Jump to content
1_Robert_

109 guns

Recommended Posts

What is the context of this statement?

Not sure I understand your question but it was in response to Soltys claims of the 109s resistance to damage in DCS being more 'egregious' than others on the previous page.

 

I would also argue that as much as counting wing spars is a simplified view of structural damage, seeing structural failure as the only way to bring down an airplane or the only measure of 'ruggedness' isn't the whole story. For example the Mustang which was stuffed with all sorts of plumbing for Fuel, Hydraulics, Coolant, Oil etc etc. At least from what I have read a not insignificant proportion of pilots who transitioned from the P-47 to the Mustang considered the major weakness of the airframe, saying essentially if the Mustang sprung a leak, you weren't coming home. Or the A-20 Boston which according to Walter Schuck usually only took one burst near the engine to bring down, as the engine would catch fire and this would spread out along the wing burning away the fabric on the ailerons.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not so much about the german guns , but more about the total overdone russian guns... i cant count the times i either have been pilot killed , shot to burn with one hit or one hit engine out the last 2 days...and that in the 88 or 110 or FW190....

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not so much about the german guns , but more about the total overdone russian guns... i cant count the times i either have been pilot killed , shot to burn with one hit or one hit engine out the last 2 days...and that in the 88 or 110 or FW190....

And i can count plenty of times where i have dumped half my shvak ammo into a 190 or 109 and they have flown on fine. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And i can count plenty of times where i have dumped half my shvak ammo into a 190 or 109 and they have flown on fine. 

 

Since this happens plenty of times, I'd be interested in viewing tracks and online stats where a 190 or 109 absorbed half a shvak load from any VVS fighter and then "flown on fine".

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same question as always right Kurfy? Thats like your main thing, asking people about their money and what they own right?

 

 

 

 

Valid question when your talking about the game. I'm late to the party but I'm also curious. It's not money or ownership it's are YOU playing the game and are YOU flying both sides? If you are arguing points on durability comparisons in game then it would be nice to know if you fly BoS and if you do are you flying everything?

 

I do. I like flying everything.

 

 

Do I see a little quirkiness here and there? Yup. I'm also noticing devs fix stuff we can prove which is fantastic in my books.

 

To me from my observations so far the German cannons seem to lack a bit of explosive oomph. Germans ordinance designers really loved pressure wave explosions.

Edited by 7./JG26_Smokejumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i mostly play single, i m level 18, so i played a lot and most of the time with the 109's .

The profile say 1829 aerial victories and i played many sortie with the PWCG campaign generator too , so i only talk by experiences, not scientific tests.

I did often put down 3-4 Russian fighters in one  sortie, sometime 5-6, and i did few time 10-11 , so i must  say the 109's even if i feel cannon are  little weak too,  the firepower is there if i can put down so much planes in one sortie, not sure if it would been even possible in real life, was it ?

 

From experiences , on the fuselage, from engine to over the wing mostly,only one deflection shot with the cannon and big chances to see the plane catch in fire, lot less success on the tail or wing from 6 o clock position, must hit the same area more than one time.

 

The only thing i feel little overpowered ... i m not complaining here,  and please don't start a war on this , just telling my impressions...it is how much engine  oil VVS planes got in their engines  , often i see  Russians planes, sometime 2-3 at same time, , smoking dark black, keep going full speed all around keep fighting full power full speed and get on the 6 of me or wingmen and keep it on and for so much long time and getting to their bases after that, my next car is a Lada  ; )

 

regards ! 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing i feel little overpowered ... i m not complaining here,  and please don't start a war on this , just telling my impressions...it is how much engine  oil VVS planes got in their engines  , often i see  Russians planes, sometime 2-3 at same time, , smoking dark black, keep going full speed all around keep fighting full power full speed and get on the 6 of me or wingmen and keep it on and for so much long time and getting to their bases after that, my next car is a Lada  ; )

 

regards ! 

 

 

I actually had a Lada. Wasn't too bad. I'd totally drive a Cossack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2017 at 10:12 PM, 150GCT_Veltro said:

On Berloga that is best test, flying as VVS you feel that MG/151 20mm are fine even if La-5 feels a bit strange, considering it can take really too much 20mm. It's just an examlpe. Yak seems to be fine. So probaly this "Lutftwhiner complain" is not just related only to the MG151 itself but also to some VVS DM.

When flying as German you have really an insane amount of istant pilot killed, flying VVS you don't feel the same, even if when you are loaded of 20mm, La-5 again is a good example.

 

When you rip the 109 wings, it does feel a bit strange too....really too easy. FW-190 feel to be another paper aircaft.

 

We don't talk about Hispano vs 109 because they feel like 30mm.

 

The big question about this big problem in this fantastic new IL2 serie is still to be answered. This is not a spam but......we can't ignore this:

 

 

 

 

Gents,

 

Just out of general interest or boredom (not sure) I joined the IRRS Sandbox server with a fellow flier to see test gun convergence and what was best. However, during this mess about we tested the Pe2 against the lagg 23mm and various other combinations of VVS against VVS;  VVS against Luftwaffe and Luftwaffe against Luftwaffe.  It was interesting to see that the Lagg 3 could take out a Pe2 with ease (although it was Human rear gunner not AI) to the extent where it would perhaps need only a few 23mm to cause a wing to come off, a fire and/or the whole crew were PK'd (something that appears to rarely happened against a Luftwaffe fighter).

 

We then tried a 109 against a 109 and the 109 that was damaged appeared to have the same damage characteristics as if it were a VVS aircraft being attacked by a 109, so we assumed that the damaged from the Luftwaffe ammo was consistent and not just that the VVS airframes were OP'd.  However, we then tried a FW190 A-5 against both VVS and luftwaffe aircraft most aircraft were destroyed very quickly, so perhaps this is why this out-load is limited in some servers.  However, that said, when we tried the Lagg 3 against both VVS and Luftwaffe all were destroyed very quickly as well.

 

Therefore, without joining the apparent Luft whinners and without knowing the development that has gone into the ballistics in the game, it would appear that perhaps either the 23mm or general ammo ballistics is the issue and not the damage modelling favouring one side that is often assumed to be the issue.

 

However, once again, this was just a random couple of guys trying different things out in a game without all of the facts of ammo weight etc etc, but I would strongly suggest that if you do not believe that there is an issue with 109 guns or any other guns for that matter, try IRRS Sandbox with different aircraft and perhaps you might understand where players frustrations are coming from.

 

Regards

 

Haza 

 

 

CAVEATE:  This messing about in IRRS was certainly not trying to undermine the FM or ballistics,  but was initially used to see what convergence was best against various targets.  

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at real ballistics of VYa 23mm round vs German 20mm

ZFu2awl.thumb.jpg.c3d47c0e94dfd56de4ee909ffa198730.jpg

 

A picture does not explain everything but does go some way to understanding the effectiveness of 23mm, the actual ballistics fill in the rest

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dakpilot said:

Have a look at real ballistics of VYa 23mm round vs German 20mm

ZFu2awl.thumb.jpg.c3d47c0e94dfd56de4ee909ffa198730.jpg

 

A picture does not explain everything but does go some way to understanding the effectiveness of 23mm, the actual ballistics fill in the rest

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

 

 

Dak,

 

A very nice picture that has been around since CLOD days regarding sizing, however, even one 7.7mm can take out a single engine fighter and can certainly upset a human if they are hit, if it hits the right spot, so perhaps size isn't everything.

However, although I agree that the VYa is a big beast, surely the Minengeschoss should do a little bit more damage than we are currently seeing?    

 

Regards

 

PS  I shall wait for my G6 with hopefully a big 30mm and then we can put that in your picture?

 

 

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, haha, nice post Dakpilot!

as always your comical post of the day made me laugh.

I got another one which also gives an indication of destructiveness. The chair is MUCH bigger.

 

asset.2600905.thumb.jpg.a9c72c1d9dc7f24d324f344e0e22e553.jpg

 

545639598.thumb.jpg.bfa0ce461155de8ab8edf11828acee9b.jpg

 

Chair clearly wins! So all the time these idiot miners have been using dynamite they you should have been throwing chairs at that rock duhh:wacko:

 

 

  • Haha 6
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/3/2018 at 6:37 AM, Dakpilot said:

Have a look at real ballistics of VYa 23mm round vs German 20mm

ZFu2awl.thumb.jpg.c3d47c0e94dfd56de4ee909ffa198730.jpg

 

A picture does not explain everything but does go some way to understanding the effectiveness of 23mm, the actual ballistics fill in the rest

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

 

Don't see any ballistics, merely a lot of "patronen".

 

As for ballistics, destructive power & weapons system weight:

http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

 

According to the above the 20mm M-geschoss was the most destructive 20mm round available at the time, at least when it comes to ripping apart the structure of an aircraft, whilst the Hispanos 20mm API rounds were the best at penetrating armour.

Edited by Panthera
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Standard BERLOGA server situation..
 
Lagg gets hits from my MK108 (pic).... but he still turns, still climbs (with flaps down of course).. and in this condition.. he shot down 2 BF109...how is this possible? Wrong axis ammo? Or wrong DM of VVS plane?
 
Ed.

2018_3_26__19_48_49.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can destroy a VVS plane with VVS ammo very easily with the infamous 1 hit wings/tails off, and pilot kills that blue planes receive, so the problem definitely seems doesn't seem to lie with the airframe damage models but rather VVS guns/ammo. 

 

Take a red airplane against a PE-2 and you will see things you've never seen before- both wings lighting up on fire quickly, crew dead.

 

The crew's  damage resistance is the most obvious indicator of this I have no idea how the rear fuselage gunner in the PE2 doesn't die after barrages of hits, especially considering back then it was a big issue with the numbers of PE2 rear gunners killed in the back there. In contrast, you can make 1 pass on a Ju88 and kill the crew with engines on fire very easily, and it is more or less the same effect shooting a VVS with VVS weaponry.

Edited by Mcdaddy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mcdaddy said:

You can destroy a VVS plane with VVS ammo very easily with the infamous 1 hit wings/tails off, and pilot kills that blue planes receive, so the problem definitely seems doesn't seem to lie with the airframe damage models but rather VVS guns/ammo. 

 

Take a red airplane against a PE-2 and you will see things you've never seen before- both wings lighting up on fire quickly, crew dead.

 

The crew's  damage resistance is the most obvious indicator of this I have no idea how the rear fuselage gunner in the PE2 doesn't die after barrages of hits, especially considering back then it was a big issue with the numbers of PE2 rear gunners killed in the back there. In contrast, you can make 1 pass on a Ju88 and kill the crew with engines on fire very easily, and it is more or less the same effect shooting a VVS with VVS weaponry.

AP performance of the Russian aircraft makes them good at setting fires and killing pilots, the German AP on the other hand isn't that good and can have issues killing aircraft like the peshka where HE seems to be less efficient. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Large caliber cannon with HE is devastating as it should be. Interceptor weapon of choice, be it on a LW or VVS interception duty, the enemy bombers and attackers will suffer. 

Let the nimble redbarons have their fun with the other fighters for aerial superiority. No destruction of ground stuff, no winning the scenarios.

 

Rocking the 30mm as LW or the 37mm as VVS in interceptor duty is the way to go, peshkas and cement planes, 111's, etc will go down. Stay on target. Let the air cover worry about the fighters.

 

2 cents

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the picture.. Lagg lost rudder... and still flying like a new plane.. my fault that I have no video :-/ 

 

Mr. "Mauser" and Mr. "Rheinmetall" should be ashamed to produce the bad weapons for Axis planes.. :lol:

 

 

 

Edited by MK_RED13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Willy__ said:

Just make the german AP ammo as effective as the russian one and we're gold :)

 

In all honesty, it is as simple as that. Yet it still hasn't been fixed. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that gpt files can be unpacked, it might be interesting to see whether we can find out the internal values used by the game for russian vs. german guns.

So far, I found this spot most interesting:

In the folder "luascripts\worldobjects\ballistics\projectiles" of "Scripts.gpt" you can find files like these:

 

shell_ger_20x82_he.txt

Class_name = "CBatchBallistics"
object_name = "SHELL_GER_20x82_HE"

//20мм патрон к пушке MG 151/20 осколочно-фугасный

//////	PhysicsBody properties
VisualImage=0,"graphics/ammo/ammoYacSmk.mgm",false
visualradius=4
SoundScript=""
ImageAttr=21	//IA_NOMINPIXELS | IA_NOINTERPOLATION

//CollisionBody="graphics/ammo/ammo.col"

NoDirecion=true
NoCollision=true

// дальность, скорость на этой дальности (на 0м - указать на 5км/ч меньше расчетной), пары броня-урон за броней. Броню больше, чем в первой паре, не пробьет
// за базовый взят урон на дальности 100м при нулевой броне, на макс. броне урон равне 0.25 от базового, на 0.8 макс. брони урон равен 0.5 от базового
// урон при нулевой броне уменьшается с дальностью по соотношению квадрата скоростей
// скорости по дальностям взяты из лога утилиты расчета .bin файлов пули (расчет таблиц наведения), на 10км/ч меньше ресчетной
// т.к. если скорость окажется больше расчетной на данной дальности, то дамага не будет
// базовый урон расчитан по соотношению кинетических энергий на дальности 100м между данной пулей и референсной пулей SHELL_GER_20x82_AP (=1000)

Armor1=1,800,		9,301,	7,753,	0,1205
Armor2=100,692,		7,223,	6,557,	0,891 // опорная бронепробиваемость пересчитана по формуле де Марра из референсной бронепробиваемости SHELL_RUS_20x99_HE на близкой скорости
Armor3=500,365,		3,62,	2,155,	0,248
Armor4=2000,128,	2,0,	1,8,	0,31

// аэродинамические коэфициенты подобраны исходя из совпадения графика скорости по дальности для эталонной пули (20мм немецкий снаряд, немецкое описание боеприпасов 1936-1945)

Gage=20					//калибр
DefaultStartSpeed=805	//дефолтная начальная скорость при стрельбе из простых пушек (наземка)
MaxDistance=2000		//предельная дальность, дальше которой объект удалится
Mass=0.0897				//масса пули
Mkr=0.75					//значение числа Маха, после которого начинается повышение Cx до момента M=1, зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Mmax=2.0				//значение числа Маха, до которого завершается понижение Cx, начавшееся при M=1, зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_0=0.3				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M <= Mkr), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_max=0.78				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M = 1), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_1=0.68				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M >= Mmax), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
R=0.01					//радиус пули
LiveTime=10				//время жизни объекта (большее из двух: время полета на MaxDistance или время горения трассера + 3.5с)
TimeToDestroy=0			//время жизни объекта после попадания в скрытом состоянии, что бы трейл трассера не пропадал пока не расствориться
TracertShowtime = 2.8	//время горения трассера
MaxRedirections = 0		//максимальное кол-во рикошетов

debug=false

DefaultBulletSpeed = 805.0		//дефолтная начальная скорость при стрельбе из комплексной (авиационной) пушки неопределенной модели
BulletSpeed = "MG151-20", 805.0	//начальная скорость при стрельбе из комплексной (авиационной) пушки Mg 151/20
BulletSpeed = "MGFF", 707.0	//начальная скорость при стрельбе из комплексной (авиационной) пушки Mg 151/20

HitDummy="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitWood="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitWater="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_water.txt"
HitGround="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_ground.txt"
HitArmor="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitBuilding="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_building.txt"
HitPlane="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitPlaneEffect="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Trash/PlaneTrash.txt"

shell_rus_20x99_he.txt

Class_name = "CBatchBallistics"
object_name = "SHELL_RUS_20x99_HE"

//20мм патрон к пушке ШВАК осколочно-фугасный

//////	PhysicsBody properties
VisualImage=0,"graphics/ammo/ammoRacSmk.mgm",false
visualradius=4
SoundScript=""
ImageAttr=21	//IA_NOMINPIXELS | IA_NOINTERPOLATION

//CollisionBody="graphics/ammo/ammo.col"

NoDirecion=true
NoCollision=true

// дальность, скорость на этой дальности (на 0м - указать на 5км/ч меньше расчетной), пары броня-урон за броней. Броню больше, чем в первой паре, не пробьет
// за базовый взят урон на дальности 100м при нулевой броне, на макс. броне урон равне 0.25 от базового, на 0.8 макс. брони урон равен 0.5 от базового
// урон при нулевой броне уменьшается с дальностью по соотношению квадрата скоростей
// скорости по дальностям взяты из лога утилиты расчета .bin файлов пули (расчет таблиц наведения), на 10км/ч меньше ресчетной
// т.к. если скорость окажется больше расчетной на данной дальности, то дамага не будет
// базовый урон расчитан по соотношению кинетических энергий на дальности 100м между данной пулей и референсной пулей SHELL_GER_20x82_AP (=1000)

Armor1=1,810,		10,313,	8,783,	0,1253
Armor2=200,656,		7,203,	6,508,	0,813 // референсная точка по бронепробиваемости для данной пули
Armor3=500,467,		4,103,	3,257,	0,411
Armor4=2000,191,	2,0,	1,17,	0,69

// аэродинамические коэфициенты подобраны исходя из совпадения графика скорости по дальности для эталонной пули (20мм ШВАК, альбом конструкции патронов стрелкового и крупнокалиберного оружия 1946г.)

Gage=20					//калибр
DefaultStartSpeed=815	//дефолтная начальная скорость при стрельбе из простых пушек (наземка)
MaxDistance=2000		//предельная дальность, дальше которой объект удалится
Mass=0.091				//масса пули
Mkr=0.99				//значение числа Маха, после которого начинается повышение Cx до момента M=1, зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Mmax=1.8				//значение числа Маха, до которого завершается понижение Cx, начавшееся при M=1, зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_0=0.21				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M <= Mkr), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_max=0.63				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M = 1), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
Cx_1=0.5				//значение к-та сопротивления при (M >= Mmax), зависит от формы тела но не от размера
R=0.01					//радиус пули
LiveTime=7				//время жизни объекта (большее из двух: время полета на MaxDistance или время горения трассера + 3.5с)
TimeToDestroy=0			//время жизни объекта после попадания в скрытом состоянии, что бы трейл трассера не пропадал пока не расствориться
TracertShowtime = 2.25	//время горения трассера
MaxRedirections = 0		//максимальное кол-во рикошетов

debug=false

DefaultBulletSpeed = 815.0		//дефолтная начальная скорость при стрельбе из комплексной (авиационной) пушки неопределенной модели
BulletSpeed = "ShVAK", 815.0	//начальная скорость при стрельбе из комплексной (авиационной) пушки ШВАК

HitDummy="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitWood="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitWater="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_water.txt"
HitGround="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_ground.txt"
HitArmor="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitBuilding="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_building.txt"
HitPlane="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_object.txt"
HitPlaneEffect="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Trash/PlaneTrash.txt"

Not sure how exactly this translates to the effectivity of the guns in the game, but at least it looks interesting to see how values in the "Armor" lines partly look nearly the same among both ammo types, and partly are different by about factor 2.

 

Just some food for thoughts and further investigation, with no claim to have reached any conclusion on my end yet.

 

Cheers!

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the good news is the ShVAK HE round is indeed 50% more aerodynamic than the MG151/20 HE round. Must be because flat surfaces on short bodies are more aerodynamic than round surfaces on long bodies.

 

(But that miracle was already evident from in game gunnery trials and has been discussed before.)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ammunition is probably the thing the developers got wrong the most. While the game is perfectly playable, a lot of fun and well "balanced"***, they got 20mm ammo belts and damage values wrong. Mainly focusing on Axis ammunition because i have not a lot of knowledge about russian ammunition except for their 20, 23 and 37mm weapons. Feel free to correct me if i am mistaken:

 

  • Minengeschosse are not modelled and act as normal HE.
  • German 20mm Belt should be M-M-HEI-HEI-API and not AP-HE-HE
  • Minengeschosse have more than twice as much destructive energy than the russian 20mm HE (108066 vs. 39920 joules). Yet in game they are nearly identical.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2018 at 5:09 PM, SAS_Storebror said:

Now that gpt files can be unpacked, it might be interesting to see whether we can find out the internal values used by the game for russian vs. german guns.

So far, I found this spot most interesting:

 

An equally interesting part lays in the  "LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt2g_frag90g_HE_expl_object.txt" and "LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Explosions/HEprojectiles/tnt20g_frag70g_HE_expl_object.txt" files. These files control the actual damage done on impact by these rounds. Like the armor parameter from the files you posted, they are somewhat cryptic, but there is one very clear parameter for the explosive charge of the shell (20g for the german 2.6g for the russian).

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting find.

Now that the explosive charge in that file is defined larger - much larger - for the german rounds, the effect observed becomes even more interesting ;)

 

Cheers!

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Pupo said:

but there is one very clear parameter for the explosive charge of the shell (20g for the german 2.6g for the russian).

 

32 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Now that the explosive charge in that file is defined larger - much larger - for the german rounds, the effect observed becomes even more interesting ;)

I suppose, this is what Jason mentioned some months ago. As they don't model the desrtruction of the explosion itself, the high pressure due to the explosion is what makes the devastating efficiency of the Minengeschosse, they increased the initial velocity of the fragments, obviously by giving the round a higher charge, as a workaround.

Edited by Yogiflight
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that you have to quadruple the blast pressure, to double the radius of effect...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 4:05 PM, Venturi said:

Remember that you have to quadruple the blast pressure, to double the radius of effect...

 

 

Unless you are blowing the charge in a confined space, such as wing or fuselage chamber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2018 at 8:52 AM, SAS_Storebror said:

Interesting find.

Now that the explosive charge in that file is defined larger - much larger - for the german rounds, the effect observed becomes even more interesting ;)

 

Cheers!

Mike 

 

As far as I can tell, the problem is, as has been brought forth many times, that the value of the explosive charge models shrapnel damage to adjacent parts of the plane.

Due to the nature of the Minengeschoss, this modeling approach is not correct. There is no or very little shrapnel.

The gas explosion should in fact act like a big ap shell causing structural damage in the place of impact and not shrapnel damage to adjacent parts.

 

Another interesting thing is that the MG hardly ever seems to rip off control surfaces etc. Again the replacement of shrapnel HE becomes evident as a wrong road the devs have taken, since I would expect shrapnel to not take off controll surfaces (as correctly implemented in game) as opposed to MG, where I would certainly expect this kind of damage.

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

As far as I can tell, the problem is, as has been brought forth many times, that the value of the explosive charge models shrapnel damage to adjacent parts of the plane.

Due to the nature of the Minengeschoss, this modeling approach is not correct. There is no or very little shrapnel.

----

 

 

My understanding is that minen shells have more fragments that are lighter and faster. However nobody knows how that translates into damage dealt exactly.

 

Interesting read in this bug report : 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I have read this bug report.

I think you misunderstand something. The Germans made the Minengeschoss with very thin casings because they did not want to obstruct the gas pressure energy i.e. they did not want fragments at all. This is why the casing of the MG is so thin. It was never their intention to have smaller and faster fragments. Even though this is one result of it.

The Problem with IL2 is that is that it only has two ammo types, shrapnel damage and ap damage. Currently it models the MG as a shrapnel explosive equivalent, which it just is not. Like I said it deals a large amount of structural damage where it impacts because of the gas pressure not because of the fragments. So in IL2 terms, it is modeled as HE, where it should be much closer to a larger AP. That’s is the main issue that is modeled wrong atm.

29 minutes ago, JaffaCake said:

y understanding is that minen shells have more fragments that are lighter and faster. However nobody knows how that translates into damage dealt exactly.

 This has nothing to do with fragments so AFAIK you are wrong about this.

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Thanks, I have read this bug report.

I think you misunderstand something. The Germans made the Minengeschoss with very thin casings because they did not want to obstruct the gas pressure energy i.e. they did not want fragments at all. This is why the casing of the MG is so thin. It was never their intention to have smaller and faster fragments. Even though this is one result of it.

The Problem with IL2 is that is that it only has two ammo types, shrapnel damage and ap damage. Currently it models the MG as a shrapnel explosive equivalent, which it just is not. Like I said it deals a large amount of structural damage where it impacts because of the gas pressure not because of the fragments. So in IL2 terms, it is modeled as HE, where it should be much closer to a larger AP. That’s is the main issue that is modeled wrong atm.

 This has nothing to do with fragments so AFAIK you are wrong about this.

 

 

I may not have made it clear that I was explaining the way minen was modelled in the game. Of course in reality the main damage would be the actual explosion rather than fragmentation, but that topic is beat to death. What really matters in the end is not exactly how well it is modelled, but that it produces the expected results - which for many right now minen shells do not. And the bug report also shows that minen shells aren't outperforming their counterparts significantly, while having much worse ballistics

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JaffaCake said:

 

 

What really matters in the end is not exactly how well it is modelled, but that it produces the expected results - which for many right now minen shells do not. And the bug report also shows that minen shells aren't outperforming their counterparts significantly, while having much worse ballistics

 

That´s why I am saying a proxy model as AP, rather than HE would be a much easier and more realistic way to circumvent the problems at hand

Edited by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble with modeling as AP is that AP can travel through the length of an aircraft from the rear and hit the pilot and the engine, which mineshells certainly cannot do. Eventually the developers are going to have to bite the bullet (or bite the mineshell ;)) and add a new damage type based on blast without fragments, affecting the whole area adjacent to the hit.  Otherwise we will never hear the end of this.

Edited by unreasonable
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is easy to adjust the ammo damage, and if they think it(mineshell) need a fix, they would have done it already. So either they think its ok now, or its too difficult and risky to adjust. Or they want to correct it, but have no time now to do it. Knowing how it is, would clear things some. They are busy but could someone ask directly or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2018 at 12:05 AM, MK_RED13 said:
Standard BERLOGA server situation..
 
Lagg gets hits from my MK108 (pic).... but he still turns, still climbs (with flaps down of course).. and in this condition.. he shot down 2 BF109...how is this possible? Wrong axis ammo? Or wrong DM of VVS plane?
 
Ed.

2018_3_26__19_48_49.jpg

 

Nothing has changed.

MK108 seems to be a bit underpowered too, or may be it'is just fine as it is now. Online, you need more than one hit to shoot down (destroy) a Spit or a La-5 for ex.. I did believe it should have to be more devastanting, first of all versus a Spitfire. It seems that "one shoot one kill" rule is reserved to allied ammo only.

 

 

Edited by 150GCT_Veltro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2018 at 6:32 PM, VesseL said:

If it is easy to adjust the ammo damage, and if they think it(mineshell) need a fix, they would have done it already. So either they think its ok now, or its too difficult and risky to adjust. Or they want to correct it, but have no time now to do it. Knowing how it is, would clear things some. They are busy but could someone ask directly or something?

 

 

Or it may be that they are just not aware of the situation? Last thing I know they mentioned about ammo was the minen getting "faster but lighter" fragments, which made no sense to me but may have been sufficient for the devs.

 

IMO it doesn't matter what or how things are modelled if the performance of the item in question is unhistorical - have it deal the same "damage" in whichever way. The excuse that "its too difficult to model explosion" to result in nerf gun ammo is poor. 

 

Somebody made the bug report on 20mm ammo - I am not sure if that was pmed to the devs yet. Lets hope it will find its way eventually.

 

 

Edit: also I have multiple times survived 3-4 hits from mk108 in a pe2. So it does feel underpowered.

Edited by JaffaCake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2018 at 1:10 AM, =LD=Hethwill said:

Large caliber cannon with HE is devastating as it should be. Interceptor weapon of choice, be it on a LW or VVS interception duty, the enemy bombers and attackers will suffer. 

Let the nimble redbarons have their fun with the other fighters for aerial superiority. No destruction of ground stuff, no winning the scenarios.

 

Rocking the 30mm as LW or the 37mm as VVS in interceptor duty is the way to go, peshkas and cement planes, 111's, etc will go down. Stay on target. Let the air cover worry about the fighters.

 

2 cents


 

 

To me, the current performance of 20mm is overmodeled. There is almost no difference between MG151 and MK108 in power. Both guns need one or 2 shots to completely cripple a P-40 and I have lost wings from both of them with 2 to 4 shots. Not to mention I started loosing engine from shots that didn't land near my engine. Sometimes even when I get hit behind the cockpit my engine gets damaged.

Is it because of latency? Possible... but I still have to say that 20mm cannons, especially MG151/20 are damn powerful and are way more powerful than they were and yet I still see people complain that they do "nothing".

 I think 109 players have a perspective that 1 hit should cripple the plane so that it becomes a non-maneuvering target and 5 shots should destroy any plane completely, even if all those hits are in different places on a plane and the plane is sturdy (P-40, Pe-2). Not even Mk108 should be guaranteed to destroy a target with one shot. Shot placement is important. If you hit a critical component with a cannon or HMG it will be damaged / destroyed. Don't expect it when you shoot the middle  of a wing.

To me the DM got worse with time in the game and planes became very fragile and it lacks nuance. I think it is time for an update and I hope Bodenplatte will add a bit more depth into it. It is not bad, but lacks features IMHO.

Edited by Solty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

 In short it after reading this thread, it seems devs favor Kinetic Energy over Chemical Energy thus VVS guns and Hispano shine in damage. Because German guns have less KE and rely on CE = losing big time. Every frigging source I've seen says the MG151/20 Minengeschoss was one of the best, if not the best, 20mm HE round in WW2. In BoX it is nowhere to be seen. MK108 round is another loser when comparing KE vs CE, even many sources say it was a devastating gun, when hitting a plane.

 

Add to the mixture this strange fetish devs have on this "1 wing spar = bad and weak" where only 2 or more is good, the results get awkward. And does not help if it has "hitpoints or healthbar", those values can be whatever.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...