Jump to content


Photo

Could we please get a field mod option to replace german 20mms with mg17?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Semir

Semir
  • Member
  • Posts: 31

Posted 28 December 2016 - 12:58

I am tired of seeing puffs of smoke with no damage dealt whatsoever, would rather have an extra mg in the nose. Mgs, in comparison, are incredibly reliable at causing fuel/oil/water leaks and pilot snipes. I literally only use the cannon on the Pe2/IL2 in the faint hope that the hits will register as the mgs aren't good at bringing those down.

 

I don't mean to be mean btw, but something is seriously wrong either with network sync or the cannon explosion trigger - regular puffs of registered hits either on wings or tail with little to no damage caused to the plane. On the other hand if the mgs hit even a glancing shot they usually at least result in a fuel leak from the wing.


  • 0

#2 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3068

Posted 28 December 2016 - 14:49

In offline mode I did a head to head test with ShVAK 20mm and MG151/20 and I found that the MG151/20 was slightly more powerful than the Russian 20mm. I know that is contrary to what some folks think is going on but that was what I was finding pretty consistently. We've got some more testing to do so I won't say thats a final conclusion.

 

It may be a network issue as a lot of people showing off weird non counting hits (they call it "dusting" in FPS games) are all from multiplayer records.


  • 0

#3 Blooddawn1942

Blooddawn1942
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3887
  • Location:Bergisches Land, Germany

Posted 28 December 2016 - 14:53

In SP I constantly manage to rip off wings of enemy aircraft with 20mm.
  • 0

Outgunned, outnumbered, though never outclassed!!!

Wyrd bid ful araed...


#4 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8776
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 December 2016 - 15:16

I flew the G4 a couple of missions after 2.006 came out, and it reconfirmed, that I have absolutely no trouble causing fatal damage to Soviet fighters using single MG 151.

I'm fine with people looking into this, and if there can be found evidence that the German 20mm shells cause too little damage compared to historical sources, it should of course be corrected.

But those people who claim, that the MG 151 is completely useless or (as the OP says) less effective than rifle caliber MGs are talking out of their nether orifice. The MG 151s are plenty deadly and easy to hit with. If you find it useless, you're not hitting your target.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#5 MatthiasAlpha

MatthiasAlpha
  • Member
  • Posts: 55

Posted 28 December 2016 - 15:19

Right but he's talking multi I think. My experience is very similar in that sometimes it just seems like 50% of the impacts don't count. Its actually very noticeable.


  • 0

#6 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8776
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 December 2016 - 15:30

Right but he's talking multi I think. My experience is very similar in that sometimes it just seems like 50% of the impacts don't count. Its actually very noticeable.


Latency issue or maybe netcode then. Nothing to do with the MG 151.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#7 Semir

Semir
  • Member
  • Posts: 31

Posted 28 December 2016 - 15:33

Latency issue or maybe netcode then. Nothing to do with the MG 151.

 

 

70-100ms latency. Consistent results with white -no damage- puffs from cannon ammo vs registered hits from mg17. And I did mention the netcode in my original post - whatever is causing it - the 20mm is virtually useless for a dogfight in multiplayer.

 

I will try to reproduce the results in local SP, but I wouldn't be surprised if it will turn out to be "perfectly fine"


Edited by Semir, 28 December 2016 - 15:35.

  • 0

#8 Kai_Lae

Kai_Lae
  • Founder
  • Posts: 365

Posted 28 December 2016 - 15:45

Not a german only issue. I can show you a video of a 109 taking 4-6 SH-37 hits and ignoring them.


  • 0

#9 MatthiasAlpha

MatthiasAlpha
  • Member
  • Posts: 55

Posted 28 December 2016 - 16:06

I wouldn't say its just a German issue at all. More a problem with HE rounds in general and that's a topic that has already been brought up in here. Although the sh-37 is AP isn't it?


  • 0

#10 3./JG15_Staiger

3./JG15_Staiger
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1145
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 28 December 2016 - 16:19

We all had that problem. But is it really an HE rounds problem or is that the russian planes stronger than the german ones ?

 

 

70-100ms latency. Consistent results with white -no damage- puffs from cannon ammo vs registered hits from mg17. And I did mention the netcode in my original post - whatever is causing it - the 20mm is virtually useless for a dogfight in multiplayer.

 

I will try to reproduce the results in local SP, but I wouldn't be surprised if it will turn out to be "perfectly fine"

 

I wouldnt say useless... but it does seems to have some fishy behavior. I've had times where I completely wrecked the enemy plane with a small quick burst, but there also time where I almost used all my ammo on the enemy and he stills flies, full of holes, leaking everything and some more and it didnt die.

 

I wouldn't say its just a German issue at all. More a problem with HE rounds in general and that's a topic that has already been brought up in here. Although the sh-37 is AP isn't it?

 

You can choose between AP and HE.


Edited by JAGER_Staiger, 28 December 2016 - 16:19.

  • 0

#11 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1952

Posted 28 December 2016 - 16:29

I'm with Finkeren here. :salute:

Devs have stated that they know about the netcode issues. Lets hope it can get an overhaul in the next year.

 

As far as Mg151 goes, Its a great gun, but it has a slow rate of fire, you need to consider that too. But usually any fighter I hit it with goes down after 4 - 6 rounds.


  • 0

Visit the 216th SAD: http://216th.proboards.com/
Hardware & Specs

Spoiler

#12 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8776
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 December 2016 - 17:04

As far as Mg151 goes, Its a great gun, but it has a slow rate of fire, you need to consider that too. But usually any fighter I hit it with goes down after 4 - 6 rounds.


Not that slow really. In the sim I think it does about 700 rpm. Only the synchronised ones on the Fw 190 fire appreciably slower than the ShVAK.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#13 Yogiflight

Yogiflight
  • Member
  • Posts: 1243
  • Location:Franggn, Germany

Posted 28 December 2016 - 17:16

I think the problem is not so much the lower rate of fire, but, because of the shorter barrel and lower muzzle velocity, more spread of the burst. So you have to fire on shorter distances, to be effective.


  • 0

#14 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8776
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 December 2016 - 17:44

I think the problem is not so much the lower rate of fire, but, because of the shorter barrel and lower muzzle velocity, more spread of the burst. So you have to fire on shorter distances, to be effective.


I find the accuracy of the MG 151 to be on par with, if not better than, the ShVAK, but then again, I never fire long bursts.

The advantage in muzzle velocity for the ShVAK is marginal.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#15 216th_Pinko

216th_Pinko
  • Member
  • Posts: 1998
  • Location:Europe

Posted 28 December 2016 - 18:52

I think the problem is not so much the lower rate of fire, but, because of the shorter barrel and lower muzzle velocity, more spread of the burst. So you have to fire on shorter distances, to be effective.


I get a shooting chance about once every 100hrs in MP so can't comment there, but in SP, firing at very close range does seem to satisfactorily wreck your target compared to trying to land hits at 300m.
  • 0

*** The opinions expressed and comments made by Pinko are those of Pinko alone and should not be taken to represent those of other members of the 216th. ***

Previously ChiefWH; before losing faith in humanity and making a fresh start as Pinko.


#16 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3068

Posted 28 December 2016 - 19:16

Not a german only issue. I can show you a video of a 109 taking 4-6 SH-37 hits and ignoring them.

 

And this is where the issue of "dusting" (ala FPS terminology) comes in. Battlefield 3/4 had notorious issues with this and it took years for DICE to figure out where the bug in the netcode was coming from.

 

Its more of an issue with big cannons like the 37mm but it also affects the 20mms as well. Less with the light machine guns because of fire rate and the reliance on multiple hits to do damage.


  • 0

#17 GridiroN

GridiroN
  • Founder
  • Posts: 371
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 28 December 2016 - 21:38

 The MG 151s are plenty deadly and easy to hit with. If you find it useless, you're not hitting your target.

 

That'sWhereYou'reWrongKiddo.jpg. 

 

Whilst I'll agree the 151 isn't a turd sandwich as most people believe, it is by no accounts "easy to hit with". The 15mm is actually the better gun via it's higher MV and straighter firing solution.

 

Latency issue or maybe netcode then. Nothing to do with the MG 151.

 

If latency is the issue, then yes, it is an issue with the gun; it's just not caused by the gun. A gun with a lower rate of fire is going to be at a disadvantage vs a gun with a higher rate of fire on a server with bad ping, aka Wings of Liberty, the #1 server for IL2 right now, who's ping is regularly in the 200+ range and severely disadvantages everyone not playing on a Russian steppe.

 

We all had that problem. But is it really an HE rounds problem or is that the russian planes stronger than the german ones ?

 

I wouldnt say useless... but it does seems to have some fishy behavior. I've had times where I completely wrecked the enemy plane with a small quick burst, but there also time where I almost used all my ammo on the enemy and he stills flies, full of holes, leaking everything and some more and it didnt die.

 

You can choose between AP and HE.

 

I will throw in that this is also the other half of this issue; Russian planes are too sturdy. Particularly the LaGG. The previous thread on this topic offered some decent sources in regards to wooden planes being hit with 20mm and their frames shattering. Furthermore, I don't know what the Russians made the Klimov out of, but it appears to not give a $%^& about oil. I'm pretty sure engines need that stuff. 

If it's realistic though, I don't have a problem with it staying, but I can't imagine that being realistic. 

 

I find the accuracy of the MG 151 to be on par with, if not better than, the ShVAK, but then again, I never fire long bursts.

The advantage in muzzle velocity for the ShVAK is marginal.

 

No, it is not. The ShVAK is clearly the better gun by virtue of it's ROF. Especially for deflection shooting. ROF means everything online. I'd much rather have the ShVAK than the MG151.  


  • 0
KCqwhHz.jpg

#18 3./JG15_Staiger

3./JG15_Staiger
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1145
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 28 December 2016 - 21:46

The advantage in muzzle velocity for the ShVAK is marginal.

 

On paper yes.

 

But in online gameplay where ping affects a big part of shooting that marginal difference becomes very, very noticeable, even more when you have 200-300+ ping, just like Grid stated above.


  • 0

#19 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8776
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 December 2016 - 23:30

I agree with you both, that the ShVAK is the better gun on most parameters that count in this sim.

I still personally find the MG 151 easier to hit with, but that might be due to the better gun sights on the German fighters, rather than a question of accuracy.

But in most other areas, the ShVAK wins out: Weight, rate of fire, muzzle velocity. The only two advantages, the MG 151 has in the sim is the generally larger ammo supply on German fighters and the Minengeschoß.

Of course, in this sim factors like adaptability, ease of maintainance, reliability and service life count for nothing.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#20 3./JG15_Staiger

3./JG15_Staiger
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1145
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 29 December 2016 - 01:25

Of course, in this sim factors like adaptability, ease of maintainance, reliability and service life count for nothing.

 

I would really love to see gun jams on the sim, but I'm afraid that is one of those "gray areas" to mess with. :(  


  • 0

#21 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3915
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 29 December 2016 - 09:51

 

I will throw in that this is also the other half of this issue; Russian planes are too sturdy. Particularly the LaGG. The previous thread on this topic offered some decent sources in regards to wooden planes being hit with 20mm and their frames shattering. Furthermore, I don't know what the Russians made the Klimov out of, but it appears to not give a $%^& about oil. I'm pretty sure engines need that stuff. 

If it's realistic though, I don't have a problem with it staying, but I can't imagine that being realistic. 

 

 

 

Why do people often say the Lagg 3 is too strong, yet one never hears much about the La-5, is it simply because the are fewer of them online? 

 

They pretty much share exactly the same airframe. Do people see/experience a difference? that would indicate an issue/bug

 

I don't remember any actual sources of "wooden planes being hit with 20mm and their frames shattering" being in  the 'canon demage thread'

 

Maybe it was a different  thread I did not read

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#22 Space_Ghost

Space_Ghost
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3535

Posted 29 December 2016 - 13:53

I would really love to see gun jams on the sim, but I'm afraid that is one of those "gray areas" to mess with. :(  

 

Yeah, I'm all for it myself. Anything to add another layer of "OH SH#%" to the combat experience.

 

But I know that newer pilots flying LW or people who aren't interested in that degree of simulation would be upset by the fact that the VVS provided implements to unjam their weapons when the Germans generally did not.

 

Off topic: It would also be cool to simulate engine damage/seizure if you are hamfisted with engine management/throttle application.


Edited by Space_Ghost, 29 December 2016 - 13:55.

  • 0

"It's very "Loft'esque" though in it's "get everyone mad at you" quality." - Gambit21


#23 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3068

Posted 29 December 2016 - 14:18

Why do people often say the Lagg 3 is too strong, yet one never hears much about the La-5, is it simply because the are fewer of them online? 

 

They pretty much share exactly the same airframe. Do people see/experience a difference? that would indicate an issue/bug

 

I don't remember any actual sources of "wooden planes being hit with 20mm and their frames shattering" being in  the 'canon demage thread'

 

Maybe it was a different  thread I did not read

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

We did talk about it in there somewhere... I think it was that thread anyways. Apparently delta wood does shatter when hit with high explosive shells... but that doesn't necessarily say to me that the LaGG-3 or La-5 should be any less resistant to damage than they are right now. They are still heavier aircraft with all of the downsides of that.

 

You're right that its weird that people complain about the LaGG-3 and not the La-5. I think sometimes people see the LaGG-3 as being an inferior aircraft and then assume its inferior in all ways. I also think people believe the "guaranteed varnished coffin" line about the LaGG-3 as being some sort of gospel that applies to all variants of the LaGG-3 equally.


Edited by ShamrockOneFive, 29 December 2016 - 14:19.

  • 2

#24 216th_LuseKofte

216th_LuseKofte
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2757

Posted 29 December 2016 - 14:22

Yeah, I'm all for it myself. Anything to add another layer of "OH SH#%" to the combat experience.

 

I like the idea, but thinking of the way engine management and endurance work with some of the planes I am afraid the gun jam will also be regulated by time and no other parameters.

I say yes to a more complex and realistic DM , but they need to be based on realism too  


  • 0

#25 Ishtaru

Ishtaru
  • Founder
  • Posts: 353
  • Location:Terra

Posted 29 December 2016 - 14:44

Yeah, I'm all for it myself. Anything to add another layer of "OH SH#%" to the combat experience.

 

But I know that newer pilots flying LW or people who aren't interested in that degree of simulation would be upset by the fact that the VVS provided implements to unjam their weapons when the Germans generally did not.

 

Off topic: It would also be cool to simulate engine damage/seizure if you are hamfisted with engine management/throttle application.

I thought the MG151/20 can unjamm, its just some electric device not a push handle.


  • 0

Windows 7 64bit, Intel i5-3570k @4,3 Ghz, 16 Gig RAM, Palit GTX 980ti SuperJetstream, Samsung 128 Gig SSD, TrackIR5, TM Warthog HOTAS, MFG Crosswind Pedals


#26 Matt

Matt
  • Tester
  • Posts: 2513
  • Location:Frankfurt / Germany

Posted 29 December 2016 - 14:45

But I know that newer pilots flying LW or people who aren't interested in that degree of simulation would be upset by the fact that the VVS provided implements to unjam their weapons when the Germans generally did not.

 

Actually, most German weapons would unjam more or less automatically and MG17 with a press of a button.

 

Also iirc, the devs have announced that weapons will get the possibility to jam in the future, so it's already planned.


Edited by Matt, 29 December 2016 - 14:52.

  • 0

I'm selling Thrustmaster Warthog Throttle - Please send PM if interested

i5-4670k - GTX 970 - 8GB DDR3 - Windows 10 - VKB Gladiator Pro + Warthog grip - TM Warthog throttle - VKB T-Rudder Mk.IV - PC360 - TrackIR5 - Monster Tech table mounts


#27 Ishtaru

Ishtaru
  • Founder
  • Posts: 353
  • Location:Terra

Posted 29 December 2016 - 15:08

I read that the electromotor used for "durchladen" runs at 17.000 rpm which is used to load the MG151, WoW.

 

"Antrieb (E 2)

Der Hauptteil des Antriebes ist der Elektromotor.

Der Elektromotor ist ein Gleichstrom-Reihenschlußmotor, der durch Umpolung der Feldwicklung in beiden Drehrichtungen laufen kann und beim Durchladen etwa 17 000 U/min macht."

 

http://www.deutschel...51/mg 151.htm#E. Wirkungsweise der elektrischen

 

Im not sure if it runs all the time or just for unjam, i think what Matt says is right, some automatic [Edited]. :)

 

Edit: I read some more and its pretty impressing, all you have to do to unjam is just to release the trigger.

 

Tritt während des Schießens eine Störung ein, etwa durch einen Versager oder durch eine Leerschaltung des Gurtes, so setzt nach Loslassen des Abfeuerdruckknopfes die elektrische Durchladeeinrichtung (E) selbsttätig ein und beseitigt die Störung.

 

German overengineering. ;)


Edited by Bearcat, 01 January 2017 - 12:27.
Profanity

  • 0

Windows 7 64bit, Intel i5-3570k @4,3 Ghz, 16 Gig RAM, Palit GTX 980ti SuperJetstream, Samsung 128 Gig SSD, TrackIR5, TM Warthog HOTAS, MFG Crosswind Pedals


#28 GridiroN

GridiroN
  • Founder
  • Posts: 371
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 29 December 2016 - 18:29

We did talk about it in there somewhere... I think it was that thread anyways. Apparently delta wood does shatter when hit with high explosive shells... but that doesn't necessarily say to me that the LaGG-3 or La-5 should be any less resistant to damage than they are right now. They are still heavier aircraft with all of the downsides of that.
 
You're right that its weird that people complain about the LaGG-3 and not the La-5. I think sometimes people see the LaGG-3 as being an inferior aircraft and then assume its inferior in all ways. I also think people believe the "guaranteed varnished coffin" line about the LaGG-3 as being some sort of gospel that applies to all variants of the LaGG-3 equally.

  

Why do people often say the Lagg 3 is too strong, yet one never hears much about the La-5, is it simply because the are fewer of them online? 
 
They pretty much share exactly the same airframe. Do people see/experience a difference? that would indicate an issue/bug
 
I don't remember any actual sources of "wooden planes being hit with 20mm and their frames shattering" being in  the 'canon demage thread'
 
Maybe it was a different  thread I did not read
 
Cheers Dakpilot


You're both reading too much into it. No one talks about the La5 because a) many people are probably unaware they share the same airframe, 2) most people don't identify La5...Most of the time I'm fighting an La5 I think it's a LaGG until I right beside it, and 3) almost no one flies the La5 because it's engine is very complicated.

The LaGG is just the second most common fighter so it gets the brunt of the criticism.
  • 0
KCqwhHz.jpg

#29 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3915
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 29 December 2016 - 18:49

You are probably right,,

 

There is one other thought, or way to look at things, the Luftwaffe had a lot of time and experience fighting on EF against La-5(F)(FN). From what i have read, which is certainly not exhaustive, there is not much reference to La-5 being easy to down or showing signs of fragility compared to other fighters

 

perhaps others have German reports of fighting La's which would enlighten the subject of both Lagg-3 and La-5, and even late IL-2 with 'wooden' wings

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 0

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#30 E69_geramos109

E69_geramos109
  • Member
  • Posts: 322
  • Location:Krakow. Poland

Posted 30 December 2016 - 14:59

Problem is with HE rounds not only with the net-code. You can test also changing the load on the La5. The most efective armament we have today in the game is the twin BS on the Mig 3 and of corse the 23mm


Edited by E69_geramos109, 30 December 2016 - 15:00.

  • 0

#31 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1309
  • Location:Australia

Posted 04 January 2017 - 02:20

As there is no server side hit detection and its all done on both client and Dedicated server Host.

So there should be little issues with server calculating the shot even with pings like mine over 250ms (Australia)


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#32 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3068

Posted 04 January 2017 - 03:02

As there is no server side hit detection and its all done on both client and Dedicated server Host.

So there should be little issues with server calculating the shot even with pings like mine over 250ms (Australia)

 

Agreed. However, I think what we may be confronting is something much more tricky to pin down. A quirk of the netcode (perhaps in combination with a few lost packets, a higher ping somewhere, etc.) causing some rounds not to count.

 

The closest analog I can think of is Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4 and other FPS games. BF3/4 frequently had an issue called "dusting" where you would hit the target, dust/explosion/etc would show on the target and then no damage would actually count. This was exaggerated in what should have been one hit kill scenarios - a tank shooting a helicopter usually destroys it in one shot but sometimes they were "absorbing" the shot and flying away at 100% health. It took two games, 4 years of development, and a concerted effort by community and LA DICE to try and find the quirks in the code that caused the problem. Battlefield1 as a result rarely suffers from any dusting issues to the best of my knowledge as a result of that...

 

This is my long winded way of saying that the problem may not be so obvious aside from odd quirks that we sometimes see in multiplayer. IL-2 Sturmovik (2001) also suffered from this... even IL-2: 1946 in the latest patch sometimes has the same issue. Ever shot a 30/37mm cannon at someone and had them fly away undamaged? Dusting :)


  • 0

#33 RAY-EU

RAY-EU
  • Founder
  • Posts: 188

Posted 04 January 2017 - 03:31

Russian planes are stronger than german planes and a high speed more maneuverables like Yak 1 , 1b to be made of wood ?
and should be the oposite , contrary ??
The bf 109 G2-4 more weight than the Spitfire MkVc and more strong 3400 kg max. Loaded vs 2911 kg.
And the Yak 1 and 1b 2883 kg loaded for the Yak 1b .
( I have had the Yak 1 with a rate climb 15.4m/seg behind me with a bf109 G4 with a historic rate climb 17 m/seg and ...??)
The Yak 1 was shorting me distance ?? So:
The Yak 1,1b climbs better than the bf 109 G4 ?? Historicaly No .
When yor crash a Bf109 G2 with a Yak 1 , 1b the bf 109 G2-4 is easily destroyed in a frontal crash more easily ??.
at high speed in frontal combat the Yah 1 1b is victurious because is more agile? a plane made of Wood this should be the oposite since my point of view :
Because a high speed 400-500 km/h the bf 109 G2-4 should be more agile is in his speed.
591km/h of Yak 1 vs 653km/h bf109 G2-4 .
And bf 109 G Should had advantage in frontal combat at high speed .
I apreciate more proportional damage with 0.5 machine gun Cal. Than 20 mm canon !¿? At long distance !
so bf 109 G2-4 vs G6 with mg 131s 13mm 0.5 inches Cal. mg in front canopy first production during spring 1943 . May be will apear with a pack in the future with a relative price ...
And the advantage of Bf109 G2-4 vs G6 131s 13mm mg 0.51 inches Cal. in frontal combats with more distance shooting covered range .
And the with relative more disadvantage of the Weight the bf109 G6 than G2-4 20mm + and mg 151/15 but with more long shoot in combat and better range , cadencia : shoots per seg mg and more bullets ammunition .

Yes Yakdrivers was right no gun pods mg17 in wings of bf109 G2-4 and neighter gun pods mg 151/15 that are 0,5 cal ,
Wikipedia: Bf109 G6
The way was the Bf109 G-6 with tow mg 131s 13mm 0.51 cal and 20 mm In February 1943, the G-6 was introduced with the 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131s, replacing the smaller 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 – externally
In February 1943, the G-6 was introduced with the 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131s, replacing the smaller 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 – externally this resulted in two sizeable Beule blisters over the gun breeches, reducing speed by 9 km/h (6 mph). Over 12,000 examples were built well into 1944 although contradictory factory and RLM records do not allow an exact tally.[74] The G-5 with a pressurized cockpit was identical to the G-6. A total of 475 examples were built between May 1943 and August 1944.[75] The G-5/AS was equipped with a DB 605AS engine for high-altitude missions. GM-1-boosted G-5 and G-6 variants received the additional designation of "/U2".[76] and were clearly identifiable as they use a modified, aerodynamically cleaner, engine cowl without the usual blisters.


Bf 109G-6 on display in the Polish Aviation Museum in Kraków
The G-6/U4 variant was armed with a 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 108 cannon mounted as a Motorkanone firing through the propeller hub instead of the 20 mm MG 151/20.[77] The G-6 was very often seen during 1943 fitted with

Edited by RAY-EU, 04 January 2017 - 11:09.

  • 0

#34 Yakdriver

Yakdriver
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1630
  • Location:Як-1б

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:45

I am tired of seeing puffs of smoke with no damage dealt whatsoever, would rather have an extra mg in the nose. Mgs, in comparison, are incredibly reliable at causing fuel/oil/water leaks and pilot snipes. I literally only use the cannon on the Pe2/IL2 in the faint hope that the hits will register as the mgs aren't good at bringing those down.

 

I don't mean to be mean btw, but something is seriously wrong either with network sync or the cannon explosion trigger - regular puffs of registered hits either on wings or tail with little to no damage caused to the plane. On the other hand if the mgs hit even a glancing shot they usually at least result in a fuel leak from the wing.

So the netcode is wrong, and the solution is to put MG17s in the wings.
On a plane that never had MG17s in the wings.

understand your gripe, but the proposed solution is... more than odd.

is this CFS3?


  • 0

sig.png


#35 303_Kwiatek

303_Kwiatek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1042

Posted 04 January 2017 - 08:04

These is known video made offline.

 

youtube.com/watch?v=PgtAvtQVreU

 

Watching  these  its looks that  is really problem with DM/HE cannons effectivness -   just look at PE2 when got many hits at tail section -   most time no visual damages at all ( not loose elevator surface, no bullet hits, not loose elevator controls).

 

BTW initialy in BOS cannons were much more effective then now ( for both sides) - after some update things were change dramaticaly.  From my online experience there is at least 2 time much faster and easier to show down 109 when flying Yak-1 ( after short cannon burst )  then opposite. When i fly Yak-1 and got 109 in fire solution i could shot down it very quickly, when got opposite situation in 109 i really need to shot much more into Yak-1 to got air kill. 

 

Before some BOS update there was not really difference if you were shoting from Germans or Russians cannons - effects was similary devastating for both sides. Now is different story.


Edited by 303_Kwiatek, 04 January 2017 - 08:07.

  • 1

#36 307_Tomcat

307_Tomcat
  • Tester
  • Posts: 1974

Posted 04 January 2017 - 08:40

From my expierence i can't remember when i critically hit yaks in first attack. Mostly i'm supprised how leaked plane is flying fine. Sometimes i got lucky and i detach yak1 not b ver. Vertical stabilizer and then fight is over. Contrary in yak sometimes i shot down two 109 in short time if i suprised them. For Example in berloga server i can build up to 5-6 streak in one sorite.
Now, yak is steady gun platform with accurate guns, 109 likes to wooble but many times i have yak in the pan but with same poor outcome.

I can understand why some say stalinwood or staluminium. So what's wrong weak or not accurate 109 guns, yaks damage model?

Edited by 307_Tomcat, 04 January 2017 - 08:44.

  • 0

#37 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1952

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:33

Han spoke about a coefficient of materials they use and that the wood is stronger than the steel. now that may be generally true, but I think the way wood and steel take damage is very different and that might be a point where wood excels a bit too much in this sim. Again this is just a theory.
  • 0

Visit the 216th SAD: http://216th.proboards.com/
Hardware & Specs

Spoiler

#38 kendo

kendo
  • Founder
  • Posts: 475

Posted 04 January 2017 - 13:13

We all had that problem. But is it really an HE rounds problem or is that the russian planes stronger than the german ones ?

 

...

 

From Han's recent response in the Q & A thread the answer would appear to be 'Yes'.

 

"Fact that all russan figters have weaker flight characteristics than german fighters is disappoints many soviet sided players. But we still do our simulator historicaly without any ballance.

Same here with your questions.

Russian planes have wooden airframe, wooden airframe have 2.0 reqired margin of durability. While metall airframe have 1.4 margin of durability. Plus Bf 109 have 1 longeron wing while La-5 and Yak-1 have 2 longeron wing. AND THIS why german planes supreme in flight characteristics - they're LIGHTER while engine have same or close power.

You want to force us to make unrealistic ballanced simulation? No, we will not."

 

https://forum.il2stu...opers/?p=424314

 

We can argue about historical correctness of this. I'm not in a position to judge - and frankly neither is anyone else on this forum - without first taking time for a more detailed look into materials science and aeronautics usage of materials.

 

That aircraft constructed of different materials will have different characteristics seems intuitively reasonable and logical though.

 

Maybe the error here is the expectation that all aircraft should react to damage the same way? And that any deviation from this has to be due to error or bias?

 

Maybe it is that expectation that is naive and wrong?

 

In which case, as Han suggests, in a perversely comical way it would actually be the move towards making everything the same that would constitute 'balancing' and deviation from historical accuracy. 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Just want to add that none of this means that modelling of German cannon effectiveness is necessarily correct or that there isn't an issue with netcode or something else as well.


Edited by kendo, 04 January 2017 - 13:14.

  • 3

#39 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3915
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 04 January 2017 - 13:24

I think Han said that the Russian aircraft design used a safety factor of 2.0 X while German was 1.4 X, reason for lighter erman designs

 

Yak fuselage is steel tube covered with wood composite

 

** see above post, went to make a coffee while writing  :)

 

Cheers Dakpilot


Edited by Dakpilot, 04 January 2017 - 13:27.

  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#40 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1952

Posted 04 January 2017 - 14:49

I think Han said that the Russian aircraft design used a safety factor of 2.0 X while German was 1.4 X, reason for lighter erman designs

 

Yak fuselage is steel tube covered with wood composite

 

** see above post, went to make a coffee while writing  :)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Well now that makes sense! Thanks.


  • 0

Visit the 216th SAD: http://216th.proboards.com/
Hardware & Specs

Spoiler




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users