Badly model of firing in G10

[Vermillion]

Fishu, I say it is your impression because you have not shown that you used any kind of rational scientific test method in the least. And the results you posted are not very precise.

You say you have shot at drones tens of times and it has taken 2-6 hits to get damage.

Where you airborne or was it a static test? (its almost impossible to do a controlled test airborne)
What distance were you when you shot the drones?
Was it the same for each gun type? And was it the exact same range each  iteration of the test?
Was the target aircraft/drone the same type, each and every iteration?
How did you determine damage?
How did you determine the number of shells expended to accomplish the damage?
How did you determine the actual number of hits?

Each and every one of those variables are critical to the situation, and if you varied them by more than just the slightest bit, your results are not valid, because you are changing the test conditions.

You say that the Hanger tests are not valid, due to the type of target it is. Fine, I can accept that premise.

Then I would suggest you find a partner to test with and do it in the training arena. Pick one type of target aircraft, and then taxi the Shooting aircraft to a designated distance (preferably you would test at different distances say 100yards, 250yards, 500 yards, 750 yards, and 1000 yards). Plus you would have to insure in some manner that you were hitting only a single aircraft damage area, each and every time (like a outter wing panel). And then you would have to repeat the test process enough times to be statistically significant, I would say each test would have to be done a minimum of 25 times to remove error (more is better).

Then when you are done, you come back, post your method and your results (including the raw data). This allows others to repeat the tests and verify your results.

This is what is called the "Scientific Method". Ask anyone who has had engineering/scientific training and they will tell you its the only way to do it and get valid results. Ask funked, niklas, zigrat, or wells. They will tell you the same thing.

Yes its extremely time consuming and boring, but anything else is just an impression, because if you are not keeping the test conditions exactly the same from test to test, your introducing error into the results.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[Pongo]

My Bf109G6 always flies with 1 mg151/20 with 150 rounds. If I can get in position with that it is enough to kill 3-4 manuvering targets. The low number gives me 50 rounds per target. I only fire the 13mm in 3 circumstances.
1) desperation.
2) The guy is dead and I want to pad my accuracy scored(goons here too)
3) Buff hunting.
At my accuracy.(10 % or so in all planes prob 15% in 109) this gives me 4-5 20mm hits per kill. If the density of the shot is not good enough this almost directly translates to an assist. He will likely not go down and someone else will finish him off.
I am of the impression that If I get 3 of those 20mm hits in fairly tight area. He is dead. Or hurt bad enough that I get to use the 13mm.
This is my experiance with the 151/20. I believe it is increadably accurate as a simulation. Sometimes lag makes for misses, some of the pilots have on demand warp ability as you bounce them and that screws things up a little.
But I think that the gunfire and damage system of AH validates and clerifies two historical occurances that I never understood well befor.
1. the single 20mm on the 109 F G and K.
2. The US love of the 50 cal Mg.

Both decsions are excellent in a non buff heavy enviroment.
Most other simulations I have played make both decisions seem silly. But in AH we see that both are good decisions, if you dont have to attack heavy bombers.
I guess I am on the yes men crowd on this one. I think the 151 is very accuratly represented(although it should have AP avail too.)
The hispano..I have spent as much breath on that one as I am going to. It is powerful, but within the realm of possibility now anyway.

[Bahtz]

Hey all

If u want to see the relative "size" difference in shells check out this link. http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum4/HTML/000011.html

If u want to compare 20mm power check this link
 http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/table-leth.htm#Gun  Effectiveness

As u can tell the german 20mm has nearly as much explosive power as the Hispanno V!! I can also bet that the 20mm shell chosen is  only the HE round, and not the Mine round, designed to kills Buffs. They suffered from worse balistics, but had a much larger punch.


Bahtz
I./JG77

P.S Don't think for a minute that the 30mm is weak..check the size difference alone  

[Fishu]

 http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/005268.html

There is more of that dear Vermillion.

If I do it tens of times with each gun, it must be more reliable than couple times made hangar shootout.


Ps. Why is it that those allies always doubts test results by hard work but done by other than allie flier?
Seems like they're afraid to admit something..

Please, grow up Vermillion, I don't need impressions to make tests, this is my honest result of that what I've done till to a boredom just to make it final that this is how it is. (not how it is in my 'impression', that you call)

[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 09-16-2000).]

[Vermillion]

Fishu, the reason I doubt test results from you (not Luftwaffe pilots) without knowing how you did them, and seeing the actual results, is because in the past you have been so obviously biased on issues regarding Luftwaffe aircraft and repeatedly touted pure bullcrap over and over again as fact, when cold hard data and actual historic flight test data have been available that contradicts you completely.

Thats why I don't believe your "Tests" without seeing any kind of systematic testing and their results.

You have cried "WOLF!" so many times in the past, that the villagers just don't believe you anymore (From the story "The Little Boy who Cried Wolf!").

PS: Kinda strange that you label me a "Allied Pilot" (or did you actually mean "American Aircraft Pilot"?), when I fly the G10 and Yak-9U mostly anymore.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 09-16-2000).]

[Fishu]

I still don't have a reason why not to be honest.
All I wan't is a good simulator, that has no different 'balance' for other part and other part has their own 'balance'.
Few things just seems like from other universe compared to some others. (this is even visible between allied planes when comparing or LW planes..)

109F4/109G10 and C.202/C.205 flight models are both good example, like from another universe.
I feel the same with Hispano/20mm M2 cannons versus MG151/20 and ShVAK.  (I haven't tested N1K2 guns yet.. so no opinion for those)
Yes.. I admit that Hispano is strong gun, but there is always limit for exagerated power. (if it would be up to me, I would give all the planes MG-FFs and .303s)

It is not fun if one single Hispano/20mm M2 hit can depart your stabilizer or wing from the root, like 30mm shell...
I have even seen 40mm flak damage being done to the planes and even then you can have a chance to get back home (like one FAF bomber that got hit in stabilizer by 40mm flak, once or twice and those aren't so tough made either)

More fun when you'll need some 10 hits and you can hear hits dropping on your airframe but still manage to fight, with some part lost (in AH, usually critical damages comes first, than minor ones)

[Minotaur]

Personally, I would rather have the guns and the damage inflicted by those guns as close to real life as the talented folks at HTC can simulate it.  I am not in favor of tweaking bullet/shell damage for game play.  IMO that just opens up a bottomless can of worms.

More over, I would rather see work done sooner than later in respect to bomb and missile blast damage.  

In any case I am surely not the one to ask for comparitive results.

Good Luck in your endevors!  

------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

"Who's next?"
Naso