Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: nimble on January 20, 2006, 11:06:47 PM
-
One of my wishes would be for realistic gun overheating in-game. Being able to spray until you are out of ammo is so gamey.
-
ya, they outta change that
-
yeah, kinda like if u ever played "call of duty" the machine guns can only be fired for around 4 seconds then it stops to cool down.
IMO would help to cut down on 8oo an 1K sparayers. It's not really a problem,but would like seein people be aim little rather than relying on luck.
-
In the interests of realisim...
- How much over heating of MG's was experienced by WWII pilots.....
- How many rounds could you expect to fire before barrel temp became a problem.
- Did the guns Jam or did the pilot find themselves firing the remains of their barrel at the enemy.
I think the buff gunners would feel the effects of this more than others
-
Never read about ww2 airplanes gun overheat problems. I think it wasnt problem at all because of high effectiveness of air cooling at speed.
Also i read interview with former soviet pilot who told as his wing leader shot down Ju87 with single long burst from 12x7mm (he flew in hurr1) spended almost all his ammo.
-
Oh, they'll overheat all right.
If you hold the trigger down, the barrels heat up and begin to warp. Dispersion increases dramatically.Eventually the barrels warp so much that the lead is going everywhere. You can get the gun so hot that it will keep firing after you let go of the trigger because the rounds "cook off" in the chamber...and of course a machine gun reloads itself.
OTOH, if you shoot in short bursts it not nearly as much of a problem.
-
---- Waiting till Karnak arrives and see this post :cool:
:D
-
because the rounds "cook off" in the chamber
Toad are you stating that from experience... ?
I was told once many moons ago that the idea of a bullet going off due to a fire (ie a box of bullets in a house fire) was highly unlikely.
Not having alot of experience in the area of fire arms though I would not know
-
No, I'm saying it from first-hand anecdotal experience.
My father flew B-25C's in New Guinea for the 345th Air Apaches. His aircraft and the rest in the squadron had 8 forward-firing 50's. When they low alt-raided Japanese airfields, they started shooting before the overflew the field boundary and held the gun button down all the way across the field. The guns overheated, sprayed .50's out in curving arcs (tracers, before you ask) AND were a hazard on the RTB because guns would "cook off". He said you had to be REAL careful not to point your nose at anyone in your formation for quite a long time after strafing a field that way.
If you'd like to talk to him and hear it first-hand let me know. I'll arrange a phone call for you.
He's posted on this BBS before, handle was Panther. As in 501st Black Panthers, 345th Air Apaches.
-
If you'd like to talk to him and hear it first-hand let me know. I'll arrange a phone call for you.
Nah Toad, your word is good enough for me I just wanted to clarify the source of the info....
That and I dont think I could afford the cost of the long call to the states... I would have to many questions for a WWII pilot to ask in a short one
Give your Dad a and a Hi from me
Later
-
the cooking off problem was an issue with ALL machineguns. i have heard from numerous WWII fighter pilots (documentaries and such) that you would NEVER fire all your ammo in one burst, though it was possible.
-
An Italian fighter got into a turn fight with some US planes while flying a C205, and was in a turn fight, and just held the trigger down while turning, after a while (unclear how long) one of his 20mm guns blew up (no major damage, but the gun probably blew a hole in his wing). It was his first flight in a 205 (his squad just got one) but they had to write the plane off afterwards, almost.
So firing nonstop *can* kill a gun in real life.
Question is: Do you want to simulate that? Not really, I say.
-
Though I am probably wrong I thought the guns would cut out after a certain point?
-
Yeah, they cut out at the point at which you quit pressing the trigger (or run out of ammo). ;)
-
Forum member Neil Stirling posted this on another forum (I would link to that thread but the forum is for members only). Its from a PRO document, Neil didn't provide the exact reference:
In its first form the gun fired about 600rpm and was found by the RAF to have severe limitations. The barrel was not capable of sustaining long bursts of fire, there were numerous stoppages due to inherent faults in design and breakages of components occured very early in the life of the gun.
The major fault was the poor life of the gun barrel and after a few rounds fire became completely inaccurate. reports of numerous trials were presented to the U.S Army Ordnance Corps but, since at the time the USAAF had but little operational experience and the complaint that worn out barrels should be replaced, despite the fact that it was impossible to replace barrels when a aircraft was in the air and that the supply of spare barrels might present problems during advanced operations. Caused the US army Ordnance Corps to develop an improved .50 Browning machine gun. This gun known as the T.36 had a rate of fire of 750rpm to 850 rpm and was designed to overcome the defects of the earlier model which had come to light in operations. The first T.36 guns became available in early 1944.
The following is quoted fromm the JFC in that same thread by Hop (AH poster Nashwan):
In addition to that you have one more great advantage - that is you can have longer and more frequent bursts without damage to the gun with the 20 than you can have from the .50 cal. That is important for the strafing airplane, because they are burning up their barrels and ruining their guns on one flight. Sometimes it is long before that one flight is over. They will come down with screaming barrels and get trigger happy, and then all the barrels are gone in one flight. It should not happen in a 20mm.
Butch provided this scan from the 'US late 1944 Aerial Gunnery manual':
(http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/1095830975bauc.jpg)
Poster, but now Persona Non Grata, Kurfürst posted the following scan from the Standard Ordnance Catalog:
(http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/post-2-1095865402.jpg)
Emmanuel Gustin posted:
There were two separate, important modifications: The increase in the rate of fire, around 1940, and the introducted of stellite-lined and chrome-plated barrels for the M2 aircraft gun, very late in the war. Barrel wear was recognized as a serious problem with the .50, and much effort went into designing a more wear-resistant barrel. But I don't know whether these barrels would have been available to the RAF (if only for testing) in early 1944.
A maximum 75-round burst (from a cold barrel) may not sound as a big restriction, but with the 2% to 5% hit rates typical for most pilots, it would only result in somewhere between 1 and 4 hits. The answer was to install large batteries of guns --- fortunately the USA built bigger fighters with more powerful engines than everyone else, so it wasn't such a big problem as it could have been.
I suppose the advantage of the Hispano HS.404 series in barrel wear would have been largely due to the projectiles having dedicated copper driving bands, while machine guns usually (not always) engage the rifling with the jacket of the projectile. But for the same effect on target the Hispano needed to achieve only a quarter of the hits, so it shorter bursts were likely to be fired anyway.
Hohun posted:
I just found the following information (Flight Journal, Special Issue Winter 2000):
"20mm cannon versus .50-caliber guns
In Monroe's - discussions, it became apparent that the British and the U. S. Navy were in the process of making a switch from .50-cailber guns to 20mm cannon. The principal reason was that although the 20mm cannon had a slower rate of fire, it put out more weight of metal than the .50-caliber gun in a given time, and it did not jam during a 20-second, full-load burst [**]. The U. S. Army was the prinipal aircraft-gun developer here. The Army Air Corps personnel who attended the conference adamantly held to the position that to get more lethal density from the configuration, .50-caliber guns must remain the wing-mounted armament. The 20mm would be tolerated only for the centerline gun installations such as those in the P-38 Lightning and the F7F Tigercat. As the discussions progressed, we were to see many more adamant, opinionated service doctrines."
* Cdr Jack Monroe, Chief of the Ordnance Branch of the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics, apparently responsible as host for the Joint Fighter Conference's ordnance discussions.
** For comparison, jamming was expected for .50-caliber guns in "bursts that exceeded five to 10 seconds".
poster hoarmurath wrote:
I have noticed a reference to length of bursts in the booklet written by Lt Col Westbrook that have been posted at Ring' Pro Doc site (http://prodocs.netfirms.com/):
II. BASIC TACTICS
1. Aerial Combat.
Following are a few points on aerial combat which should be habits while in the target area.
a. Look around
b. Stick together
c. Stick with your element leader. Should you lose him join with anyone. The pilot who is careless about getting off by himself will get it sooner or later.
d. An immediate attack is the best defense. If you have an even to better altitude advantage tangle with anything up to twice your number.
e. Don't try to turn with the Nip. It can't be done in any Allied aircraft. Break off when lead can no longer be held. At slow speeds (200-220) this will be approximately 40-50 degrees of turn. At high speed (350-375) as much as 180 degrees.
f. Be prepared for his turns on your approach -- starting shallow and then "reefing in" as you close within range.
g. Turn into the attack.
h. Keep up speed -- it's the big advantage.
i. Hold fire until within range. Bullet drop, loss of impact force, and dispersion make long range shooting impractical.
j. Try for a low quarter 10-20 degree deflection stern attack after driving down slightly below and behind him.
k. Don't rely on tracer or deflection shooting. Use the gunsight.
l. Allow an extra 1/4 to 1/2 ring when 2 "Gs" or more are being pulled on pursuit curve. Error the long side.
m. Bullet drop is not compensated for when you're in a bank -- you must aim high on the line of flight -- as along top of Nip fuselage.
n. Our planes are equipped with gun booster. The rate of fire is so increased that a four second burst will burn out the barrels on the first burst. Succeeding bursts must be reduced in length to two second maximums if firing is in quick succession.
o. If a Nipper catches you turn away from your element leader so that he will be able to turn into the Nip. Do this while pulling into a shallow balls-out climb or dive using plenty of evasive action.
p. The Nipper's favorite evasion is the split "S" close to the ground -- don't let him "auger you in"; it's been done!
q. If you are latched badly while on escort drag the Nipper across close to the bomber formation and let their guns brush him off.
r. Stick together.
The article can be found under 'US combat tactics'.
Felix99 wrote:
In "British Aircraft Armament - Vol. 2" by R. Wallace Clarke, the author notes, as Emmanuel says: "With minor improvements, the M2 armed nearly all US warplanes in the Second World War. One of its drawbacks was short barrel life: the ammunition was not fitted with the usual driving band, and when armour-piercing rounds were fired, the hard metal soon wore down the rifling. However, this was not seen as a major problem, and the supply of barrels was always adequate."
Hope this helps,
Felix
Pro-longed bursts seem to have caused concern in regards to several issues the main being barrel wear and jamming.
I was just reading several pilot accounts of Ami pilots during Bodenplatte (Jan 1 '45) several pilots commented on being caught up in the excitement of the attacks they held down their fire at one or two LW fighters running out of ammo. There's was mention of 4 or 6 sec burst with all guns. Then the pilots 'kicking themselves' for wasting so much ammo. There was no mention of jams / cook-offs etc...
With the hundreds of LW fighters flying OTD at 50 meters with their radios off and orders not to dogfight (push through to target) had these Ami pilots been more frugal with their ammo they would have most likely earned more then the 1 or 2 kills they did get. For most of these pilots this was there first and only up close contact with the enemy. LW fighters had become extremely rare at this point during the war.
-
If you hold the trigger down, the barrels heat up and begin to warp. Dispersion increases dramatically.Eventually the barrels warp so much that the lead is going everywhere.
Once when I was still in the Army I had a 50. Cal. run away on me...
The barrel went white hot.... rounds was landing behind & around my only tank.... 1 or 2 even went out and hit the front of the tank.
Oh yes they will cook off!.........:O
CAVALRY
-
There must be big differences between firing a .50 on the ground at 0 speed (BTW I'm not referring in any way to the experiences of the above posters who I'm assuming know their stuff) and firing one at 20,000 feet at 350 mph with regards to heating and cooling times. For realism, I'd have thought that these factors would need to be addressed.
I seem to remember early Hurricanes (as well as others) having problems with their guns freezing up at altitude and this being fixed by diverting hot air from the engine. So it seems that heat related problems were a two way street.
From the point of view of playing AH, I don't mind at all if my opponent rattles off all his ammo in one continuous spray at 1k. I'm much more afraid of the guy who manages to get close in, firing several short bursts.
Some of the great aces of WWII averaged something like 15 cannon shells expended per kill. This being because they didn't open fire until the enemy aircraft filled the screen.
The only thing that might be partially solved (in my own opinion, of course) would be the continuous and deadly accurate streams of fire from the arse end of American bomber vics.
KD
-
Originally posted by mussie
Toad are you stating that from experience... ?
I was told once many moons ago that the idea of a bullet going off due to a fire (ie a box of bullets in a house fire) was highly unlikely.
Not having alot of experience in the area of fire arms though I would not know
If you fire long bursts from a magazine fed weapon, such as an LMG then you have a chance of what's called a "runaway gun" rounds still being fed into the chamber as gas is ejecting the last round and the spring is loading another one into the chamber and on it goes.
If you fire burst in excess of 4-6 rounds per squeeze of the trigger from a linked fed weapon such as the GPMG or the US M-60 then you have a chance of damaging the barrel by over heating, If you do this on a consistent basis then you would have to change the barrel after say, 250-400 rounds.
changing barrels while in contact is not good for the health or nerves.....
-
However the overheating of machineguns would've been a big problem, I've heard much more stories about guns freezing, especially in bombers.
One good story was about an F4U pilot who stumbled upon a Japanese divebomber.
Both the F4U's and the Japanese rearfiring guns were frozen.
The pilot downed the divebomber by chopping off the tail with it's propellor (must've been possible due to rice-paper construction)
This sounds unbelievable, but it was a true story. Don't know where to find it though.
-
I think that modeling gun overheating is not a bad idea. I don't know how much of an effect it would have on the way people fight in AH, but it is a documented problem with holding the trigger down. It also seems that it would be fairly simple to create a generic "gun overheat" model. I doubt that the information is available to model each gun type's overheating time.
Loddar,
You continue to fail to understand why I opposed your idea.
-
I think that modeling gun overheating is not a bad idea. I don't know how much of an effect it would have on the way people fight in AH, but it is a documented problem with holding the trigger down. It also seems that it would be fairly simple to create a generic "gun overheat" model. I doubt that the information is available to model each gun type's overheating time.
Perhaps.
However, I personally believe just getting rid of the ammo counter is a simpler, more efficient, more realistic, and more effective way of discouraging people from the main effect its introduction will have upon AH - namely, getting rid of "spraying" and "long-range sniping".
Where's the need to model in a gun heat equation to the game, when just simply blacking out the ammo counters would do?
-
I have advocated the removal of the ammo counters for a long, long time.
-
and I have advocated their presence for a long, long, time :P
-
Removing the ammo counters would change some folks style and go unnoticed by others.
Some of the new cockpits have counters that are not in my normal "front" view when flying. It hasn't changed my style one bit. I generally fight until the guns go "click" anyway and I take any shot I think I can make. Seeing or not seeing counters hasn't changed that a bit.
For others it might make a difference. Those wrapped up in score or in saving their pixel life might fly more.....carefully.... and take less shots if they obsess about running out of ammo.
-
Removing the ammo counters would change some folks style and go unnoticed by others.
Some of the new cockpits have counters that are not in my normal "front" view when flying. It hasn't changed my style one bit. I generally fight until the guns go "click" anyway and I take any shot I think I can make. Seeing or not seeing counters hasn't changed that a bit.
For others it might make a difference. Those wrapped up in score or in saving their pixel life might fly more.....carefully.... and take less shots if they obsess about running out of ammo.
It also depends on the plane you are flying - not every plane has thousands of rounds to fire. I certainly wouldn't like to waste precious 200~240 rounds of cannons in a shot I'm not sure I can hit.
-
Why would you ever pull the trigger if you don't think there's a chance you could hit?
There are "sure thing" shots and "should hit" shots and "maybe shots" and "probably not" shots and "no way" shots.
I'll take any of the first four if that is what the situation demands. It all depends. But it doesn't depend on ammo counters.
-
Originally posted by Toad
No, I'm saying it from first-hand anecdotal experience.
My father flew B-25C's in New Guinea for the 345th Air Apaches. His aircraft and the rest in the squadron had 8 forward-firing 50's. When they low alt-raided Japanese airfields, they started shooting before the overflew the field boundary and held the gun button down all the way across the field. The guns overheated, sprayed .50's out in curving arcs (tracers, before you ask) AND were a hazard on the RTB because guns would "cook off". He said you had to be REAL careful not to point your nose at anyone in your formation for quite a long time after strafing a field that way.
If you'd like to talk to him and hear it first-hand let me know. I'll arrange a phone call for you.
He's posted on this BBS before, handle was Panther. As in 501st Black Panthers, 345th Air Apaches.
The greatest reason for not shooting out the rifling in you MGs is not to give the armorers an excuse to slip something venomous into your bunk.
My regards,
Widewing
-
I feel sorry for the 345th's armorers.
IIRC, he said it was pretty much standard procedure to change out the entire Wing's nose mounted gun barrels after every mission.
It was just the way they did it. SOP. They were convinced that it reduced the willingness of the AAA gunners to stand to the guns as they came in.
Maybe. 8-10 B-25's line abreast with 8 .50's each blazing away would probably make me duck.