Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: niklas on October 29, 2000, 11:38:00 AM
-
i run a test how the muzzle velocity changes with distance
The X-Axis is a linear distance unit (NOT yard or meter, but 7.5 is approximate the range where the mk108 30mm round disappears, 0.5 is ~50-100yards in front of the spinner)
The Y-Axis is a kind of time unit, the higher the slower is the muzzle flying (bad of course)
Because i got the impression that deceleration is a linear function of distance, i used only to points, at the beginning and at the end for the curve.
For Guns:
(http://www.stud.mw.tum.de/~sl1/guns.gif)
For Cannons:
(http://www.stud.mw.tum.de/~sl1/cannon.gif)
mg151 and Shvak (seem to be almost equal) are modelled to be at the beginning almost as fast as Hispanos and NIK cannons, but to slow down much faster. That makes long ranges shots almost impossible, while Hispanos and 99 M2 cannons.... you know it.
Zero cannons hold their velocity well too, but are slow from the beginning.
Strange is imo that small mg-guns have no high velocity, and they slow down very fast compared to heavy guns.
.50 cal are modelled to be fastest and to slow down least ...
niklas
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 10-29-2000).]
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 10-29-2000).]
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 10-29-2000).]
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 10-29-2000).]
-
http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm (http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm)
The customary measure of the ability of a round to retain speed is by its Ballistic Coefficient (BC). A higher BC indicates that a round retains its velocity better.
I have very good information on a number of rounds. .50 BMG rounds typically have a G1-BC in the range of .65-.72 (this is quite good). .30 cal rounds typically have a G1-BC around .50 (average) and the G1-BCs for Mg151/20mm rounds are typically between .30 and .50.
In general a heavy long round will have a higher BC. i.e. if you have 2 rounds of identical caliber that are pushing aside the same amount of air the heavier round will hold its speed better because the force of the drag has to operate on a bigger mass. A 130g 20mm round should hold its speed significantly better than a 90g 20mm round. Similarly if you have identically shaped .30 and .50 rounds the larger round should have better ballistics because it has higher sectional density. In this particular example the .50 round should generate about 2.8 times the drag of the .30 round but weigh 4.6 times as much.
Hooligan
-
Intersting site Hooligan, but i don´t think the AH code is handling those equations there (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I had a look at the calculator site. The big question is what input did they use (geometry input). This is what the calculator needs.
Variables
a total vector acceleration aD vector acceleration due to drag
C ballistic coefficient CD drag coefficient
d bullet diameter F vector drag force
g vector gravitational acceleration G "G" function
i form factor KD drag coefficient
m mach number M bullet mass
p atmospheric density p0 sea level atmospheric density
pi 3.14159... SD sectional density
s cross sectional area (pi d2/4) v vector velocity, | v | = (v·v)1/2 and v = u - w
w vector wind velocity u velocity of bullet relative to ground
The results of your site depend very much from the input values, especially CD, KD.
-
Niklas:
Sorry I forget to mention in my earlier post: Thanks for going to all the work and producing this information (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
It is easy to determine the ballistic coefficient (upon which so much depends) if you have some actual trajectory data for the round in question. This is what I did in my example.
Also, ballistic calculations by numerical integration are well understood and accepted so I would be very surprised if AH does not use something very similar. So IMO the AH code is "handling those equations". As far as I can tell the outputs of the AH model certainly seem to indicate that the AH ballistics model is right on. Frankly, compared to many other components of AH, ballistics of this sort are trivial and very easy to get right.
Hooligan
-
There is always the chance that an error might slip in. No human is so perfect as to not make any errors.
In the case of AH there was an error in ballistics, trivial as you say it is. Gravity was applied twice in the equations. IIRC Hitech noticed this when he was working on the tank sight (I've been lurking on this BBS unregistered for a long time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) ). As always, this error was swiftly corrected.
So what's my point? No matter how trivial something is, an error might still slip in(mark me, I am not implying that there are any errors in AH's ballistics) and it will only get noticed by chance if anyone does not investigate.
------------------
---
SageFIN
"The wolves are gathering, the stars are shifting...
come, join us in the hunt!"
---
-
Hooligan:
quote:" It is easy to determine the ballistic coefficient (upon which so much depends) if you have some actual trajectory data for the round in question".
Hmm when you have the data why do you need to recalculate them ?? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
You see at the moment i´m interested in the difference of the weapons in AH, not in RL. And i find it quite interesting to see that a AH-hispano round has after ~1000yards still the same velocity like a mg151 round after ~75yards (though your calculation says a cannon round loses ~half of it´s speed after 600-800yards...)
niklas
-
Niklas:
I don't think you understand what I said.
Hmm when you have the data why do you need to recalculate them?
I have trajectory data. From that I calculate Ballistic Coefficients and these BCs can be used in ballistic programs to calculate trajectories under various conditions.
And i find it quite interesting to see that a AH-hispano round has after ~1000yards still the same velocity like a mg151 round after ~75yards (though your calculation says a cannon round loses ~half of it´s speed after 600-800yards...)
My calculations say that at sea level an Mg151 CANNON ROUND loses a very large part of its velocity in 600 to 800 yards. Mg151 rounds have very poor ballistics (among the worst) Hispano rounds have excellent ballistics (among the best) both in the real world and AH. Hispano rounds are pretty close to .50 M2 rounds in performance in AH so I will use .50 data from my example.
In my sea-level example, the .50 round loses about 25% of its velocity in 600 yards. The 151 Mine shell loses about 60% of its velocity in the same distance. Results for the Hispano should be similar to results for the .50 M2 so you charts and my example produce similar results.
Also according to your charts, an AH-Hispano round at 1000 yards does not have the same velocity of an Mg151 round at 75 yards. On your chart the HS velocity at 750 yards is definitely less than the 151 velocity at 75. It appears that the true range where this occurs is about 550 yards.
I am not certain how accurate your velocity measurements are, but at the relationships between the velocities of the Mg151, HS and .50 M2 seem fairly consistent with real world data.
Hooligan
-
Hooligan, again: 7.5 does NOT mean 750yards!!
i don´t know anything about supersonic aerodynamics.
All i know about simulation programs that it depends very much on your input.
Have you an origional trajctory picture for the hispanos?
-
Hooligan said: ...at sea level...
So, is it so that AH take air density in the ballistics calculations and, hence at high altitute, you are getting flatter trajectory and faster bullets at long range?
Or is the difference negligible?
-
Originally posted by janjan:
Hooligan said: ...at sea level...
So, is it so that AH take air density in the ballistics calculations and, hence at high altitute, you are getting flatter trajectory and faster bullets at long range?
Or is the difference negligible?
no its not negligible. the very thin air allows for an excellent extirior ballistics enviroment. However it is still relevant in that the the performance between the different rounds will still have the same gap.
Hooligan is also correct in his findings. One thing to add is that finding BC's is not always constant. The "static" ballistic Coeffecient of a projectile is easy to find. It is a basic formula using the sectional density and some other factors. But when the projectile is launched it changes constantly during its flight.
A basic way of looking at it is this.
the faster, most aero dynanmic, heaviest projectile will perform the the best in extirior ballistics. This is not to sya it will be the best performer in a terminal aspect however..ie..upon impact. However it has been said that the effects from supiorior energy outweighs the effect of a small amount of HE. the diameter of the round of course has a great effect on a projectiles destructive force, especially if it is combined with a alot of velocity.
ammo
-
Hooligan, did you ever get your copy of "Rapid Fire"? If you have, I would appreciate knowing what your opinon is.
Interesting test Niklas. How did you do it, and what are the scales/units of the test.
The results are pretty much what I would expect to see.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Vermillion:
I pre-ordered it months ago and my copy still has not arrived (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif).
Hooligan
-
Looks like Hispano and .50 caliber has tiny rocket projectiles when those don't lose much with distance...
or other guns has flat tipped projectiles so that drag definetly would affect..
-
Fishu:
On my web site I pointed to some trajectory data which gives the Mg151 Mine shell a G1-BC of .263 (very bad) and ball Ammo for the .50 M2 a G1-BC of .72 (very good).
You seem to think that somehow the ballistics of these 2 rounds should be closer. Do you actually have any data at all? If not, why do you keep sharing your ignorance with us?
Hooligan
[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 10-30-2000).]
-
fishu.... all U.S. fifties and Hispano 20mm rounds did indeed have "tiny rockets" in their base. The balistic coeficients of said rounds was of course twice as good as other rounds but that was tivial compared to the little rockets. As you may have guessed.. the rockets were a very well guarded secret! The information has only recently been declassified for everyone with the exception of Finland... No people from Finland are allowed to know about the little rockets to this day. There is no reason to keep this info from them other than to frustrate them... Reason enough I suppose.
lazs
-
Hooligan,
Ignorance is all fishu HAS to share, besides his attitude.
Mav
-
.50 cal and Hispano starting out the fastest and slowing down the least? That should not be surprising to anybody who took high school physics or is familiar with firearms. If you have two items with about the same drag, but one is heavier, which one slows down quicker?
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-30-2000).]
-
funked, that was at best a transparent attempt to hide the secret of the little rockets.
lazs
-
Laz!
Cool it! Loose lips sink ships!
Next thing you know you'll be telling them about the second-stage solid fuel boosters on the WW2 .50 and the 20mm.
Oops!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Toad
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
-William Pitt
-
We does hooligan keep comparing the ballistics of the mine round for the 151 with the ? round for the hispano. We know that the hispano is an AP round. But I thought we were certain that the mine round was not modeled in AH. So why keep comparing it?
What are the ballistics of the 151 AP round.
What are the ballistics of the Hispano AP round...
No name calling now.
-
Originally posted by Toad:
Laz!
Cool it! Loose lips sink ships!
Next thing you know you'll be telling them about the second-stage solid fuel boosters on the WW2 .50 and the 20mm.
Oops!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Darnit toad. You keep this up and we won't be having a battle of wits anymore!!!! I won't play with someone who arms the Finns. (or at least one of them)
You know darn well this could lead to a new and disastrous arms race!!
Mav
-
Pongo:
I think that you are wrong. 151 Mine rounds have a MV around 800 m/s. All other 151 rounds have a MV around 705m/s.
Niklas charts show a MV for the 151 nearly identical to that of ShVak (which is 800 m/s) and much closer to the HS than it would be if it was an AP round.
Hooligan
-
I wonder whos ignorant in here..
maverick, look at the mirror ok?
I think i'll give up.. theres alot other sims coming up, where hopefully is people that can discuss instead of callin others "whiner whiner whiner" on every second post.
So.. Aces High will be 'yankee rules' type of sim.. err game.. (didnt ht say its game not sim? explains alot..)
Well, thats good if wants to come along with the budget and for them who don't really care about hispanos with 30mm HE effect..
..but for them who looks for the sim, it is pretty depressing.
I wonder if 'Maverick' and other guys have ever flown 109 in AH for hundred kills.
Tell what you tell, but you can't say there isn't frustrating difference with the cannons.
If I am luftwaffe whiner (though, I wonder that.. I consider myself more of neutral, as I try to seek for a sim, not for arcade), then you "allied whiners" better think from another perspective than from your F4u 1C seats perspective.
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 10-31-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
If I am luftwaffe whiner (though, I wonder that.. I consider myself more of neutral, as I try to seek for a sim, not for arcade), then you "allied whiners" better think from another perspective than from your F4u 1C seats perspective.
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 10-31-2000).]
you try to seek for a sim...? You mean you actually try to seek to justify your point of view on your own "thoughts and suppositions" and not any research or data. And it isnt working. Sorry fishu, don't pull out the "allied oppertunist" truimp, it wont work. There are at least 2 people who know a little about ballistics that have attempted to show you, but you disreguarg. The 30mm was very destructive in close, as was the 20mm LW stuff. But it just will not do what you want it to do.
So if you really have gotten you feelings hurt and intend to leave, well heres a quarter......
{translation, nonone wants to hear your whining}
ammo
-
Fishu:
Do you or do you not have some actual data?
Hooligan
-
The discrepancy we have here is IMO due to the synthesis modelling of the rounds. We have Hispano rounds that fly with the trajectory of an AP Hispano round. We have Mauser rounds that fly with the trajectory of an HE Mauser round (allegedly). (I don't know squat about the Russian, Italian and Japanese cannons... does anyone have any numbers to throw in? What type of round would their trajectories suggest?)
This would be very well if the other characteristics of the weapons would have been modelled using the same ammo type as with the ballistics calculations. The problem is, they aren't. According to Pyro they sort of combined the HE and AP effects into a single round so that the guns don't really fire different sorts of ammo.
So now we have Hispano with HE capabilities (or all the other cannon's are lacking theirs) and with the trajectory of an AP round. Mauser apparently does not have any AP capabilities (it's damage in A2A is IMO fine) and has the trajectory of a HE round. I don't really know enough of the other cannons to say anything about them.
So perhaps the Hispano's ballistics should be calculated using the HE projectile or then maybe other cannon's ballistics should use the AP round to determine trajectory, BC and such.
Hooligan, you might have info about the BCs and weights of the Hispano HE rounds and of the AP rounds of Mg151 both AP and HE, ShVak, Type-99 etc. ? (The BCs for the Hispano AP and Mg151 minengeschosse have already been posted) Care to post them?
------------------
---
SageFIN
"The wolves are gathering, the stars are shifting...
come, join us in the hunt!"
---
-
I don't have trajectory data for Hispano rounds.
There shouldn't be much difference between the trajectories of most HE and AP rounds for the same guns. The reason that there is a big difference for the Mine round and the AP round is that the Mine round is much lighter (around 90g instead of 115g). All the conventional 151 rounds (including HE) that I have information on weigh about 115g and have similar G1-BCs in the range of .44 to .50.
Here are some BCs I have calculated.
45.9g .50 Ball .72
42.9g .50 AP/I .65
(all of the following 151 rounds weigh 115g except for the mine)
151 HE-tracer .48
151 HE-practice .44
151 HE/I .48
151 Incendiary .47
87g Mine .27
90g Mine .27
Concerning the Mauser's AP performance: The 151 AP round has a muzzle velocity of 705 m/s (compared to around 880 m/s for the Hispano or 928 m/s for the .50 AP/I). At short range a Hispano can punch through about 45mm of armor plate, while a .50 and 151 should both be able to punch through about 25mm. .50s don't do much to PzIV's either.
Hispano's do hit somewhat harder than the other cannons, but they should. They fire larger rounds at a much higher velocity. A Hispano AP round will go through most of the aircraft structure in addition to the pilot armor on any WWII fighter at any range at which you can hit.
Hooligan
[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 10-31-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
I wonder whos ignorant in here..
maverick, look at the mirror ok
I think i'll give up.. theres alot other sims coming up, where hopefully is people that can discuss instead of callin others "whiner whiner whiner" on every second post.
So.. Aces High will be 'yankee rules' type of sim.. err game.. (didnt ht say its game not sim? explains alot..)
Well, thats good if wants to come along with the budget and for them who don't really care about hispanos with 30mm HE effect..
..but for them who looks for the sim, it is pretty depressing.
I wonder if 'Maverick' and other guys have ever flown 109 in AH for hundred kills.
Tell what you tell, but you can't say there isn't frustrating difference with the cannons.
If I am luftwaffe whiner (though, I wonder that.. I consider myself more of neutral, as I try to seek for a sim, not for arcade), then you "allied whiners" better think from another perspective than from your F4u 1C seats perspective.
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 10-31-2000).]
Fishu, As I have stated in the past. You read about things that I have personal experience at. Then you proceed to try and expound as an expert at what you have read about. I spent 24 years in Armor. I have fired many thousands of small caliber MG's (7.62), 50 Cal MG's both in infantry and tank mounts. Yes fishu, 50 cals will sail right through both sides of an armored personnel carrier (M113) constructed of aluminum that is considerably thicker, harder and heavier than WW2 aircraft. I have also fired quite a few cannon rounds at both hard and soft targets. This doesn't even count any small arms experience I had. Now how many MG's have you fired? How many cannon rounds have you fired? How much time have you spent on a real live fire range setting and replacing targets? How many "hard targets" have you examined before and after the range was opened? Have you ever attended a classified ordinance and weapon briefing? What is your security classification in ANY armed force?
I taught Armor tactics in the Army Armor Officers Advance Course. I taught the operational(tactical and strategic) and administrative portion of the Army Command and General Staff Course. You have the audacity to say that I am ignorant???? You don't even have the experiances of a first week boot camp enlistee.
This IS a game fishu, it is not real. I don't care how many "missions or sorties" you have flown in a game. How many hours have you flown as a pilot in any airplane??? I have my own plane that I fly, for real, not just some computer game. I also know and speak to veterans of WW2 who flew the REAL planes in combat.
I would like to know just how or on what basis you say the 20mm (HISPANO) is the equivalent to a 30mm HE round. Where is your data? Do you have any charts? Do you have any information on ballistics, explosive characteristics of either round?
Finally, yes there are a lot of other sims coming. In one or another someone there will know even less than you do and will have no idea that you really don't know what you are talking about. I am sure you will enjoy being an "expert" to them. As far as I can see, the only thing you are expert in is what is commonly used to fertilize gardens and is the byproduct of the cattle industry.
Mav
[This message has been edited by Maverick (edited 10-31-2000).]
-
Nice post Mav (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Never have said myself as an expert, maverick, you're going too far mr. rambo.
I would like to know just how or on what basis you say the 20mm (HISPANO) is the equivalent to a 30mm HE round. Where is your data? Do you have any charts? Do you have any information on ballistics, explosive characteristics of either round?
Are you serious? buah.. that was AH description for the Hispano...
It is 20mm AP (well, so they say) but still it blows up pieces off like 30mm.
I know kinda well that Hispano is 20mm.. I know well too that it was AP, but AH knows it as HE or something between.
Ok.. i'll ignore you Maverick, you don't seem read enough that you would had understood that I have talked of AH hispano in that one.
Do you happen to be that same Maverick of 'Omnipotent'?
At least you two sound alike.
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
I don't have trajectory data for Hispano rounds.
There shouldn't be much difference between the trajectories of most HE and AP rounds for the same guns. The reason that there is a big difference for the Mine round and the AP round is that the Mine round is much lighter (around 90g instead of 115g). All the conventional 151 rounds (including HE) that I have information on weigh about 115g and have similar G1-BCs in the range of .44 to .50.
Here are some BCs I have calculated.
45.9g .50 Ball .72
42.9g .50 AP/I .65
(all of the following 151 rounds weigh 115g except for the mine)
151 HE-tracer .48
151 HE-practice .44
151 HE/I .48
151 Incendiary .47
87g Mine .27
90g Mine .27
Concerning the Mauser's AP performance: The 151 AP round has a muzzle velocity of 705 m/s (compared to around 880 m/s for the Hispano or 928 m/s for the .50 AP/I). At short range a Hispano can punch through about 45mm of armor plate, while a .50 and 151 should both be able to punch through about 25mm. .50s don't do much to PzIV's either.
Hispano's do hit somewhat harder than the other cannons, but they should. They fire larger rounds at a much higher velocity. A Hispano AP round will go through most of the aircraft structure in addition to the pilot armor on any WWII fighter at any range at which you can hit.
Hooligan
[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 10-31-2000).]
Unfortunately the differences between an AP and HE round grow further apart with size.
As in the case of the Hispano HE round, it is lighter and has 10mm of flat surface area directly perpendicular to flight line (the fuse surface) that adds considerable drag to an already lighter round.
Nearly all of the Hispano HE's mounted Mk 26 fuse caps (on a Mk 7 explosive shell) with the flat nose. (from late '43 onward)
Granted most other HE cannon shells have the same type of fuse, they are generally not quite as large as the Mk 26's fuse cross-section.
Anyway, there is a signifigant difference in ballistics of the two shells.
The HE losses energy more rapidly at long range, and arcs. (not as much as the Mauser however) However,under about 300 yards or so, the flight paths are nearly identical.
-
Jigster:
Cool information:
I would love to get any hard information on Hispano rounds that you have. MV, weight, trajectories, explosive content, pictures etc...
I would be grateful if you would email me the information you have or the details of the source material so that I can obtain it.
Hooligan
-
Janjan:
Missed your question earlier. At higher altitudes projectiles keep their speed better. Presumably AH models this.
Hooligan
-
Nice post, Mav.
Hey, Fish...you ever grow enough hair to post the name you fly under?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Toad
If you want government to intervene domestically, you’re a liberal. If you want government to intervene overseas, you’re a conservative. If you want government to intervene everywhere, you’re a moderate. If you don’t want government to intervene anywhere, you’re an extremist.
-Joseph Sobran (1995)
-
Pyro's got a picture of the 3 Mk 4 casing rounds somewhere in this forum.
Btw the differences between the two Hispano shells would only be apparent at long range, and is still much better then the MG 151 and ShVak.
- Jig
[This message has been edited by Jigster (edited 10-31-2000).]
-
Niklas, I'm not sure how you made your observations, but I don't see anything that jumps out at me as being incorrect. Deceleration is not a linear function of distance, but that would only change how it looks inbetween the two points.
There is no issue of Hispano modeling being based on AP rounds while 151 rounds are based on HE. If that were the case, initial velocities would be almost identical, but velocity retention would favor the Hispano even greater.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
Fishu,
You must be a wonderful student for your teachers. I can just see you telling them they know nothing of the subjects they teach as you know it all already.
You lack experience, knowledge and maturity. Until you gain some of those you cannot claim any credibility on the subjects you speak of. In short, Grow up and get out in the world boy.
Mav
-
Originally posted by Maverick:
Fishu,
You must be a wonderful student for your teachers. I can just see you telling them they know nothing of the subjects they teach as you know it all already.
You lack experience, knowledge and maturity. Until you gain some of those you cannot claim any credibility on the subjects you speak of. In short, Grow up and get out in the world boy.
Mav
Excuse me, but where are you referring to now?
You didn't answer to my question and you're talking me of teaching someone when I haven't been saying anything worth knowledge in last post.
I think your army career is same as discovery channel.
Ps. at least I will be going to army unlike some discovery channel fans who tells they've been in army.
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
Excuse me, but where are you referring to now?
You didn't answer to my question and you're talking me of teaching someone when I haven't been saying anything worth knowledge in last post.
I think your army career is same as discovery channel.
Ps. at least I will be going to army unlike some discovery channel fans who tells they've been in army.
Fishu,
The allegation you make, that you "think" is highly suspect. I will say this. You are a very mistaken little boy. I will be happy to provide documentation to a neutral party that proves my service. Your statement is clearly a wild stab in the dark as you have no basis for it other than you mean it to be a defamatory remark.
The only statement you have made that is accurate is this one. "I haven't been saying anything worth knowledge in last post." You are absolutely correct there. You have not said anything with or worth knowledge in your post.
Now who shall the neutral party be that I will send my documentation to?
My nominations are:
Nexx - Britian
Dowding - Britian
Yeager - US
Hangtime - US
RAM - Spain
St Santa (I forgot your country of origin, sorry)
To any of those folks I will be happy to send documentation verifying my Army service. Would any of the named parties please confirm a willingness to be a neutral party in examining them?
Mav
[This message has been edited by Maverick (edited 11-01-2000).]
-
You talk about maturity and 'little boy' things when you don't know anything about me and yourself just keep insulting me.. so whos losing some maturity here?
and back to the topic...
btw. you got little problem with 'army service' things.. I don't know about hispano, mg151/20 or shvak being used lately..
you might well know .50 caliber.. but we're not talking of it in here.
-
You didn't answer the question fishu. Who is your nominee for neutral party. You have insinuated I have lied. I will not tolerate that especially from you.
Mav
-
"little boy things"?
At least Mav flies under his BBS posting handle. He's not afraid to be known to all in the arena.
Seems like people that hide their identity might have a little boy thing.
-
Bah.. same as talking to the bricks (http://www.kolumbus.fi/fishu/whineblow.gif)
Mav, well.. you better begin tolerate such things, because you actually threw the first stone in that case.
Toad, if you read things above, you know why I fly as other.
I don't go into arena to hear BS from this sort of guys like mav etc.
-
Fishu,
Here is a straight out statement for you. You have impugned my honesty and honor. Now either apologize or name your neutral party to examine the documentation. I am willing to prove my background. I am putting up right now. It is your turn to put up or shut up. Unlike you, I can prove it.
Mav
[This message has been edited by Maverick (edited 11-01-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Maverick:
Fishu,
Here is a straight out statement for you. You have impugned my honesty and honor. Now either apologize or name your neutral party to examine the documentation. I am willing to prove my background. I am putting up right now. It is your turn to put up or shut up. Unlike you, I can prove it.
Mav
Err.. no deal.
I don't strike against other people unless they've done it to me first.
I see no reason to apologize anything because I haven't heard apologize from you, who started it.
-
tell me how a hell 190A8 be caled bucherbird if AH is corect on historical
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
Pongo:
I think that you are wrong. 151 Mine rounds have a MV around 800 m/s. All other 151 rounds have a MV around 705m/s.
Niklas charts show a MV for the 151 nearly identical to that of ShVak (which is 800 m/s) and much closer to the HS than it would be if it was an AP round.
Hooligan
I was under the impression that the largest 151 he round(mine) was a bigger projectile with alot more chemical energy but it had poorer ballistic qualities.
But I rebuilt my pc and lost my ww2 cannon web link...
Ill take your word for it though
-
Minus, the Fw190A8 is VERY deadly with its cannons both historically, and in AH. Its nickname of the "ButcherBird" is appropriate. Especially against bombers.
Just because the -1C is more deadly, doesn't make the 190 incorrect, or either plane unrealistic.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
Minus, the Fw190A8 is VERY deadly with its cannons both historically, and in AH. Its nickname of the "ButcherBird" is appropriate. Especially against bombers.
Just because the -1C is more deadly, doesn't make the 190 incorrect, or either plane unrealistic.
I'll find funny that I prefer more likely Spitfire for buff hunting than 190.. just because of it's Hispanos which blows up whole plane instead of just damaging and then blowing up. (and I thought that 4 HE cannons were more fearsome for buffers than 2 AP cannons..)
-
Pongo:
Would I hold out on you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)? Here is one place that has a little bit of information:
http://otitsun.oulu.fi/~pkoski/151-ammopreview.html (http://otitsun.oulu.fi/~pkoski/151-ammopreview.html)
The second round is the Mine round.
HE/I projectile weighs 115g, 705 m/sec muzzle velocity, contains 2.3g PETN and 2.1g of incendiary compound.
Mine projectile weighs 92g, 785 m/sec muzzle velocity, contains 18.6g PETN.
Hooligan
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
Err.. no deal.
I don't strike against other people unless they've done it to me first.
I see no reason to apologize anything because I haven't heard apologize from you, who started it.
I figured you would be in denial about this. You just can't face up to being wrong can you? As I said before, your expertise is in the bovine byproduct arena.
Mav
-
Originally posted by Maverick:
I figured you would be in denial about this. You just can't face up to being wrong can you? As I said before, your expertise is in the bovine byproduct arena.
Mav
Have a nice day! smile (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)