Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Vila on January 31, 2000, 05:57:00 PM
-
Ok, I dint say anything till now, casue we were in Beta, but now that we're going PAY....
Well, the long range gunnery issue is outta hand. Buffs getting kills at 1.2 K, and toaday I got critically damaged by a Stang at 850 yards (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif).
Whjat's up with this? seems a bit silly fro an otherwise great sim!
Vila
-
I find myself in overall support of your observations on this issue.
In my experience, I have little luck making hits *fighter vs fighter* much passed 650 and when I do get hits beyond that range it usually doesnt result in a kill.
When I am in the tail guns position in the B26, I find that many fighters, attacking from dead astern, begin firing out at 1100 and do indeed get some hits at that extreme distance in low speed closure attacks. I usually start firing at 1000 unless the con fires beyond that range in which case I return fire in hopes of spoiling the shot.
In summary, I find everything in *fair* order with the lethality envelope perhaps over-extended by 10-15%. Most of my fighter vs fighter kills occur between 350 and 450
and tail gunner position kills perhaps (and Im going by recalled memory here) out to 450-550.
Yeager
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 01-31-2000).]
-
Vila,
Yeah sorry about that but when you were heading toward reinforcements I had to do something. Normally I wouldn't have fired till I closed the range because well it just seems so dweeb-like even though it works (although it shouldn't).
If it makes ya feel any better, after I got you in the break, your buddies dived in on me. I broke hard into them, unloaded the stick an ran like hell. Everyone of them started opening up on me and not a one was any closer than 850 yds. To top it off the B-26 that was with them joins in and shoots off my left aileron and a flap at 1200yds!! I got away but I got all shot up by planes that were never any closer than 850 yds.
I've had several guys in the arena ask me what convergence I use and when I tell em 250-300 yds, they can't believe it and tell me they set theirs at 600-800 yds!!
Anyway sorry for the dweeb shot, but it was my only chance before you got to reinforcements. Please HT and company fix this soon!
Sharky
P.S. HT why did you get ride of the anti-stick stirring routine? That was on of the best anti-dweeb features in the game!
------------------
You can run, but you just die tired.
-
Dont apologise for killing Villa, heck, smile and know you earned it. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Smoked 3 engines on a B-17 from 600 yards with a -1C the other day, did think that it was rather excessive. But with convergence set just short of that range, I was wondering if the ballistics were just more accurate?
------------------
Lake City
-lakc-
-
My understanding from Pyro and HT is that the guns are modeled to real life ballistics exactly. But consider that in here opposed to real life we have more sorties and kills than all the WWII vets combined. Hence better gunnery in general. Just IMHO. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Rocket
------------------
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________
www.reddragons.de
-
Err, that theory is BS. If I took a rifle and tried to hit a plane-sized target 1000 yards away I very much doubt I would be able to. But in AH I can easily hit enemy fighters at 1500 yards from the tail gun of a bomber, or even in a fighter(with a 250-300 yard convergence) at 1000+, if they aren't manoeuvering.
Maybe if they get rid of the range on icons, then we might see more realistic gunnery results.
-
I'd like to ask those that think:
1. Six .50's wouldn't rip up an aluminum airplane at 1000 yards
or
2. That it's impossible to hit an airplane at 1000 yards
Upon what experience(s)do you base your comments?
I am not saying that it is or is not possible, I'm simply asking how you arrive at these conclusions.
-
Agree with Vila.
If the gunnery is indeed correct as it is, something gotta be done to make it harder to aim. . . for example get rid of the range counters. . .
// -nr-1-
-
OUCH! I remember raising the issue of long range gunnery about 2 months ago.
From the flaming responses I received I consider myself lucky to have escaped with my life!
But yep Vila, you're absolutely right. I'm generally shooting from about 450 yds on a hard maneuvering target, and have no trouble getting solid hits at that range. Makes it kinda pointless going for the Hartmann solution when you can sit well back behind your target and tear him to shreds.
It's either the gunnery or the icons... one or the other has to be changed. If you force the guys to get in close to get the kill, you open up the whole spectrum of defensive tactics designed to force the overshoot. But at the moment, unless the enemy pilot is coming in with heaps of smash, its just too easy to sit half a kilometre back of your target and shoot him down.
For those who think long range gunnery is OK, go to your nearest golf course. Stand on the tee of a straight par 5... start jogging on the spot and tell me you would have no trouble machine gunning a 39' wingspan aircraft sitting on the green.
------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
www.users.bigpond.com/afinlayson/index.htm
'feel the heat .......'
-
Maniac said:
. . . for example get rid of the range counters. . .
Interesting thought. If we had no indication of range other than plane size, it would be a whole new ball game.
------------------
leonid
129 IAP VVS RKKA
-
I say, lets get rid of the Icons all the way, just leave a coloured dot saying if it's nits, rook or bish...or just a green/red dot...
{Saintaw, hides, ducks and runs before heavy-metal plonking starts..."chaff","flares"...} (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Saint
DCO 186th Wardogs (Falcon4 Squad)
http://www.wardogs.org/ (http://www.wardogs.org/)
"Firepower Mate, that is what separates the men from the boys..."
-
I spoke with a ball turret gunner awhile back at Boeing Field when they unveiled the restored B-17F Flying Bee, and at that time, folks were getting D10 shots (1000 yds) in Warbirds, I asked him if this was possible, he said it was possible, but the odds were extremely high of hitting anything, let alone doing any major damage at that distance.
Just reporting from one of the horses mouths.
------------------
Brian "Ripsnort" Nelson
++JG2++ ~Richthofen~
(Formerly VF-101 Grim Reapers~Defected~)
"There is no reason anyone would
want a computer in their home."
Ken Olson, president, chairman and
founder of Digital Equipment Corp.,1977
-
Here this other day I was rtb after a long flight, while I was RTBing I engaged a P51, I flew that Japanese plane, dont recall the name.
I got on his 6 and he (clever as he is) tried to out run me, I was real low on ammo now, counters was on 4 and 6 and I had vis of my homefield.
So I just trowed my last 10 bullets or so after him, he was now (on my FE) D11, I saw 2 flashes and he went BOOM.
This unlucky P51 Pilot was Maniac (If I remember right), he contacted me on channel 1, On his FE I was at D12, about the same as my FE said.
Still I blew up his pony with 2 pings at D11.5, I think there is something wrong here, I dont know what , but something it is .
------------------
The Wild Vikings
Commanding Officer
lasse-
-
Guys sorry but this ain't golf,
The .05 has a max effective range of about 2200 meters as for hitting an aircraft sized target at 1000 yards, well I have hit man-sized targets at that range with 7.62mm
so I think that isn't the issue. Historically
pilots did not shoot from that far out simply because an airplane is not a stable platform, if you modeled wind,turbulence,and
relative Humidity into the game, (Not really soon, it'd take a Cray) then you would see people closing because the odds of scoring a hit beyond 500 yards would be incredible, with the game engine currently only factoring the ballistic properties of the round, the max stated range is the range you can engage from.
My .02 on it
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Yup sure as hell was me lasse, and it was not the first time it happened to me, ive been killed from around d10 several times.
I usually do not fire untill d3 but once in anwhile i have djust "thrown some bullets" at an con to make him turn at d9 and got kills. . .
I will say this again, sure the gunnery may be realistic modelled but with the gunnery aids we have dont make it very realistic nor fun. . .
// -nr-1-
-
I agree Vila.
I think the ballistics are correctly modeled, but the lack of some other factors make it too easy to nail somebody from far away. Without modelling a bunch of other inputs, the only solution I can see is to increase the dispersion effects or throw in a bit of randomness of some kind. Some random factor that increases in effect with range would have the desired effect on the gunnery model I believe. Heck, turning up the dispersion effect might just do the trick.
I'd love to see HTC try it so we could see the effect. If it doesn't work... oh well. But if it does... it removes the only fault of any consequence I see with AH right now as far as "modelling" goes. (I put modelling in quotes because the gunnery model is likely very correct. We need the adjustment for play balance reasons, but this is still percieved as a "modelling" issue to most I think.)
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
[This message has been edited by Lephturn (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
I agree with lephturn there.. the ballistics are correct as far as I can tell cause to my understanding the .50mg has an extremely long range. Add the random affect that he mentions and also, get rid of the range markers and I think things will get much better.
baneX
=357th Pony Express=
-
If I took a rifle and tried to hit a plane-sized target 1000 yards away I very much doubt I would be able to.
Really?? I've seen pilots online wasting hundreds of rounds to get a couple pings on me from 800 yards away. Give me a rifle and allow me to fire 300 times and I can guarantee you I would hit it a few times at 1000 yards. The issue is not whether the hit probability is correct, its damage modeling.
-Ding
-
I'm still curious, so I'll repeat:
I'd like to ask those that think:
1. Six .50's wouldn't rip up an aluminum airplane at 1000 yards
or
2. That it's impossible to hit an airplane at 1000 yards
Upon what experience(s) do you base your comments?
Have you fired heavy machine guns in the military? Enough to be proficient (not just a quick familiarity shoot).
If no machine-gunning, have you at least fired several thousand rounds of centerfire rifle rounds to be familiar with ballistics and range?
Or have you just "played a lot of flight sims" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Inquiring minds want to know; how else can we evaluate your opinions? Maybe you know something we don't!
>For those who think long range gunnery is OK, go to your nearest golf course. Stand on the tee of a straight par 5... start jogging on the spot and tell me you would have no trouble machine gunning a 39' wingspan aircraft sitting on the green.<
Jekyll, I'm very curious with respect to the "jogging on the spot" part of this. What does that have to do with aerial gunnery?
Are you implying that either the target aircraft or the shooting aircraft are some how bouncing up and down, similar to a rifleman trying to shoot while jogging?
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
....and here are a few places that you can do online calculations of the ballistics on the various projectiles available in Aces High....
This is one of the good ones, IMHO:
http://www.lascruces.com/~jbm/ (http://www.lascruces.com/~jbm/)
That's IF you have the correct information to start with. You'll have to know a few facts about the round in question before you can calculate its ballistic performance.
Another site offers a ballistics calculator as well, but the calculator is down right now. It does offer a nice "quick and dirty" guide to understanding ballistics.
Try:
I've no axe to grind either way about the AH ballistics.
What is starting to bug me is people whining without providing any FACTUAL INFORMATION on why they think AH is wrong.
"I think" is fine and I'm willing to read your opinion.
But until there is something to BACK UP your opinion, I don't see why HTC would be rushing to change anything.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 02-01-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 02-01-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 02-01-2000).] (http://students.washington.edu/basiji/Ballistics/ballistics.html)
-
Heheh well I have fired an M-60 alot and I can tell you that at 1K yards I wouldn't hit much, and if you put me on a moving platform that jumped up and down and sideways abit I would hit even less. Aerial gunnery is NOT a bench rest enviroment so more than just the stats of balistics come into play here I think that just a toneing down of the effectiveness at range would work wonders, without much programming???? I am not a programmer so I hate say it wouldn't take much work since I have no idea.
-
Hiya Jim!
Well, that's more like it! Now I've got a frame of reference.
I assume that since the M60 is an LMG you were shooting at mainly man-sized stuff?
So, when you say you can't hit anything a 1K yards does that mean...
you couldn't hit a coyote
you couldn't hit a man
you couldn't hit a '64 coupe de ville
you couldn't hit a school bus
you couldn't hit a locomotive
or you couldn't even hit the Empire State building?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
There is indeed more to it than ballistics but that's where you have to start. You don't want a .50 that shoots only 100' and you don't want one that shoots 100 miles...the ballistics model is the mandatory beginning.
I haven't shot any heavy machine guns but I have spent a lot of time in the air. I think there's a little misconception on how much aircraft "bounce around".
This is a famous "it depends" situation.
It does depend on a lot of things. Some situations, the aircraft is so smooth it's like being at a benchrest. In others it's like being in paint shaker!
It depends.... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I myself have shot a vehicle mounted .50cal machine gun in the army quite extensively and hitting a truck sized target at 1000yds for me isn't too difficult even while moving, but not having been in the air and trying to do the same I wouldn't know if the plane moves more or not.
Now after looking at things I have shot with said machine gun.. there was some damage, but nothing that would lead me to believe it would be destroyed. If presonnel had been in this vehicle they would very much have been dead.
baneX
=357th Pony Express=
"Need a package delivered? Call the Pony Express"
-
I shot an Elk once from 300 yards,with iron sights, right through the heart, does that count? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Heard the "THUP" from all the way across the valley, the bull took 2 steps but he didn't realize that he was dead, and food on my table.
------------------
Brian "Ripsnort" Nelson
++JG2++ ~Richthofen~
(Formerly VF-101 Grim Reapers~Defected~)
"There is no reason anyone would
want a computer in their home."
Ken Olson, president, chairman and
founder of Digital Equipment Corp.,1977
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
Well 1 time when I was playing Quake2 I shot my rocket from ...oh..uh..never mind. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
------------------
Mighty1
The New Baby Harp Seals
"Come try to club THIS Seal"
-
Hiya Toad,
Well based on my AH gunnery I couldn't hit the Empire State Building LOL. But on a serious note, the recoil on an M-60 for a 2 sec burst will cause you to reacquire your target after said burst, now if target is moving and attempting NOT to be hit it gets even tricker <grin>. Now I never fired at a truck sized target (triple canopy jungle doesn't afford many truck size targets) and mostly fired in a direction (usually for as short a time as possible, while looking for holes to crawl into) sooo in answer to your question I guess you are right it all depends ???
-
Hell fellas, even a puny little 22LR round is lethal out to 1 and 1/3 miles (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Yeager
-
It's simply too easy to hit and do damage at ranges near 1000 yds. This is based purely on reading hundreds and hundreds of first-person accounts of kills by WW2 pilots.
-
Funked
So there's three possibilities right?
Either it's too easy to hit at 1000 yards..or
hits do too much damage at a 1000 yards..or
Both.
Again, it may not be the gunnery model at all..might be damage right?
-
Originally posted by Vila:
Ok, I dint say anything till now, casue we were in Beta, but now that we're going PAY....
Well, the long range gunnery issue is outta hand. Buffs getting kills at 1.2 K, and toaday I got critically damaged by a Stang at 850 yards (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif).
Whjat's up with this? seems a bit silly fro an otherwise great sim!
Vila
This is a very low percentage shot so its likely a LOT of ammo was expended to get a few hits. Still, it only takes one hit to wound/kill a pilot, shoot out a coolant line or cut a control cable even at long range. A pilot 4 hours from home with a limited ammo load would not be likely to try this shot. Here in AH, no one is more than a few minutes to the nearest base and a fresh ammo load so we're all a lot more likely to hose away attempting to get a few hits.
Regarding long range damage: Most strafing in WW2 was started from well outside effective range. The .50's were used regularly on ground targets at ranges of a half mile or more. Judging from the gun camera films widely available on video, hits at these ranges were quite effective. Not many of the trains, ships and trucks were made of the soft aluminum (aluminium for our non-US viewers) that makes up our airplanes yet the damage caused by half inch AP shells could be extreme.
MiG
-
Thanks for the comments all.
Sharky: no blast at you (that's why I dint post ur name). You did what ya had to do given the circumstances, and would I have. But after I'd done a fairly decent of job of avoiding your attacks from an advantage, I was fairly proud of bleeding off your e and being able to make a run for it. Was just kinda depressing to get a radiator hit at 850 yrds and KNOW it was just a (short) matter of time before you'd get a shot at waxing me in the ditch (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Toad: I don't have a really good answer for you other than the pilots I've talked to and my experience firing an M2 at the range. The lehtal ranges in AH seem rather farther than most pilot accounts.... and 1000 yards is a LONG way. <shrug>
All: I'm not NECESSARILY arguing that the "modelling" is "wrong." Heck, I don't know. But I agree that if the ballistics are right, then there appear to be some factors that arent taken into consideration that make gunnery easier for us. Some possibiities:
1) We have LOTS more practice than RL WWII pilots and therefore, we're just BETTER within the confines of the sims we fly.
2) No turbulence.
3) "perfect" weapons. That is, every .50 shoots like every other .50, making the results less "random" than in real life. Also, weapons accuracy doesn't degrade from prolonged "spray and pray" firing.
4) Range Icons. Makes setting up for the proper bullet drop MUCH easier.
5) No "pilot factor". We don't pull G's, etc.
Vila
-
Hey, it's all just a discussion! No arms and legs getting chopped off here!
Funked, you said:
>This is based purely on reading hundreds and hundreds of first-person accounts >
What would you, of all posters, (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
say to a guy that wanted to speed up the P-51 flight model or degrade the Bf-109's climb ability based on this type of information? What would you expect Pyro to do? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I think we just have to trust HTC to get the ballistics model pretty close.
The damage model is pretty subjective, OTOH and I totally agree with what Mig said above.
An anecdote to illustrate:
My PT, at some un-noticed moment (not a part of the pre-flight inspection) had the little nylon-insert lock nut fall off the stud where the throttle rod attaches to the carb. The rod, of course, realized its duty was to shake loose in flight and so it did. The carb and engine went to idle.
Since the real PT has (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) accurately modeled drag, a very short while later the PT was sitting undamaged in a hay field. (Yep, I'd much rather be lucky than good!) A quick fix with about a yard of safety wire and it was off and back to the home drome for a proper fix.
The moral of the story is that you don't have to blow a wing off to bring an airplane down. There are lots and lots of tiny little "soft" parts that are necessary for flight.
-
Ballistics seems to be right, but I actually dont have a clue (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
But does that include bullet speed ?
In AH, is the bullet modeled to actually getting slower and slower thus further away from the barrel it gets ?
Like when I hit maniac at D12, did my bullet(s) hit him at max speed at that distance, it shure looked like that, but at that distance, shouldnt they be relatively slow ?
But then again, what do I know ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
The Wild Vikings
Commanding Officer
lasse-
[This message has been edited by lasse (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
About long range gunnery.
The modling of the bullets is fairly accurate. All bullets arn't the same and are very random in there pattern. Infact this makes long range gunnery easyer (more of a chance of a few bullets hitting) than perfect bullets would.
All weapons have different muzzle velocoties and are as accurate as the data we could find. All weapons have different drag coef.
Thing is im still not convinced that the current long range gunnery is a problem. I can on rare occasion do damage out side of 800 yards on a fighter , but it is exception not the norm. The times I do get hits at that distance the target is flying perfectly straight for me. BTW Im also interested if this is how everyone else is seeing their hits. And please don't tell me about when you got shot at that distance , only when you landed hits at long range.
A while back when this topic was brought up I posted a challange to send me films of anyone getting a kill out side of 850 yards. Never did recieve a film.
Buff's need to be able to hit at longer range's than fighters simply do to net lag on 6 problem. If we didn't give them a slightly longer range a fighter could sit just out of buff range, 200 - 400 yard net lag differance, and shoot with imunity.
Im open to suggestion's and comments but we also need to discuss what we want out of gunnery in the end. In my view there are only 2 ways of looking at things.
1. From a real life view point, this involves only what could be done in real planes and not what was done by the average pilot. Because almost everyone playing has better gunnery abilitys the 99% of real life WWII pilots.
2. We adjust gunnery to what we want the outcome to be. If we wish to elimitate kills out side of a certan range, then we just remove bullets after they fly a certian distance. Or we adjust lethalities at longer ranges to be even lower than they are now.
HiTech
-
I think the ultimate observation I could make
on this issue is not so much about how the bullits behave after leaving the gun barrel (in AH I am *satisfied* with the current modeling) but rather, how secure the actual guns were in their mounts. Here is an example using a Remington 308, bolt action hunting rifle: Bedding is a term used to describe how the reciever is secured in the stock. A glass bead bedding is preferred due to the enchanced
accuracy it provides. Now I have seen both the regular factory mountings and the glass bead mountings and I tell you there is nothing I can see that explains why such a minor tweak makes such a noticable difference but it does improve hit groupings at longer ranges. The reason is simple when you investigate the principle. The glass bead bedding creates a more stable mating between the receiver and the the stock. Extrapolate this to a large aluminum airframes powered by large vibrating engines. Coupled with the wear and tear that occur in installation and maintenance of the guns, the stresses on the airframe even in one G flight and one starts to get a feel for the actual vr the virtual. There are so many factors playing on the RL ballistics that these planes rarey got hits on enemy aircraft out passed 600-700 yards in actual combat.
Hits in AH out past 700 yrds should to be rare but not impossible.
Am I making ANY sense?
Does this observation have ANY pertinence to this topic?
Yeager
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
<Yeager>....
Of course you are man....you have always made sense to me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
<Toad>.....
In regards to your last post....Well Said....I doubt that WWII Fighter Aircraft possessed spare parts on board (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
<To All Who Posted>.....
This whole thread made me tired (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Was interesting but is the topic really that relevant to us having fun? You guys be the judges, as for me, I dont plan on lettin any of you within 1500yds of my ride (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Cyas Up!
Rude Out!
------------------
-
The last time this came up, it suddenly died off after HT asked for film. So I will repeat this request. Can one of you long range sharpshooters be so kind as to make film of this? I don't want film of other people shooting you, I want film from the shooters perspective.
Just take a ride a P-51 up and only shoot at people who are over 800 yards away and send me film.
I'm not saying this to be facetious, I can't do more than get a lucky ping once in awhile from those distances. I need to see what you're talking about.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid."
-
Well I'm Joe Average at best when it comes to aerial gunnery. I've found in AH that I should not ever bother taking a shot if the con is 650 or over.
There are many occasions that I have had a decent deflection shot and I will hit the trigger if the con is at approx 650-600 in range. But I lead the hell out of em. And I do occasionally get good hits. Enough to make the bogy break thier flight path and lose more E where I can hopefully finish them off.
I have never gotten a kill at better than 650. I also cannot recall being shot down from any great distance. Or if I was maybe I did not take notice as I've been so used to the Internet fudge factor sometimes involved in these things.
If anyones keeping track, fly mainly .50 armed aircraft. The exception being the C205 and occasionally the Spitfire.
Just my "average joe" wooden nickels worth.
-Westy
-
Toad - Yeah I dunno what it is.
I'm not going to pretend I know very much about modeling damage or ballistics.
It just seems weird compared to the anectdotes.
Who knows, maybe all the vets were misjudging the range. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
P.S. I only go to the anectdotes when I don't have any other information. I'll take scientific tests over anectdotes anyday. But I don't think there's much data out there for our gunnery questions.
Some factors that might be at work here:
1. I think small scale turbulence is under-rated. I ridden in a lot of twin turboprops that I would think are less resistant to turbulence than a smaller plane like a WW2 fighter. In these planes I've noticed that the nose wobbles around quite a bit in level flight (yes sometimes they even let me look out the front of the plane). Anyways this motion is definitely enough to screw up a 750-yd gun solution.
2. The laser rangefinder probably helps more than we realize. I know my first bursts are usually pretty darn close, even out at 750 yds.
3. We get perfect damage feedback. If we score a hit, we always see the hit flash. I'm not sure a real pilot would be able to see this at 1000 yrds. Anyways the hit flashes are a great tool for adjusting fire.
4. Net Lag. Never trust a range report from the guy that got shot. Hits are scored on the shooter's front end. Whatever range he sees is the range that matters. What the other guy sees is meaningless.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
I did 10 year in USMC (67-77) mostly in the air wing but I did fire the M2 (.50) and the M60 (7.63mm) a fair amount on the range and both in combat (a little on the M2 - about 2 belts, a lot of M60 - serveral thousand rounds). On the range with the M2 getting out to 1000 or 1200 yrd was learnable and often acheived by better gunners (not me), the M60's was more like 800 to 1000. However, in combat, accurate gunnery was often well less then half that. Poor conditions and stress (fear, adrenalin, fatigue) I am sure were contributing factors. Long range shot were not attempted nearly as much ammo was a scarce resource and running out was not conducive to long term survival. Yes, those guns are accurate to long ranges, yes they do a lot of damage at those ranges, but under real combat conditions that is dificult (but not impossible) to achieve. Now as to HiTech's question, I do a lot of long range gunnery and I am pretty good at it (my convergence is almost always at max). It is my belief that the further out and can "work" the opponent the better it is for me. I have routinely gotten hits out to 1200 (none beyond, seems I would get an occasional hit out to 1500) but damage beyond 900 is pittiful at best (seems none existent beyond 1000). I have downed a few planes at 1000 (almost all not manuvering) and many many 600 to 800. However, I use a lot more ammunition per kill than most (long range gunnery is hard). If it were real life, I doubt that I would attempt most of those shots (the penalty here for running out is much less severe). Well a long winded answer - to say, all and all, current damage is not out of line (although long range damage might be a little on the light side) and that the gunnery seems pretty well modelled.
-
Pyro - you post came in while I was writting that long winded reply. I will record you some long range hits (kills beyond 800 are very hard).
-
P.S.
I played the abomination known as WB 2.6. This taught a lot of us to be ridiculously precise with the guns, and my opinions are colored as a result.
-
>The last time this came up, it suddenly
>died off after HT asked for film.
Well I'm no sharp shooter but I did get a kill on Stalker1 the other night where I was d1.5 on his end and d1.1 on mine. Complete luck, not a common occurance. I was going fast so had nice stable platform and he was flying straight as a arrow (must have been on autopilot). I was in Spit firing mg and cannon. No film but he can confirm I imagine.
As far as the Buff's range...shrug. I think the real problem isn't their range or lethality. The real problem is that there is no wind layers to effect bombing accuracy. They should have to get lower to bomb accurately. The less air the bomb drops through the less it get blown off target. That would allow fighters to dive in slashing attacks instead of climbing desparately upto a bomber from the six as they bomb with impunity and laser guided accuracy from near earth orbit.
$0.02 no charge,
Wab
-
You guys can pick any range that you like. I dont fire long range shots anyway. What I would like to see. Is something really bad happen to a wing I light up at 60 yrds. I dont want to hear about convergance. When my whole screen is full of airplane. Convergance shoud'nt matter.
-
Who knows, maybe all the vets were misjudging the range
---------------------------------
Funked, there's a lot to that. Anytime I've read about combat reports being matched to gun-cams where actual range can be measured, its stated that most pilots would underestimate the range in their reports.
I was once flying as a crewman when we had a near mid-air collision. I'm sitting in the back of the plane and just happen to look out my window as a H-3 just passes off our port wing on a reciprical heading. We all saw it just at the same instant and it put everyone's heart in their throat. Now if I had to write a report immediately afterward(I didn't), I would have guessed that we passed within 50 feet of each other. In reality, it was probably more like 50 yards. But I can certainly see how perceptions differ when you're in a scared or excited state. It's not the same as looking down the fairway at the pin.
Phantom, those are good points too. Military pilots are going to perform as they're trained. If they're trained not to shoot at extreme distances, most of them won't do it.
As to the film, mind you I'm not just looking for a hit or two to prove that it's possible. I know it's possible and that's intentional. I just want if it's really as effective a tactic as it's often made out to be.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid."
[This message has been edited by Pyro (edited 02-01-2000).]
-
Turned out to be a pretty interesting thread.
I think a lot of really fine, important points were made in the last 10-15 posts. Lots of things in there that should be considered when gameplay gets reviewed every so often. <shameless "hint, hint" to HTC...did someone say "icons"? <g,d,r>
HiTech said:
>In my view there are only 2 ways of looking at things.
1. From a real life view point, this involves only what could be done in real planes<
Thought this one had already been decided before you wrote the first code. Go for Real! Real as you know how! Real as a free download that runs on a PC can be! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) You go boy!
To the guys that related actual experiences with the "big bores" Thx! Interesting reading.
Funked:
I think you've pointed to an OBVIOUS clue that we've overlooked, the part about hit sprites at the longer ranges. How many guys would hammer away if they didn't have the encouragement of the occasional spark? At 1k, it might well be tuff to see results of MG rounds hitting unless the big pieces started falling off. <I defer to our experienced RL gunners here...??>
Others pointed out correctly that here, as opposed to RL, more ammo and fuel are usually a short fast dive away. Changing that might temper the urge to twitch the trigger finger as well.
Lastly, Pyro's right...you should be able to score long range hits...it shouldn't be an "effective tactic" though.
-
No one mentioned trajectory but I think a .50cal round would drop about 12-14 feet at 1000 yards and would loose a great deal of velocity. This complicates the aiming equation and in all the stuff I have read, most fighter to fighter shooting started when the enemy plane filled or even exceeded the diameter of the sight ring. One German pilot mentioned that he fired several long bursts from the 6'clock position at a P-38 at about 700 meters and got no hits at all. Another reference indicated that air gunners on bombers could probably hit a directly oncoming radial engine fighter at 400 yards with some consistancy- but the low percentage of kills from bomber gunners suggests that it was very difficult to hit a fighter even when in range. Since some Japanese Ki-43 pilots were successful at shooting down B-24's by themselves I'd say that defensive fire from the bombers was rather ineffective. I think a 1000 yard kill is pure fantansy. I have found no evidence of either air gunners or fighter pilots getting a kill at that range. Remember the ordnance people measured machine gun potenial in pounds/second. You have to get multiple hits within your 2 or3 second shooting window to do much damage thus you have to be reasonably close. The best of the German aces were always close-like within 150 yards to nail down a kill. I did notice that some German fighter pilots fired at B-17's from 500-600 yards but achieved less than 2% hits. They also started firing early on head-on passes because the rapid closing speed gave little time for adjusting aim. The bomber had to fly into the bullets path so to speak. For the purposes of a game I would think that it would be much more interesting from a manuvering skills point of view to have to get close to assure a kill. Remember the spit and hurry pilots whose guns were harmonized at 400 meters early on. They didn't hit squat until the guns were re-harmonized at 250.
-
>For those who think long range gunnery is OK, go to your nearest golf course. Stand on the tee of a straight par 5... start jogging on the spot and tell me you would have no trouble machine gunning a 39' wingspan aircraft sitting on the green.<
Jekyll, I'm very curious with respect to the "jogging on the spot" part of this. What does that have to do with aerial gunnery?
Well, I would imagine that a moving aircraft is not a pefectly stable platform. I'm not talking about movements of 10 or 20 feet up and down (unless you can jump 20' straight up) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) But even the most stable aircraft would not be able to hold altitude to within a foot or two with 6 50cal machine guns spitting shells .. thus the jogging analogy.
Personally, I think the long range gunnery cheapens what is an incredibly impressive sim.
An example: in another thread I saluted MrAnza for a fight we had a couple of nights ago. A classic energy fight between his 109 and my stang. The fight eventually ended when I caught him in a 90 degree deflection shot at about 500 yards. And you know, it kinda spoiled the outcome for me, because I've got my doubts whether it would have been like that in WW2 for real. But I KNEW he was 500yds away.. the icons told me so. So it became just a fairly simple matter of put the gunsight in the right spot for a 500yd crossing shot and BANG... down he went.
But if I had not had his range exact to the yard.. it might well have been a different story, as I was already low on ammo.
P.S. for those suggesting that we should be sending in films I've got this to say. I NEVER shoot beyond about 550yds so a film from me would be worthless. I understand the differing perceptions of netlag, but on a number of occasions I've been nailed at over D1.2 on my FE, asked the shooter what range he saw on his FE, and have been told 800yds or more.
------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
www.users.bigpond.com/afinlayson/index.htm
'feel the heat .......'
-
--- HiTech: ---
Buff's need to be able to hit at longer range's than fighters simply do to net lag on 6 problem. If we didn't give them a slightly longer range a fighter could sit just out of buff range, 200 - 400 yard net lag differance, and shoot with imunity.
--- end ---
How is this longer hitting range achieved? Higher Mv and/or bigger bullet radius ala High Velovity <edit>Velocity that is</edit> Basketballs(tm)?
//fats
[This message has been edited by fats (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
Pyro wrote :
Funked, there's a lot to that. Anytime I've read about combat reports being matched to gun-cams where actual range can be measured, its stated that most pilots would underestimate the range in their reports.
-----------
So it is hard to estimate range in RL right? why should it be so easy in AH? why do we have the range counters? keep the icons but remove the counters. . .
// -nr-1-
-
Juss
If I took a rifle and tried to hit a plane-sized target 1000 yards away I very much doubt I would be able to
With a 5.56 or .227 with a Scoped rifle, U are able to shoot a penny sized target up to 300 meters, with a .2 , you are able to hit that same target up to 500/600 meters...
NO problem hitting a Fighter sized target at 1KM...
But, that is, being stable, on a tripod...
------------------
Saw/Saintaw/Saint
BISHOPS
(http://www.harrythecat.com/graphics/k/plane11.gif)
DCO 186th Wardogs (Falcon4 Squad)
http://www.wardogs.org/ (http://www.wardogs.org/)
"Firepower Mate, that is what separates the men from the boys..."
[This message has been edited by Saintaw (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
Well all my RL time with heavies was in UH-1's where not only did you not have a stable gun platform (particularly on a bungie cord)
but you weren't in control of the A/c either
yes we got hits on targets out to 1200-1300 perhaps 30-40 hits for 600-800 rds (which explains my gunnery) and yes on a metal target one does see strikes at that range.
as for damage, simple rule of thumb here, if the round that hits is at a velocity high enough to impart kinetic energy sufficient to penetrate, then in actuality you ARE causing damage, now wether you damage something that means something to the aircraft's ability to stay in the air, is luck, an aircraft has a lot of parts that it needs to stay up, it also has a lot of dead space that you can drill holes in all day with no real effect. My ship came home from Grenada with 64 holes in her, but no real damage besides the vomit by the doors (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
In AH I've gotten hits out to 1.6 but as a rule I'll only fire like that if I'm about to break off a chase, (and I believe the Brits were fond of "parting shots" too)
L/r gunnery is easiest when your target is near ground since you can observe impact on land and adjust fire accordingly (sound familiar SC-Greybeard? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
But, as I said before We do things that people who are aware of the penalty for "screwing up" would not even think about
eg; 1 plane Jabo attacks on airfields
So we get hits at max eff range? It doesn't, if you think about it happen often enough to really be a problem now does it?
(Hmm jeez, I really don't tend to run on like this, time to shut up)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Pyro,
Just take a ride a P-51 up and only shoot at people who are over 800 yards away and send me film. I'm not saying this to be facetious, I can't do more than get a lucky ping once in awhile from those distances. I need to see what you're talking about.
At what convergance? I normally set mine at 250-300yds so at 800yds my bullets stream is pretty dispersed, however if I set it to 800yds I'm sure it will be fairly easy to kill guys out to 800 yds and although this is unrealistic (setting convergence at 800yds) I know guys are doing it.
Also I don't have a website to post the film on so it could be a long email (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Sharky
------------------
You can run, but you just die tired.
-
Jekyll,
Recoil isn't the only force acting on that wing. I'm sure the recoil from a .50 Browning is pretty hefty; my 8 pound Weatherby .300 is reported to have about 38 pounds of "felt recoil". I'd bet the Browning is at least 80 or more...and it fires consecutive shots. If it reacts like a normal machine pistol, the barrel wants to rise...and there's three per wing.
BUT the plane weighs a whole lot more than a rifle. And like a rifle "felt recoil" and muzzle jump would be less the heavier the structure that holds the barrel & action.
In the Weatherby example it's 38 pounds from an 8 pound rifle. Even with 6 .50's at 100 lbs of recoil, they'd be working against (I don't have a reference for the operating weight of a combat loaded -51) many thousands, if not ten thousand pounds. That kind of weight can tame a lot of recoil when the gun is firmly attached.
Also, there are other forces acting on the wing all the time. The airflow both over and under the wing at 300kts exerts a lot of pressure on the wing. This too would work against the recoiling motion.
The wing guns are relatively close to the center of lift as well. This gives the recoil less moment to work with.
I'm not a physicist though...and someone might be able to explain this more clearly or tell me I'm full of it... I just know that almost nothing in aviation is simple. There's always more going on than meets the eye. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Lastly, I know you've seen the gun cam films. There's shaking and jumping in those films but look at the tracer streams...they're blurry because of the shake but they are generally straight. You don't see "starburst" patters, with tracers going up down and sideways in an expanding cone, you see _lines_ of tracer.
The shake is there because the cameras were usually shock-mounted to protect the mechanism. They could move a bit. The guns weren't shock mounted...
Another note..those .50's shoot at 800 rounds a minute and there's six of them...4800 rounds a minute, 80 rounds a second. Ballistics tell us that a .50 slug will easily, easily travel 1k and still have enough energy at that range to crack an engine block, slice a coolant line or fracture a pilot's brain pan.
So if someone slings a 5 second burst at you, there's 400 hornets headed your way...and it only takes one...if it's not your lucky day. Just something to think about (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
As Pyro said, not an effective tactic, but possible.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 02-02-2000).]
-
HiTech,
Just a quick thought, I understand the lag difference for a buff rear gunner, but it seems your forumla is out of whack??? If it is a level playing field then when I am at 800 yards he should see 1.2 K??? But as it is when I see 1.2k he is firing and hitting me effectively and he must be seeing 1.6K??
I would would have no problem if when I am at 500 yrds and he sees 800 yrds he begins to take affect, but when he burns me at 1.2k and that is the reading on MY screen then I think the forumla needs adjusting
-
Toad;
So if someone slings a 5 second burst at you, there's 400 hornets headed your way...and it only takes one...if it's not your lucky day. Just something to think about
I am not convinced that each and every round is modeled. I think that "Groups" of rounds get modeled. Depending upon what gun is modeled the lethality is computed upon impact. IE: The gun ammo counter ticks 5 times but only one projectile is modeled in flight.
In your example, a 5 second burst yields 5 rounds in flight. This is wether the plane has 17 x 20mm guns shooting at once or 1 x 7.7mm shooting. The only difference is that the lethality of the projectile changes if a collision is detected. I would assume range is a major factor effecting lethality.
I am only guesing of course, but I have been wondering about it for some time. HTC got an answer for me?
Mino
-
Every round is individually modeled. Toad's example is correct. 5 seconds of fire from a P-51 or F4U will put 400 rounds in the air. Every fifth round is a tracer, so for every tracer you see, there are four more bullets that you don't see until they hit. You can make a film and watch it in slow motion if you don't notice the effect in normal play.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid."
-
How do you get the slow motion to work?
-
TT,
Slid the playback speed bar to the left to slow things down.
--ra--
-
The slider on the bottom changes replay speed.
As for proper dispersion at 1000 yards, I got out my reloading manuals. According to the 50'th anniversary edition of the Sierra bullets loading manual, the current World record for a 1000 yard group is under 4". Thousand yard bursts of 400 rounds should yield a few hits on any aircraft size target.
You may note that airplane wings are made of Aluminum, and quite able to bend. But when you are flying there is an equal amount of force pushing up on those wings as gravity is pulling down on your 6000-14000 pound airplane, which should take most of the spring out of the airframe. What makes a big difference is air density, thermals, turbulance, etc. None of this is modeled in the random matter of which it occurs in real life. It is simply out of the horsepower requirements of probably every computer that exists. So, we are missing a few links in an ultra-realistic gunnery model. Altitude has a big difference in air density, and that may or may not be modeled into the gunnery equasion, and I recall an interview with a former Black Sheep who would open fire at extreme ranges during high alt engagements in Korea. Less air to slow the bullet down. So altitude should/may play a part in gunery as well.
------------------
Lake City
-lakc-
-
Interesting thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Thx guys.
-
Agreed with all those that want no rang counters. They didn't have range counters in real life so the Hartmann cure to range finding made more sense. If you develop the skill of judging long range shots and the lead required to make hits, then you've earned it and deserve long ranged kills. I'll wager that HO passes would become less lethal or frequent when you don't see those numbers clicking down to your convergance or at least a viable range. Lose the icons PLEASE.
------------------
Sven 'hppy' Brown
900th Jaguars
963d AACS