different Ammobelts for german MG151/20

[Irgendjemand]

This has nothing to do with expressing your opinion. You're saying very clearly that the beta testers did not do their job by not noticing this, which you can't possibly know due to lack of access to the beta forums. So you're only spreading rumours about the incapabiltiy of the beta testers and possibly the devs decision of choosing the beta testers. All without knowing. And all that publicly on these forums.

 

And that's what i call insulting and certainly not "appreciating the testers work".

 

Dude. Get a life. Maybe while searching for one you'll realize that there are actually important things to get mad about. ROFL

Edited July 12, 2017 by Irgendjemand

[Jizzo]

Dude. Get a life. Maybe while searching for one you'll realize that there are actually important things to get mad about. ROFL

Stop editing so much please, you are taking away the magic of your writing!

[Matt]

Dude. Get a life. Maybe while searching for one you'll realize that there are actually important things to get mad about. ROFL

If i wouldn't have a life, i would probably also get mad about all those important things like too high damage output of cannons in a flightsim and stuff like that.

 

 

 

Unfortunately the opaque development process (closed beta forums), lack of any debug tools for the rest of us - simple users, and lack of any visible proof from the developers (other than "hey guys its all OK on our side") is a direct reason why conspiracy theories, baseless arguments and fanboism exists.

Closed beta forums are pretty common. Lack of debug tools is an issue, though i'm not sure if it would really helps in these cases. Many things people discuss about are also not really bugs, the majority are FM or DM discussions that might need adjustment here and there. I think the devs (for instance Gavricks recent responses following the Spitfires release) have been quite open, as are the recent, regular and detailed dev updates. There's always room for improvement of course, but imho, things have gotten much better over the past months. But that was not the point i was trying to make.

 

 

 

But seriously, what is wrong with some of the guys here in this forum who seems so easily offended about some opinions? As if we hate IL2 and all involved in it just because we critisize parts of the game.

I don't get offended by opinions or by people critizing parts of the game. I do that all the time myself and you won't see me defending stuff fanboy style. Quite the contrary.

 

Doesn't mean that people have to get personal about it and start pointing fingers at people they think are personally responsible for everything wrong with the game. Which i think happened in this topic and that's why i got offended. Maybe that was not your intention though.

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Matt, of course i dont know what was noticed and what not for sure because like you mentioned, i have no access to the beta testing forums but the guy who did make the Spitfire wasnt aware of the short recovery timer for emergency boost. So this indicates that i might be right about my impression of the recovery timer that it got through unnoticed. If one of the beta tester feels insultet i will apologise for it, sorry guys it was not my intention to insult you. It was just so obvious to me that it jumped me right in the face in the first quickmission test of the Spitfire, sorry. Also the really strong cannons was noticed by more then just me but i didnt mean that this is a bug, just that it feels a bit strong. Should have made it clear in my post.

 

But seriously, what is wrong with some of the guys here in this forum who seems so easily offended about some opinions? As if we hate IL2 and all involved in it just because we critisize parts of the game. Im still not happy with BoX on so many parts of it but i still like it enough to invest my time to test for myself and being vocal about my impressions and feelings. I also did invest money like you to support the devs even while being unhappy with the state of the sim. 

 

This is not pointed to you in personal but everyone here. The thing with being a beta tester is that we try not to go in and speak to developers about "feelings" but instead try to help with things we can provide enough info such as documents which backs up our thoughts.

Example me I have no idea how the cannons should perform and have no documents or and findings online that can provide enough info to point out a change is needed and did not notice and big and obvious deviation from the cannons, therefore I use my time to other things such as regular bugs.

 

An example is the Ju-52 nose engine cowling which were a little bit too long in the initial release and where I had enough info and facts to help the devs and then they shortened it as they found out as well it was too long. A very small thing but its a thing I could help out with other than "I think/feel its too long".

 

I don't think anyone is offended but it can be a bit sad too see people like Irgendjemand coming here saying that the devs/testers are not doing their job when they have no idea how much time are put into everything. If you noticed something send a PM to the devs or simply say it here without useless comments. I can assure you that if you do that you have a much higher chance of being hear and the issue being fixed

Edited July 12, 2017 by 6./ZG26_McKvack

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

People have done that in the past. Developers called the tests very limited and flawed. We do not  have the tools or ability to perform reliable tests that would prove a point beyond reasonable doubt. Thus any sort of "test" performed currently can be easily dismissed and is a waste of time for anyone to do.

 

Sorry but what utter nonsense.  Many things have been changed over the last couple of years (many since 31 Jan 2017) within this sim because people have provided evidence and reports. To say testing is a waste of time is just a non-argument. When people start asking for “tools” to test a flight sim because they don’t have time, that really does have conspiracy theories written all over it. What ends up happening when folks want “everything” is what happened with Cliffs, where Oleg tried to please everyone and just look what happened there.   

Can I ask Jaffa if you even fly this sim because you have no badges or any user data to check out or are this merely a shadow account?  See how that conspiracy theory nonsense works?

Feeling won’t cut it, if you have an issue, complaint or bug report why not just post it in the relevant part or the forum?

[Blutaar]

I don't think anyone is offended but it can be a bit sad too see people like Irgendjemand coming here saying that the devs/testers are not doing their job when they have no idea how much time are put into everything. If you noticed something send a PM to the devs or simply say it here without useless comments. I can assure you that if you do that you have a much higher chance of being hear and the issue being fixed

 

Still im sry, it is true that i dont know what you guys exactly are doing in terms of bugfinding and working with documents to and stuff just to point some bugs out. Thank you for give a little look at what and how you do it and also thanks for your time for doing all that, i respect what you guys do and will be more carefull next time. Keep up the good work together wit the devs making this game greater.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

What i didnt get is the short recovery timer for emergency boost, how that wasnt noticed instantly and was fixed before early access release i cant understand. The really good damage performance is another thing i struggle with. It is ture, the shells are bigger but the HE is half of what the Minen has if i remember correcly. It should have more kinetic energy because the mv is higher by ca 100m/s but this should only benefit the lead for aiming at distant targets or on heavily armored targets/components. I shoot only at really close range especially with the Hispanos and most of the time the wings rip off no matter wihch fighterplane i hit, most noticible on the Spit itself, it has the toughest wings in my opinion and loses them not so easy as any other plane but it still loses them freqeuntly when hitting the plane with the Hispanos. Overall i feel that the Spit is the toughest plane in damage resistence, more so then the IL2 but this is just my opinion and it seems im the only one who think that because i dont see people complaining about this. So pls dont nail me on that. Also the 5 min boost timing from the ingame manuals are not the same as ingame. Ingame i get 2:55 min for +16 boost till boost time is reached and 4:11 for +12 boost before limit. 

 

These things i noticed in my first few quickmissions and i was vocal about the damage and recovery timer in another thread but only the 2:05 min recovery timer was confirmed to be an error. Anyway, the Spit is in an open beta status and i think it is awesome. It feels like a dream and i really hope that something from it will be reflected on all planes with the updated FMs like the Spit has. It would be a shame if the spit will be the only plane that seems to correlate with pilot accounts handling wise. I mainly speak about the 109 and 190 of course but other planes are also a bit weird like the Mig3, La5 and the P40. Even the Yaks cant be compared to the Spitifre when it comes to pure handling in my opinion so i have really high hopes in the new FM.

 

You really brought this into an ammo thread???????

[JtD]

Jason just recently asked for more testers in here. It's not a closed club for some chosen elite. If you think beta-testing can be improved, the best way to deal with it is to send in an application.

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

I want a hispano mod for the 109. :D

[Willy__]

How are the ammobelts for the hispanos ? Do they carry more AP than HE ? Lets remember that AP is still way too much effective ingame and maybe thats ONE of the reasons the hispanos do great damage compared to others ?

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Hispano belt is AP-HE-AP-HE, same for the 20mm and 15mm gunpods in the 109 (nose cannon is HE-HE-AP), so If you want more AP you would have to mount gunpods.

[Holtzauge]

I just want to add that maybe my posts above have come across in the wrong way: I’m really grateful that the developers listened to the community input and adjusted the hitting power of the Minengeschoss in the earlier patch.

 

However, I don’t see the problem with allowing us to do our own belting? So again, I’m truly happy they did the adjustment but if possible I would also like to see a belting option under mods and it would be great if they could consider adding this feature later on nothing more.

[Irgendjemand]

I just want to add that maybe my posts above have come across in the wrong way: I’m really grateful that the developers listened to the community input and adjusted the hitting power of the Minengeschoss in the earlier patch.

 

However, I don’t see the problem with allowing us to do our own belting? So again, I’m truly happy they did the adjustment but if possible I would also like to see a belting option under mods and it would be great if they could consider adding this feature later on nothing more.

 

+1 doesnt have to be as detailed a in CLOD for example. A few diffrent beltingoptions, each with focus on diffrent shells would suffice for the beginning.

 

[Blutaar]

I am all for more options in the ammo belting but what i also would like is different convergency settings for the different weaponsets, vertically and horizontally.

[[_FLAPS_]Grim]

It would be nice if we could choose between the recommended (A,Gallands Schießfibl Page 32) fighter and bomber belting.




Also I have the feeling (nothing more) that the way the Minengeschoss works isnt right...I would guess because the shell works with gas pressure and not the fragmentation.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

Well generally there were recommended belt setups from the LW anyway. Don't see why these shouldn't be implemented. I would guess that this is what the belts are based off of atm anyway.

 

This if from an old thread on the ED forums. Ammo recommendations from June 44. Not sure how much they changed over time.

 

Edit: These are very similar if not Identical to the ones in the Schießfiebel.

 

More Edit:

Also there is a 1942 version around somewhere. Was deleted from Scribd.... I'm looking to see if I can find a copy somewhere else.

 

 

Even More Edit: Not sure if this has been posted before but http://www.germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Munition/handbuchderflugzeugbordwaffenmunition1936-1945.pdf

Teil II Panzerdurchschlagsleistung could be interesting if people wanted to do more sciencey tests.

 

http://www.germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/d/Dienstvorschriften/Diverses/Ldv%20400_10%20Muntionsvorschrift.pdf

Full document from 44

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by 9./JG27DefaultFace

[Holtzauge]

Interesting info and thanks for posting it. I still think it would be good to allow us to choose our own belting though. This could be done IRL as well and IMHO it's no more "unhistorical" than taking off with 20% fuel or some home coocked mix of bombs and rockets etc. like we can do in BoX today.

[Wulf]

Is there any evidence to suggest that your 'bog standard' LW fighter pilot was allowed to dictate the composition of the ammunition loaded into his aircraft?

 

I have no idea but it seems highly unlikely to me given all the additional faffing about that would be required by the armourers.  If permitted, it could potentially mean 20 or so different loadouts per squadron.  Doesn't sound all that efficient does it.

 

And given that a reasonable percentage of these guys would be one trip wonders, it hardly seems worth the effort. 

Edited July 13, 2017 by Wulf

[JaffaCake]

Is there any evidence to suggest that your 'bog standard' LW fighter pilot was allowed to dictate the composition of the ammunition loaded into his aircraft?

 

I have no idea but it seems highly unlikely to me given all the additional additional faffing about that would be required by the armourers.  If permitted, it could potentially mean 20 or so different loadouts per squadron.  Doesn't sound all that efficient does it.

 

And given that a reasonable percentage of these guys would be one trip wonders, it hardly seems worth the effort. 

 

 

Tbh treating player as common one trip wonder is a poor choice. I would hazard a guess that majority of the playerbase are on a level of a veteran of the war and some could easily beat up the top aces of the war. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that given the skill levels "we" could request the hassle of organising a custom ammo belt.

[Yogiflight]

TBH, IRL, the pilots, exept the top aces, maybe, also did not decide with how much fuel they were flying, or with what convergence setting.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

I would hazard a guess that majority of the playerbase are on a level of a veteran of the war and some could easily beat up the top aces of the war.

I think most people who spend more than 5 minutes on  a multiplayer server will come to a very different conclusion.....

Edited July 13, 2017 by 9./JG27DefaultFace

[Wulf]

Tbh treating player as common one trip wonder is a poor choice. I would hazard a guess that majority of the playerbase are on a level of a veteran of the war and some could easily beat up the top aces of the war. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that given the skill levels "we" could request the hassle of organising a custom ammo belt.

 

 

Hahahaha ... seriously.  You do understand that, unlike our little video games, they used real bullets in WW 2 -  stuff that will blow your head clean off .

 

You think you'd be showing the old aces how to fly do you with 20 mms whizzing past your ears.   Wow ... you must be really brave.

[JaffaCake]

Hahahaha ... seriously.  You do understand that, unlike our little video games, they used real bullets in WW 2 -  stuff that will blow your head clean off .

 

You think you'd be showing the old aces how to fly do you with 20 mms whizzing past your ears.   Wow ... you must be really brave.

 

 

I should have expected this reply... In what this simulation simulates majority of the players are able to perform on veteran level. Of course those guys had to feel gravity and injuries, while we do not. But decision making, awareness and strategy is the same, sim or reality.

 

Players have weeks of flight time and multiple kills. We are "veterans" of this simulation at the very least as well.

Edited July 13, 2017 by JaffaCake

[Irgendjemand]

I should have expected this reply... In what this simulation simulates majority of the players are able to perform on veteran level. Of course those guys had to feel gravity and injuries, while we do not. But decision making, awareness and strategy is the same, sim or reality.

 

Players have weeks of flight time and multiple kills. We are "veterans" of this simulation at the very least as well.

 

LOL +1. Gotta quote myself from another thread: Quax said: "Every coach potato pilot"    My answer: "So true. Many here tend to forget what they are. Nothing more than that!"

We all are nothing more than seatfarting gamers with varying degrees of overweight:P Some of wich wouldnt even fit into the cockpit of a 109 ROFL

Edited July 13, 2017 by Irgendjemand

[Holtzauge]

<snip>Is there any evidence to suggest that your 'bog standard' LW fighter pilot was allowed to dictate the composition of the ammunition loaded into his aircraft?

 

Of course not but as Yogiflight pointed out, you probably would not be allowed to change your convergence between flights either, so why no allow custom belting as well?

[JaffaCake]

LOL +1. Gotta quote myself from another thread: Quax said: "Every coach potato pilot"    My answer: "So true. Many here tend to forget what they are. Nothing more than that!"

We all are nothing more than seatfarting gamers with varying degrees of overweight:P Some of wich wouldnt even fit into the cockpit of a 109 ROFL

 

 

I guess the entire point of military simulators,  simulated "exercises" and sim-hours that real military pilots have is completely meaningless...

[Holtzauge]

A real life story: A friend of mine worked for the Swedish FMV (Defence Procurement Agency). He flew combat simulators in his spare time when the real pilot were not there. He had good connections and on one occasion for fun he flew against a visiting senior SwAF pilot with thousands of flight hours. They flew a head-on scenario, exchanging missiles while getting closer. Suddenly the SwAF pilot says: “There is something wrong with my screen: The picture just froze”. He then looked up across the table to where my friend was sitting and the horrible truth dawned on him…….

 

So yeah,I would not discount the experience you gain from simulators and TBH I think we do get a lot of free practice in deflection shooting so many here would probably do quite well once in the “saddle” but as Wulf said: Probably a different ballgame IRL when the 20 mm's are wizzing past your head…….

[[_FLAPS_]Grim]

Put them in planes and let them repeat.

[Holtzauge]

Actually I don't think that would have helped in this case. I deliberately avoided saying what mistake the SwAF pilot did because it's a bit embarrasing and when I first heard it I could not believe he missed out on that. Nuff said.

[Irgendjemand]

I guess the entire point of military simulators,  simulated "exercises" and sim-hours that real military pilots have is completely meaningless...

 

No, but you sitting in your armchair pressing 1 button to startup your simplane is meaningless.

 

 

IRL when the 20 mm's are wizzing past your head

And the physical stress, stickforces and constant fear of death.

I prefer my cosy fartchair:) 

I just dont get that some people actually seem to feel special because they do well in a computergame.

Just one question: What can you actually buy from that? Nothing:P

Some here, especially those that spend countless hours racking up kills online, should rather do something useful with their time.

A healthy portion of gaming for fun - nothing to say against. But hours over hours? Pointless.

Edited July 13, 2017 by Irgendjemand

[Holtzauge]

And the physical stress, stickforces and constant fear of death.

I prefer my cosy fartchair:)

 

Yup, and a replay button sure beats pushing up the daisies!

[JaffaCake]

No, but you sitting in your armchair pressing 1 button to startup your simplane is meaningless.

 

 

And the physical stress, stickforces and constant fear of death.

I prefer my cosy fartchair:) 

I just dont get that some people actually seem to feel special because they do well in a computergame.

Just one question: What can you actually buy from that? Nothing:P

Some here, especially those that spend countless hours racking up kills online, should rather do something useful with their time.

A healthy portion of gaming for fun - nothing to say against. But hours over hours? Pointless.

 

I guess I was flying wrong all along, I just needed 1 button to get all of the kills! Nobody argues that sitting in the chair is equivalent to sitting in pilot's seat. But there is enough evidence out there that sim experience is crucial and cheap way to learn the sort of tasks that sims simulate - such as understanding of flight dynamics, tactical decisions in a dogfight and object recognition.

 

I won't argue any further on this point as it really isn't worth. If you wish to dismiss your own achievement in learning to fly and dogfight, even if in a sim, then it is entirely your choice.  ...though if you sat in real aircraft and performed the same actions with your stick... it would act approximately the same...

Edited July 13, 2017 by JaffaCake

[Irgendjemand]

I guess I was flying wrong all along, I just needed 1 button to get all of the kills! Nobody argues that sitting in the chair is equivalent to sitting in pilot's seat. But there is enough evidence out there that sim experience is crucial and cheap way to learn the sort of tasks that sims simulate - such as understanding of flight dynamics, tactical decisions in a dogfight and object recognition.

 

I won't argue any further on this point as it really isn't worth. If you wish to dismiss your own achievement in learning to fly and dogfight, even if in a sim, then it is entirely your choice.  ...though if you sat in real aircraft and performed the same actions with your stick... it would act approximately the same...

 

 

Sure its useful if youre a real pilot. For a real pilot I even get why they do lots of hours in the simulator.

I just mean dont you get mixed up what you are doing. You are gaming. Not training to fly a real aircraft:)

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by Irgendjemand

[sniperton]

Just as a side note, Lewis Hamilton was already World Champion when he admitted that his younger brother was regularly beating him when playing Formula 1 video games together. 

[MadisonV44]

20 mm on MC 202 are far more effective compared to the 151/20

Even the 15 mm on the 109 F2 are more effective compared to the 151/20 

 

There is definitely something I can not understand with the german 20 mm efficiency guys

[ShamrockOneFive]

 

20 mm on MC 202 are far more effective compared to the 151/20

Even the 15 mm on the 109 F2 are more effective compared to the 151/20 

 

There is definitely something I can not understand with the german 20 mm efficiency guys

 

 

The MC.202's gunpods are MG151/20.

[Asgar]

 

20 mm on MC 202 are far more effective compared to the 151/20

Even the 15 mm on the 109 F2 are more effective compared to the 151/20 

 

There is definitely something I can not understand with the german 20 mm efficiency guys

 

[VesseL]

I wonder, if this is a sim, would it be capable also simulate the feelings of a real life 109 pilots? Did they whine about inefficient 20mm cannons? It could be, i dont know.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

 

 

In the June 1944 manual you posted there it's a bit different, maybe that picture is from a different period?

 

 

In that one they don't make a distinction between Eastern and Western front, and for fighters they have the HE(mine) - HE(mine )- HEI - HEI- API or APHE. Then the c) (lots of HEI and HE(mine) with the odd API and APHE each 10 rounds) and d) ( HEI-API-APHE-APHE) are interesting. The HEI round has 2.3g of explosives and 2.1g of Incendiary compound, this one wouldn't do that much in terms of structural damage (in comparison to the 19g Mine) but good for lighting up fuel tanks.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

Interesting. The picture I posted was posted by Rel4y over in ED forums, and he listed it as from June 44. The document is also listed as June 44 on that website.

 

L.D.v 4000/10 is the document number and Teil #. I noticed the upper one then has a 6 after and the lower one a 10? Maybe This is for Revision #6 and #10? That would mean that maybe as you say the picture is an earlier version (maybe even from the 1942 version that was online but deleted).