Would like some 109 training

[moot]

Well, most of the time I RTB with ~20-30 30mm rounds in the 152.  You can definitely use about as much/little ammo with the 109s as successively as in the 152.  The difference in total kills when you RTB isn't that big, because the 109 can afford that much more knife fighting where the 152 just can't quite keep up.  There's more films later in that thread.

Yes practice with the 30 can make up for the difference in ballistics, but like I said, you have to compensate for the 30's handicap with ACM.  It's not a bad deal at all. 
No, no magic trick.. Just find the convergence you're most comfortable with and practice till it's second nature.

[boomerlu]

I did some offline practice as well as flew against some computer opponents in the old 2.13 version (practice missions). I upped the ammo count so I would not be so gun shy - I wanted to really see the 30mm in action.

What I'm finding is that if I didn't take a shot with the 30mm, I probably would not have taken it with a 20mm either. I feel like I land less hits with the 30mm, but then again, it is also proportionally more lethal. So with practice, there is no real tradeoff except with very high closure/LOS rate shots (front quarter or beam snap shots) which are not the 109's strong suits anyways (unless you take the gondolas in a G model, which come with a hefty price in speed, acceleration, and maneuverability).

[Madkow]

You can't learn from shots you don't take. Set the 30mm to 175 it helps a lot with snapshot because you don't have to lead as much. At 175 it shoots very flat. IMO you shouldn't be afraid to use all 65 rounds on one plane when your trying to learn. Dont spray and pray just shoot when you have a shot. Also record everything. This way you can see what worked and WHY. It's the best way to learn. 

[boomerlu]

First I'd like to thank everybody for their input, even though this wasn't my thread to begin with . It's helped me a lot in just a few days, I sometimes surprise myself with my 30mm gunnery.

Set the 30mm to 175 it helps a lot with snapshot because you don't have to lead as much. At 175 it shoots very flat.

Question: what about 150 or 200? I currently have it set to 150, does it make much difference?

[moot]

Best way is to test it out yourself.. Use .target xxx, where xxx is the range in yards.  The target will be north of you.  You can reset or turn it off with .target 0
If you're shooting from very high speed on a slower target, your bullet drop will happen in slow motion.  With regards to the target's range from you.  This is only a problem if you start using longer convergence.

[boomerlu]

Best way is to test it out yourself.. Use .target xxx, where xxx is the range in yards.  The target will be north of you.  You can reset or turn it off with .target 0
If you're shooting from very high speed on a slower target, your bullet drop will happen in slow motion.  With regards to the target's range from you.  This is only a problem if you start using longer convergence.

I have tried a variety of convergence and target ranges. Interestingly enough, the convergence didn't seem to make that big of a difference (even from 150 to 600). Maybe my sense isn't fine tuned enough, that is why I'm asking you guys. Perhaps you see something or have experienced something that I'm missing.

Usually I would test this out by comparing the flight trajectories - but that's rather difficult given we don't have a very intuitive system to graph the trajectories. Yes tracers and yes film viewer, but the viewer is not easy to use.

On second thought I may try this when I have more time - using a plane relative view while autopilot's engaged and spraying 30mm rounds. As long as I can keep the views consistent, this may help visualize the bullet trajectory.

[moot]

You could use the target to map bullet height thru a (e.g.) 500y trajectory.  .target at 1, 100, 200, etc.  Then graph it... If you really wanna be thorough about it  

A plainly visible case is to take an Me262, set your convergence to the max, and shoot bursts while flying at 550+.  You'll see the bullets strain to fly forward and stay (relatively) much longer in the climbing portion of their trajectory.

Like I said earlier though: It's a matter of preference.  Do you want to have the 30mm shoot automatically higher so that it lands on the piper at range (mine is 375), or do you want to have the tater aimed manually (convergence set very short)?  I prefer the former because it allows me to shoot all guns together on targets I absolutely need to kill in one burst with no hesitation/lead evaluation delay; and the only accomodation I need to take for the 375y tater convergence setting is to shoot slightly lower on short-range targets or high speed snapshots.   With the taters set to very short convergence and aimed manually, you're pretty much removing the ability to shoot other guns together with the 30 (the 30 will always fall short at long range, or the other guns shoot a little too high at short range).

[Agent360]

I have had my conv set at d200 for years. I have tried long D400+ and short D150. Several other threads have discussed trajectory of nose mounted cannon. All of it is true.

In the 109k4 and G14 firing 30mm rounds, there are two things that make your shot.
#1 - Your plane IS A GUN. Your not flying to lead and then tracking the rounds in like 50 cals. YOU ARE THE GUN. You must fly your plane into the gun solution. There is no saddling up for a tracking shot.

#2 - G LOAD, you must learn to fly to your target and prepare a low G loades shot. Any G's on the plane and you will miss. Hi G shots can be made but usually result in severe E loss or snap stalls and loss of position.

Use of rudder to sling the nose into the shot is useful but its not what makes the kill. It is the setup before that.

Moot said "let the ACM do the work". This is the essesance of 30mm gunnery. You must fly in a way that gives you INTERSECTING flight paths. If you do this correctly you get lots of shot and still maintain position.

Conv over D250 can result in actually firing ahead of the target. Its hard to believe but it is true. Counting on the high arc of the round to compensate for lack of lead is the wrong way to go about it.

[moot]

Well.. when I say that there's convenience in 250y+ convergence on a nose 30mm, you gotta take it at face value.  When you're shooting a target flying at an odd solution angle (e.g. that F6F fast snapshot film in the 152 thread), the vertical convergence on the 30mm (if you have it set to 375y like me) will do nothing but mess with your aim - you have to aim slightly lower in the vertical coordinate WRT to your gunsight which isn't intuitive at all WRT to everything else. 

But IMO that's better than the tradeoff in trajectories that you pay for by having the 30 set to short range and (unless you have the other guns set to very short range too, for which I can't think of a good reason to) having to manually raise the aim as well as having the 30 not match the other gun's convergence.

Like I said.... It's really a matter of pilot preference.  The tradeoffs on each of the two alternatives are just about equal.

[boomerlu]

Thanks guys, this was the type of insightful analysis I was looking for.

From what it sounds... I usually fly the type of ACM that you guys are talking about - intersecting flight path snapshots (usually at medium speed).

That said, I usually take my shots around 200 range (icon indication) and I would like to be able to shoot my guns in unison. In this case is it still useful to have 375 convergence, or would I be better served setting both the MGs and the 30 down to around 200 conv?

[moot]

If you're shooting almost exclusively at 200y, the convergence doesn't make much difference except in small profile target, glancing shots.  You'll have the tater flying a little high there, and that can make it fly right next (literally) to the edge of the target.  The reason I have mine (all guns) set to 375 is so that I can most easily shoot the hardest shot (for me): dead six.  I also like to have the reach on running targets with the 20mm, but the natural dispersion on the 20's makes it so that you're barely gaining anything from setting those further than 375-400 yards. 
If you're flying a 109, then it's really not that hard to manage the slight upwards offset to nail a runner or long distance target (e.g. someone hanging at the top of his rope 500y away from you) with the 13mm set to 375.  The lateral convergence is almost negligible too (cowl guns).  And setting everything to 375 might not make much difference at all when shooting 200y targets.  The best way to find out is to try it out youself

[mtnman]

I have tried a variety of convergence and target ranges. Interestingly enough, the convergence didn't seem to make that big of a difference (even from 150 to 600). Maybe my sense isn't fine tuned enough, that is why I'm asking you guys. Perhaps you see something or have experienced something that I'm missing.

I think you need to realize that what doesn't look like much difference, or not enough difference to matter, may easily be due to the scale of the .target.

Hitting all of your shots in the "bullseye", or "10" ring isn't really good enough, because the center ring is 20ft in diameter, with each consecutive ring an additional 10ft on each side.  So, the "9" ring is actually 40ft across.  The back side of a typical fighter gets lost in a 40ft diameter circle, and doesn't even fill 1/2 of the center ring.

What looks like "a little low" in the center ring may actually mean shooting 4-5 feet under your target in the MA...  Here's an F4U centered in the .target for size comparison.  See how easy it would be to have what look like "good groups" completely miss the plane?

Almost all of these shots will miss!

Look, almost all are misses, again!

Size reference only, showing the full target.

Finally!  Lots of hits on this one!

[mtnman]

That said, I usually take my shots around 200 range (icon indication) and I would like to be able to shoot my guns in unison. In this case is it still useful to have 375 convergence, or would I be better served setting both the MGs and the 30 down to around 200 conv?

What's the point of setting your convergence at all?  Or knowing where it's set?  If you set your convergence at 375, how do you know when you're 375yds from your target?  The point of adjusting and/or knowing your convergence point is to give you a predictable firing distance to hit and do the most damage to your enemy.

It's not possible to know when you're 375 yards from your target in AH, unless you memorize the size of each of your opponents, and how they compare in size in your sights.  The icons in the game won't tell you when you're 375 out.

The useful (IMO) enemy icons for gunnery in the game are D200, D400, and D600.  Each icon range encompasses a span of 200yds, with the depicted distance being the CENTER of that span.  So, D200 is the space between 100 and 299yds.  D400 is anywhere between 300 and 499yds.  D600 is anywhere between 500 and 699yds.

If you set your convergence at 375, how do you know you're 375yds from your target?  You don't.  You have to guess (and you may even get good at it), because 375 is "somewhere" around 1/2 way from when the icon distance switched from D400 and will switch to D200.  It's not very predictable, since speed/closure rates will vary so much.  375 may be the perfect compromise in trajectory (I'm not saying that's true), but what good is it if you never know when your target is 375yds away?

So, how do you use the icons to give you a better reference of actual firing distance?  There are a few "sweet-spot" distances that you can use, and actually know when you are very close to firing at your pre-set convergence distance.  This maximizes the chances that you'll actually land a tight group on your target, or that you'll hit the target with one well-placed big-azz round.  Using these sweet-spot convergence ranges, and firing at the correct time, takes the trajectory issue out of play for the most part, and let's you think more about properly timing the trigger-pull.

So, what are the sweet spots?  They're the distance that one icon changes to the next icon distance.  The icon will change from D400 to D200 (or vice versa) at 299 or 300yds.  It will change from D600 to D400 at 499 or 500 yds.  If you set your convergence to 300 or 500, and fire when the icon counter changes, it's ridiculous how easy it is to destroy a plane with a tiny burst.  My normal is to set mine for 275, and while the icon says 400, I'm getting my aim fairly close.  As soon as it switches to D200, I finalize my aim and fire, and I'll be firing at my opponent right around 250-275 yards.  I don't use 500 for convergence, because from my testing I've found that the normal dispersal of the rounds at 600yds isn't really any worse with a 275 convergence setting than it is with a 600yd convergence setting, and for me, fighters out at D600 are too far away (and too small) for me to shoot at.  275 optimizes my effectiveness on fighters, but doesn't hurt my performance against bombers, which I'll fire at sooner (about D400 usually).  In crossing shots (high deflection and speed), your chances of success are much higher against a closer, larger target with less required lead, which is another argument for a 275 setting vs a 475 or 500yd setting.

These guys have the "let the ACM do the work" idea just right.  If you do that, and have your convergence set right, and learn to fire at convergence distances, then the actual firing part of the fight is quick, small, and over quickly.  Winning the fight is more about winning the flight aspect, and it's just finalized with a brief shot.

[boomerlu]

I think you need to realize that what doesn't look like much difference, or not enough difference to matter, may easily be due to the scale of the .target.

True, and yes I'm misjudging the size of the target. However, I judge target groupings based on where I place my pipper versus where the round lands. In that sense, it doesn't look like much difference. In addition, there's the huge problem of the hit sprite size - the precision afforded by that is small.

Yes you can bring the target back up closer, but again what I really want to know isn't how good my gunnery was on the very center of the target, rather I'd like an idea of where my bullet landed wrt to my aim point.

Again why I asked for a second opinion instead of relying solely on my own.

[boomerlu]

The useful (IMO) enemy icons for gunnery in the game are D200, D400, and D600.  Each icon range encompasses a span of 200yds, with the depicted distance being the CENTER of that span.  So, D200 is the space between 100 and 299yds.  D400 is anywhere between 300 and 499yds.  D600 is anywhere between 500 and 699yds.

[...]

So, what are the sweet spots?  They're the distance that one icon changes to the next icon distance.  The icon will change from D400 to D200 (or vice versa) at 299 or 300yds.  It will change from D600 to D400 at 499 or 500 yds.  If you set your convergence to 300 or 500, and fire when the icon counter changes, it's ridiculous how easy it is to destroy a plane with a tiny burst.  My normal is to set mine for 275, and while the icon says 400, I'm getting my aim fairly close. 

I have always wondered about the distances. Now I know the switching points and that helps tremendously.

These guys have the "let the ACM do the work" idea just right.  If you do that, and have your convergence set right, and learn to fire at convergence distances, then the actual firing part of the fight is quick, small, and over quickly.  Winning the fight is more about winning the flight aspect, and it's just finalized with a brief shot.

This agrees with my experience thus far in the game. My best shots come from good setups. Usually my firing bursts are relatively short and they are usually lethal assuming they land. However, I've heard many times that the 30mm specifically was hard to aim and also lots of convergence advice without the detailed analysis which you guys have given me in this thread (and for that I greatly appreciate your help). Such a mindset and lack of sound information lead to a lot of frustration with the gun on my part.

Now I have something rather consistent to base my convergence and firing decisions off of. I can also now distinguish the component parts of any failures when I shoot. With all this, I have what I need to improve rapidly and somewhat scientifically.

Once again, I've much appreciated all the discussion.