P-40 4 vs 6 guns performance

[CrazyDuck]

Hi chaps and chapettes,

 

so has anyone tested the difference in performance if outer 2 guns are removed and no additional ammo is carried?

 

Historically on the example of Wildcats pilots were quite dissatisfied at having 2 additional guns on version F4F-4 compared to F4F-3, since additional guns provided more firepower at the cost of degraded performance and shorter firing time. I guess against Japanese aircraft of 1942 four fifties were already an overkill and they desperately needed better performance so I can understand their motives and priorities. However, degradation of performance due to 2 wing mounted fifties is quite interesting, has anyone noticed or tested anything like this in this sim?

 

A citation from "Battle of Midway, Action report: USS Yorktown, Captain E. Buckminster to Admiral Chester A. Nimitz, 18 JUN 1942"

 

(c) F4F-4 Airplanes

The fighter pilots are very disappointed with the performance and length of sustained fire power of the F4F-4 airplanes. The Zero fighters could easily outmaneuver and out-climb the F4F-3, and the consensus of fighter pilot opinion is that the F4F-4 is even more sluggish and slow than the F4F-3. It is also felt that it was a mistake to put 6 guns on the F4F-4 and thus to reduce the rounds per gun. For the opposition now being encountered the combination of 4 guns and 450 rounds per gun is much superior to the 6 guns with 240 rounds per gun. Many of our fighters ran out of ammunition even before the Jap dive bombers arrived over our forces; these were experienced pilots, not novices. It is strongly urged that the Navy be supplied with a fighter that is at least equal of the Zero fighter. It is believed that 4-50 caliber fixed machine guns give sufficient fire power for carrier based fighters, especially in view of the loss of performance involved in adding two additional guns.

 

Entire report can be read here:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/logs/CV/cv5-Midway.html

[69TD_Hajo_Garlic]

I usually run 4 and the extra ammo.  I dont really notice any changes in firepower or performance.  

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

I run 6, but I'm usually ground attacking or swatting 111's.

[iflyflightsims]

I usually take 6 with extra ammo for the lolz.

 

Theoretically the aircraft should climb a bit better with 4 guns and no extra ammo than default. If you take extra ammo with the 4 guns, the aircraft is heavier than default. I haven’t taken any exact measurements, but it does seem like the P40 climbs better with 4 guns and no extra ammo.

[Ehret]

9 minutes ago, =SqSq=SignorMagnifico said:

Theoretically the aircraft should climb a bit better with 4 guns and no extra ammo than default. If you take extra ammo with the 4 guns, the aircraft is heavier than default. I haven’t taken any exact measurements, but it does seem like the P40 climbs better with 4 guns and no extra ammo.

 

The obvious perk of 4 guns and extra ammo is once you expend half of your rounds you will get the same performance benefit as with 4 guns and no extra ammo. That's why the former configuration is best, imho.

[Gambit21]

A pilot that can shoot and avoids the knife fight will benefit from 6 guns and the destructive power of the quick snap-shot.

If you're gunnery is less up to snuff and/or you tend find yourself turning, (to the extent that it's possible in the current P-40) you'll benefit from 4 guns.

 

Zeke vs Wildcat is a different story.

[VBF-12_Stele]

I always go with 4 guns and 40% fuel. I find it performs much better and I can hold my own with most of the 109s in a one on one fight if it comes to it.

[ZachariasX]

4 guns and extra ammo feels like „unlimited ammo“. For Berloga (if there‘s many players and less 1 on 1 situations, it is awesome. Also if you are to plow mud. You can work an airfield or truck colums seemingly forever.

[TRRA15]

Good question. From my observations, it's not a major difference. It's more of whether you hit what you're shooting at, or you don't. I've taken 4 guns and had good gunnery and really went to town. I've taken 6 guns and "sprayed & preyed", as the say with "meh" results. All I know is that when hitting an A/C at perfect convergence, 4 50 calibers don't seem to cause appreciably less damage than 6. Just my observation.

It'll be interesting to see if the 8 guns of the P-47 create some sort of breach of critical mass of destructive power. 

Edited November 15, 2018 by TRRA15
clarity

[303_Bies]

10 hours ago, CrazyDuck said:

It is believed that 4-50 caliber fixed machine guns give sufficient fire power for carrier based fighters (...)

 

Japanese planes had lightweight delicate airframes so 4x 0.5 had enough firepower - if you hit with 4 or 6 it was enough anyway and additional ammo was more beneficial. 

Non carrier based fighters fighting with heavier bombers and more armored planes benefit with 6.

Edited November 15, 2018 by Bies

[CrazyDuck]

48 minutes ago, Bies said:

 

Japanese planes had lightweight delicate airframes so 4x 0.5 had enough firepower - if you hit with 4 or 6 it was enough anyway and additional ammo was more beneficial. 

Non carrier based fighters fighting with heavier bombers and more armored planes benefit with 6.

 

Yeah, that's my belief precisely.

 

However (ignoring the Japanese opposition) I'm more interested in the fact that they are mentioning noticable performance degradation on Wildcats due to two additional guns. I wonder if that was also the case with P-40 and whether it is present in the sim.

[303_Bies]

Yes it is, P-40 don't have performance of Bf 109 and most people fly with less than half fuel and 4x 0.5' to compensate.

Edited November 19, 2018 by Bies

[Voyager]

On 11/15/2018 at 4:29 AM, CrazyDuck said:

 

Yeah, that's my belief precisely.

 

However (ignoring the Japanese opposition) I'm more interested in the fact that they are mentioning noticable performance degradation on Wildcats due to two additional guns. I wonder if that was also the case with P-40 and whether it is present in the sim.

 

Bear in mind the F4F-4 also added a wing folding mechanisms and additional hardware over the F4F-3, adding around 900lbs to its unloaded weight. The guns alone would only account for 100-150lbs of that. 

 

Also, it did not just give up firing time; the switch from 4x450 to 6x240 cost around 360 rounds, or about a fifth of the total ammo load of the plane. 

[Ehret]

On 11/15/2018 at 9:51 AM, TRRA15 said:

Good question. From my observations, it's not a major difference. It's more of whether you hit what you're shooting at, or you don't. I've taken 4 guns and had good gunnery and really went to town. I've taken 6 guns and "sprayed & preyed", as the say with "meh" results. All I know is that when hitting an A/C at perfect convergence, 4 50 calibers don't seem to cause appreciably less damage than 6. Just my observation.

It'll be interesting to see if the 8 guns of the P-47 create some sort of breach of critical mass of destructive power. 

 

How guns are synchronized in the P-40 or the P-47?

 

For the in the sim P-40 they seem to be firing all at once so all are synchronized. If so it'd explain a minor difference in firepower between 4 and 6 guns. The extra  round or two in the 6 configuration would be redundant as the hit component would receive 2-4 AP 0.50" rounds, already.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Ehret

[Tag777]

From my observations, six guns add a stronger "punch" as compared with four.