Author Topic: Gun Ballistics  (Read 1510 times)

Offline Traveler

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
      • 113th Lucky Strikes
Traveler
Executive Officer
113th LUcky Strikes
http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/113th_Lucky_Strikes

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8079
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2017, 02:52:37 PM »
Only slight issue all kinds of numbers on the internet, but I've never been able to find the ballistic coefficient on a cannon round.

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline Traveler

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
      • 113th Lucky Strikes
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2017, 03:19:43 PM »
Only slight issue all kinds of numbers on the internet, but I've never been able to find the ballistic coefficient on a cannon round.

Wiley.

Smooth bore?  go here: http://arc.id.au/CannonBallistics.html
Traveler
Executive Officer
113th LUcky Strikes
http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/113th_Lucky_Strikes

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8079
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #18 on: August 30, 2017, 03:21:49 PM »
No I mean something like an MK 108 or MK 103 or Hispano.

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #19 on: August 30, 2017, 03:43:16 PM »
Tony Williams at combatsim.com.

-----------------------------------------------------
Somebody asked me about ballistic coefficients so I though some of you might be interested in the answer.

There are two aspects to "ballistic coefficient". One is the sectional density ratio, the other is a form factor.

The sectional density ratio is a straightforward calculation which compares the projectile weight with the calibre. The formula basically divides the weight by the square of the calibre (there is another multiplier in there which varies depending on the units of measurement being used, to get all SDRs back to a comparable figure). Projectiles of different calibres but with the same SDR will lose velocity at the same rate (and will therefore follow the same trajectories if fired at the same muzzle velocity) provided
that they are aerodynamically comparable.

This brings in the form factor. Clearly, a streamlined bullet has less air resistance than a flat-nosed cylinder, so the SDR is modified by a "form factor" to take account of this. The end result is the ballistic coefficient (BC), which gives an accurate comparator of the rate at which different projectiles are slowed by wind resistance. It is not a simple matter to calculate an exact ballistic coefficient, because the form factor will vary with quite minor changes in projectile shape, but reasonable estimates can be made.

Incidentally, an outcome of these calculations is that for projectiles of exactly the same shape and proportions, the ballistic coefficient improves with increasing calibre in recognition of the fact that (other things being equal) big bullets travel further than little ones.

I'll give some examples from WW2 aircraft guns.

A typical 7.92mm bullet weighed 10g and had an SDR of 0.227
The .50 M2 bullet weighed 46g giving an SDR of 0.406
The 20mm M-Geschoss weighed 92g giving an SDR of 0.327
The 20mm Hispano weighed 130g giving an SDR of 0.462
The standard 30mm M-Geschoss weighed 330g with an SDR of 0.522
The 30mm Hartkern AP round weighed 355g with an SDR of 0.561

Obviously, the higher the figure the better.

Now we come to the tricky bit; the form factor. The only relevant
information I have relates to rifle and pistol bullets, but cannon
projectiles can be guesstimated from their shape. A blunt, round-nose
bullet has a form factor of 1.75, a pointed one around 1.0, a spitzer 0.8 and a match bullet (as streamlined as possible) 0.6. These factors are divided into the SDR to give the BC. The 7.92mm and .50 bullets were well streamlined, let's say 0.75. The cannon shells were blunt and cylindrical, so would be around 1.5. The Hartkern, though, was highly streamlined so would be around 0.75.

This gives the following approximate ballistic coefficients:
7.92 = .30
.50" = .54
20mm M-Geschoss = .22
20mm Hispano = .31
30mm M-Geschoss = .35
30mm Hartkern = .75

There is a direct relationship between BC and velocity loss. A bullet with a BC of .30 will lose 11% of its velocity (+/- 1%) over the first 100m, one of .15 will lose about 22%.

As you can see, their streamlined shape means that the MG bullets show up quite well against the blunt cannon shells despite their smaller calibre. The .50" in particular was a very good long-range gun.


Tony Williams
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Wiley

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8079
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #20 on: August 30, 2017, 04:02:19 PM »
Hmp!  Thanks bustr.

Wiley.
If you think you are having a 1v1 in the Main Arena, your SA has failed you.

JG11

Offline Zoney

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6503
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #21 on: August 30, 2017, 04:22:23 PM »
Everything I need to know about in-game ballistics can be succinctly summed up with three words:

pew, pew, pew
Wag more, bark less.

Offline Skuzzy

  • Support Member
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31462
      • HiTech Creations Home Page
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #22 on: August 30, 2017, 04:31:43 PM »
Everything I need to know about in-game ballistics can be succinctly summed up with three words:

pew, pew, pew

rofl!  :rofl
Roy "Skuzzy" Neese
support@hitechcreations.com

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2017, 05:21:49 PM »
The only thing researching and building all those gunsights did for me was force me to practice my gunnery all the time to know what I was talking about. So during those years I got good at pew, pew, pew in this game. Building two terrains has had me spend less time pew, pew, pew and it gets rusty.

If this request was in the hopes of gaining some insight to gunnery to help you pew, pew, pew. Placing yourself in situations more frequently to pew, pew, pew will do a lot more for your gunnery in the game. The Trainers can help fill in the gaps.

There is an AAF Gun Harmonizing manual from 1945 that has data tables for .50cal - 75mm. If you do a wide spread google search you can find other manuals for ammunition that will fill in the gaps. I have some of them, after I read them, it was apparent for this game that Zoney is dead on. Just go into the game and practice pew, pew pew.
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline wil3ur

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1990
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2017, 05:34:01 PM »
I'm a fairly decent shot...  I was just hoping to find some information that is game related, because I'm sorry... but I don't believe the game takes into account all of the different things that a real life bullet does, even down to the change in ballistics between a tracer and non-tracer rounds.

The main point of wanting to know this is trying to find a sweet spot for convergence versus hitting power for different guns...  Specifically German 20mm cannons and 7.62mgs.

To me they seem to have worse drop and velocity than either the 20mm hispano or the .303s.

No biggie, I was just hoping there was something quick and easy that someone had on hand as opposed to the tedious work of setting up a .target.
"look at me I am making a derogatory remark to the OP"


Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #25 on: August 30, 2017, 05:52:41 PM »
Which german 20mm? The MG/FF you find on 109Es and 110Cs and 190A5s (the planes it shows up with 7mms) historically have terrible ballistics. You can "cheat" this by setting convergence out 100 yards more than you want so that they'll "lob" upwards a little more. Some do that with the 30mms also due to terrible drop.

Hispanos, on the other hand, are one of the fastest muzzle velocity cannons in the game and are amongst the best, so... yeah. The MG/FF don't compare at all. The MG151/20s are better by a lot, but still nowhere close. Then you get into other guns like the 20mm ShVak and so forth. All modeled with correct ballistics.

The rounds are averaged so that every individual round is the average of the overall belting. In reality, the difference between tracer and normal rounds was minimal. I think for AH purposes they disregarded the minimal weight shaving because the rounds were averaged out to normalize impact.

EDIT: For the sake of wing-mounted MG/FFs, don't shoot outside 300 yards. They can still hit and since they're a chemical explosive round they'll still do a lot of damage further out, but the aiming them reliably is key and they have very few rounds to miss with. Closer is better, but no plan of battle survives contact with the enemy.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2017, 05:54:30 PM by Krusty »

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #26 on: August 30, 2017, 08:26:38 PM »
I'm a fairly decent shot...  I was just hoping to find some information that is game related, because I'm sorry... but I don't believe the game takes into account all of the different things that a real life bullet does, even down to the change in ballistics between a tracer and non-tracer rounds.

The main point of wanting to know this is trying to find a sweet spot for convergence versus hitting power for different guns...  Specifically German 20mm cannons and 7.62mgs.

To me they seem to have worse drop and velocity than either the 20mm hispano or the .303s.

No biggie, I was just hoping there was something quick and easy that someone had on hand as opposed to the tedious work of setting up a .target.

You use the 100mph principle. Determine how long it takes an MGFF or MG151\20 to travel 300-400yds. Average your con's speed as 100mph. How far does your con travel at 100mph in the time it takes one of those 20mm to travel 300-400yds. That distance of travel by your con will be the Mil you lead by for a 100mph con using those rounds at 300-400yds. For every 100mph increase in speed, lead by another travel distance in Mil for 100mph.

For the allies this was based on the .50 and 20mm traveled 1200ft in about .48 seconds. Using the 100mph rule a con at 300mph at 1200ft away traveling 90 degrees would require a lead of 3 100Mil ring radii or 150Mil. At 1200ft traveling 100mph a con would cross 50Mil of a 100Mil ring reticle. This is why most pilots couldn't hit anything until the K14 did it all for them.

You can find a copy of Bordwaffenmunition on the internet as a free download. It will give you drops at range for the two cannon in meters. Then do a little math. You can search wiki for Mil math related to ballistics.

The MGFF drops about 8.5ft at .80sec to 400m, and the MG151 7ft. The MG151 takes .71sec to travel 400m, a lot slower than the .50 or 20mm hiso. The .50 and 20mm hiso drop about 40in at 1200ft. Lazor beams versus high explosive spud chukkers. You might say it's imperative to shoot german cannon at your convergence point to account for those long trajectory drops. That's what the german fixed gunnery manual taught fighter pilots. 
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline USCH

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1713
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #27 on: August 30, 2017, 08:34:44 PM »
if you get in close drop doesn't happen..... shoot point blank

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6974
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #28 on: August 30, 2017, 09:21:24 PM »
The only thing that matters is what happens in game.

I use the target command for all guns..........but I also test them at different speeds and altitudes just to make sure I've taken everything in account.

I don't use the gunsight much at all in game.


Offline TequilaChaser

  • AH Training Corps - Retired
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10173
      • The Damned - founded by Ptero in 1988
Re: Gun Ballistics
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2017, 02:02:24 PM »

I don't use the gunsight much at all in game.

You use it, but not in the way the majority of players use it....

You have played the game long enough and practiced enough that you have developed a "mental hit picture" that has become like second nature to tell your muscle memory to "FIRE" or "pull the trigger", because the size of the enemy plane is at the same size of your "mental picture" that you've developed over time...

TC
"When one considers just what they should say to a new pilot who is logging in Aces High, the mind becomes confused in the complex maze of info it is necessary for the new player to know. All of it is important; most of it vital; and all of it just too much for one brain to absorb in 1-2 lessons" TC