Mk108 Damage model (Not accured)

[E69_geramos109]

Here you can see few vídeos or photos about the damage that this kind of weapon causes on a plane. 

https://imgur.com/gallery/HkGqW?fbclid=IwAR2bW5Bid_K_2aXVtFpvUEVTxngeR5x6QGsqUsI7YjetZWnLgwRk4eTkUNQ

 

Is surprising for me the result that shows 50 fracments on the cockpit after a hit on the wing with the analysis that this would wounde the pilot, while on the current game is difficult to kill a pilot with this gun unless you hit him directly on the cockpit. 

The result show as well that the tail would be ripped off by a single hit even with no air effect

 

Please this is a post to discuss about this damage model or to provide info to the users, devs etc. So no coments about luftwinners, luft pilots crying again and this kind of comments from the same people who are poisoning treads like this all the time

Edited November 3, 2018 by E69_geramos109

[-SF-Disarray]

One thing to keep in mind with demonstration photos and video is that it is only showing what happened under those specific circumstances with that specific round. In essence it shows what is possible. Small variations in the shell, the fuse, the high-ex filler, the casing can alter the outcome significantly. Throw in changes in the plane, material defects, wear, the angle the round hits the plane at and the effect can be very different.

 

It would be interesting to have splash damage from a HE round affect parts of the plane around it but I don't know how easily that could be implemented. It sounds like a lot of math.

[Legioneod]

As with all ballistics there is always a chance of something going differently than what you'd believe. Just because a 30 ripped the tail off of an aircraft once doesn't mean it would do it every single time, there's always a chance of something going differently.

 

The 30mm is a very powerful round and will take out just about anything in Il2 with 1-2 hits. If you expect it to be a one hit kill every time then you are mistaken and in for some disappointment.

[E69_geramos109]

39 minutes ago, Disarray said:

One thing to keep in mind with demonstration photos and video is that it is only showing what happened under those specific circumstances with that specific round. In essence it shows what is possible. Small variations in the shell, the fuse, the high-ex filler, the casing can alter the outcome significantly. Throw in changes in the plane, material defects, wear, the angle the round hits the plane at and the effect can be very different.

 

It would be interesting to have splash damage from a HE round affect parts of the plane around it but I don't know how easily that could be implemented. It sounds like a lot of math.

Of course there is going to be differences on the situation. But this is a good scenario to test. We are talking about minnen round and there are not to much variation between the same kind of round. Maybe the plane can survive with luck or with a specific rare circumstance. But to ripp off the tail of a bomber you can expect that the fade of any fighter tail is going to be the same. 

I would see your point if what we have on the game is close, but is far from this case and you can hit tail of the lagg3 like 3 times and nothing happens, you can hit wing of the spit like 3 times as well and nothing happens. Sometimes they just need a shot. But something is wrong on the model when there are single engine planes than can affort to be hit like 4 times. 

Not talking also on the situation that a plane would be if survive with one hit and aerodinamic drastically afected with difficulty to fly. That is not happening on the game and the planes keep the shape with a hit.  The pilot on the game is ralely wounded and here on the test there are more than 50 fracments on the cockpit with a Hit on the Wing so.... Is a FACT that the game is not close to the real gun. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by E69_geramos109

[LeLv76_Erkki]

47 minutes ago, Disarray said:

It would be interesting to have splash damage from a HE round affect parts of the plane around it but I don't know how easily that could be implemented. It sounds like a lot of math.

 

Its in old il-2 already. Explosions send shrapnel around them that can hit the plane. In conf.ini set arcade=1 and it enables hit arrows(showing point of impact and direction of the bullet, grenade or shrapnel). I made an example screenshot, within spoiler, theres 1 or 2 Mk108 hits close to each other(I shot head-on and only Mk108 so the arrows heading towards the nose of the plane cant be my fire). Some fragments have flown all the way to the engines.

 

edit: 2 hits, I added another screenshot where you can better see what I mean.

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by LeLv76_Erkki

[Haza]

 

@ LeLv76_Erkki,

 

Are you able to model or show the current scatter effects that we have within the various aircraft we currently have in Great Battles? 

I'm amazed how much damage some aircraft can take without any damage etc to any of the occupants!

 

Regards

 

 

[LeLv76_Erkki]

5 hours ago, Haza said:

 

@ LeLv76_Erkki,

 

Are you able to model or show the current scatter effects that we have within the various aircraft we currently have in Great Battles? 

I'm amazed how much damage some aircraft can take without any damage etc to any of the occupants!

 

I'm very sure that something similar happens under the hood in BoX. Heres me hitting A-20 tail with a single 30 mm. Both the elevator and the tail fuselage are damaged. I remember hitting planes in wing with just 1 explosive shell and then see engine damage, holes in fuselage etc. many times. Both in single and multiplayer(reviewing tracks). I find that there is quite a lot of variation in what happens when a plane is hit. While I think planes are more fragile than in other flight sims, it still is important to hit the vital parts and focus fire when shooting larger aircraft.

 

Spoiler

 

[Mac_Messer]

The screens you linked to presents a part of the minenshell 'problem'. A single ingame hit creates a result of aircraft skin being torn with multiple smaller holes, suggesting detonation outside of the skin plus lots smaller shrapnel. Compared to a large gaping hole the Mk108 is predicted to cause, it`s not very convincing. Now does the aircraft skin ingame show exactly what is happening or is it just an approximate graphic presentation? That`s imo a relevant question since 3.006 was said to remodel the explosive shell effect.

[unreasonable]

3 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

The screens you linked to presents a part of the minenshell 'problem'. A single ingame hit creates a result of aircraft skin being torn with multiple smaller holes, suggesting detonation outside of the skin plus lots smaller shrapnel. Compared to a large gaping hole the Mk108 is predicted to cause, it`s not very convincing. Now does the aircraft skin ingame show exactly what is happening or is it just an approximate graphic presentation? That`s imo a relevant question since 3.006 was said to remodel the explosive shell effect.

 

I an 99% sure it is just a generic effect.  If you run loads of tests on some specific case - as I did when testing light AA effectiveness - you see identical damage effects on the skin of lightly wounded aircraft again and again.  So my assumption is that the DM calculates some value of damage to a particular part or area, and once some threshold of damage to a defined area or part is met, a generic damage effect is applied.

 

Since I ran those tests the DM and graphics have been tweaked but I would bet that the basic mechanism is unchanged.  Easy way to find out: fly a formation of aircraft over a battery of light AA a few dozen times in the ME and look at each of the aircraft. 

[Mac_Messer]

On 11/3/2018 at 9:21 PM, Legioneod said:

As with all ballistics there is always a chance of something going differently than what you'd believe. Just because a 30 ripped the tail off of an aircraft once doesn't mean it would do it every single time, there's always a chance of something going differently.

 

The 30mm is a very powerful round and will take out just about anything in Il2 with 1-2 hits. If you expect it to be a one hit kill every time then you are mistaken and in for some disappointment.

 

By now using the MK108 (exclusively on the 109G6) I`ve shot down about a hundred AI planes of different sizes (fighters, IL2, Pe2 etc.). Not one time a single hit was fatal. Now did I experience blowing off a smaller a/c surface such as elevator/stabilizer/aileron - yes. Did I experience blowing off an entire a/c segment such as tail/fuselage/wing/wingtip/engine/propeller/canopy - no. Can all those AI planes sustain level flight after 1-2 hits - yes, be it fighters or bombers.

 

That said, another question is how does MK108 exactly impair a/c ability to fly compared say to ShVak/MG151/20, and does it (as currently modelled ingame) pose an actual alternative? Both cause heavy damage to plane surface most of the time, taking it out of the fight although the heavier a/c don`t exactly react to MK108 in a way I would imagine. IMO when taken into account ballistics and low ammoload of MK108 I`m not sure I prefer it over the MG151/20.

[JaffaCake]

1 hour ago, Mac_Messer said:

 

By now using the MK108 (exclusively on the 109G6) I`ve shot down about a hundred AI planes of different sizes (fighters, IL2, Pe2 etc.). Not one time a single hit was fatal. Now did I experience blowing off a smaller a/c surface such as elevator/stabilizer/aileron - yes. Did I experience blowing off an entire a/c segment such as tail/fuselage/wing/wingtip/engine/propeller/canopy - no. Can all those AI planes sustain level flight after 1-2 hits - yes, be it fighters or bombers.

 

That said, another question is how does MK108 exactly impair a/c ability to fly compared say to ShVak/MG151/20, and does it (as currently modelled ingame) pose an actual alternative? Both cause heavy damage to plane surface most of the time, taking it out of the fight although the heavier a/c don`t exactly react to MK108 in a way I would imagine. IMO when taken into account ballistics and low ammoload of MK108 I`m not sure I prefer it over the MG151/20.

 

 

Sounds pretty bad modelling considering that we have video examples of mk108 taking an unloaded - non-flying - tail section from the aircraft. Needing more than 2 hits on a fighter aircraft to bring it down should be an outstanding exception.

[D3adCZE]

Mk108 is lighter than mk151/20 so the plane should climb a bit better. However the ballistics are, well, beyond abysmal. Deflection shooting with it is almost impossible. Leading shots as well, since we lack vertical convergence settings. From my experience, using 30mm against fighters is close to useless since hitting a skilled opponent is almost impossible.

[Barnacles]

1 hour ago, Mac_Messer said:

 

By now using the MK108 (exclusively on the 109G6) I`ve shot down about a hundred AI planes of different sizes (fighters, IL2, Pe2 etc.). Not one time a single hit was fatal. Now did I experience blowing off a smaller a/c surface such as elevator/stabilizer/aileron - yes. Did I experience blowing off an entire a/c segment such as tail/fuselage/wing/wingtip/engine/propeller/canopy - no. Can all those AI planes sustain level flight after 1-2 hits - yes, be it fighters or bombers.

 

That said, another question is how does MK108 exactly impair a/c ability to fly compared say to ShVak/MG151/20, and does it (as currently modelled ingame) pose an actual alternative? Both cause heavy damage to plane surface most of the time, taking it out of the fight although the heavier a/c don`t exactly react to MK108 in a way I would imagine. IMO when taken into account ballistics and low ammoload of MK108 I`m not sure I prefer it over the MG151/20.

When I read your account of never having a 1 hit kill with a MK108, my first thought was that you were very unlucky.  In the interest of science, I just loaded a quick mission with 8 unarmed LaGGs v me in a 108 armed G6. The results were..

 

1st LaGG hit in the wing root. Wing off. (1 hit kill)

2nd LaGG hit in horizontal stabiliser, which fell off but the plane kept flying. 2nd hit in tail section caused entire tail section to fall off. (2 hit kill)

3rd LaGG hit in wing root, lots of fuel leaks, 2nd hit in tail, 1 elevator fell off, 3rd hit on wingtip, aileron fell off, 4th hit caused entire tail section to fall off. (4 hit kill)

4th LaGG hit in engine from head on, pilot bailed. (1 hit kill)

5th LaGG hit in wing root, wing fell off (1 hit kill)

6th Lagg hit in tail. Entire tail section fell off (1 hit kill)

7 and 8 collided with each other 

 

My experience seems credible to me, of course I may have been lucky, but I'm sure if I had a run of say 10 fights like the 4th example I would have thought it wasn't simulated convincingly.

 

One thing I would say I didn't have any fires started in the LaGGs, I would have expected number four to burst into flames owing to the fuel in the wing.

Edited November 7, 2018 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[E69_geramos109]

I dont know why but spitfires mklX are so strong. I hit them a lot of times on the same wing about 3 times with no kill. So there is like inconsintency there. Other times i got the kill with one hit. Laggs 3 the same. Sometimes it takes one hit bit other times you can hit them with 3-4 shells on the tail and nothing happens

[LuftManu]

I have no issues at the moment. Honestly, one or two hits kills everything. Maybe you need more hits on an not critical part but that might come from the fragmentation system.

[Diggun]

8 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

spitfires mklX are so strong

Whereas when I'm flying the IX, the wings feel like butter, and constantly detach from the wingroot given the slightest provocation.....

[Makz]

В 04.11.2018 в 05:08, E69_geramos109 сказал:

Here you can see few vídeos or photos about the damage that this kind of weapon causes on a plane. 

https://imgur.com/gallery/HkGqW?fbclid=IwAR2bW5Bid_K_2aXVtFpvUEVTxngeR5x6QGsqUsI7YjetZWnLgwRk4eTkUNQ

 

Is surprising for me the result that shows 50 fracments on the cockpit after a hit on the wing with the analysis that this would wounde the pilot, while on the current game is difficult to kill a pilot with this gun unless you hit him directly on the cockpit. 

The result show as well that the tail would be ripped off by a single hit even with no air effect

 

Please this is a post to discuss about this damage model or to provide info to the users, devs etc. So no coments about luftwinners, luft pilots crying again and this kind of comments from the same people who are poisoning treads like this all the time

Damage is not as big as it looks on a zoomed photos. Comparing to the size of a Spitfire. 

And as you can see there are not many holes made by schrapnel in the wings near hit-zones. M-geschoss are mine shells. Not a schrapnel.

 

[E69_geramos109]

Blenheim tail looks like a ballon so...

[Makz]

the construction designs of the wing and tail are different. resistance to the mine-shell explosion too

Edited November 19, 2018 by Makz

[JtD]

7 hours ago, Makz said:

And as you can see there are not many holes made by schrapnel in the wings near hit-zones. M-geschoss are mine shells. Not a schrapnel.

 

A M-round is still three quarters metal and produces shrapnel. Additionally does a disintegrating wing.

 

That shrapnel is however of secondary concern if you lose the wing or a tail.

[PainGod85]

8 hours ago, Makz said:

Damage is not as big as it looks on a zoomed photos. Comparing to the size of a Spitfire. 

And as you can see there are not many holes made by schrapnel in the wings near hit-zones. M-geschoss are mine shells. Not a schrapnel.

 

 

That damage was judged to be 'probably lethal structurally and aerodynamically. Lethal due to loss of control'.

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

Whether MG are modeled hostorically correct or not has been the subject of a number of threads. IMO they are not. However I do not have any problems with the MK108. 1-2 Hits will easily take out a fighter and deflection shooting works just fine too. It is my preferred weapon atm.

One thing that I do find surprising, is that the 23mm Vya is at least on par withe the 30mm MG, if not superior in all aspects. In contrast to the realism of the DM the relative in game performance is quite easy to test and not very convincing IMO.

Edited November 20, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[Makz]

15 часов назад, PainGod85 сказал:

 

That damage was judged to be 'probably lethal structurally and aerodynamically. Lethal due to loss of control'.

There is a 30 mm hit comparable to the m-geschoss british tests. Spitfire came back. Pilot looks healthy.

16 часов назад, JtD сказал:

 

A M-round is still three quarters metal and produces shrapnel. Additionally does a disintegrating wing.

 

That shrapnel is however of secondary concern if you lose the wing or a tail.

The m-schoss shell has a very thin wall due to the fact that the entire volume is filled by explosives. When its explodes it turns into foil. 

At war photos even with a direct hit in a design constructions there are very few shrapnel holes.

[JaffaCake]

Shrapnel is, as far as I understand, not the primary damage mode of the m-shells. It is primarily the shockwave and whatever shrapnel is generated by the destruction caused by this shockwave - think dislodged bolts washers and so on.

 

@Makz  that picture looks drastically different from actual field tests of the 30mm shell

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by JaffaCake

[Makz]

10 минут назад, JaffaCake сказал:

@Makz  that picture looks drastically different from actual field tests of the 30mm shell

Almost the same

[JtD]

6 hours ago, Makz said:

The m-schoss shell has a very thin wall due to the fact that the entire volume is filled by explosives. When its explodes it turns into foil.

 

The 30mm M-round has a wall thickness of about 3mm average, only slightly less than a classic 20mm HE or even SAP round, which relied on splinter damage. The 20mm M-round hand considerably thinner walls (~1.5mm), but on a large round like 30mm you need some extra wall thickness for the structural stability - otherwise it will disintegrate when fired.

 

Every picture of exit sides, if still present, I've seen, shows splinter damage.

[Makz]

5 минут назад, JtD сказал:

 

The 30mm M-round has a wall thickness of about 3mm average, only slightly less than a classic 20mm HE or even SAP round, which relied on splinter damage. The 20mm M-round hand considerably thinner walls (~1.5mm), but on a large round like 30mm you need some extra wall thickness for the structural stability - otherwise it will disintegrate when fired.

 

Every picture of exit sides, if still present, I've seen, shows splinter damage.

It has a lot more explosives.

When the shell explosiode it gets streched

And this 3 mm shell became foil

[JtD]

It's not a physical property of steel of being stretchable to foil from 3mm thickness without breaking. Unless you consider 2.5mm or so foil.

[Makz]

28 минут назад, JtD сказал:

It's not a physical property of steel of being stretchable to foil from 3mm thickness without breaking. Unless you consider 2.5mm or so foil.

At high strain rates, it has the following properties

The resulting foil is so thin that it does not damage the skin of the aircraft at the explosion site (look at the photos)

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

In my opinion, the 30mm damage model seems to be quite good actually. Especially if you compare it to other sims. The only time they kind of feel dodgy is when you engage targets with a wonky damage model like the spitfire or LaGG. So its more of an DM issue than a 30mm one i think.

[Roland_HUNter]

I hope u guys know, the Minengeschoß(german HE) had a delayer inside the shell, its means the german HE had 4-10 mm armor penetration value/effect and Its entered into the plane and then exploded.

Edited December 4, 2018 by -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter

[Makz]

В 05.12.2018 в 00:15, -[HRAF]Roland_HUNter сказал:

I hope u guys know, the Minengeschoß(german HE) had a delayer inside the shell, its means the german HE had 4-10 mm armor penetration value/effect and Its entered into the plane and then exploded.

Its all written here

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Messerschmitt/Diverses/Flugwerkschutzes.pdf

About schrapnel uneffectiveness too.

 

In 3.008 minengeschoss are very realistic.

Thanks to the devs!

[JtD]

12 hours ago, Makz said:

About schrapnel uneffectiveness too.

 

As a general statement regarding structural failure, not limited to MK108 shrapnel.

[Bremspropeller]

On 12/8/2018 at 3:56 AM, Makz said:

Its all written here

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Messerschmitt/Diverses/Flugwerkschutzes.pdf

About schrapnel uneffectiveness too. 

 

That's an interesting document, thanks!

 

The biggest takeaway (doesn't really come as a surprise) is that a stressed skin design is more vulnerable to M-Geschoss damage than a common truss or frame-design, where the skin only contributes minimally to the overall strength and structural integrity.