Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: BALSUR on October 18, 2004, 09:44:19 PM
-
I've spent some time reseaching some information on the M2 .50 used in US aircraft. First off I want to say to HTC WTG it looks like you got this one right. Now, for everyone to understand this it will be detailed so if I sound as if I am going to indepth, sorry. The biggest thing you must remember when dealing with weapons and munitions is what you see in the movies is for the big screen. What we're talking about here is muzzle velocity. Due to the short barrels in the wings the ammunition cannot obtain full powder burn. So, your .50's and other "rifle" cartridges are only getting from 500 to 800 foot pounds. Most pistol cartridges achieve up to 1100 so, you can see where distance, accuracy and power is greatly reduced. When you use these calibers with proper barrel length you'll acheive the 2000+ you'd expect from them. This is partly why cannons became a must. Not because their ballistics where any better(only slightly, 1300 to 1800) but, because they were equiped with explosive charges. Airplanes that had weapons in the cowel or through the prop driveshaft faired better results due in fact to longer barrels and better ballistics.
Using this knowledge and pilot experiences you'd want to get close and use shorter convergences. Shot placement is probly the biggest key. According the Luftwaffe reseachers all the rifle calibers to include the .50 would just punch little holes in the plane unless it hit the pilot or engines. The cannons were made to punch through and explode causing great damage. Thats why every german plane had a cannon. Early in the war the British had a problem with their cannons. The fuzes weren't quite right the cannon shells would explode before or pass through and explode. So, they went to AP rounds which meant they were back to shooting at the pilot or engine agian.
Ok, now that I've opened this hornets nest have at it!
-
ok so you are saying that the .50's they have modeled are correct in AH?
i dont know what is right or what is wrong, but please don't say that the .50's only work shooting pilot or close range. (thats what i got from reading your post).
if that is what you are saying, then why can the .50's rip a plane up at 800+ yards in ah, but the cannons have such dispersment you will almost not get a hit at ranges above 500
sir, just trying to get what you are saying, because i dont think im reading it right
-
What I am saying is due to the fact that low muzzle velocity effects range, accuracy and power most ww2 vets would keep their convergences low and would wait until they were close before engaging.
I know many people get kills and hits at 800 or even those magical few get 1000 meter kills. That I believe is part of the game and would be hard to model correctly. Take some time and look at old combat footage of ww2. Pilots didn't engage way out except on head on passes but that was because of the fast closing distance. The cannons would disperse even greater due to the greater density of the shell. They also had the fuze thing going on and 400 to 600 meters would be realistic. Alot of fuzes wouldn't ignite until it impacted the skin of the aircraft. This proved not to be the best for those ground folks so, Air burst fuzes were developed in which the shell would leave the barrel and arm itself after so many revolutions then travel farther and explode.
A goood movie with real footage is The Memphis Bell. They show a german plane behind a B17 and you can actually see the cannon explosion sprites in the B17.
-
A .50 is not considered a rifle cartridge. And I don't understand your comparison of aircraft machine guns to pistols. But yes, cannons are way more effective than MGs.
-
The comparison is the foot pounds.
the .50 and other "rifle" caliber MG's were only hitting 500 to 800 and an average pistol cartridge can hit upto a 1100. No comparison just using an example of muzzle velocity.
The M2 is considered a heavy machine gun but, back in the day the .50 round was classed into rifle cartridges because it wasn't a cannon and didn't carry an explosive charge. It was an aircraft classification only.
-
A foot pound is not a measure of muzzle velocity, and I don't think there is any type of ballistic measurement where a pistol would be greater than a .50, regardless of how short the .50 barrel is.
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Using this knowledge and pilot experiences you'd want to get close and use shorter convergences. Shot placement is probly the biggest key. According the Luftwaffe reseachers all the rifle calibers to include the .50 would just punch little holes in the plane unless it hit the pilot or engines. The cannons were made to punch through and explode causing great damage. Thats why every german plane had a cannon. Early in the war the British had a problem with their cannons. The fuzes weren't quite right the cannon shells would explode before or pass through and explode. So, they went to AP rounds which meant they were back to shooting at the pilot or engine agian.
Ok, now that I've opened this hornets nest have at it!
HTC hasn't modelled the guns this accurate at all. In some games I can understand the difference in damage do to power, but I do not think AH2 has reached this level of complexity yet. A hit is a hit, its not scored any other way. No matter if you shoot it from 2000 out, or 50 out, it does the same damage. - Do not quote me on this because I could be wrong, however I am pretty sure the game is not this complex...
-
QUOTE:"Take some time and look at old combat footage of ww2."
The cameras used for these shots had zoom lenses on them. What you are seeing is at an average of 200yds. I dont know about you but my .50's in a pony are like spitwads even at point blank ranges. A Browning M2 could pierce an engine block at 1.5 and you're saying they wont shred a wing at 200. Okee Dokee
-
I dont know about you but my .50's in a pony are like spitwads even at point blank ranges. A Browning M2 could pierce an engine block at 1.5 and you're saying they wont shred a wing at 200. Okee Dokee
Depends.
There's no way for one to tell the difference between 10 rounds landing on the target and 50 rounds landing on the target unless you run the film file in slowest of motions and actually count all the "layers" of overlapped hit sprites forming.
I bet the number of successful hits at "point blank range" you claim is hardly as much as you think it is.
Besides, four out of five major air-war combatants of WW2 concluding the 20mm was much more efficient weapon for A2A purposes should mean something.
-
.50 cal damage to a 190G-6:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/245_1098198359_5496107.0.50browningeffectonbf109g6_1.jpg)
Nice little holes.
-
Originally posted by Mak333
HTC hasn't modelled the guns this accurate at all. In some games I can understand the difference in damage do to power, but I do not think AH2 has reached this level of complexity yet. A hit is a hit, its not scored any other way. No matter if you shoot it from 2000 out, or 50 out, it does the same damage. - Do not quote me on this because I could be wrong, however I am pretty sure the game is not this complex...
You are incorrect and I'm quoting you on it ;). Velocity plays a major role in how much damage a round does in AH and bullets lose velocity as the travel. Many of us think it is playing too high a role in damage as looking at the MG/FF and Type 99 Model 1 when compared to the MG151/20 and the MG151/20 when compared to the Hispano Mk II.
Do some searches by posts made by Pyro and you should be able to find his explanations of how it works.
EDIT:
Kweassa,
Don't forget that the US Navy concluded the same thing. IIRC AH's performance relationship between the Browning M2 .50 caliber and the M2/Hispano Mk II 20mm is based on the US Navy's finding that one Hispano was equal in firepower to three .50 calibers. If I remember my RoF correctly, 10rps for the Hispano and 12.5rps for the .50 caliber, that would make one hit from a Hispano equal to 3.75 hits from the .50 cal, if the Navy was counting the effectiveness under the assumtion that all rounds hit. If they were being more realistic and docking the cannon's performance due to the few rounds being put in the air resulting in lower chances of scoring hits then it would have to be more on the one hispano hit equaling five or six .50 caliber hits.
-
Mak333, you are completely wrong.
HiTech
-
Velocity is measured in units of speed, eg. feet/sec
Energy is measured in foot-pounds... Muzzle energy is simply a function of weight and speed.
AHII has to model range for several factors - speed (including reducing with distance) to compute the time to get there, effects of air resistance and gravity, mass of the bullet (weight), and finally (as a function of mass and speed) energy delivered.
The energy delivered is what determines the damage.
I can drop a bullet on your foot and it might hurt a bit. If I shoot you in the foot - well, ask Mak333 - I think he shot himself in the foot.
:aok
-
Well thank you Hitech for letting me know :aok
-
Originally posted by hitech
Mak333, you are completely wrong.
HiTech
LOL! that sure told you.
sit down and shut up. :D
-
Seems to me damage is based on velocity.. Thats why hispanos kick butt and the more explosive german20mm's suck.
-
I think the Hispanos are better than the German 20mms because they are easier to aim. If you hit something with the German cannons it goes down.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Mak333, you are completely wrong.
HiTech
Good to know... how about clearing it up a shade so others know and can share the knowledge next time this comes up?
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Due to the short barrels in the wings the ammunition cannot obtain full powder burn. So, your .50's and other "rifle" cartridges are only getting from 500 to 800 foot pounds. Most pistol cartridges achieve up to 1100 so, you can see where distance, accuracy and power is greatly reduced.
Sorry, but you're way off here. A .50cal (say 700 grain bullet give or take) would have to have a velocity of only 500 ft/sec to give 800 foot pounds of energy. Or less than half the speed of my .357 snub nose. At the frequently quoted muzzle velocity of 2900 ft/s for the 50cal its energy is over 26,000 foot pounds. If we assume that the aircraft version was so bad that it's muzzle velocity was only 2000 ft/s it still has 12,500 foot pounds. You're figure of 500-800 is just wrong.
If the .50 was as bad as you say, bullet energy would be the least of our concerns. A 700 grain bullet with 800 ft-lbs of energy is only going 340mph!!! Most of the planes in AH could outrun it!
--Peregrine.
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
Good to know... how about clearing it up a shade so others know and can share the knowledge next time this comes up?
It has been shared in the past. My post above HiTech's was not a wild guess.
-
Alrighty.. What I'm saying is a brief description would have been helpfull.
-
IDK, but ive seen real live guncams and some vids of .50s being shot at heystackes with targets on them (for the convergances) and .50s i think were more acuratley "displayed" back when AH2 1st came out, but still too strong. I think they went a tad overboard with the toning down on the .50s. Ive seen a guncamera of the P51D and the P40E and they completely ripped planes apart, expecially the P40E on the Jap planes in the pacific. I saw a P51D zoom down on a 109G6 and rip its wing clear off, but i dont know how close they were.
-My 2 cents!!!!!! :p
-
ok Peregrin, you can go and read it for yourself. The ballistic information came from "WW2 Fighter Gun Debate" at the following sight....
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hanger/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html
I believe the Ballistic table came from the US Navy.
I also looked into gun cameras having a zoom on them and they did not. Then common sense told me they were activated when the pilot pulled the trigger how would he be able to zoom them in and out. He couldn't! Shouldn't of even spent my time looking this one up.
As for the real live gun cams of airplanes flying in and "blowing the wings off" of other planes there are many factors involved in this. How many - or + G's the plane was pulling. How many hits on the wing and so on. Bottom line is I didn't say it couldn't be done.
-
Blowing the wing off with .50s usually happened when the hit rounds penetrated and ignited the ammo box. Otherwise, just plain cutting the wing off with .50s alone would require a significant amount of .50s striking the supporting structures and causing it to fail.
Frankly, the only cases of .50 guncams blowing wings off planes I've seen was when the enemy plane was already on fire and losing control, and could be cosidered "shot down". .50s hit, fuel leak, fuel ignition, pilot bails, and boom! the flame ignites the ammo box and the wing rips off. I've never seen .50 rounds just plain "saw off" a wing.
In that sense, I'm all for implementing a new situation in AH2, so when a plane is leaking fuel, more hits to the leaking area would have a high chance(at least 30%) of igniting the fuels and causing a flame.
However, I've seen nothing problematic with the accuracy, or hitting power of the .50 itself.
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
ok Peregrin, you can go and read it for yourself. The ballistic information came from "WW2 Fighter Gun Debate" at the following sight....
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hanger/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html
I believe the Ballistic table came from the US Navy.
Actually, I can't read it for myself, since the link is broken. But I don't need to read it. I've done the unit conversion necessary. Energy is 0.5 * mass * velocity**2 every time. You're numbers for .50 cal energy are wrong, no matter who you're quoting.
Also, I believe the fellow who referred to a "zoom" lens meant a telephoto lens, ie, a lens with fixed but large magnification. No pilot intervention required.
--Peregrine.
-
Just curious........
Are the .50s modelled as API or just plain ole .50 cal. bullets?
-
In most of the US gun camera footage I've seen, the target plane winds up on fire. Also a lot of the British BoB reports mention their targets burning or smoking heavily. In RL were fuel/oil lines armored? It seems that if you sprayed a target plane with .50 bullets you would have a pretty good chance of cutting a line somewhere. Is that type of thing modeled in AH or just if you hit the engine or fuel tank itself?
63tb
-
I think the word of the thread here people is:
Get closer. And when you think you're close,....GET CLOSER!
-
I dont recall whether or not they are API or not. I think they should be though.
-
"What we're talking about here is muzzle velocity. Due to the short barrels in the wings the ammunition cannot obtain full powder burn. So, your .50's and other "rifle" cartridges are only getting from 500 to 800 foot pounds. Most pistol cartridges achieve up to 1100 so, you can see where distance, accuracy and power is greatly reduced. When you use these calibers with proper barrel length you'll acheive the 2000+ you'd expect from them. This is partly why cannons became a must. Not because their ballistics where any better(only slightly, 1300 to 1800)"
"The comparison is the foot pounds.
the .50 and other "rifle" caliber MG's were only hitting 500 to 800 and an average pistol cartridge can hit upto a 1100. No comparison just using an example of muzzle velocity. "
Balsur,
I guess those WWII armorers should have just stripped the machine guns out of the wings and put Model 1911 Colts in!
I don't where you get this stuff, but you are off by a mile! To say that a WWII Aircraft machine gun has less energy than a pistol is so far off the mark as to make anything else you say suspect.
Get your facts straight before you post such a ridiculous statement.
Example, my favorite pistol round is the .45acp. :
From http://www.federalcartridge.com
MV is Muzzle Velocity, ME is Muzzle Energy
230 Gr. JHP Hydrashock 850 MV fps / 369 ME Ft-lbs
185 Gr. JHP 950 MV fps / 371 ME Ft-lbs
230 Gr. FMJ 835 MV fps / 356 ME Ft-lbs
185 Gr. JHP+P Hydrashock 1140 MV fps / 534 ME Ft-lbs
The site you put the incorrect link to is probably: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-pe.html (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-pe.html)
The 50 cal M2:Browning .50 M2 Bullet Weight: 43.3Gr. That is in Grams, not Grains. 43.3 Grams is 1.6 ounces!
Pistol bullets are listed in Grains, Machine Guns in Grams.
In other words the .45 acp 185 gr. weighs only 11.99 Grams.
50 cal M2 Muzzle Velocity is 880 Meters/sec
NOTE: That is Meters per second, NOT feet per second!!!!
The WWII M2 .50 cal machine gun had a bullet weight 3.6 times higher and travelled 3.1 times faster than a pistol.
If you had ever fired a pistol or a machine gun you would have known intuitively how ridiculous your opening statement was.
-
when ur plane is onfire it should blow up faster cause u cant fly in and inferno for 5 min> seen it happen in AH!
-
In most of the US gun camera footage I've seen, the target plane winds up on fire. Also a lot of the British BoB reports mention their targets burning or smoking heavily. In RL were fuel/oil lines armored? It seems that if you sprayed a target plane with .50 bullets you would have a pretty good chance of cutting a line somewhere. Is that type of thing modeled in AH or just if you hit the engine or fuel tank itself?
That's a very good question 63tb.
People who think .50s are too weak, should be asking for a better DM implementation than demanding that the .50s are changed back into the laser-weapon that it was in AH1.
AFAIK AH has a very limited internal DM parts - the pilot, engine, oil, radiator and fuels. Other parts such as superchargers, throttle system, support structures, cable/rods and etc aren't modelled(at least, it seems that way).
Thus, a plane armed with a .50 HMG(especially, mounted at the wings), usually needs to bring down an enemy craft by causing a direct structural faillure. This wasn't a problem when hitting thing at 500yards was pretty easy as in AH1, but since it is much harder to score consistent hits on the enemy plane now in AH2, the lack of internal systems really shows.
One shouldn't expect "lighting up the enemy plane like a Christams tree" will just pop the enemy plane out of the sky like some suggest, however, it should have a significant chance of damaging some of the internal systems to the extent that survival becomes a serious mater on the receiving end.
A few rods or cables could be cut, slowing down the efficiency in maneuvering. A fuel line can be cut, causing leaks. Leaking fuel can be ignited, causing fires.. and etc etc. However, currently, the only direct result of a .50 armed plane that "rakes across the surface, but fails to do structural damage" is minor inconvenience at best. The most serious thing that could happen in that case is a pilot wound or a radiator damage.
Again, in this sense I do agree that somethings could be done better.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Besides, four out of five major air-war combatants of WW2 concluding the 20mm was much more efficient weapon for A2A purposes should mean something.
There's another layer to that US decision though -- US was the only power that didnt have to worry about bringing down tough buffs. Almost all US combat was fighter to fighter, not fighter to bomber. (Japanese Type One Lighters don't count.) Since US targets had less resistent airframes, the advantage of true ballistic concentration was chosen.
For example, Yeager liked the 0.50s because he didnt have mixed ballistics to worry about -- every projectile from his wing had the same energy characteristics and would theoretically hit at the same deflection. He said that if you held the burst on point for a fraction of a second, 50s would rip throughj anything.
I think thats true in AH2. Remember that airframes have more "hit boxes" in AH2 model than AH1. Blasting away is likely to spread your hits along a number of boxes, so no single box will accumulate enough damage to register a kill. You can easily kill fighters with 6x50s, if you understand your convergance and focus hits on a specific PART of your target.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Blasting away is likely to spread your hits along a number of boxes, so no single box will accumulate enough damage to register a kill. You can easily kill fighters with 6x50s, if you understand your convergance and focus hits on a specific PART of your target.
This quote sums it up well for AH2!
-
Originally posted by BALSUR
Ok, now that I've opened this hornets nest have at it!
This had troll written on it from the start.
Karaya