VIDEO TEST 20mm.

[BlitzPig_Bill_Kelso]

Without having icons on, you cannot replicate exact distances from test to test, hence test is invalid.  If you are going to present evidence, it has to be accurate.  This isn't.

 

I have no horse in this race as I seem to be able to kill what I'm aiming at, no matter which side I fly, even Italian.

 

The Revi site can and is used to determine distance to the target. It works really well for aiming and defection shooting.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Targ, you are missing the point.  ( Yeah I see you hiding ) 

 

What I said about icons was for static testing of the guns so that a known range could be established, thus ruling out one variable.

 

[BubiHUN]

Nice video! Would be awesome if the Devs listen to the tests

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Has there been any update on the situation?

[Asgar]

nope

[BubiHUN]

Has there been any update on the situation?

of course not. These arent wrote with cyrill letters. 

[E69_geramos109]

The last nexs i heared about that is a Jason's post saying that there is no evidence...

Amacing.

[Original_Uwe]

Hmmm...certainly good for thought

[BubiHUN]

The last nexs i heared about that is a Jason's post saying that there is no evidence...

Amacing.

funny isnt it? we just payed for [edited].

Edited May 8, 2017 by SYN_Haashashin
Bias acusation

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Always been curious about belt make up..

While they say like AP/HE/AP
How many of each and how many Tracers per 10 rounds?

Eg, Video with a P51 pilot say how every 10th .50cal was a tracer.
But games like WT had them at every 4th (which NERFS the gun majorly only 7-8 AP per belt depending if it starts with tracer or not)

[BubiHUN]

Always been curious about belt make up..

 

While they say like AP/HE/AP

How many of each and how many Tracers per 10 rounds?

 

Eg, Video with a P51 pilot say how every 10th .50cal was a tracer.

But games like WT had them at every 4th (which NERFS the gun majorly only 7-8 AP per belt depending if it starts with tracer or not)

well i dont belive in that. with a 109 20mm shells have effect on planes whats have tracers only.

Edited May 1, 2017 by BubiHUN

[mb339pan]

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

It is not a cheat, lucky bullets spray & pray that's all!

[mb339pan]

It is not a cheat, lucky bullets spray & pray that's all!

Maybe in War thunder, 1 shot 1 kill i can not call lucky, not at 0.8km at High speed

[Jason_Williams]

To the OP,

 

We ask that you boil this hour long video into something under 10 mins and explain your finding and what you claim to have found in a clear concise document less than 1 page explaining what is shown in the video. Watching an hour long video to locate a bug or problematic issue is not how we operate. Make your claim easy to understand and re-produce and eliminate as many factors as possible so we can consider your findings. But do not post it on the forum so we can take all emotion out out of this. Send it to us privately and we'll take a look. However, even if you do this, there is no guarantee we will change anything.

 

Jason 

[Asgar]

@@Jason_Williams  OP and i have different conclusions but we're both seeing a similar problem. OP thinks it's a difference in the guns. i think it's a difference in the ammo, which is problematic on both sides, Russian and German.

I made this video 2 month ago testing the German and Russian 37mm HE and AP (since it's the only caliber that offeres selectable ammo types for both airforces). my conclusion after doing the tests (the video is just a few representative examples i did about an hour of test shooting) is that AP damage against aircraft is too high compared to HE. People who conclude that a) German cannons are too weak or b) Russian cannons are to strong probably come to that conclusion because the German ammo belts have a higher HE share than the Russian belts which means less damage output overall. So due to the wrong HE damage compared to AP and he fact that German aircraft use more HE ammo it creates a feeling that German cannons are weaker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjHXVWPe8Gs

Once again, i don't claim bias, i think it's a general problem with the damage of ammo types which is a problem found on the weapons of both airforces. i think that's also what makes MG so incredibly deadly in the BoX series compared to some other flight sim products. 
 

Edited May 1, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Asgar

[mb339pan]

To the OP,

 

We ask that you boil this hour long video into something under 10 mins and explain your finding and what you claim to have found in a clear concise document less than 1 page explaining what is shown in the video. Watching an hour long video to locate a bug or problematic issue is not how we operate. Make your claim easy to understand and re-produce and eliminate as many factors as possible so we can consider your findings. But do not post it on the forum so we can take all emotion out out of this. Send it to us privately and we'll take a look. However, even if you do this, there is no guarantee we will change anything.

 

Jason 

Saburo Sakay, Pierre Clostermann, Johnnie Johnson and others. I've never read NEVER shoots at more than 500 meters with the instant destruction of the enemy plane, even if it was much larger than hunting objects like bombers, Pilot shooting distance was well below 500 meters, if there is something wrong that you have to say to you, and not players in the usual hunting witch, the sources have been public for 80 years, there is no secret, I just reported a strange, too strange fact

 

What then the weapon can hit a static object at a kilometer is another thing

 

Regards

Edited May 2, 2017 by 339_pan

[Original_Uwe]

@@Jason_Williams  OP and i have different conclusions but we're both seeing a similar problem. OP thinks it's a difference in the guns. i think it's a difference in the ammo, which is problematic on both sides, Russian and German.

I made this video 2 month ago testing the German and Russian 37mm HE and AP (since it's the only caliber that offeres selectable ammo types for both airforces). my conclusion after doing the tests (the video is just a few representative examples i did about an hour of test shooting) is that AP damage against aircraft is too high compared to HE. People who conclude that a) German cannons are too weak or b) Russian cannons are to strong probably come to that conclusion because the German ammo belts have a higher HE share than the Russian belts which means less damage output overall. So due to the wrong HE damage compared to AP and he fact that German aircraft use more HE ammo it creates a feeling that German cannons are weaker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjHXVWPe8Gs

Once again, i don't claim bias, i think it's a general problem with the damage of ammo types which is a problem found on the weapons of both airforces. i think that's also what makes MG so incredibly deadly in the BoX series compared to some other flight sim products.

 

Interesting vid.

It almost seems like HE and AP are reversed in effect.

And you're either a better shot with the Russian planes or the Russian 37 removes control strangest more aptly lol.

[E69_geramos109]

To the OP,

 

We ask that you boil this hour long video into something under 10 mins and explain your finding and what you claim to have found in a clear concise document less than 1 page explaining what is shown in the video. Watching an hour long video to locate a bug or problematic issue is not how we operate. Make your claim easy to understand and re-produce and eliminate as many factors as possible so we can consider your findings. But do not post it on the forum so we can take all emotion out out of this. Send it to us privately and we'll take a look. However, even if you do this, there is no guarantee we will change anything.

 

Jason 

Ok. The point to make a hour video is to evade any coincidence having a good amount of data. I can make a resume minute but some people will say that is just a lucky shot etc. Anyways if you want i can make a document for you to explain all of my points aout the problem we have with the ammo.

Thanks for consider it. 

[150GCT_Veltro]

Agree.

...and about HE would be nice to check this video, finally somebody has posted it again.

http://i.imgur.com/6f9sY6K.gifv

[Asgar]

Agree.

...and about HE would be nice to check this video, finally somebody has posted it again.

http://i.imgur.com/6f9sY6K.gifv

that was actually me :D

[ITAF_Cymao]

It is not a cheat, lucky bullets spray & pray that's all!

I agre with you, it isnt a cheat, but it happens too often to be able to talk about a lucky shot and I think there is something wrong.

Meanwhile I think it would be appropriate to consider the possibility to remove the zoom...

 

S!

[Original_Uwe]

Zoom has to stay.

It's a bad compromise but it's necessary.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

I guess some people in here have 30/30 vision opposed to the normal people in here have 15/15 vision that mostly play this sim, I'm sorry but the needs of the many outway the one..

 

while there is only maybe 3 of you guys crying about this and that, you should consider the cost of your complaints..if you want x changed for y, then pay IL2 777 studios a couple of thousand dollars and ask for the changes?

 

 

 

modding is coming to this sim...

Edited May 3, 2017 by 71st_AH_Mastiff

[150GCT_Veltro]

that was actually me :D

 

Yes, nice find! Thank!

Would be nice have the "original" video.

[ITAF_Cymao]

Zoom has to stay.

It's a bad compromise but it's necessary.

Why is it necessary? Without zooming would be more realistic, the game would be would simulative and we wouldnt have a 1 shot 1 kill game.

 

 

while there is only maybe 3 of you guys crying about this and that, you should consider the cost of your complaints..if you want x changed for y, then pay IL2 777 studios a couple of thousand dollars and ask for the changes?

So if one thing is wrong  must it remain wrong if we only pay $ 70 an episode of the game?

 

The problem with the weapons I think is real, I dont know if it depends on the too effective of some bullets compared to others, or the fragility of some planes while others can be hit by many shots before being shot down.

Too many lucky shots, too many precise shots of over 800 mt, too many one shot one kill...

Or maybe we are all just victims of hallucinations!

 

 

S! and sorry for my English

[707shap_Srbin]

Agree.

...and about HE would be nice to check this video, finally somebody has posted it again.

http://i.imgur.com/6f9sY6K.gifv

Hans Philipp's ( I./JG 54) claim during early 1942.

[150GCT_Veltro]

Hans Philipp's ( I./JG 54) claim during early 1942.

 

Bravo! Thank you!

 

1' 20''

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Why is it necessary? Without zooming would be more realistic, the game would be would simulative and we wouldnt have a 1 shot 1 kill game.

 

 

 

So if one thing is wrong  must it remain wrong if we only pay $ 70 an episode of the game?

 

The problem with the weapons I think is real, I dont know if it depends on the too effective of some bullets compared to others, or the fragility of some planes while others can be hit by many shots before being shot down.

Too many lucky shots, too many precise shots of over 800 mt, too many one shot one kill...

Or maybe we are all just victims of hallucinations!

 

 

S! and sorry for my English

 

Variety of decapitation of enemy planes are what make this game realistic and fun, i spend same amount of time in Red and Blue airplanes and have successes and failures  in both side, i do not see much a diffrence side wise... ofc some thinkg shuld be look at (e.g. Pe2 durability), it is not perfect sim but making it less realistic is never the solution to the problem of something not being realistic enough.

[ITAF_Cymao]

it is not perfect sim but making it less realistic is never the solution to the problem of something not being realistic enough.

Perfection doesn't exist...

What would be less realistic?

 

I see german planes firing only from less than 500 mt and russian planes that have no problem shooting from over 500 mt to even 1 KM, with devastating effects

I don't shoot from afar because I know I will not get anything...

 

S!

Edited May 3, 2017 by ITAF_Cymao

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Perfection doesn't exist...

What would be less realistic?

 

I see german planes firing only from less than 500 mt and russian planes that have no problem shooting from over 500 mt to even 1 KM, with devastating effects

I don't shoot from afar because I know I will not get anything...

 

S!

Preventing people try to shoot at you at that distance by making unrealistic bullet ballistic, energy or dispersion.

We have 1000 time more flight hours than real pilots have and can practice shooting endlessly. Also we did misss some elements of real live like lack of static head shake, Gs and focusing on multiple objects. It isn't easy lining up three things when your eye can only focus on one of them at a time, but on a computer monitor, all three can be focused on at the same time.

 

I agree that zoom helps shoting from large distances but playing without it hmm - well if all would not then why not ....

S!

[ITAF_Cymao]

 

Preventing people try to shoot at you at that distance by making unrealistic bullet ballistic, energy or dispersion.

People try an unrealistic shot because know he have good chanches to get airkill...

And we might think that there is now an unrealistic ballistic problem (and many think it).

 

S!

[Scojo]

I just want to state that I fully agree with Asgar.

[Asgar]

I just want to state that I fully agree with Asgar.

you can never go wrong with that 

[marklar]

Thanks geramos for this thread. I came back to BoX after over a year break and noticed immediately that there is something wrong with german 20mm shells. First, I thought that soviet planes are made of stalinium but apparently the problem is with the ammunition.

 

I am glad that someone from 1C finally noticed this thread (after 8 months) but based on his response I don't have any hope this issue will be fixed anytime soon.

[Jason_Williams]

I will address this topic in more detail now that I have been able to speak to Han about this more deeply the past few days.

 

But first, I’m going to say this again. Stop disrespecting the team. We do not ignore our users or your complaints. Sometimes, we either cannot act on something or we disagree that action is needed, but we never truly ignore. I still see too many comments that are out of line just because we have not changed something that SOME of you thing is incorrect. Just because you make a lengthy video, doesn’t necessarily mean we agree with its findings. But we appreciate the attempt to be scientific. We only wish such demonstrations were shorter because our time is preciously short.

 

I hate writing such responses too because I am not an engineer and my few engineers barely speak English and they are swamped with work so there is no time anyways. But I’ll attempt to tell you what the situation is.

 

General Comments:

 

First, it is impossible to model damage, such as a wing falling off due to exploding ammo to 100% accuracy. To even get close would require computer horsepower that doesn’t exist yet. However, we try to take several logical factors into account when calculating the different types of ammo and wing structures.

 

We also cannot build our aircraft rivet by rivet so we cannot include every breakable part so we have to incorporate some logical break points and damage calculations to certain parts we do model. The end result is hopefully plausible when in motion and in-game.

 

Ammo Comments:

 

German and Soviet 20mm ammo differ in some ways. German HE ammo has a bigger charge, but lower fragment mass due to a thinner casing than Soviet 20mm rounds. Does this mean smaller, lighter fragments, but at a higher velocity??? We don’t know for sure.

 

Russian 20mm HE ammo has a lower charge, but more fragment mass due to a thicker casing than German 20mm. But does this mean fewer, heavier fragments, but at a lower velocity? We don’t know for sure.

 

What we don’t know is the actual velocity these fragments fly at when detonated so we make an educated guess.

 

We also don’t know the exact real-world effect on different materials at real world detonations and velocities.

 

Wing Comments:

 

There are differences in German and Soviet designs and materials not only in a general sense, but from plane to plane. For instance, the Bf-109 has metal wings with a single longeron. The Fw-190 is metal with 3 longerons of different sizes. The Lagg-3 has wooden wings with two longerons. And I use the word “wooden” to mean the Soviet wooden composite material called “Delta-wood”. Delta-wood was not just simple plywood. It was heavier and stronger than normal wood.

 

Typically, airplanes were “over built” to some degree to add a level of reliability and stave off fatigue and warpage etc. They were also built to withstand the limits of human g-loads, but often could endure heavier G-loads then any human could handle. Also, due to the increased precision of metal materials this could be more easily determined so the amount of “reserve strength” can be lessened, but still be durable in flight. However, wood is less precise and reliable as a construction material so the Soviets built in even more “reserve strength” into their wooden parts making their earlier planes heavier and therefore slower. One added benefit is that they were pretty rugged.

 

The logical end result in the most talked about example is that the Bf-109 wing has one major failure point with a lighter structure and the Lagg-3 has two failure points and a heavier structure. It would stand to reason that the Lagg-3 wing is a bit tougher and could in theory absorb more punishment. Regardless, the Lagg-3 is only about 15% tougher than the Bf-109 wing according to our engineering team.

 

Conclusion:

 

Well, it’s tough to come to a definitive conclusion because our tests indicate that both German and Soviet 20mm rounds are pretty close in destructive power, but some Soviet wings are a little tougher.

 

So, our thinking comes back to the effect of an increased charge on the German 20mm may have on velocity of fragments. Does it cause more damage even with lighter fragments? We don’t know the actual answer.

 

Even if we increased the power of the German rounds, what change would that have on tougher Soviet wings?  Maybe they’ll break a little faster. But is that realistic?

 

The team over the years has had to try and build a plausible damage model and make it without so much real-world data. Right now, we think it is plausible and pretty darn realistic when paired with our physics engine. Some of you disagree and have tried to demonstrate that. In situations like this, it is just a difference of opinion because NO ONE knows the absolute truth. Therefore, our shells are not “broken” or a “problem”. They are what we told them to be based on the info we have on hand.

 

We also DO NOT change something just to create parity. If something is unbalanced that’s the way it will be. You’ll need to adjust your tactics just as in the real war.

 

Additionally, our visual damage model and no other damage model out there, shows a 1:1 bullet to bullet hole ratio on the plane model. Some visual damage model systems may look prettier than others or show more holes etc. but they all work on the same principle as far as visuals go.

 

Some have commented that our damage model does not work because a bullet or cannon shell lands and explodes, but there is no visible damage. There may be no physical damage in that exact spot due to how the visual model works, but some damage is being registered virtually on the connected pieces and components and with enough hits or at the right angle it will fail. There is such a thing as a lucky shot in Sturmovik just as there was in real life.

 

So, with all the teeth gnashing and arguing I will just say that we are evaluating this issue and if we decide to make any further changes we’ll let you know.

 

If you have a German or Soviet 20mm gun from WWII lying around and a spare WWII airplane feel free to shoot it with the 20mm and show us the damage please and film high-speed video of fragment velocities etc.

 

And yes, we’ve seen many WWII gun camera videos and all kinds of unscientific YouTube videos as part of our research. And even though we don’t prefer this, we consider anecdotal evidence when no scientific data on this subject exists, but it’s hard to place faith in old memories.

 

What you have in game now is our best estimation of how it was in real life. We will continue to look at this issue time permitting as we build Kuban.

 

Our damage model is still amazing and with the visual tweaks to impact visuals placement it will be even better.

 

This is the last I will say on the subject until or if something changes.

 

Jason

[Barnacles]

Thank you, Jason, for taking your time to provide this insight.

[AndyJWest]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Jason. 

[[I./JG62]steppa]

Because of a lack of engenieering knowledge i was wondering wheather certain values like fragmentation and blast pressure etc. could be tested in a scientific way(maybe also in the game engine) by some sort of "freelancer"? In my my mind you would need a few wing resembling metal structures, explosive filled metal pieces, a highspeed camera, a few sheets of paper and a remote backyard.

Maybe time to call the Mythbusters back out of retirement...

 

ps: if there are any entries in this forum surrunding this idea i would appreciate someone giving me a hint were to find them in PM, i don´t want to divert even further from the original post than i already did

Cheers!

Edited May 3, 2017 by [I./JG62]steppa

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Are time delay fuses in HE ammunition simulated for those that had them?