Twin MG81 bf110-g2 feels exceptionally underwhelming?

[JaffaCake]

As a preface - I am a long term pe2 pilot and generally do not rely on AI gunner to defend myself - joystick in the left hand while aiming with the mouse in the right is how I do it. If I am tired, I just autolevel the aircraft and fight.

 

Recently I decided to give the german equivalent (bf110-g2) a serious go, and that beast  is amazing, great climb rate, great bomb load.

 

What surprised me a lot though was how exceptionally ineffective the rear gunner was! I understand that we are talking about the difference between 1x heavy machine gun and 2x light machine gun, but the difference is simply staggering to me.

 

In Pe2 the general experience is that several hits anywhere on the LW engine would results in black smoke and very likely complete stoppage of the engine. Occasionally you get a pilot snipe or take off the wing entirely. If the fighter insisted on staying on my 6 he would be taken apart entirely by the UBS. 

 

In Bf110-g2 I ended up continuously firing at a yak or la5 that was obliviously sitting on my 6 and the results were extremely underwhelming - out of several cases there wasn't even black smoke, and engine would usually stop after 3-4 seconds of successful hits. Moreover the gun tends to overheat extremely quickly, even when travelling at 500kmph, so you are forced to fire in short bursts.

 

While I understand that UBS packs a lot more punch and is able to go through the engine to deliver the critical hit, I fail to understand how MG81 does not deal enough damage to the propeller to make the engine basically completely inoperable, destabilise the prop such that the aircraft will shake itself to pieces and make the aim impossible for the pilot? And did 81Z really overheat so quickly and dramatically? it seems to spray in 30 degree cone just after a few seconds of continuous fire.

[Alexmarine]

I think that even the dual mounting of the gun on the G-2 suffer from the plane field of fire. When I have to attack the Ju 87 and 88 I always fear those mounts (and indeed I was downed several times by them) but not when I have to face the 110.

[JaffaCake]

I think that even the dual mounting of the gun on the G-2 suffer from the plane field of fire. When I have to attack the Ju 87 and 88 I always fear those mounts (and indeed I was downed several times by them) but not when I have to face the 110.

 

 

I wish this was the issue I was facing - its rarely a problem of hitting the aircraft, but downing it seems only possible after a long and very precise burst on the engine. And usually you take enough damage already to not be operable yourself. If the fighter uses any kind of "smart" approach to downing you - most of the time you wouldn't even scratch them. But I found usually red pilots rarely resort to careful tactis - seems to me that the Pe2 gunner's effectiveness did teach the LW pilots well though 

Edited February 22, 2018 by JaffaCake

[216th_Jordan]

Well that caliber just isn't very good. Additionally MG81s muzzle velocity is rather weak, reducing its effectiveness even further.

 

The soviet Shkas is kind of equal but has quite a bit higher muzzle velocity, still its a pain to take down a plane with it. Just give it a try with the Yak1s69 without the cannon.

 

There is a strong reason why the defensive armament got bigger in size and by 1943 many planes were flying with 12.7 or 13mm. Later in the war they even equipped 20mms.

[JaffaCake]

Well that caliber just isn't very good. Additionally MG81s muzzle velocity is rather weak, reducing its effectiveness even further.

 

The soviet Shkas is kind of equal but has quite a bit higher muzzle velocity, still its a pain to take down a plane with it. Just give it a try with the Yak1s69 without the cannon.

 

There is a strong reason why the defensive armament got bigger in size and by 1943 many planes were flying with 12.7 or 13mm. Later in the war they even equipped 20mms.

 

 

Makes sense why it wouldn't penetrate that deep into the engine - but the prop still never takes any damage.

 

while the shkas is weak, don't forget that the 110-g2 is armed with the twinned mg81 - around 3000 rpm and that is firing backwards at short range (100-400m). comparing that to a single shkas on a yak firing forward into the back of an aircraft is anything but fair 

 

Edit: also Shkas and Mg81 have approximately the same muzzle velocity - as per wiki (terrible source, but no time to find better atm) - MG81 - 790m/s, SHkas - 775m/s - 825m/s, and MG81 has slightly heavier bullet (~12.7g vs 11.7g for shkas) resulting in slighter higher total KE.

Edited February 22, 2018 by JaffaCake

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

Yeah i think this caliber wont do much to an engine regardless how often you hit.
What I wonder though is damage to the propeller even modelled in game? I mean is it possible to hit the propeller and do engine damage that way in game?

Edited February 22, 2018 by =ARTOA=Bombenleger

[BlitzPig_EL]

I can't recall gunfire ever hurting a prop in any of the IL2 branded sims.

 

There is a reason why the rifle caliber machine gun, which was the standard aircraft armament from WW1 to the early years of WW2 was dropped in favor of the heavy machine gun and small cannons, the rifle caliber guns were simply not effective enough.

 

At best you should be aiming at the radiator, as those are pretty fragile, no matter what aircraft they are mounted on.

Edited February 22, 2018 by BlitzPig_EL

[Guest deleted@134347]

I can't recall gunfire ever hurting a prop in any of the IL2 branded sims.

 

 

as some brilliant mind once suggested: "the prop simply chops the bullets up.."

[Jade_Monkey]

I dont want to open that can of worms but using the Pe2 defenses as a reference is not really the best comparison.

[Pail]

 

 

I dont want to open that can of worms

 

 

  #PeToo

[Porkins]

It pains me to say because the 110 is a personal favorite of mine, but in IL-2 they are made to be shot down. In a Yak I can shoot down 110's in droves. In a German plane against PE-2's and IL-2, it's a completely different story. The P-2's rear gunner is deadly, and of course the IL-2 can soak up bullets like a sponge. 

 

Poor maneuverability and poor rear armament are two of the 110's major weaknesses. Which of course it was historically quite vulnerable to single engine fighters.I still love it though, it's a sexy beast. 

Edited February 22, 2018 by Porkins

[OrLoK]

I can't recall gunfire ever hurting a prop in any of the IL2 branded sims.

 

 

I attacked a flight of Heinkels today and I noticed one aircrafts prop had gone when I went external to see what damage I had done. It might be in?

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

One factor is that gunners wont fire when you are in a turn, like at all so a nimble two engine plane like the 110 suffers greatly from this

[Jade_Monkey]

One factor is that gunners wont fire when you are in a turn, like at all so a nimble two engine plane like the 110 suffers greatly from this

True, AI gunners need level flight to fire most of the time.

[Wulf]

I can't recall gunfire ever hurting a prop in any of the IL2 branded sims.

 

There is a reason why the rifle caliber machine gun, which was the standard aircraft armament from WW1 to the early years of WW2 was dropped in favor of the heavy machine gun and small cannons, the rifle caliber guns were simply not effective enough.

 

At best you should be aiming at the radiator, as those are pretty fragile, no matter what aircraft they are mounted on.

 

 

If that's the case, BoB Spitfires and Hurricanes would have failed to stop the LW in 1940 - so not true.  Cannon do a better job but standard rifle caliber machine guns will destroy aero engines.  

[von-Luck]

Take a 30-06/7.98/7.62 And shoot an engine from 300m then come back and tell me it's ineffective. For more relevant purposes shoot it 5 times or so and run that puppy. Is higher calaber more effective- yes but rifle caliber worked. Especially if the RoF was high.

 

von Luck

[Nightrise]

If that's the case, BoB Spitfires and Hurricanes would have failed to stop the LW in 1940 - so not true.  Cannon do a better job but standard rifle caliber machine guns will destroy aero engines.  

well it took something like 300 rounds of .303 on average to down a german bomber during the Bob, the'res a reason the brits switched to the Hispano as soon as it was viable to do so. 

[KoN_]

Welcome to the dark side.

[CrazyDuck]

Hmmm, comparing the MG 81 with the most powerful HMG of WW2 will give you skewed view no doubt. It seems better to compare the rear gunner effectivenes on 110 E (single barrel - MG 15) with 110 G and see if there's any improvement.

[Willy__]

 

 

Hmmm, comparing the MG 81 with the most powerful HMG of WW2 will give you skewed view no doubt. It seems better to compare the rear gunner effectivenes on 110 E (single barrel - MG 15) with 110 G and see if there's any improvement.

 

The thing is, the 81 is the same gun we have on the stuka, yet the 87s gunners sometimes are able to hit something whereas in the 110 the gunner dont hit shit. 

[Alexmarine]

The thing is, the 81 is the same gun we have on the stuka, yet the 87s gunners sometimes are able to hit something whereas in the 110 the gunner dont hit shit.

And it is also mounted under both the Ju-88 and the H-16. The issue is the guns field of fire in the 110 mount are more restricted than these other planes. When I atttack the 110 I rarely receive defensive fire at all because it is soo easy to stay in the gunner blindspots...

[303_Bies]

Additionally MG81s muzzle velocity is rather weak, reducing its effectiveness even further. The soviet Shkas is kind of equal but has quite a bit higher muzzle velocity

MG81 fires bigger caliber, heavier and more powerfull bullet than Shkas, (7,92 × 57 mm Mauser vs. 7,62 × 54 mm R),  that is why Shkas has slightly higher muzzle velocity. (790m/s vs. 825m/s) Overall kinetic energy of Mauser bullet was slightly bigger. It is not really a big difference.

cheers

Edited February 23, 2018 by Bies

[BlitzPig_EL]

The ventral gun in the A20 is also a rifle caliber machine gun (30.06 chambering, the standard US service rifle caliber of that time) it will be interesting to see how it does.  Still all of these are rifle caliber guns, which all air forces of the time left behind over the time span of the war for being too weak against aircraft in general.  Still, aerial gunnery from defensive positions on bombers and strike aircraft was exceedingly inaccurate, and kill claims for them, across the board, were highly optimistic, even with heavy machine guns.

[Dakpilot]

MG81 fires bigger caliber, heavier and more powerfull bullet than Shkas, (7,92 × 57 mm Mauser vs. 7,62 × 54 mm R),  that is why Shkas has slightly higher muzzle velocity. (790m/s vs. 825m/s) Overall kinetic energy of Mauser bullet was slightly bigger. It is not really a big difference.

cheers

 

In fact ShKAS has slightly larger case capacity this is one reason for higher velocity, both often fired 181 grain round from memory, but I am no expert

 

slightly higher velocity and higher rate of fire would lead one to expect slightly better results with ShKaSS but they are similar

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

[SAS_Storebror]

I'd say it also depends on the plane you shoot at.

"Peshka whining" - as irrelevant as the comparison of Pe-2 gunners to anything else in this game may be - often times involves 109 fighter jockeys not respecting the fragility of their engines (not to speak of the rest of Mr. Messerschmitt's ultralight plane).

Take a Spitfire to engage a 110 with MG81Z and things will look quite similar to you like they do to 109 jockeys attacking Peshkas.

This for instance is me, having pulled up behind a 110 a second too early, ending up in a 45° climb slightly behind the plane instead of being right below, therefore being in the gunner's line of fire for a second or two.

Lucky me there was enough oil in that Merlin to take me back home, and the 110 pilot's marksmanship wasn't as good as his gunner was (click for full size):

 

 

Cheers!

Mike

[JaffaCake]

In fact ShKAS has slightly larger case capacity this is one reason for higher velocity, both often fired 181 grain round from memory, but I am no expert

 

slightly higher velocity and higher rate of fire would lead one to expect slightly better results with ShKaSS but they are similar

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

If you read my post below, the MG81 bullet is around 1gram heavier, travelling just slightly slower, resulting in effectively the same KE per shot.

 

 

 

I'd say it also depends on the plane you shoot at.

"Peshka whining" - as irrelevant as the comparison of Pe-2 gunners to anything else in this game may be - often times involves 109 fighter jockeys not respecting the fragility of their engines (not to speak of the rest of Mr. Messerschmitt's ultralight plane).

Take a Spitfire to engage a 110 with MG81Z and things will look quite similar to you like they do to 109 jockeys attacking Peshkas.

This for instance is me, having pulled up behind a 110 a second too early, ending up in a 45° climb slightly behind the plane instead of being right below, therefore being in the gunner's line of fire for a second or two.

Lucky me there was enough oil in that Merlin to take me back home, and the 110 pilot's marksmanship wasn't as good as his gunner was (click for full size):

 

 

 

Cheers!

Mike

 

 

FW190 lasts a tiny bit longer against PE2 gunner, but the UBS appears not to have favourites.

 

Do yaks really have much sturdier engines than the 109? They are both inline V with little armour  all around, or at least I thought so.

 

 

And guys, my issue isn't ability to hit - I can do so pretty well, as I am able to both control the aircraft and the gunner to get the line of fire. My issue is the damage dealt by the MG81Z - or rather the lack of damage dealt against aircraft engines, front glass, propeller blades and everything else. The apparent 3000-3200 rpm fire rate does not appear to do much. On top of all of that the gun tends to overheat and spray worse than a garden hose in just a few seconds of continuous fire or ~80% duty cycle intermittent fire.

Edited February 26, 2018 by JaffaCake

[SAS_Storebror]

Hard to tell.

Personally, I can't hit s**t when manning a 110's gunner seat, but AI seems to be much more professional in that regard.

To be honest, spraying 7.92mm bullets (or .303 ones) IMHO only makes sense in large numbers, and "2" isn't large enough to give any good effect.

Nevertheless, I have the greatest respect for AI gunners either on the 110, the 111 or the 88.

Despite all other claims, I find myself regularly shot to pieces when I don't manage to stay out of their line of fire during my attack runs.

 

Cheers!

Mike

[sniperton]

To be honest, spraying 7.92mm bullets (or .303 ones) IMHO only makes sense in large numbers, and "2" isn't large enough to give any good effect.

This. IIRC there are calculations and guidelines as to how many LMG hits are needed in a gross average to take down a single-engine fighter (in contrast to how many HMG or cannon hits are needed). The 4 LMGs on the Rata or the Spit, or the 2 LMGs on the 109 require much longer (i.e. really long) bursts to have any considerable effect. Rear-firing gunners can only achieve a few hits, not dozens of them.

Another question is how single hits on an engine are dealt with. I agree that the DB engine and its cooling system is notoriously fragile, even a single LMG hit can disable it almost instantly, while most damaged VVS fighters can still limp back to base before their engine completely dies. It's a matter of damage resistance, however, not of gun effectiveness.

 

@JaffaCake: As to the rest, I know of no better method than to test it comparatively (e.g. by shooting at parking friendlies). Record and report your findings.

Edited February 26, 2018 by sniperton

[GridiroN]

I have seen propellor damage often. It's definitely modelled. 

[CrazyDuck]

All this "feeling" exchange will get us nowhere, hard numbers maybe will. 

 

This should be relatively easy to test for numbers (via stationary setup on the ground).

[wtornado]

People think it is hard gunning in a 110 in the BoS series ,try gunning in a 110 in CLoD Blitz.

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, 19//Rekt said:

I know for a fact that it is modeled when you fly into an enemy's detached stabilizer!

Or when your prop gets hit by the wing, you shot your enemy off.

[Willy__]

Yes, prop damage is modeled, but I think the op meant as "damaged by bullets", I dont think that is modeled, to damage the prop you have to hit it on something, but I never saw it being damaged by bullets