Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: StSanta on May 02, 2000, 09:58:00 AM
-
Was shot down by a Spit in a 1v1 the other day. Admittedly, it was a great shot; I was extending at good speed, and got pinged from 650+ yards. Kudos for the pilot for pulling that off (cannot recall who it was, but please remind me if you read this).
Now, this has got me wondering a little about the relative strengths/weaknesses of the guns in AH. I personally do not think that one 650+ yards shot should take out both wings, both flaps, engine oil and stabilizers on a rugged plane like the 109G10. One ping, and there wasn't any lag worth speaking of before, during or after the fight, so I doubt that his FE differed much from mine.
Since I don't want to whine about what was a good shot, but educate myself instead, I'd like to ask the engineer guys in this community to break down the physics for me; I know it has to do with lethality (which a nose firing beast like the 109 has plenty of, landing all rounds in a relatively small area, assuming no deflection shot/high g maneuver. It also has something to do with muzzle velocity, rate of fire, type of warhead, convergence, weight of bullet and so forth.
I'm reasonably comfortable with physics, so if someone would take upon himself the task of stating the real life characteristics of the guns in AH, I would be delighted and appreciative.
I know that the LW guns were inferior in real life. How much varies depending on who you ask it seems, but there is some raw "objective" data out there that suggests that this is the case.
In the 109, I do not open up with guns until within 300 yards. Anything farther than that, and I can hope only to damage the enemy, and that is if I am lucky.
The .50's and Hispanos sure are great. Flew the 51 the other night; compared to the 13mm's of the 109, they flew like laser beams and I greatly exaggerated the needed lead. Same with Hispanos. And the killing power! Absolutely stunning. I have new found respect for the makers of these very potent weapons. Then again, I have also newfound respect for the LW, who, it seems, used inferior planes with inferior guns, and still put up a hell of a fight.
So, if anyone would like to enlighen me, I would really appreciate it.
------------------
--
StSanta
II/JG2
-
Nothing against Sis-fires or F4U-1C's, but I usually take one up when the opposition is flying them heavily. It's the only plane that I'm very successful in at 500+- 1000 yard shots. Fire with Fire concept. I'm not questioning the code of the guns, etc. simply just saying that if I want a string of 5-8 kills, I fly the F4U-1C. If I want to kill from beyond 500 yards, the Spit is the bird I fly.
-
ok, someone clear this up for me......
I thought the range markers in this sim were in feet......
if so then this spit shot you down at 1.9k (650 yards)
correct?
Swoop
-
Swoop,
It has been my understand that distance is in yardage. 1.9k = 1900yds.
S!
Rocket
------------------
(http://www.reddragons.de/images/sig.jpg)
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________
www.reddragons.de (http://www.reddragons.de)
[This message has been edited by Rocket (edited 05-02-2000).]
-
Somebody needs to do some testing to find out how many hits it is taking to do damage.
I have a feeling this has more to do with ammo load and number of guns than the amount of damage per hit.
-
It’s rather odd to say that LW guns are inferior. Compared to the Western Allied guns they are certainly lighter. The guns on an A8 weigh about 200kg compared to about 180kg for the guns on a Mustang. I doubt they could have shoe-horned 4 Hispanos and 2 .50 BMGs (260kg) into a FW without some big problems.
German guns also had better HE rounds. The Western allied guns had better muzzle velocities and ballistic characteristics. This gave them noticeably flatter trajectories and better armor piercing capabilities. Which guns are "better" undoubtedly depend upon what your shooting at.
For a comparison of Mg151 and .50 BMG trajectories see http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm (http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm)
Hooligan
[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 05-02-2000).]
-
Thanks for the link, Hooli, you gonna give AH a 2 week trial and test them guns? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Ripsnort(-rip1-)
I./JG2~Richthofen~
=CO=Panzer Group Afrika-15th Panzer division
JG2 Communications Officer
Aces High Training Corps
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/ripsnort.jpg)
Too often, we lose sight of life's simple pleasures. Remember, when
someone annoys you it takes 42 muscles in your face to frown, BUT, it
only takes 4 muscles to extend your arm, grasp the joystick button,
and shoot the sucker down!
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 05-02-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
It’s rather odd to say that LW guns are inferior. Compared to the Western Allied guns they are certainly lighter. The guns on an A8 weigh about 200kg compared to about 180kg for the guns on a Mustang. I doubt they could have shoe-horned 4 Hispanos and 2 .50 BMGs (260kg) into a FW without some big problems.
German guns also had better HE rounds. The Western allied guns had better muzzle velocities and ballistic characteristics. This gave them noticeably flatter trajectories and better armor piercing capabilities. Which guns are "better" undoubtedly depend upon what your shooting at.
For a comparison of Mg151 and .50 BMG trajectories see http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm (http://home.earthlink.net/~jayboyer/ballistics.htm)
Hooligan
[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 05-02-2000).]
In this game it doesnt matter what you are shooting at.. the 50cal and the M2 Hispano are better...quite a bit better. then the 131-151/20..
If the mine round for the 151 has better fusing or explosive effects we dont see it here.
If the 151 was more reliable...we dont see it here.
-
HISPANOS vs 151/20??
There´s a question I have been askin myself for a long time, reading and studying books about german Machinguns/Cannons.
They (germany) had the productionrights for the hispano, who is a swiss design, right? But they only used it as a groundgun (MG FF hispano?) What I mean is that, if the Hispano was that great, why didnt they use 2it, more? Why did t2hey spend so much money and time to devlope a "better" design and then use it?
Was it because the troubles they had with the sync. of the MG:s/Cannonsin the early 109 types?
After what I heard the "chain" of sync could be broken if you took the 109 into a high G 888turn, wich would result in:non of the guns could fire (if equipt with gondola guns)! Mechanic sync was replaced with electricprimersystem after a while.
I doubt that the LW, Who could have used hispanos, took a worse design and put it into the planes.
Heard also that the US was very intrested in the 151/20 design and where going to adopt it after the war.
I claim that the 151/20 must have had some kind of advantage compared to the Hispano design.
(yes I know that german Hispanos had a shorter caselenght than the brittish/Us ones)
About shooting, If you are turning infront of me within 500 yards, passing my sights, you are as good as dead. Flying straight the
dist. is 400. And I ashure you, I´m not spraying.
I get a little bit pissed when I see thoose
15-25 20mm (151/20) hit the HOG/spit and the guy is still flying. (rounds dosent explode or what?)
To be sure of him going down, a longer burst or a concentrated burst must be placed.
He , only need a 1-5 bullets to shoot me to peices.
I belive that the hispanos are modeled to have exploding bullets, while the 151/20, is just a "heavier" MG with solid bullets.
------------------
BORK,BORK,BORK!!!"
Crabofix <What happend?...:A stranger morgie turndee burndee ,flip flip flip flip flip flip>
Flygflottlj.19(Lento R5)"swedish Gladiators"
-
StSanta,
When you say you were pinged at 650yds, should I interpret that as you saw him on your 6 at 650yds when he fired? If so, then the actual distance of your opponent, at least from his POV, was more like 350yds. The explanation for this is due to the effect, netlag, or internet lag. Views towards the rear are always longer than they seem.
------------------
leonid, Komandir
5 GIAP VVS RKKA (http://www.adamfive.com/guerrero)
"Our cause is just. The enemy will be crushed. Victory will be ours."
[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 05-03-2000).]
-
MG 151/20 superiority over Hispano is in better reliability, compact size, lighter weight, possibility of synchronization and better HE ammunition (for its relative size).
The MG 151/20 in 109 does not need synchronization - at all ! The hub cannon obviously doesn't need it, and the gondola cannons are placed outside of the propeller disc.
However, I believe I read that Hispano could never been effectively synchronized. Ever seen a Hispano firing through propeller disc ?
Also, I wouldn't blame ballistics. Take a look at rounds of MG 151/20 and Hispano. It should tell you enough. Hispano should be deadly at greater ranges than MG 151/20.
But what is different in real life are the icons. They extend the firing range at which AH pilots open fire. Do not tell me we hit because we have 10 times more gunnery practice than WW2 vets - fly without icons and tell me if you hit at 500+ yards. What WW2 pilot had enemy plane type icon with range markings and closure rate ?! They would wait to get much closer than usual AH Spit firing range of 500-700 yards.
At ranges of 200-300 yards MG 151/20 is just enough, while Hispano is an overkill.
IMO, MG 151/20 was well balanced weapon in real life, with effective range just about the usual range of when fire was opened. Hispano was an overkill - its effective range extended far outside of ranges where fire was opened. Unnecessary weight of gun and ammo, at the expense of ammo count.
This translates into unhistorical AH modeling of WW2 gunnery. Solution is simple - ICONS !
So we get to the real problem - how to limit AH firing ranges to the more historical ones ? It surely has to do much with icons.
P.S.
Yes, I lost parts numerous times to Spits firing outside 1000 yards, while Hogs shot me down at ranges of 1200 yards !!!
-
Leonid, it is quite possible that lag caused it to look like 650 yards, but suggesting that one needs to add say 300 yards to the real distance at most times isn't really consistent with the lag I generally experience with my connection. Even though the server is across the atlantic, and there's a huge leap in lag (from 83ms to around 180ms), I don't think it would make that much of a difference.
If anything, it should be most noticeable at head ons, and I don't experience much lag there.
It is however a realistic possibility.
------------------
--
StSanta
II/JG2
-
Santa, your connection is only half of the path though. You may have a 80ms connect, but the other guy may have a 800ms connect.
Plus all shooting is computed on the Shooters Front End (FE), so its the distance he see's that counts, not what you see.
So sometimes strange net lag effects can occur even if you have the fastest of connects. Unfortunately its just the nature of internet gaming. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Originally posted by crabofix:
HISPANOS vs 151/20??
They (germany) had the productionrights for the hispano, who is a swiss design, right? But they only used it as a groundgun (MG FF hispano?) What I mean is that, if the Hispano was that great, why didnt they use 2it, more? Why did t2hey spend so much money and time to devlope a "better" design and then use it?
crabo.
the mgff-used on the 109E and the outer wings of the fw190a5 amongst others was a licensed orlikon design which is a swiss company. It is a quite inferior design of cannon. The Hispano is a french design.
But your point is still valid. Why with the factories in their hands since 1940 did the germans not make use of this superlative anti bomber gun in 1942-43. coulndt have adapted their planes too it? They adapted a spit to take a db605 for crisake...They adapted their SPGs to take russian guns. the 262 would have been way more useful with 3 or 4 (of the AH)hispanos in the nose. 3 guns with 250 rpg...centerline mounted....wow..
And while ungaingly the faring required to mount the M2 on the fw would have been simple and elligant compared to the mk103 mounting and ready 2 years earlier.
-
Pongo, both the Fw 190 and the Me 109 were covered with blisters and bulges just to hold the standard armament. Going to larger guns would have only made this worse. All the protuberances on these planes, especially the 109 cause a lot more drag than people realize.
Plus the 190 in particular had a serious weight problem. A heavier gun with heavier ammo would have meant a reduction in either the number of guns, the ammo load, or the range. Most likely all of the above.
-
Worse protuberances then caused on the spit? Was the Spit Vb a pig compared to the Va?
I know it would have been a struggle. But certainly they could have done it if the gun was as much a war winner as it is here. Or at least we would have a historical record of the lame attempts to do so? Or used it as a flak gun instead of the 151...
Were the germans incapable of shrinking the m2 into the m5 like the brits did?
Look at what they did to the poor FW to take on buffs.. and does it really make that much difference puting gondola M2s on a 109 instead of gondola 151s...Im not shure but I know which I would choose if the load out was available.
[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 05-03-2000).]
-
Pongo read my email.......
-
Pongo:
As far as I can see there are three issues here:
1) Ballistics/velocity: The HS MkII is the clear winner.
2) Reliability: Not modeled in the game. According to "The Machine Gun" by George Chinn, Navy Bureau of Ordnance. The British HS mkII was fairly reliable but not as good as the Mg151. So undoubtedly the Mg151 suffers a little bit in relative effectiveness due to lack of reliability being modeled.
3) Effectiveness of hits: I have never seen any hard data on how many HS or Mg151 hits were required to kill a fighter, so it is kind of hard to draw much in the way of comparisons between how much damage the weapons do in AH compared to the real world. It is at least possible to compare the weapons in the game however. Has anybody gathered statistics on how many Mg151 hits and HS hits it takes to kill a fighter in the arena? Maybe Mg151 rounds do more damage than HS rounds, but the worse ballistics and resulting fewer hits might cause a different perception. The benefits of the tradeoff between penetration and explosive power are not necessarily clear. Higher explosive power (German) causes more structural damage and weapons effectiveness decreases little with range. High penetration rounds (Western Allies) have a much better chance to penetrate into the “vitals” of an aircraft, and their higher velocity gives them the added benefit of flatter trajectories and greater effective range.
Here are some comparisons of the Armament of the Spit-IXe firing 20mm HE/.50 AP/I and the A8 (2 cannon only) firing 20mm Mine/13mm AP/I. Figures are calculated from the weapons muzzle velocity.
Weapon Set weight
FW-118Kg Spit-160Kg
Projectiles / second
FW-46 Spit-46.7
Mass / Second
FW-2724g Spit-3744g
Energy / Second
FW-816KJ Spit-1499KJ
Combined Explosives and Incendiaries / Second
FW-382g Spit-252g
Penetration:
At 100m the .50 AP/I penetrates about 25mm or rolled homogeneous armor and the 131 AP/I penetrates about 17mm.
The Spitfire weapon set weighs about 35% more than the FW Set and by all measures except explosive/incendiary output the British gun set shows an advantage. Unless one assumes that either the British or Germans didn’t know what they were doing, one would expect that the British weapon set would hit somewhat harder than the German set.
Hooligan
-
Hooligan..did funked put you up to this?
What ROF did you use for the synced 151/20?
Is penetration a major factor? (pongo suspects minimal)
Isnt ROF a very signifigant accuracy improver vs manuvering fighters?
Against tanks and ground targets I concede that the HS is far supperior..Easier to hit at long range Penatration vital.
But even based on your numbers if it is more effecitve versus airframes then something is wrong with cannon damage resolution in AH. The 151 for a given burst blows up more little bombs in the enemy plane. It was designed to do so.
Most all postwar cannon development maintained that priority.
I think that they did so because it is a more effecive way to destroy planes. AH should show that.
I would rate the two planes you mentioned as being very close in the game as well so I have no problem there. It is the 4 gun package of the HS that seems to tip the scales.
-
Pongo:
No funked did not put me up to anything. I just tried to present some hard data so that we have a less subjective basis for discussion.
ROF for the synced 151 is 600. This is the same as the ROF for the HS II so with your particular ride (A8 with 2 cannon) this is not a factor.
You wrote: “Is penetration a major factor?” Well I certainly think so (as did the US and British Air services). If you look at a cut-away view of a single-engine fighter from any angle you will discover that something like 20%-40% of the cross-sectional area contains a critical component like the Pilot, fuel, engine, oxygen, ammo boxes etc… Theoretically this means that just a few hits would be likely to disable a fighter if the rounds were sufficiently powerful to penetrate to the critical component. Note that with bombers the equation changes somewhat. Since they have multiple engines, pilots etc... they should be much harder to take down with a single hit in the right place. It is probably not a coincidence that the air-force most interested in HE ammunition also had the responsibility of shooting down large numbers of 4-engine bombers.
In one of your prior posts you mentioned that the US was impressed with the Mg151. This is true. The US actually made a prototype of a .60 Cal (15mm) gun based on the Mg151. The US Bureau of Ordnance was impressed with the firing mechanism but the US copy had very different ballistics. It was designed for a Muzzle Velocity of 3500 ft/sec (1067 m/sec). In the US Ordnance Bureau’s view the follow up weapon for the .50 BMG needed more velocity and penetration. Of course they were designing this weapon for immediate use and they knew that they would primarily be shooting at enemy fighters, and not bombers.
As far as I can tell AH models APHE rounds for the Hispanos (i.e. they don’t bounce off of tanks). These rounds can penetrate something like 40mm of armor at 100m. If they hit a fighter at any practical range they are going to go all the way through the aircraft unless they are stopped by the engine, in which case that engine is probably toast. It just shouldn’t take too many hits from them to kill a fighter.
I’m not sure I really understand the following comment you made:
“I would rate the two planes you mentioned as being very close in the game as well so I have no problem there. It is the 4 gun package of the HS that seems to tip the scales.”
It sounds like you are saying: The relative effectiveness of 2 Hispanos vs. 2 Mg151 seems okay but the relative effectiveness of 4 Hispanos vs. 4 Mg151s does not.
This doesn’t make much sense to me.
Hooligan
-
Pongo: I didn't put him up to it. He's got a nose for gunnery threads. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hooli: I think Pongo means the package of:
2 x Hispano + 2 x Fifties
Vs.
2 x MG 151/20 + 2 x MG 131
All of ya:
I think this bit here is the key:
Energy / Second
FW-816KJ Spit-1499KJ
Combined Explosives and Incendiaries / Second
FW-382g Spit-252g
How much should the sim weight the explosive power vs. the power from kinetic energy?
Ya know that Wildbill fella has a T-28...
Didn't one of the Finnish WB guys have a collection of WW2 machine guns?
I'm thinking at the WBCon we oughta gas up the Trojan, load up the guns, and do us some "gunnery model verification"...
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
crabo.
The Hispano is a french design.
[/B]
I still Belive hispano suiza is a swiss factory
------------------
BORK,BORK,BORK!!!"
Crabofix <What happend?...:A stranger morgie turndee burndee ,flip flip flip flip flip flip>
Flygflottlj.19(Lento R5)"swedish Gladiators"
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
MG 151/20 superiority over Hispano is in better reliability, compact size, lighter weight, possibility of synchronization and better HE ammunition (for its relative size).
The MG 151/20 in 109 does not need synchronization - at all ! The hub cannon obviously doesn't need it, and the gondola cannons are placed outside of the propeller disc.
P.S.
Yes, I lost parts numerous times to Spits firing outside 1000 yards, while Hogs shot me down at ranges of 1200 yards !!!
I might be on a bicycle, saying this: I still
belive there was some kind of mechanic sync in the 109 (The electric primer made it very easy to sync guns, later on.)
, wich made most 109 pilots to choose to not fly with gondolas.
I am pretty sure of reading an interview with a famed 109 fighter pilot, sayng this.
I´ll try to find my sourse.
Tonite I shoot down lupo in a 205 from a 205 at the distance of 900 yards, with a short burst, my longst kill ever. My plane was armed with 151/20.
I would also like to thank you for the answers Hristos, well thought.
------------------
BORK,BORK,BORK!!!"
Crabofix <What happend?...:A stranger morgie turndee burndee ,flip flip flip flip flip flip>
Flygflottlj.19(Lento R5)"swedish Gladiators"
-
Hello St Santa: I thought your question was a good one relative to the overly long kills possible in the simulated environment. I have not been been able to play AH yet but in other sims long kills are possible that do not seem to reflect the real world. The practical information from WW2 pilot biographies suggests that closer kills( around 100-200 yards) were the rule and long kills were an exception. The enemy AC would have to fill or exceed the limits of the sight ring before firing would bring good results. I think that the programers are probably doing their best to get the scale as close as they can but in my opinion after checking the relative sizes of wing spans of AC in the outside world the size of the AC's in the sims should be different relative to the range. That is, when the screen numbers say 100 yards it should be more like 150. I know that the wider human field of view has been compressed onto the narrower field of the computer screen which makes objects smaller than they would appear outside but I still believe that the effectiveness of weaponry should be scaled down to better represent WW2 air combat scenarios. In warbirds for example the defensive gunners on a B17 could fire at 1000yds and get hits when biographical/historical info suggest that real life gunners started getting hits at about 400 yds. Anyway, the computer environment is different and one has to way the overall balance in kill ratios taking into consideration some of the variables mentioned above like lag but I would still opt for decreasing the weapons effectiveness at longer ranges.
-
Hmmm plenty of kills 500 to 1000 yds in books I read. There was Luftwaffe gun cam film posted on this board showing kills on bombers in that region also.
Also remember that because of net lag, the range of the enemy is usually shorter than what you see. A good rule of thumb is 200 yds difference if he is behind you. So if you see 700, it is probably more like 500 on his computer. And his computer is the one computing bullet trajectory and velocity.
However I agree with the general idea that it is too easy to score hits at these ranges.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-03-2000).]
-
Hooligan noticed.
"
It sounds like you are saying: The relative effectiveness of 2 Hispanos vs. 2 Mg151 seems okay but the relative effectiveness of 4 Hispanos vs. 4 Mg151s does not.
This doesn’t make much sense to me.
"
well it doesnt make much sence to me either! But I feel the majority of the problem with the HS becomes dominant when you have 4 of them.... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)I dont think that a different gun is being put on the 4 gun load outs...but it shure feels like different kettle of fish with 4 of em..
Your point on the vulnerable areas of a fighter and penetration is well made. I take it then that the 151 or any other 20mm except the soon to be inflicted MGFF had a problem getting its rounds into the interior of the AC? remember I am trying to make an over kill case here against the HS. So keep in mind that the added velocity and penetration of the HS vs the 151/20 has to be wasted for me to have an argument here....
If the 151 has enough velocity to accuratly deliver its round and enough kinetic energy to allow it to penetrate sheet aluminum and a wing spar, and fusing that lets it go boom effecivly on penatration.
Well thats the straw I keep poking funked with anyway....
-
20mm APHE AP/I etc.. rounds should have no problem penetrating but they carry less explosive than HE rounds. The tradeoff is between HE rounds with a bigger boom or AP rounds with signigicant penetration.
Hooligan
-
You think the 20mm mine round would have trouble getting into the internals of a fighter.. I bet it wouldnt.
-
Sounds fine to me Pongo.
I have a feeling the HE for all the rounds is not creating much damage. Lethality seems to be in order of KE ranking.
-
I (subjectivly) aggree...
We can let this one lie I guess.
-
Pongo:
Any HE round should have no trouble penetrating through the aluminum skin of a fighter. If one actually hit armor plate or anything else really solid it would probably shatter. Of course you can make the shell sturdier by giving it thicker walls and put an AP cap on it, but then you have an APHE shell which carries much less explosive (4g instead of 18.6g in the case of the Mg151 20mm).
My understanding is that HE shells were generally fuzed to explode immediately when they hit. Think about it. If it is delayed fuzed so that it can get a foot or two into the aircraft before exploding, what happens if it hits a wing or stabilizer. You probably don't want the shell to punch all the way through a stabilizer and explode 1 foot past the aircraft.
If an HE shell is fuzed for immediate detonation it always (if the fuzing works) explodes and does structural damage to the aircraft. If it is delay-fuzed there is a good chance it can damage interals (like fuel tanks), but there is a also a chance it can shatter or pass through and detonate outside the aircraft.
Hooligan
-
It is my perception that MG 151/20 20 mm HE round detonated after it entered the aircraft (not instantly on contact), due to its specific fusing (centrifugal detonator, sorry poor English).
-
I have come full circle ballistics (kinda).
I was a realism fan regarding ballistics for a long while.
I am now of the opinion that gameplay AND realism need to be tempered against one another. Find the balance between the two and most folks will be pleased.
AH has done a good job overall balancing these two factors out.
Yeager
-
I guess my main resistance to messing with guns is the disaster it has caused in other sims. One sim has been screwing with this issue for about a year now, and they are still apparently having major problems.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-04-2000).]
-
There are many cases of several HE 20mm rounds hitting pilot armor and not penetrating. In those cases any ap round would not be overkill. Armor on oil tanks would need ap rounds as would oxy bottles. Any angle of the hit compounds penetration problems for HE more than for AP also.. I do not believe that AP is "overkill". The LW used AP rounds in a mix for fighter loadouts. Why would they bother?
I agree somewhat with Yeager and for the same reasons..... Make em "feel" right and everyone will be happy(er) I come from a sim with wildly fluctuating leathiality ratios..... No one is happy long over there. AH seems to have the ratios pretty even handed to me.
lazs
-
My choice of the word "immediately" was undoubtedly poor. From what I’ve read of German fusing they could control it to a very small interval but of course the round would have to travel some distance while this was happening. I know that they used centrifugal fusing for their self-destruct mechanism. I am uncertain if they also used it as the primary fusing mechanism since many of the German explosive shells were not self-destructing (the shells which self-destruct have a specific notation in their nomenclature so it’s easy to tell which ones have this feature) and with centrifugal fusing they would have to be. It is quite possible that they had a contact fuse and the centrifugal self-destruct fuse acted as a back up. I know a couple of German guys who have loads of documents from Mauser and Rechlin. I’ll ask them and see if they can clarify.
-
I have an MG 151/20 round lodged in my cranium. I'll ask it about the fuzing. Stand by.
-
LOL!!
-
Oh Funked, please don't joke like that (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
In one of my books, I have a picture of a Bomber pilot that was hit while over Ploesti I believe.
A 20mm Cannon shell from a Bf109 went thru the pilots side window, penetrated his face at about the cheek, tore a huge hole thru his mouth/lower face, penetrated clean thru and then removed the co-pilots head entirely when it detonated.
The Pilot survived, and was captured by the Germans. The picture is the standard prisoner of war photo taken when he was interned in the POW Camp.
It is truely Ghastly (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
funky:
Did that shell nick your language centers? Fusing is spelled, well ... fusing not fuzing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Hooligan
-
Oh great the FNG's are correcting my spelling now!
Sorry to joke about it Verm. I've read quite a few accounts of things like that. There are quite a few artifacts at the USAF museum that were parts of personal gear of crewmen hit by enemy fire. It ain't pretty.
-
Hmm, hispano really nasty and 151's weak? Sounds like the HE side is badly modelled and it all depends on KE.... again....
Sounds like WB before HE modelling?
kamel (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[The aformentioned poster takes no responsibilty for any offense any reader may take from any points he may {or may not have} made in the three line post above. Any slight taken should definately be considered imaginary and due to excessive paranoia on the readers part.]
-
Yeag, I agree. But my whole point is that the HS doenst feel ballanced with the historical record from an air to air stand point. Air to ground it is right on.
Some are confused about the fact that I have a problem with the 4 HS load out but no problem with the 2 HS load out. Well this is a simulation. there might be a line of code somewhere that says
If Damage > 121 then Boom.
And the 2 HS load out might do 61 points of damage. So the 4 gun load out does 122...BOOM
But the 2 gun 151 does 60 damage. and the 4 gun does 120. no boom. They could be a miniscule % different and have a disproportinate effect for it.
I KNOW THAT THE GUNFIRE RESOLULTION IS NOT THIS SIMPLE
But that is the kind of thing I want to keep nagging HTC about until it is resolved..or funked kills me...
[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 05-05-2000).]
-
Die!!!!!!!!
Naaaaa, I hope Pyro takes a look at it too. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
I just hope this doesn't turn into a "leathiality" follies thing where one tour/week/day/hour, your guns are shooting ping pong balls and the next they are instant death from nothing more than a mean glance in the nme's direction.... I've allready had my fill of that thank you very much..
To say that HE is not modeled is very simplistic IMO... Many things about leathiality are not modeled. Many vulnerable (to AP rounds) parts of AC are not modeled. To model only HE will make for unfair and unrealistic ratios.
Without doing any testing at all (perhaps others have?)....Seems that right now in AH.... 1 20mm HE is worth about 2+ fifty cal rounds and a 20mm HS is worth just a RCH more... I would say that is fair. I would also say (from experiance) that if you change that "ratio" significantly... You will make one group very happy and very guilt ridden and the other unhappy and bitter, depending on whose ox is being gored.
lazs
[This message has been edited by -lazs- (edited 05-06-2000).]
-
I'd prefer te guns to be left as is.
no one wants the fiddling fiasco hotseat created over at WB to happen here.
currently 30mm is deadly
20mm both types are lethal.
50 cal if you hit enough it gets you results you want.
30 cal rightfully sucks (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Well I would prefer that they assess if the HS is really more leathal then the other 20mm to the extent it is in the game.
The statement that there are parts of the AC not modeled that are suseptible to AP implies that they would only be suseptible to HS 20mm other wise its a non issue for our discussion. Are there any parts of any of these planes that are proof against any 20mm ap round.....(except the soon to be introduced mgFF)
I dont think so. So giving the HS a fudge factor vs Aircraft based on its kinetic energy advantage is a suspect decision.
But I believe that you have stated the opinion of HTC to a tee.
I dont want the guns fuktuating weekly either. But I will suport any thread that questions the HS and question any thread that defends it. Until I see some account that supports the capabilities in the game.
-
Pongo I think you meant fluctuating, but fuktuating accurately describes the Warbirds gunnery follies. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
oopss. bad fingers
-
I haven't had the time to read this whole thread, so I won't make any comments about it. What I wanted to ask is if any of you have seen the "visual aid" pyro posted a while back showing the actual rounds fired? The Hispano round looks absolutely massive compared to the Mg151/20. It is at least a full 25% larger. Same thing goes for the 50 cal vs 13mm mg131.
I also thought I'd share a little story here about what happened to me last night. I was flying a heavy p38 to bomb a7. A 190 dove down to attack a bomber near me, so I dropped my bombs and rockets right there and dove on him. He was moving much faster than I was, so after landing a few 50 cal pings from 500 yds, he rapidly extended to 1k. To my surprise though I could still ping him with the 50 cal. (The Hispano could not shoot that far.) Since it was the only con in the area, I just kept firing 50 rds in bursts and landing 3 or 4 pings on the 190. All at ranges between 950 yds to 1.1k. After firing 1500 rds (yep, LOL, what a waste of ammo (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) ) ,he lost a wingtip. I was then able to close in on him and finish him off. My gunnery percentage went down a full 3.5% as a result of this sortie, but I did get the kill. I should have filmed it, but I'm sure others can attest to being able to hit at 1k with the 50s. Although I do think hits at that range are improbable at best; I was happy to see that it took well over 100 hits at that range to even knock off the 190s wingtip.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Yep bloom, the .50's are amazing.
They do not require that many rounds from 700-900yds though.
------------------
StSanta
II/JG2
-
pongo, all 151 rounds are lighter and lower velocity than HS rounds. HE rounds killed by structual damage and were not very effective against armor. The HS AP round has a better balistic coefficent along with it's higher energy than the 151 AP round and the Browning fifty has a better BC than either but less energy than either.
lazs
-
He He ..
What purpose does all that extra velocity and kinetic energy serve against lightly built and armoured aircraft..It is great against tanks and ships and locomotives. It is wasted against aircraft.
How many times do you think those wimpy 151/20rds bouced off of a p51?????
THEY USED CHEMICAL ENERGY(EXPLOSION-FRAGMENTATION) TO KILL!!!!
All of the 20mm here have more then enough penetration to peirce the vitals of any aircraft in the game. Giving the HS extra capability based on that penatration is missleading.
-
Pongo said:
"All of the 20mm here have more then enough penetration to pierce the vitals of any aircraft in the game."
As long as the rounds in question are AP rounds this is largely true with some Caveats. The MGFF has a pretty low muzzle velocity so I wouldn't count on it being true for that gun. At short to medium ranges from most angles 151 20mm AP rounds and .50 AP rounds (which have similar penetration capabilities) should be able to penetrate sufficiently. Hispano rounds penetrate 50% better than this and are probably good at almost any range and angle. Aside from the penetration issue Mg151 APHE rounds are smaller and carry less explosive than Hispano APHE rounds, so they should do less damage.
Don't count on HE rounds penetrating anything but the aircraft skin. Fragments from a 20mm HE round penetrate significantly less than a .30 cal round.
Hooligan
-
Well. the fragments are generated inside the aircraft so that should not be an issue. Many pilots where saved by the armour behind their backs and heads but they where mostly saved from the fragments.
-
uh... ok
lazs