Jump to content

6./ZG26_Custard

Testers
  • Content Count

    1800
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

932 Excellent

1 Follower

About 6./ZG26_Custard

  • Rank
    Tester

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Blighty
  • Interests
    PC gaming, films and modelling...(Not the catwalk kind!)

Recent Profile Visitors

2553 profile views
  1. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    Not surprising, with possibly 4 MK 108's hitting the aircraft. I'm also fairly confident that if you put enough 30 mm rounds into a B-17, its wings will most certainly fall off Pilot reports and anecdotal evidence can't always be relied on to be 100% accurate but Its plainly obvious that the MK 108 was a fearsome weapon. I tend to agree with what you posted here. Unfortunately I don't know whether it was just 20 mm or not, but the hits to the Liberator from 5:39 look like a larger caliber than 20 mm. I'm not sure but could the clip you mentioned be hits to the outboard Tokyo tanks and igniting fuel?
  2. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    The US, Britain and Germany all carried out testing on the effectiveness of ammunition types and while its undeniable that the MK 108 packed a massive punch but there were some variables recorded between all of the tests. Its clear from the spitfire testing that the MK 108 was a formidable weapon but according to the US testing it may have been probable that a large fighter or a twin engine bomber may have survived instantaneous catastrophic damage from a 30 mm hit or several and make it back to base. Regarding the oft quoted "Luftwaffe" 3-4 hits to bring down a heavy, Id like to think (but of course maybe wrong) that it may have been in some cases an over exuberant account similar to bouncing 50 cals taking out Tiger tanks and the over-claiming for the effectiveness of taking out tanks in the air to ground role. I don't often like to refer to gun cam footage but many of the "heavies" in this footage are receiving numerous hits from Fw190 A-8s and Bf110 G-2s and even though the damage is most likely catastrophic they are not disintegrating after 3 or 4 hits. At round the 2 minute mark a 110 attacks a B-17 and I lost count after about 30 hits. At the 5 minute mark a LaGG takes multiple hit from the guns of an A-8. Many of you have undoubtedly already seen this video. I'm sure that in many instances 1 30 mm round would be sufficient to down a fighter, if it hit a vital component. I think we also have to assume that in some instances, aircraft could survive a catastrophic failure and manage to return home. I think looking at all the evidence 1 hit from a 30 mm may not always end in an instant kill, even though the damage caused would be significant.
  3. I don't think its as easy a statement to make as that. A hit in the right place could down an aircraft with one hit. I think the issue is that the tests between the different nations during WWII yielded differing results. As pointed out by @II./JG77_Kempthe US tests were conducted from a front-below aspect. Looking at the British tests (shooting from behind), the 1 30 mm hit to Spitfire wings and fuselage would almost certainly have caused a catastrophic failure. The Luftwaffe "claim" of 4 hits to bring down a B-17 may need to be taken with a pinch of salt and further examination. The Williams/Gustin report on armament effectiveness states: "The outstanding performer is clearly the German 30 mm MK 108, which achieves ten times the destructiveness of the .50 M2 for only twice the weight." Then there are all the variables to take into consideration. I know the devs are striving for the most accurate damage model that they can, given the limitations of a simulated environment. Thanks to @unreasonable for his explanations regarding the US tests.
  4. It seems if it was dependent on whether it was an A or a B kill. It also seems to depend where the damage occurred to individual aircraft. There is of course some test data for the thousands of aircraft that were shot down and didn't return to base but there is also a lot of evidence that cannot be examined. It's perfectly reasonable to expect that given a whole host of parameters a fighter aircraft could receive several hits from a 30 mm round and continue flying but following that course of logic, it's also perfectly reasonable to expect an aircraft could suffer catastrophic damage from one 30 mm round. The testing that I have carried out in the current build, on public servers is of course no reflection of what could happen in a real life situation. However, most of the fighters can take 4-6 30 mm HE hits.. Edit:(dead 6 into the fuselage and wings) and remain flying in current build. Considering the real life ammunition testing conducted by the British, US and Germans yielded variable results, I'm not sure if the video posted by the devs yesterday is showing the results of some further additions made to their excellent damage model. If this is the case hopefully it will be a happy medium for everyone?
  5. Personally speaking, I'd just like the damage from MK 108's and all HE rounds to be modeled as accurately as possible. I understand and accept that it may not be possible to get it spot on, due to a whole range of variables but 6 hits from 30 mm rounds should disintegrate a single engines fighter, based on RL test information. The discussion in this section and other sections on the forum have referred to the US tests regarding probability of "kills" from various ammunition types. If I'm reading the charts right, 2 30 mm hits on a P-47 would result in an 84% chance in destruction of the aircraft. Posted in (Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?) Thread. Checking the video posted by the devs yesterday, both the aircraft in the tests were out of the fight after receiving 1 hit for the Yak and 2 when the P-47 got hit. (Video above) If these are improvements that are to be added at a later date to current DM in the video, then its very encouraging. However, if there were no changes (in the video) made then I'm amazed that after hours of testing the MK 108 and larger caliber rounds on various aircraft types, in the current build, some aircraft can soak up 4 to 6 30 mm hits and keep on flying. Edit: Hopefully we'll get some news on further developments in the near future.
  6. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    It's interesting to note that the video was posted today. Have to see if there are any further developments.
  7. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    Both aircraft in a real situation would most likely have suffered catastrophic failure after one or two hits. You can receive damage from control surfaces, that are shot off and striking your prop taking out you engine etc due to collateral damage in the current build.
  8. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    Absolutely both. The same should apply in this video and the 109 should be toast from collateral damage.
  9. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    It completely acceptable that both aircraft could survive 1 or even 2 hits from a 30 mm round given a variable of conditions (angle etc) but fighter aircraft surviving 6 to 8 30 mm hits without structural failure really doesn't seem plausible. You can definitely get one shot kills with the MK 108 if you hit the aircraft say in the engine, or kill the pilot. Flying straight and level or turning to allow friends to take shots at you for a few hours provides interesting results. Edit: I really like the new damage model but personally the 30 mm just don't seem to have the punch they should have.
  10. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    I cannot discuss Beta or testing information but you could go online with a friend and shoot at each other in level flight and record the results or set up a QM and do some current testing with 3.008
  11. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    The results are somewhat surprising and not what I was expecting to happen. I would recommend that you set up a QM and set your second flight to say A-20s and then shoot at them with the 37 mm or use the P-39.
  12. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    Several different categories.with similar results.
  13. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    Looking at historical data and anecdotal evidence available the MK 108 was a devastating weapon. I remember watching a documentary featuring the test pilot, Eric Brown where he witnessed an attack on B-26's and he stated that they were turned into confetti by the withering fire from MK 108's. There is also plenty of photographic and documented evidence to peruse. I think the new damage model is an excellent step forward. However, before the update, the 30 mm rounds were deadly and you would be very fortunate to survive 1 hit and if you survived 2 hits then you felt a miracle had taken place. Flying online now you can take 5 , 6 or even more 30 mm hits and remain airborne, admittedly your aircraft will probably be terminally damaged but its can still be flown until the engine conks out or you take another hit. Many would expect a catastrophic failure after the first or second hit with wing or fuselage failure. I fully understand that you will never please everyone and that the changes to the damage model will have all sorts of effects that may not be what we perceived they should be. I think the devs continue to work wonders but I was surprised that prior to our latest update virtually every one of the current aircraft was very vulnerable to 30 mm and now a Lagg can take 4 to 5 rounds to the fuselage and continue flying. This is of course a personal opinion and is in no way a blanket criticism of a truly excellent product, but I'd like to see to see the 30 mm exhibit the same level of destructive power that we had before 3.008 but with all the goodies we have in the current build. Edit: - Just a quick video from the other night on BERLOGA public
  14. 6./ZG26_Custard

    Which DM do you like more - before 3.008 or after?

    The damage model over all is better but the larger calibre round damage (30 mm) etc need to be looked at in my view.
×