .303 Which I didn't know until I read it yesterday, while looking up the info for LUPO.

So was the Japanese Navy 7.7mm - but the Japanese Army's 7.7mm was different....

Tony Williams
Author: "Rapid Fire: The development of automatic cannon, heavy machine guns and their ammunition for armies, navies and air forces"
Details on my military gun and ammunition website:
http://website.lineone.net/~a_g_williams
Gun and ammunition discussions at:
http://www.delphi.com/autogun/messages

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #48 on:** January 24, 2002, 02:52:30 AM »

Isnt it curious that AH has it reversed, wing mounted guns are much better then center mounted weapons.

Just compare any current Spit vs any Bf109 with only the 20mm engine cannon.......

SageFIN · « **Reply #49 on:** January 24, 2002, 05:22:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Isnt it curious that AH has it reversed, wing mounted guns are much better then center mounted weapons.

Just compare any current Spit vs any Bf109 with only the 20mm engine cannon.......

I'd probably venture to guess that it is because dispersion is calculated by gun, not by mount & gun. I'm not sure if it is so but it would make much sense to me programming wise.

If the difference in dispersion between wing mounted and nose mounted (especially with the twins which don't have an engine on the nose) was significant in reality, then centerline mounts are penalized a bit perhaps.

Is the .target command available online? If it is, it would be simple to test the difference between a wing mount and a centerline mount. Take a Spit and a P-38 and get a GV or something to damage the spits other cannon. Then it's just firing a lot of rounds and comparing the results.

LUPO · « **Reply #50 on:** January 24, 2002, 07:15:02 AM »

Hi SageFIN,
this is another really intersting question. I'm becoming more and more passionate in understanding how gunnery is conceived and works in AH. So I want to put this question to HTC: Is dispersion in Aces High calculated just by gun, or by mount & gun?

mrsid2 · « **Reply #51 on:** January 24, 2002, 08:31:23 AM »

Dang I just wish one day our graphics will look like that guncam footage was.

Hooligan · « **Reply #52 on:** January 24, 2002, 10:56:04 AM »

Quote

Just compare any current Spit vs any Bf109 with only the 20mm engine cannon.......

Anybody who does this will discover that much to their SURPRISE:

2 20mm cannon and 4 lmg are better than
1 20mm cannon and 2 lmg

Who would have ever guessed!

Hooligan

LUPO · « **Reply #53 on:** January 24, 2002, 11:49:46 AM »

Some news here!

First of all I have to say that I verified the data that Hooligan kindly provided about Breda MG:

Quote

Hooligan wrote:
Breda 12.7mm 36.7g, 760m/s, 575 rpm. [...]
The very poor rate of fire on the Breda 12.7mm especially hurts.

I asked to an expert (Piero Lomazzi, historic and journalist for "Aerofan", one of the best source of information about italian armament on planes). He sent me a lot of interesting infos and pics. So I discovered that... the rate of fire of Breda SAFAT wasn't 575 rpm, BUT 700 rpm!!!
Other data Hooligan posted were correct. I hope that my scanner will be ok soon and I'll post some nice pics here.

Second: I did a test. It's not a REAL test. I mean it's just a film that shows how effective the MG of the 202 are. If interested, have a look and try yourself. Second and third pass are... frustrating? I wait for comments.
(Don't look at my BFM skillz, I was typing and flying at same time

)
Click here to download the film

Hooligan · « **Reply #54 on:** January 24, 2002, 12:08:58 PM »

LUPO please pay attention:

1) 575 is the rate of fire for the Breda 12.7mm IN ACES HIGH. Or to be more precise, when I measured it over a year ago it was then. This is easy to measure. Feel free to measure the rate of fire yourself in the current version and let us know what you discover.

2) The cowl mounted 12.7mm machine guns are SYNCHRONIZED to fire through the propellor disk. This slows the rate of fire. 700 is the rate of fire for an unsynchronized gun.

Perhaps Mr. Lomazzi has some information about the synchronized rate of fire for this gun. If you can come up with an archival document showing the the synchronized ROF for Breda's I am certain that HTC would love to see it. I know that I and Tony Williams would be interested also.

By the way I can't download your film.

Hooligan

Tac · « **Reply #55 on:** January 24, 2002, 12:45:21 PM »

I remember in the C-hog days, I once emptied an entire c202 ammo on KBMAN's chog.. he only lost a flap. Was hilarious

One thing I do find very interesting though, is that the 202 in the MA really has no bite.. but in the CT, when I am whacked to TCP connection, they can smack a yak9t with 2 good bursts. Tried that in the MA, the entire ammo load on hits (all below d200 in both cases) on a yak, and it flew away unharmed.

bigUC · « **Reply #56 on:** January 24, 2002, 01:03:32 PM »

Trouble downloading the film - SuperEva not very willing today, I'm afraid...

mrsid2 · « **Reply #57 on:** January 24, 2002, 02:57:54 PM »

Hmm.. I've killed a dhog or chog not sure which one it was with less than 1/4 ammo load of the 202. I only fly the version with the 2x7.7 only!

I've done a 4 kill sortie in 202 and still have ammo left..

I've killed a b17 with 202 although THAT took 3/4 ammo sprayed to the tail and wingtip at close distance. For some reason the pilot didn't bother to shoot me during the 20-30 seconds I hung there shooting his wingtip.

One pass kill in 202? Must have been already damaged part..

LUPO · « **Reply #58 on:** January 25, 2002, 09:06:08 AM »

Many interesting things here.

Rgr Hooligan. I thought you were speakin about REAL SAFAT rate of fire. It's nice from your side to specify this now. Of course I'll check the ROF in AH, even if I haven't any reason to doubt of the result of the test you already did.

But now, pay attention, this means they're using "syncronized ROF data" which are INFERIOR to the ROF data I found (non synchro?).
Now, OF COURSE real Breda-SAFAT guns were syncronyzed in order to fire through the propeller. As you know the two 12,7 were installed immediatly ahead of the cockpit. At the beginning, when mounted on the MC200 "Saetta" the SAFAT had provision for 310 rounds per gun with the unusual feature of an ammunition indicator in the cockpit wich registered the number of rounds remaining per gun. In the MC200 the capacity was increased to 370 rpg.
Early production series of MC202 retained the original Saetta armament of twin 12,7-mm Breda SAFAT guns, ammunition capacity being increased to 400 rpg, but later production series (e.g. Serie IX-XI) also carried a 7,7-mm gun with 500 rounds in each wing (non syncro), while one batch carried a 20-mm Mauser MG 151 cannon (with 200 rpg) under each wing (non synchro).
(I have a picture of the cannon-202 but my scanner doesen't want to work

)
BUT...

The data I found indicated a ROF of 700 for the 12,7 with a "starting velocity" (velocità iniziale) of 760 m/s (meters per second).
I'd be glad to find an archival document showing the synchronized ROF, even if all the document I found until now are indicating the ROF whitout any specification.
And of course I'd be happy to share it with the community.

So, it comes to mind another question for HT staff:
Do they have data for ROF of each gun based on synchronyzed and non syncronyzed guns? Are this data used in order to model simulated ROF different for guns shooting through the propeller or not?

If the answer is NOT, perhaps the current AH ROF for the SAFAT is uncorrect.
This also remind me the another questions I posed above:
Is dispersion in Aces High calculated just by gun, or by mount & gun?

Those question are posed because of a genuine interest both for historical data and for the complex simulated world HTC created.

The link works. But SuperEva is a naughty girl... Try again or, BETTER, just get a 202 and fly it in MA

LUPO · « **Reply #59 on:** January 25, 2002, 09:24:26 AM »

BTW this is a pic of the MG we're speaking about...