Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: waystin2 on November 25, 2010, 02:38:10 PM
-
Dear HTC,
Please review the flight model of the IL-2 when equipped with the 37mm cannon package. I submit that the recoil of the now unsychronized cannons is inadequately modeled into it's flight profile. When firing the 37mm cannons the flight and site picture of the IL-2 was greatly disrupted. Firing of more than 2-3 cannon shells at one time with accuracy should be impossible. As currently flown the IL-2 should be near impossible to fly while firing full automatic with the 37mm cannons. It was found to be more effective when fired sniper style, as opposed to mashing and holding the trigger.
Here is some of my supporting evidence (please bear with I had to translate from Russian website):
Deterioration of handling characteristics of a new attack aircraft, as well as IL-2 with guns Was associated with a large spacing of the masses of the wing span and the presence of guns fairings, which could affect the overall aerodynamics of the aircraft. Throughout the range for-2 with NS-37 had the longitudinal stability, which significantly reduces the accuracy of shooting in the air. Last exacerbated by the strong impact of guns by firing them. According to the Air Force Research AB CA (letter head of SRI AB, Major-General Mikhail V. Gurevich on 11/19/1943, addressed Ilyushin) the maximum impact force that was in effect for about 0.03 seconds, on ground machine ( existing at the time the equipment will not permit the measurement of "actual recoil force" on airplanes and even more so when shooting in the air) was a very significant amount - about 5500 kg and the average recoil force of approximately equal to 2500 kg. All this led to a large dispersion of projectiles when firing in the air.
Field testing conducted at the Research Institute AB Air Force spacecraft showed that the firing of the IL-2 from the NS-37 guns to carry only short bursts no longer than two or three shots, as when firing simultaneously from two guns because of their asynchronism of aircraft experienced a significant shock, peck, and went astray from the line of sight. Amendment to the aim in this case was basically impossible.
When firing from a gun hit the target could only be the first shot, as the attack unfolded in the direction of shooting the gun and aiming at the correction is virtually impossible. The number of hits to the ammunition expended was 2.98%.
The findings of the report on state tests particularly drew attention to the fact that the flight crews, flying on IL-2, armed with guns NS-37, must undergo special training to conduct aimed fire short bursts of small targets (separate tanks, vehicles, etc . etc.). thirtieth aircraft plant NCAP and OKB-16 was recommended by IEC to urgently establish a cannon muzzle brake.
Phalanx pilots reported that IL-2 AM-38F with two NS-37 cannons, as compared with IL-2, armed with guns or ShVAK of Linguistics, has a greater inertia, impaired mobility and maneuverability, especially at high speeds, significantly increased the radius of the bend and the derivation of a dive at a speed of 340-360 km / h was observed over a large load on the handlebars.
However, most of the recoil when firing these guns created considerable difficulties in conducting fire pointwise targets, which are tanks, self-propelled guns, etc., for both pilots having combat experience, and for the young pilots who had just embarked on stream.
Calculations based on the results of range testing and analysis of combat experience shows that well-trained pilot of attack aircraft in the standard terms of planning an attack with an angle of 30 ° with the shooting of the NS-37 guns from a distance of about 300-400 meters could provide a single entry probability the defeat of German medium tank type Pz. IV Ausf G max 0,04-0,07 and armored type Sd Kfz 251 - no higher 0,08-0,17. That is, for the destruction of one unit of armored Wehrmacht firing cannons NS 37 it was necessary to devote at least half a dozen armored "ooze".
Here is the weblink where I found my supporting documentation:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.battlefield.ru/ru/articles/243-il2-vs-panzers.html%3Fstart%3D7&ei=U7_uTMSgEoKBlAf6z5zgDA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCgQ7gEwAg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwww.battlefield.ru%2Bil-2%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1R2ADFA_enUS374%26prmd%3Div (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.battlefield.ru/ru/articles/243-il2-vs-panzers.html%3Fstart%3D7&ei=U7_uTMSgEoKBlAf6z5zgDA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCgQ7gEwAg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwww.battlefield.ru%2Bil-2%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1R2ADFA_enUS374%26prmd%3Div)
:salute
Way
-
I'm sorry but I don't see that this is not currently or correctly modeled in AH at this point sir.
It is indeed much more accurate firing single aimed shots than holding the trigger down.
-
The accuracy is really a symptom of the larger problem. Due to the fact that the cannon are not synchronized, each time a cannon fires 2500kgs of recoil push the plane backwards on the specific side of the cannon being fired. As the firing continues, the pitching and yawing should get worse and affect the ability to fly the plane. Hence accuracy would suffer accordingly. This is not modeled into the IL-2 we now have in game. You can fire the cannon nonstop and not have the recoil adversely affect the flight profile of the plane.
-
The guns didn't alternate fire, they simply were not in sync and slightly different rates of fire would cause yawing from kick if the trigger were held down. The initial shot would come at very close to the same moment, if not the same moment, from both cannons.
-
Here's the guncam film of the Stuka armed with 37mm cannon (hence the comparative relationship). The film suggests both left and right cannon fired simultaneously with a reload time of about 2 seconds. Im surprised that the IL2 fires out of sync and as rapidly as it does when compared to the german gun.
The game is usually relatively accurate about such things......the apparent lack of recoil and subsequent yaw when firing out of sync may be a gameplay concession. I dont know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU6OK1zSxKg
-
The game is usually relatively accurate about such things......the apparent lack of recoil and subsequent yaw when firing out of sync may be a gameplay concession. I dont know.
I thought about this, and do concede the point that HTC makes concessions for gameplay reasons.
-
You're not going to slam left and right wildly if firing a steady stream. Why not? Because that 2500kg of force is being applied to BOTH wings, albeit staggered. I would imagine it would be far worse if you got only 1 gun to fire (other jammed, perhaps?), but even if it's delayed you still have equal forces impacting both wings. It's just a matter of how much of an impact that left-to-right has.
I think you might have a point, but that you'd have to find out exactly how MUCH back-and-forth there really was.
P.S. The Ju87 guns were entirely different. It's not even something you can compare to the IL2's NS37 guns.
-
The site he translated clearly states it messes up the aim. If the forces aren't synchronized in time, they will cause dynamic oscillation about the yaw axis. My question is: why on Earth didn't they just add synchronization somehow?
-
Actually if you want you can prove this yourself.
Drop into the TA, up a iL2 with 37mm.
Set .target 600 line up on the center, fire off all your ammo in one long rush.
Look at the pattern, measure it from side to side, top to bottom.
Now reup, now fire off single aimed shots only, make sure each one is aimed correctly.
Measure your pattern again.
I suspect you'll find a considerable difference between the 2 "IF" your honest about it.
If your just looking for something to !#oscar#@% about you won't bother.
-
Hello Ghosth,
I never whine post. I have looked at this info and formed my point over a period of time to make sure that it is solid. I must say that you are focusing on the firing accuracy, a minor point. Dispersion is modeled on all aircraft already, so you will see a difference between your two proposed TA scenarios. I fly both the HurriD and the IL-2 so I am familiar with the short burst accuracy vs. the full auto accuracy of both birds. The true issue is the planes flight model, which is not currently disrupted by the nonstop firing of the unsynched cannons. No one has refuted the evidence yet, either with game video or real documents. I'll gladly take my medicine if this information is found to be incorrect.
:salute
Way
-
All of the discussions of the IL2 I found on the internet refrence to Waystin's link or the person has the original source used by Waystin's link. I know the HTC rule on sources. I'm also confident HTC has more sources than Carter has pills.
The information from the reference indicates the amount of yaw introduced by fireing the canons for longer than tapping the trigger starting at 400-300m made it impossible to hold the guns on target for any length of time or precision aiming.
Russians sure were lucky the germans didn't value Whirbels as much as panzers on the eastern front. So a game concession to equitable play might be toning down the recoil problem to allow culling of the Whirbel hoards. Whirbels are a poor mans answer to ACM in Aces High.
-
"I must say that you are focusing on the firing accuracy, a minor point"
The firing accuracy IS the point, the plane is not going to stop flying because your firing your guns.
While firing the guns will effect accuracy, it will not cause the plane to stop flying.
There simply is not enough recoil to totally counteract that big fan in front.
Even with the GAU in the A-10 firing depleted uranium rounds, the plane may slow, or shudder, but it does not stop flying.
-
Hello Ghost,
I went back and reread my info. You are correct that the documentation focuses on ability to maintain site picture. Bear with me, the flu has a grip on my house and I am dosed to high heaven on Nyquil. :lol Little fuzzy here. Here is a question for you: Do you think that given the above information, that the IL-2 with the large gun package is accurately modeled? This is sincere, not an A-ha I got you to admit it question. My feeling is that after flying it, and fighting it, it is not. As Bozon mentioned in my thread in the Help Forum, the Hurricane IID used to suffer from unsynched cannons to the point of unfliability(new word). HTC decided to synch the cannons. Was this a gameplay concession or a flight model that was in error?
:salute
Way
-
You're not going to slam left and right wildly if firing a steady stream. Why not? Because that 2500kg of force is being applied to BOTH wings, albeit staggered. I would imagine it would be far worse if you got only 1 gun to fire (other jammed, perhaps?), but even if it's delayed you still have equal forces impacting both wings. It's just a matter of how much of an impact that left-to-right has.
I think you might have a point, but that you'd have to find out exactly how MUCH back-and-forth there really was.
P.S. The Ju87 guns were entirely different. It's not even something you can compare to the IL2's NS37 guns.
ive had a damaged NS37 before and forced to fire only one of them. You actually do get a kick to the left or right while firing only one of the two guns
-
ive had a damaged NS37 before and forced to fire only one of them. You actually do get a kick to the left or right while firing only one of the two guns
Indeed, however I believe Oinkie's point is there isn't enough disruption in yaw when firing both cannons 'trigger down'.
At least, that's what I picked up skimming over the thread.
Though I'd like to see this fixed (Assuming, of course, that this is an issue that may be fixed), I do believe that the cannon recoil/inaccuracy we have currently is a fair balance between life(history) and our game.
-
Indeed, however I believe Oinkie's point is there isn't enough disruption in yaw when firing both cannons 'trigger down'.
At least, that's what I picked up skimming over the thread.
Though I'd like to see this fixed (Assuming, of course, that this is an issue that may be fixed), I do believe that the cannon recoil/inaccuracy we have currently is a fair balance between life(history) and our game.
yeah i was just backing up krusty's statement. i believe the 37mms have the correct recoil in the game. Now you want recoil use the hurris 40mms
-
Be carefull asking for accurate realism in this game. HiTech could give it to us.
bustr - Waystin why am I sitting in a B17?
waystin - Don't worry gandpaw you'll like level bombing. It's quiet and sooothing......
Kablooooommmmmmmmm
bustr - Waystin, why did all of my bombs just blow up?
waystin - It's april 1, guess HiTech modeled realism into the ordanence after I whined for it........
bustr - HiTech if you are listening, any plane Waystin flys today blows up on the runway as he is landing. Pleeeeassssssss..... :)
-
I'll stand on what I originally said, don't take my word for it, go test it for yourself.
Watch where the rounds hit when you hold the trigger down, watch how big the dispersion cone is.
Then repeat with single aimed shots and see how big the spread is.
What you want, is already in there! You already have it!
What it isn't going to do is become radically out of sync in a short burst.
Assuming both guns are loaded, ready they get the fire signal. Gun A on the left is for whatever reason cycling slightly faster than gun B. BAM they both fire, BAMM they both fire again but the difference between them is small. B fired slightly slower.
ONLY if you hold the trigger down can you eventually perhaps get to a state where its going Bam(a) Bam(b) where it is trying to "walk the dog"
It is just not going to happen with aimed single shots.
It may not happen every sortie.
Just because they "can" get out of sync does not mean they will.
Trust me, when it comes to modeling, very very little gets "adjusted" for gameplay.
This is HT and Pyro's bread and butter, this is what they DO, and they do it very very well.
-
Great OP Waystin.....but the IL2 is like the Brewster, they have die hard fans :aok
-
AFAIK the lack of synchronization was also a reason why MK103 pods were considered too inaccurate in FW190. Of course the rate of fire was greater than that of NS37 and the plane was lighter so the effects were greater resulting that the MK103 was scarcely used if at all.
Though I never fire NS37 on full auto anyway...
-C+
-
So all this is basically getting to the point that although the site picture does not show it, the gun's accuracy is adjusted to compensate for the buffetting caused by the offset firing sequence.
Also since we don't have the Stuka's with the 37mm, why compare it? :salute
-
So all this is basically getting to the point that although the site picture does not show it, the gun's accuracy is adjusted to compensate for the buffetting caused by the offset firing sequence.
Also since we don't have the Stuka's with the 37mm, why compare it? :salute
You got it Sir. I have tested it, attacked vehicles with it, and been attacked by the IL-2 with the NS-37. It is now my solid opinion that it is incorrectly modeled. Several folks have somewhat debated my point, but none have been able to refute the provided documentation.
:salute
Way
-
So what exactly are you asking for? You want the plane to fall out of the sky if someone sprays?
-
So what exactly are you asking for? You want the plane to fall out of the sky if someone sprays?
It's what it just about did according to the provided Russian Military Docs. The pilots themselves preferred the 23mm package as it was more stable. The plane is not modeled correctly with the NS-37 gun package. I would like it to be correct. If it is corrected then the IL-2 will experience difficult handling and increasingly more difficult aiming solutions if the NS-37's are fired non-stop.
:salute
Way
-
It's what it just about did according to the provided Russian Military Docs. The pilots themselves preferred the 23mm package as it was more stable. The plane is not modeled correctly with the NS-37 gun package. I would like it to be correct. If it is corrected then the IL-2 will experience difficult handling and increasingly more difficult aiming solutions if the NS-37's are fired non-stop.
:salute
Way
By Russian Military Docs. are you referencing the link in your original post? That is just a google translation of a Russian web page and hardly can be considered primary source documentation. No where in there do I see anything about the aircraft becoming so unstable as to cause loss of control, and you yourself concede the point that it focuses on the ability to fire accurately.
What you have provided is a claim, which I do not doubt, that the greatest accuracy was obtained by firing short well placed bursts. Which most, myself included, seem to agree is just the way it is in the game. Based on the below quote I believe you agree with this as well.
I fly both the HurriD and the IL-2 so I am familiar with the short burst accuracy vs. the full auto accuracy of both birds.
The other part of your original argument was that...
As currently flown the IL-2 should be near impossible to fly while firing full automatic with the 37mm cannons.
You have provided nothing that backs this claim.
You can spin it all you want, but what you're asking for is the plane to get nerfed without providing anything close to proof that it's wrong.
-
You can spin it all you want, but what you're asking for is the plane to get nerfed without providing anything close to proof that it's wrong.
Hello Tec,
This is the same documentation that HTC chose to acknowledge and unsynch the IL-2's guns (see below). The documentation is vetted. So I am asking them to take the next step and make the plane's flight model the way it should be. If you were to take the time to actually read it, you will see the referenced military documents. This is not some trumped up Wiki like website. Your challenge no more disproves my position on this than any of the others before. I feel it is up to HTC or another AH player with knowledge and documentation to disprove my point. So tell me that it is wrong but back it up.
Here is the link to the Unsynch Thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263890.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263890.0.html)
I concede your point on the near impossible to fly. However, flight was impacted by the firing of these cannons in bursts of more than 2-3 shots. When is the last time ingame that your flight was impacted by mashing down and holding the trigger in the IL-2? When is the last time you lost the site picture when firing full auto in the IL-2? Read the info, and test it yourself.
:salute
Way
-
Hello Tec,
This is the same documentation that HTC chose to acknowledge and unsynch the IL-2's guns (see below). The documentation is vetted. So I am asking them to take the next step and make the plane's flight model the way it should be. If you were to take the time to actually read it, you will see the referenced military documents. This is not some trumped up Wiki like website. Your challenge no more disproves my position on this than any of the others before. I feel it is up to HTC or another AH player with knowledge and documentation to disprove my point. So tell me that it is wrong but back it up.
Here is the link to the Unsynch Thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263890.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,263890.0.html)
I concede your point on the near impossible to fly. However, flight was impacted by the firing of these cannons in bursts of more than 2-3 shots. When is the last time ingame that your flight was impacted by mashing down and holding the trigger in the IL-2? When is the last time you lost the site picture when firing full auto in the IL-2? Read the info, and test it yourself.
:salute
Way
This would make the IL2 HO nearly impossible......LIKE!!!
Be careful of a Tec troll Way...... :aok
-
Even the A10, with its 30mm Gattling cannon in the nose does not stop flying when its firing.
Granted it may slow a bit, but it doesn't fall out of the sky.
What you are asking for is modeled, its just the effect is smaller than you think it should be.
So your not seeing it.
I say it again, go back to the TA, use the .target command, fire single shots, fire them all, show the dispersion cone.
Then reload and do it again with the trigger held down.
You'll see the dispersion cone is clearly larger.
And until you run the test yourself, honestly, carefully, you are not going to believe what anyone else says.
Be scientific, be methodical, prove it to yourself one way or the other.
But have an open mind going in, don't disprove it because you don't believe it can be modeled.
-
What you are asking for is modeled, its just the effect is smaller than you think it should be.
So your not seeing it.
I concur.
-
Hello Ghost,
I conceded the "impossible to fly" issue to Tec earlier and I am focusing instead on the loss of site picture. However the two are woefully intertwined.
I took your advice on the test Ghost, and your right there is a difference in dispersion. Dispersion is not the issue, loss of site picture is. Sources cited say this:
Field testing conducted at the Research Institute AB Air Force spacecraft showed that the firing of the IL-2 from the NS-37 guns to carry only short bursts no longer than two or three shots, as when firing simultaneously from two guns because of their asynchronism of aircraft experienced a significant shock, peck, and went astray from the line of sight. Amendment to the aim in this case was basically impossible.
This does not happen in your suggested tests, nor does it occur in game. This does not occur while attack vehicles ingame, and it does not get accurately reflected in your tests.
I ask for an open mind back and ask someone to produce a film where the IL-2 while firing full auto NS-37's loses site picture. This will disprove my position, and I will gladly step away.
Much respect,
Way
-
So your saying that they could not accurately change their aim point while holding down the trigger?
While I have not tested looking for this effect I suspect that if you are fully zoomed in, and shooting while holding down the trigger you probably can not "accurately" change the aim point either.
But the point is you don't need to be super accurate when attempting a HO shot vs another plane.
You just need to put that bullet stream out there where the other guy will run into it.
Sorry if I'm bugging you, but to me it seems that you are looking for some very large scale effect where none exists. The difference in dispersion cones proves that it is modeled correctly.
Yet you continue to twist the twist the discussion into pretzels trying to prove that it is not.
Either way I have no desire to continue this discussion in any form.
I have tried to the best of my ability to show you that it is modeled yet you refuse to accept it.
Ultimately at some point you have to decide that it is the way it is, and won't be changed and accept it and continue to fly and enjoy AH, or pack up your toys and give up the battle.
While I am a HTC Fanboi (Sorry but its in my job description as an AH Trainer) I have no desire to beat a dead horse endlessly, nor indeed any desire to insult, denigrate, or put you down in any way. I have tried to be open minded, fair and helpful, but I see no point in continuing this.
-
No disrespect taken, none intended Ghost. Simply a difference of opinion on this matter. I though that I was the biggest HTC fanboi ever, but apparently others feel the same way.
:salute
Way
-
Be careful of a Tec troll Way...... :aok
I'm just engaging in what I find to be a somewhat interesting conversation. If I told you to go sit in the corner and cry about the Brewster that would be a Tec troll.
I have found that thanks to Oleg searching for anything IL2 related, especially videos, means wading through a lot of crap to find anything useful. But I will get back to this a bit later hopefully.
-
I'm just engaging in what I find to be a somewhat interesting conversation. If I told you to go sit in the corner and cry about the Brewster that would be a Tec troll.
I have found that thanks to Oleg searching for anything IL2 related, especially videos, means wading through a lot of crap to find anything useful. But I will get back to this a bit later hopefully.
I don't see a troll, and I would appreciate any additional information you may find. This actually started from my want to know a bit more about the bird itself. This just popped out at me from a few of the sources.
:salute
Way
-
I don't see a troll, and I would appreciate any additional information you may find. This actually started from my want to know a bit more about the bird itself. This just popped out at me from a few of the sources.
:salute
Way
Werd, if I have time this weekend I will do some more research as I find this to be interesting as well.
-
None taken, none intended, no hard feelings either way sir. <S>
Good luck!
No disrespect taken, none intended Ghost. Simply a difference of opinion on this matter. I though that I was the biggest HTC fanboi ever, but apparently others feel the same way.
:salute
Way
-
Werd, if I have time this weekend I will do some more research as I find this to be interesting as well.
I know it has been busy Tec with the holidays and all. You learnt anything on this? I am trying to find more info myself...
:salute
Way