Cannon demage model

[216th_Jordan]

If both shells were constructed using the same method, using the same materials then the one with the thinner side walls would require less resistance (so you would be correct), 

 

but the mine shell was constructed differently using different materials (Minengeschoss used high quality steel), which is why they managed to have more explosive filler (the type of explosive also needs to be taken into consideration to determine energy at detonation).

If the thicker sidewall of the Russian shells required more force, combined with the lower amount of explosive would lead to less damage (Reminds me of the many threads I read about battleships shells though that topic was in regards to AP rounds),

 

The German shell would have less fragments (due to less material making up the shell) but much higher energy (18.6 grams of explosive v's 6.2-6.7 grams), whereas the Russian 20mm should have more fragments at lower energy (I haven't had too much time to read up on the studies of the Russian 23mm other than it's muzzle velocity and explosive filler which is 12-15 grams).

 

From what I have learned, the strength ,if not mutiple times higher will have a small impact on how much pressure a structure takes but exponentially more so impact does the thickness of the walls forming the resisting structure. But should you find anything consistent in that area (a document describing the effect) then as i said, I am ppy to learn something new. I am btw very bad at finding documents, are there any sources available for those shells in general that are more useful than wikipedia? I would like to get to know its dimensions for example.

 

Yes, but does it work also with 20mm? This is the main question, and the answer is: NO it doesn't.

 

So we return to the same question, 20mm HE and explosion of VVS aircrafts.

 

It does not matter if a 20mm round strikes an inert-gas filled tank or a 37mm round. The tank will not explode, at least not from combusting fuel vapors. As others have stated it might still burn though.

Edited December 7, 2016 by 216th_Jordan

[Dakpilot]

 Let's do an experiment. We can have Cheers Dakpilot stand behind an inert system while being shot by just two MG151/20 rounds. There'll be no way to reproduce mysterious 'packet loss' and warping unfortunately.  

 

We're not asking about the system's current modern day use. The question was simple. Would it deter several 20mm hits? Believe the answer is nyet.

 

You totally miss why I posted those links, some people do not seem to genuinely understand what it is for

 

but I would certainly prefer to be near a tank with inert system than one without  and it appears the FAA and US military agrees

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Brano]

Explosion happens in closed environment of intact (relativly) fuel tank. It means that explosive mixture of fuel vapours with residual air can be ignited by incendiary ammo. Best is to have API,so the projectile can penetrate into fuel tank without causing massive leakage and its incendiary component can ignite the mixture. If you shoot with just HE,it can happen that you manage to tear a hole in the fuel tank,but fail to ignite it,as the fuel is no more in closed environment full of volatile vapours.It just leaks out rather quickly.It may still catch a fire,but it usually burns rather quickly and strong stream of air will soon kill the flame. What you need to have a nice burning airplane is to add some sticky substance into the process,which is usually oil leaking from engine or the punctuated oil system/radiator. Famous Molotow cocktail was mixture of volatile petrol/gasoline (benzin in Slovak ) and sticky part was the oil.

[150GCT_Veltro]

Yes, good point here.

So, you say that a mixture of oxigen, sprayed fuel and off course fire is not enough to generate an explosion, but may be just only a flaming. What you state is that we should need the addition ot the fourth chemical component.

Edited December 7, 2016 by 150GCT_Veltro

[3./JG15_Kampf]

Look at 1 minute. 3x 151/20 guns

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

This thread has more angst than a millennial at prom

[Danziger]

This thread has more angst than a millennial at prom

Haven't you heard? German 20mm is the new 190.

[Asgar]

Haven't you heard? German 20mm is the new 190.

so you're saying people are making rasonable claims about something that does not perform as stated by man pilots of the time?

[Dakpilot]

so you're saying people are making rasonable claims about something that does not perform as stated by man pilots of the time?

 

If that was the case all would be fine, however read OP first post in this thread for some sort of explanation for sarcasm

 

Jager, your vid does not seem to work for me

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Livai]

SuperGhostBoy. I highly doubt this flaming wreckage was done with a single hit. Can you consistently repeat it? Was this a lucky once in a lifetime shot?

 

Lucky one maybe or maybe not? What I can repeat everytime is the same amount ammo used or sometimes even much more less to create several different damage on the enemy plane. Just look the screenshots and see how much ammo it takes for me to down the plane down. If I wanted only water or oil leaks from both engine this cost me only a single hit to the engine section.

[3./JG15_Kampf]

Jager, your vid does not seem to work for me

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fr2aBGfz2k&t=70s

Edited December 7, 2016 by JAGER_Kampf

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

Fair enough SGB. I clearly misunderstood at first reading the amount of ammo used. My bad. Pe-2 is a decent test subject as there are quitee a bit of pilot "anecdotes" about it. The easiest part of it to catch fire was between fuselage and engine. Engines were also prone to fire after a short burst. This from many Finnish aces who shot down several Pe-2's during the war. They said the Pe-2 lost controls very fast after it caught fire spiraling out of the sky. Planes mentioned were: Fiat G.50bis (2 x .50cal), Curtiss 75C Hawk (.303cal/.50cal), Brewster F2A-1(4 x .50cal), Moran-Saulnier 406/410)2 x .303cal/1 x 20mm) and Bf109G-2/6.

[Danziger]

so you're saying people are making rasonable claims about something that does not perform as stated by man pilots of the time?

No. I'm saying that one or two people who actually are doing some real research into the matter are being drown out by the usual crowd of exclusive blue flying Hartmann wannabes jumping on the same old hate wagon trying to imply some kind of bias. These guys can't complain about the 190 anymore so they have to find something else to fill that void in their souls. Therefore, German 20mm is the new 190.

[Dakpilot]

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fr2aBGfz2k&t=70s

 

Interesting, but if watched in very slow motion it is very hard to judge how many hits are by 20mm or by Mg, also exacerbated by known netcode issues to know where they impact, you can see a lot of misses by cannon possibly because of extreme close range and convergence of outer guns, later in the vid there are lots of misses as well when he detaches the wing

 

Vids like this can highlight an issue, but more accurate scientific/repeatable evidence is needed for any proof

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[150GCT_Veltro]

About that video, Jason has already answered.

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26324-20mm-he-detonation-bug/?do=findComment&comment=413623

 

 

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

 

 

No. I'm saying that one or two people who actually are doing some real research into the matter are being drown out by the usual crow

 

Even though I don´t agree that every post in a discussion has to be backed by research, I think you should set an example for your demands by never posting here again until you have done some research ;D

[StG77_Kondor]

You totally miss why I posted those links, some people do not seem to genuinely understand what it is for

 

but I would certainly prefer to be near a tank with inert system than one without  and it appears the FAA and US military agrees

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

You posted them in order to not answer a direct question. But continue obfuscating.

 

But what is clear, is that some combination of inherent multiplayer netcode/PC lag (packet loss issues, distance to online MP servers, etc) coupled with the current status of 151/20 damage is what gives us ample anecdotal and video evidence of what seems to be 'weak' cannons. Whether it's a 50/50 combination, or 90/10. It's there. 

 

The Devs have shown to be very magnanimous in owning up to incorrect calculations, game features, FMs etc - especially compared to just a few years ago. 190 FM, as an example. There is legitimate room for grievances.

 

As an aside, it would be a bit funny if one day in the future we do get a G6. And all the mini-hartmanns flying it never shoot their 20mm and only use the 13mm HMGs since they do more damage vs a Russian fighter.

Edited December 7, 2016 by StG77_Kondor

[Dakpilot]

You posted them in order to not answer a direct question. But continue obfuscating.

 

 

I beg to differ, but seeing as you know more about how my mind was working what question was I refusing to answer?

 

genuinely people do not seem to understand what inert system is

 

read my post #107 what is wrong with that? how am I obfuscating by mentioning that inert system MAY be a reason for non EXPLODING fuel tanks on some VVS aircraft, an issue which is perceived by some

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Danziger]

Even though I don´t agree that every post in a discussion has to be backed by research, I think you should set an example for your demands by never posting here again until you have done some research ;D

I've been researching these threads all over the forums. The data suggests a certain group of people constantly complaining that playing as a German fighter jockey isn't as easy in this game as they read it was for their heroes in WW2. They generally flood most threads with some sort of thinly veiled insults and accusations toward the developers (sometimes not veiled at all).

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I've been researching these threads all over the forums. The data suggests a certain group of people constantly complaining that playing as a German fighter jockey isn't as easy in this game as they read it was for their heroes in WW2. They generally flood most threads with some sort of thinly veiled insults and accusations toward the developers (sometimes not veiled at all).

 

My research has led me to the conclusion that those who flood threads are also followed by oppositional thread-flooders who won't take the moral highroad of averting their gaze and moving on. Some have even convinced themselves that endless, circular bickering will validate their anti-positions and lead to the concession of a point by the opposite side... That said, it never works.

 

I think Mark Twain wrote a popular excerpt about it that is quoted pretty often...

[Danziger]

My research has led me to the conclusion that those who flood threads are also followed by oppositional thread-flooders who won't take the moral highroad of averting their gaze and moving on. Some have even convinced themselves that endless, circular bickering will validate their anti-positions and lead to the concession of a point by the opposite side... That said, it never works.

 

I think Mark Twain wrote a popular excerpt about it that is quoted pretty often...

And the chosen ones who see themselves above taking a side and act as some sort of deliverers of justice from on high...

 

Now that we are all present and accounted for, can we get back to arguing about 20mm ammunition or the myriad of other problems plaguing the Luftwaffe fighter aces?

[Wulf]

I've been researching these threads all over the forums. The data suggests a certain group of people constantly complaining that playing as a German fighter jockey isn't as easy in this game as they read it was for their heroes in WW2. They generally flood most threads with some sort of thinly veiled insults and accusations toward the developers (sometimes not veiled at all).

 

 

Wow, just amazing.  When was the last time anyone on the VVS side has felt it necessary to stick their hand up and raise a concern about an under performing Soviet aircraft?  Pretty much never.  It just doesn't happen.  And why would it?  Even the poor old LaGG 3 rolls about the same as a 190 and yet I have never seen any evidence, anywhere, to suggest that the 'RW' LaGG was more agile than a Bf 109.  

 

I'd be the first person to say that the devs appear to be on the case now and I look forward to flying the new 190s in the near future.  So in that sense progress has clearly been made.   But lets not forget that the issues around the 190 were hardly generated out of thin air by 190 enthusiasts.  The aircraft was problematic from day one.  The instrument binnacle was wrong, the Revi had been  incorrectly situated, the armoured glass and bar, topics that had been debated endlessly on CFS forums for years before the release of the aircraft hadn't been modeled and the overall performance of the aircraft was poor to say the least.  All of those issues were instantly apparent to anyone with an interest in the aircraft but not, it would seem, to the people who put the model together.

 

So please, before you go around accusing us of being 'unreasonable' or what have you, familiarize yourself with the history.  We are the aggrieved party here; not you.  We paid for something that was below par and yeah, we complained.  You're just a bystander screaming vitriol from the sidelines.  

[Sunde]

  And why would it?  Even the poor old LaGG 3 rolls about the same as a 190 and yet I have never seen any evidence, anywhere, to suggest that the 'RW' LaGG was more agile than a Bf 109.  

 

 

Agreed with almost every point you made but one. 

Are you saying that the ingame LaGG is more agile than the ingame BF 109? Beacuse im sorry but thats just not true. Maybe i am misunderstanding, which is entirely possible. 

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

These guys can't complain about the 190 anymore so they have to find something else to fill that void in their souls.

Believe me they can and will.

 

The changes will be made and still won't be good enough for some. No sim is ever going to be perfect, but if someone states they are not going to fly because X isn't correct then I really don't know why they waste their time  (and ours) coming on here to tell everyone that they are done with it. If testing is carried out with solid evidence to back it up instead of "feelings" to show something is wrong with the cannon DM then I'm sure the Devs will look into it. Just like they have with "that" aircraft. 

 

Is the  DM for the cannon 100% correct? I have no idea as I have never been on the receiving  end of a 20mm IRL. Flying online, I can attest to the fact that those 20mms can take down the Pe2 you are flying in short order if they hit you where it hurts. 

 

Good grief, I can only imagine what the forum will be like when the MkV debuts.

[Danziger]

Wow, just amazing. When was the last time anyone on the VVS side has felt it necessary to stick their hand up and raise a concern about an under performing Soviet aircraft? Pretty much never. It just doesn't happen. And why would it? Even the poor old LaGG 3 rolls about the same as a 190 and yet I have never seen any evidence, anywhere, to suggest that the 'RW' LaGG was more agile than a Bf 109.

 

I'd be the first person to say that the devs appear to be on the case now and I look forward to flying the new 190s in the near future. So in that sense progress has clearly been made. But lets not forget that the issues around the 190 were hardly generated out of thin air by 190 enthusiasts. The aircraft was problematic from day one. The instrument binnacle was wrong, the Revi had been incorrectly situated, the armoured glass and bar, topics that had been debated endlessly on CFS forums for years before the release of the aircraft hadn't been modeled and the overall performance of the aircraft was poor to say the least. All of those issues were instantly apparent to anyone with an interest in the aircraft but not, it would seem, to the people who put the model together.

 

So please, before you go around accusing us of being 'unreasonable' or what have you, familiarize yourself with the history. We are the aggrieved party here; not you. We paid for something that was below par and yeah, we complained. You're just a bystander screaming vitriol from the sidelines.

People complain about the La-5 possibly underperforming. Nobody really notices because they don't spam every single thread with hate speech about it.

 

I bought this product and fly the planes so I'm not sure how it makes me a bystander...

 

The only ones screaming are the same people I mentioned before. I believe a term has already been coined for the exclusive Luftwaffe fighter flyers who are constantly whining about something being broken that keeps them from dominating the sky instead of realising they just don't have the skills of a WW2 Luftwaffe ace...

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

Good grief, I can only imagine what the forum will be like when the MkV debuts.

 

 

Deeply entertaining.

[Wulf]

Agreed with almost every point you made but one. 

Are you saying that the ingame LaGG is more agile than the ingame BF 109? Beacuse im sorry but thats just not true. Maybe i am misunderstanding, which is entirely possible. 

 

 

The point I'm making is this.  The in-game LaGG 3 rolls about the same as the 190.  Maybe not quite as quick but close enough.

 

In the West, the 190 was widely considered to have an exceptional rate of roll (certainly in '41-'42) and certainly far better than the contemporary Bf 109.  And yet, if all of that is true, how come I have yet to come across any reference, in the historical record, to LaGG 3 and La 5 pilots being advised to use their superior roll rate to wrong foot an attacking 109?  They didn't have the speed or the climb or what have you but they had the roll rate, at least in the game, BUT, it never seems to be mentioned in the record.  Hmmmmm ....

 

Isn't that odd.  I certainly find it so. 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Wulf

[SuperCossack]

half his tail fell off then his wing fell off

 

looks like those guns did the trick

[StG2_Manfred]

half his tail fell off then his wing fell off

 

looks like those guns did the trick

For both 'sides' it would be helpful to record tracks then just to write what was happening. Not meant as an offend. But otherwise this leads to nothing. Maybe the gun is too weak, maybe the plane is too hard, maybe it's poor aiming or bad netcode/latency. Video records could help, at least as a common base what we're talking about.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Wow, just amazing.  When was the last time anyone on the VVS side has felt it necessary to stick their hand up and raise a concern about an under performing Soviet aircraft?  Pretty much never.  It just doesn't happen.  And why would it?  Even the poor old LaGG 3 rolls about the same as a 190 and yet I have never seen any evidence, anywhere, to suggest that the 'RW' LaGG was more agile than a Bf 109.  

 

I'd be the first person to say that the devs appear to be on the case now and I look forward to flying the new 190s in the near future.  So in that sense progress has clearly been made.   But lets not forget that the issues around the 190 were hardly generated out of thin air by 190 enthusiasts.  The aircraft was problematic from day one.  The instrument binnacle was wrong, the Revi had been  incorrectly situated, the armoured glass and bar, topics that had been debated endlessly on CFS forums for years before the release of the aircraft hadn't been modeled and the overall performance of the aircraft was poor to say the least.  All of those issues were instantly apparent to anyone with an interest in the aircraft but not, it would seem, to the people who put the model together.

 

So please, before you go around accusing us of being 'unreasonable' or what have you, familiarize yourself with the history.  We are the aggrieved party here; not you.  We paid for something that was below par and yeah, we complained.  You're just a bystander screaming vitriol from the sidelines.  

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

 

 

The only ones screaming are the same people I mentioned before. I believe a term has already been coined for the exclusive Luftwaffe fighter flyers who are constantly whining about something being broken that keeps them from dominating the sky instead of realising they just don't have the skills of a WW2 Luftwaffe ace...

 

While there might be a distinct few to really act this way, it's not the majority. Most people who are critizising certain aspects of the game, including FM errors just want to get an as good and realistic simulator as possible - and are flying both sides equally, care about both sides equally (hint: take a look into the P40 FM topics). 

It's not their fault ("critics") that the vast majority of the game faults have been in favour of Soviet aircraft, and against German aircraft. Just look back what has been fixed in the last 2 years, and you'll see what i mean.

Of course people who only think black or white, Soviet communist or German Nazi, don't get this in their mind. Everytime they see anybody critizising an aspect of the game, that would- if fixed - shift the balance (if only in the slightest) towards the Germans, they panic that their beloved Soviet aircraft might not be as mighty as before, and try with all means - be it namecalling aka "Luftwhiner", be it discrediting, be it dragging the topic OT, or coming up with some dubious explanations (can't even count how often this happened for the Yak flaps, or the recent 190 story). Definitely "the people from the other side only want to boost their side, and become the Uber-Hartmanns", that are the only terms they can think in, that's the only explanation for them. People who think this way can be found in every thread of this kind, always the same..not gonna call names, but it started 2 years ago, and those people have been proven to be wrong so often (defending status quo until it was fixed/noted by the Devs, and then quickly turn their minds 180° and "they've always had the feeling something wasn't right"). After so many occasions one has to conclude, that those people are not gonna learn anything, not being able to learn thinking in different ways than black and white, you against us.

Edited December 8, 2016 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Danziger]

And again... Nobody has a problem with people who actually work to prove something is wrong or post their complaints in a logical and non-derogatory manner.

 

The "Luftwhiners" are not doing this. They are the ones posting bs about bias and game balancing and political agendas. They post angry emotional rants after getting their ass handed to them and want to blame everything except their poor skills. They will always be complaining about something in the German fighters until the developers turn the 109 and 190 triggers into an Instant Win/Nuke the Sky button..

 

 

Are the German 20mm rounds working properly? I have no idea I never used any of the in-game weapons IRL apart from Browning M2 .50 caliber. I personally have no problems scoring kills. When I fly German I just adjust my gunnery for convergence of wing guns and bullets with a higher arc in trajectory, slower velocity and firing rate.

 

If there is really something wrong, I'm sure someone will or already is working on proving it.

 

Reading posts like the OP makes one more inclined to dismiss it as a bitter loser who can't win easily enough.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Are the German 20mm rounds working properly? I have no idea I never used any of the in-game weapons IRL apart from Browning M2 .50 caliber. I personally have no problems scoring kills. When I fly German I just adjust my gunnery for convergence of wing guns and bullets with a higher arc in trajectory, slower velocity and firing rate. If there is really something wrong, I'm sure someone will or already is working on proving it.

I think it's not only the German 20mm, it's HE in general. I first noticed this with the La5 long time ago, when i regularly used the 20mm HE only (which would be the wise choice against fighters IRL), and wondered why it is so uneffective ... until i switched to AP only, and the cannons worked wonders. That was the first time i noticed that something is probably wrong. With German aircraft you notice it a lot more then the usual Russian belts, because their ammunition belt mainly consists of HE, and at the same time had the best HE of the world (at that time), which isn't represented in the game. However i still think the German Minengeschoss is better then the Russian HE in game..just take the La5 with HE only, and you have the feeling you are shooting paintballs. I feel more comfortable shooting something down with the Macchi and it's two Breda Safat, which tells something. Hopefully they are working on the HE ammunition in general, i don't want it fixed only for the Germans.

As for scoring kills - i have no problems scoring kills with 7mm only. Does it tell anything about cannon effectiveness, that you are able to kill stuff with it? No. This is the same argument like people showing their 190 K/D ratios as an argument that the 190 is not broken^^. Being able to do A or B tells you nothing about right or wrong.

 

 

 

Reading posts like the OP makes one more inclined to dismiss it as a bitter loser who can't win easily enough.

Well, some people don't speak English that good. Some people tend to write very emotional. Some people (or rather all) tend to exxaggerate sometimes - myself included, and i am sure you do sometimes as well -. This all in combination can produce those kind of posts.

You shouldn't dismiss a point totally and completely, only because OP exxaggerated. This only leads to more "moderate" people jumping in and trying to get it right, and an endless discussion with more and more hostility. Dakpilot is a master in starting those, as proven quite often

Edited December 8, 2016 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Danziger]

I think it's not only the German 20mm, it's HE in general. I first noticed this with the La5 long time ago, when i regularly used the 20mm HE only (which would be the wise choice against fighters IRL), and wondered why it is so uneffective ... until i switched to AP only, and the cannons worked wonders. That was the first time i noticed that something is probably wrong. With German aircraft you notice it a lot more then the usual Russian belts, because their ammunition belt mainly consists of HE, and at the same time had the best HE of the world (at that time), which isn't represented in the game. However i still think the German Minengeschoss is better then the Russian HE in game..just take the La5 with HE only, and you have the feeling you are shooting paintballs. I feel more comfortable shooting something down with the Macchi and it's two Breda Safat, which tells something. Hopefully they are working on the HE ammunition in general, i don't want it fixed only for the Germans.

As for scoring kills - i have no problems scoring kills with 7mm only. Does it tell anything about cannon effectiveness, that you are able to kill stuff with it? No. This is the same argument like people showing their 190 K/D ratios as an argument that the 190 is not broken^^. Being able to do A or B tells you nothing about right or wrong.

 

 

 

Well, some people don't speak English that good. Some people tend to write very emotional. Some people (or rather all) tend to exxaggerate sometimes - myself included, and i am sure you do sometimes as well -. This all in combination can produce those kind of posts.

You shouldn't dismiss a point totally and completely, only because OP exxaggerated. This only leads to more "moderate" people jumping in and trying to get it right, and an endless discussion with more and more hostility. Dakpilot is a master in starting those, as proven quite often

Your post is very interesting and reasonable leading me to do some experiments later in the game.

 

The OP still reads as childish rantings of a sore loser. It doesn't present any real facts that would lead one to investigate further.

[Dakpilot]

endless discussion with more and more hostility. Dakpilot is a master in starting those, as proven quite often

 

As usual first in with the unprovoked insults, seriously and this is just a question, how old are you?

 

reply  by P.M. if needed

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[RFG_Hisl]

I really wonder why this thread is not closed. Rather noobish moderation in my opinion.

[Grancesc]

In the reference publication for aircraft guns (the "Flying Guns" trilogy, by Antohony G. Williams and Dr. Emmanuel Gustin) one finds in vol. 2 on pages 329-331 a comparison of the most important WWII aircraft guns and their ammunition. Here is a tabular extract of the weapons that are of interest to us:

 

Gun                     Cartridge             ROF       Gun Power       Gun Weight       Gun Efficiency

MG17                   7.92x57                20           21                           12                           1.75

MG131                 13x64B                 15           45                           17                           2.65

Breda                   12.7x81SR           12           36                           29                           1.24

.50M2                   12.7x99                13           58                           29                           2

12.7UB                 12.7x108              17           102                        25                           4.1

MG-FF                  20x80RB              8             120                        28                           4.3

MG151                 20x82                    12           204                        42                           4.9

ShVAK                 20x99R                 13           169                        42                           4

B-20                     20x99R                 13           169                        25                           6.8

Hispano II           20x110                 10           200                        50                           4

Hispano V           20x110                 12           240                        42                           5.7

Vya                        23x152B               9             234                         68                           3.4

MK108                 30x90RB              10           580                        60                           9.7

NS-37                   37x195                 4             424                        170                        2.5

 

ROF= Rate of Fire for an unsynchronized gun

Gun Power= It’s a calculated and normalized number that takes into account the destructive force of different types of ammunition multiplied by the ROF of the weapon. These calculations were compared with empirical data from RAF experiments. The results were nearly equal.

Gun Efficiency= To judge the efficiency of a gun installation in a plane the Gun Power was divided by the weight of the gun (in kg). The outstanding performer here is clearly the MK108/30mm, which achieves ten times the destructiveness of the 0.50M2 for only twice the weight.

 

For our discussion the Gun Power is decisive. Here you can see that the 12.7UB (=BS12.7) has 50% and the Vya-23 only about 115% of the destructive power of the MG151/20. According to the in-game experiences of many players (including some experiments) these facts do not seem to be taken into account in our BOX simulation.

 

If you want to have a historically realistic simulation, this point should be reviewed by the developers. If you want to keep the game balanced for both sides, you can leave as it is.

Both possibilities are viable and will generate for many people a lot of fun.

[Willy__]

 

 

For our discussion the Gun Power is decisive. Here you can see that the 12.7UB (=BS12.7) has 50% and the Vya-23 only about 115% of the destructive power of the MG151/20. According to the in-game experiences of many players (including some experiments) these facts do not seem to be taken into account in our BOX simulation.

 

LMAO Vya-23 ingame sure feels like a 30mm. And in my opinion the UBs are a bit over the top, but nothing spetacular. I think a few tweaks should make it perfect since I dont think the weapon right is too far off.

[KoN_]

Haven't you heard? German 20mm is the new 190.

No i haven't . !!

Have you heard that there is absolutely nothing wrong with VVs aircraft . 

[LittleJP]

It's something to do with the AP vs HE damage. I just jumped on the La-5 to test. 2-4 shots in AP, 3 - 5 in HE, overall, to kill.

[StG2_Manfred]

I made some tests and I think it has also something to do with the ballistic and the jumpiness behavior of the German planes. But I'm happy to open a dedicated thread for it if you think it doesn't fit here. If I do so I would appreciate if the usual red whiners could stay away from it. Yes, I created this new term, the non factual red whiners. Do you know them....?