Jump to content
sevenless

German MK 108 footage - What did the effect on target look like and how much damage was done ?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

Hmm after many qmb fights i was unable to shot off rudder or elevator.

I think you might have to hit it directly. I'll look at my recordings and see. Hit detection does seem to be a bit off as well, I've seen rounds miss the airplane yet it acts as if the round hit, and I've also seen rounds go right through the airplane yet no hit is detected.

Edited by Legioneod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

This must be very frustrating for the developers, they are doing an amazing job, did a great upgrade to the DM, we get it quick, for free and un expected.

Now people want back the one shot one kill arcade kind of simulation.

Want to see wing or tail fall off so they are certain they got a kill (And that still happens , just not nearly as often, which is better)

 

I do think the majority are very happy with new DM, way more realistic, but still some people get annoyed because they cannot get an easy kill anymore.

Maybe a tweak to the 30mm if anything? I am really not sure if it is needed or not, hard to tell(If they keep it the way it is , I would dont mind it at all).

 

Would hate the DM to go back to what it was.

 

 

I see, you enjoy like others here enjoy DM hard as titanium and want more titanium. So the old DM wasn't already tough enough for you - ???? - 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CrazyDuck said:

So, I did some semi-scientific approach testing. I've fired up QMB, saddled up my 109 K4, picked 10 waves of P-47s (40% fuel, standard weapons) as target.

 

Then I dogfighted them, using MK 108 only, fired single shells only, and stopped firing after scoring 1 hit. I've tried to shoot from closest distance possible, hitting plane into the fuselage or wingroots. After single hit was scored, I disengaged and observed the plane for 3 minutes. Here are the results:

 

image.png.ea03bb87e64e7653e5893c8f2a03db3a.png

 

Fuel leak and visual damage are the most often result of a 108 hit. On one instance plane immediately started burning, on another one PK was scored.

Structural damage is the case, when I managed to hit the very tail of the aircraft - this didn't cause any leaks, but it did tear away rudder and one of the horizontal stabilizers (therefore the "Yes" assessment of structural failure).

 

Bottom line: In this quick and dirty test, 8 out of 10 P-47s were shot down with a single MK 108 shell hit, but only 2 out of 10 (nos. 4 and 10) exhibited obvious fatal damage after receiving a hit.

Nice testing. But how did you manage a pilot kill? Where did it hit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Max_Damage said:

Nice testing. But how did you manage a pilot kill? Where did it hit?

I'm assuming the cockpit but who knows. Pilot kills are extremely easy to get against the P-47 just aim center mass around the cockpit and you'll Pk most of the time, by far the easiest way to kill the P-47 only takes one shot if you hit right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Rewatched it and it does actually say Bf-110G2, must have missed that and thought it was the A7 from earlier. Infact the entire film seems identical to the first you posted. That said there still appears to be no hits with Mk108s in that clip (would've been obvious), only very obvious 20mm hits (identical to all the other clips with 20mm only armament), so most likely just footage from a regular G2 with 4x MG151/20's + 4x MG15's and not footage from the later Mk108 armed G2/U9 variant. 

 

 

It's not the LW who would've fudged any footage, if it was done (example above turned out not to be a re run anyway) it would've been the theaters who were given the strips of film from which they would then likely reuse the footage they were given in different shows. The theaters no doubt weren't given that much footage as most of it would've been used by the LW for analysis and verification purposes. Otherwise we would've had a lot more footage to go by.

 

__________________________________________________________________

 

Anyway..

 

Rattlesnake (CMBailey) and I just met each other on the airquake server and decided to run some simple tests, and the results are quite interesting.

 

Mk108 vs P-47D

Setup: Rattlesnake would fly straight in a P-47 and allow me to take pot shots at his wings from his direct 6'o'clock.

 

Results: In every case very little blast damage was inflicted with hits to the wings, i.e. it will definitely take more than 2 hits to sever the wing, and likely often more than 3 too. HOWEVER here comes the interesting bit: Shrapnel damage(!) This is pretty intense, more than it should be. We tried several times, and whilst 2-3 hits on the wings did not break the wings, instead shrapnel from these hits would seriously damage and kill the engine almost every time, even hits near the tips seemed to spray shrapnel into the engine. Oddly enough none of the hits hurt the pilot, not even hits at the wing root would hurt the pilot, instead it would be the engine every time.

 

MK108 vs Spitfire

Setup: Same as before

 

Results: 1 hit seemed to have little effect on the wings for some strange reason, infact Rattlesnake reported no effect to his airplane after the first hit to his wings. Second hit resulted in the wing snapping off. After this we decided to try again but stop after the first hit and then allow Rattlesnake to test out how much it would subsequently take to break it. Once again the hit to the wing seemed to cause no damage to anything, and following this Rattlesnake was even able to perform tight 4+ G maneuvers without the wing coming off, reporting along the way that he experienced no issues with control. It took a high speed dive and aggressive high G pull up to finally snap his wing.

 

 

So in conclusion the MK108 seemed to do way too little local blast damage whilst at the same time the shrapnel damage, atleast to the engine, was unrealistically severe. A R2800 should not sieze to function due to shrapnel from a 30mm round that strikes the wings. Turbocharger damage? Sure if the hit is at the root, but not engine damage. 

 

 

like some say sit in airplane that is hit by 1x30mm and youll see how powerfull it is in game, outside damage just dont show it.

 

i dont understand why they decided for this change in dm, but it aint gona look nice in youtube ace in flight videos, no more dramatic wow one shot kills on one pass kills, now one pass is still effective but who wonts to wait 5-10min for kill, and some one els will steal it from you, no instant gratification on kills like before, rookies cant score critical hit on veterans as easy as before, and so on...  to me it looks like this dm modification was to rushed if it dosent also add more detail visual damage represantation also.

31 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

I'm assuming the cockpit but who knows. Pilot kills are extremely easy to get against the P-47 just aim center mass around the cockpit and you'll Pk most of the time, by far the easiest way to kill the P-47 only takes one shot if you hit right.

 

Yes i get killed most of the time by pilot killed in 47 by thouse poor 30mm k4s, its so hard for them , we must understand their pain lol

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max_Damage said:

Nice testing. But how did you manage a pilot kill? Where did it hit?

Not really sure - coul be a wingroot (shrapnel piercing a thin unarmoured wall by the pilots side). Majority of hits weren't scored directly from dead 6 o'clock but rather at a slight angle due to P-47 evading, but they all landed on fuselage or wingroot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Panthera said:

Even the non explosive incendiary "brandgranate" shells produced lethal damage with hits at glancing angles for the most part:

Entry:

z9ngt77.jpg

Exit:

BRMGRj0.jpg

 

 

Report: "Probably lethal aerodynamically"

 

That wing is a goner.

The torsional D-box is completely destroyed over at least three frames/ ribs (3, 4 and 5; quite possibly 2 too - some fasteners are missing; hard to tell on 6 and 7, but the buckling of the leading edge indicates a bossible de-bonding, too) with a possible de-bonding of the skin at the spar (top and bottom, but hard to judge).

Losing torsional stiffness alone would most probably take the wing off immediately - certainly within the next couple of instants.

 

Edited by Bremspropeller
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant wait to start seeing thouse videos on youtube how players are so glad that now they have to df enemy for 5-10min and spend all thir 20mm ammo in yak/lagg and then let him go full of wholes and get kill after 5min when they are returning back to base and dont even see what happend to him, they will be so great and atract so many new people to game :) 

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Again the conclusions from the tests conducted by Rattlesnake and I were rather clear in regards to the MK108:

 

1. Way too little blast damage, i.e. local damage 

2. Way too severe shrapnel damage, atleast to the engine

3. Oddly resistant pilot, never gets hurt unless you strike the cockpit directly

 

In other words the Mk108 damage model can be improved by:

a) increasing the local damage dealt

b) decreasing the shrapnel damage, atleast in terms of lethal radius  (a P-47 shouldn't lose its engine to a wing hit)

c) adjusting pilot vulnerability, making him more susceptible to wounding from blast/shrapnel by hits close to cockpit (couldn't hurt the pilot even with hits right next to the cockpit on the wing root of the aircraft) 

 

The tests we carried out were essentially identical to the British trials, me being directly 6'o'clock and Rattlesnake on Auto level, allowing me good time to place my shots. So I'm not sure it can be done much more thuroughly ingame. Video footage of the event:

 

First couple of videos Rattlesnake was going real slow, so I had issues overshooting him at one point leading to just 2 hits in test nr.2 where I would've wanted to make 3 hits.

 

 

2 hits (right on top of each other due to RoF) to the right wing from directly 6'o'clock, result; engine damaged & right aileron lost. Aircraft still controllable.

 

 

2 hits to the left wing from direct 6'o'clock, result; engine & turbocharger severely damaged. No loss of control to aircraft.

 

4 hits to the right wing from directly 6'o'clock, result; 1st hit did virtually nothing, 2nd hit the engine caught fire immediately, 3rd hit and flap is lost, 4th hit nothing noticable, but probably just another tick to the structure healthbar:

 

2 hits to right wing, with so far the most realistic results: Hit nr.1 to middle of wing did visible damage to wing & stabilizer, but no loss of control (Odd). 2nd hit directly to wing root severed the wing in level flight.

 

 

Final test is missing atm, but I expect it to be uploaded as well. This is the Spitfire being struck once to the right wing from directly 6'o'clock and then proceeding to do tight maneuvers without any issues and no problems with control. Takes a high speed pull up to sever the wing.

 

59 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

That wing is a goner.

The torsional D-box is completely destroyed over at least three frames/ ribs (3, 4 and 5; quite possibly 2 too - some fasteners are missing; hard to tell on 6 and 7, but the buckling of the leading edge indicates a bossible de-bonding, too) with a possible de-bonding of the skin at the spar (top and bottom, but hard to judge).

Losing torsional stiffness alone would most probably take the wing off immediately - certainly within the next couple of instants.

 

 

Yes, I believe "probably lethal aerodynamically" refers to the the high likelihood of the wing collapsing under flight conditions within a short space of time.

Edited by Panthera
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to see that a hit near or directly behind the engine on those Viermots dosent damage the engine as often as we see it ingame on our bombers and fighters. Of course we cant be sure if engine got damaged or not on these clips but there is no smoke coming of of them like we see it ingame with such hits. Ingame you dont need to shoot at the engine to damage it. Just through shrapnell alone you can damage the engine severly with hits anywhere on the plane. At least post DM patch. Hit the wing of a fighter or bomber and the engine is smoking almost everytime. Even dead six o clock hits can make your engine smoking/damaged. I hadnt enough testing time with the new patch but i couldnt see much change in that regard in my very few testflights. The wings are much harder to break which is a good thing in my opinion but overal i think planes are to robust now but thats only my opinion after very few tests. So this could be just me. I will test a bit more if i can motivate myself to fly. AI is still garbage and that takes all the fun away for me. Still!

 

Edit: I didtn read the whole thread before posting so i didnt see that PE2 video. Holy crap. Im not sure if i still want a B17 in this game. ;)

Edited by Ishtaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Legioneod said:

I've taken off rudders and control surfaces with single Mk 108 hits. Wings are tougher now which is good imo and I've been able to take them off with a few hits though I don't think there is ever a need to fire that many rounds into the P-47, it's basically dead after the first few hits.

Same experience here, no problem taking wings off and shooting down P47s.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've repeated Crazyduck's tests myself with similar results against a variety of planes. Yak1B statistical outlier in terms of survivability. Will collect the data in a nicer format later. However, I was amused to twice (!) see the Sopwith Camel survive 2(!!) direct hits from the Mk108 and continue combat maneuvering. That particular data is useless, but still amusing.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, here's the footage of the 2nd Spitfire test conducted.

 

1 hit to right wing, results: Damage to cooling system, very little to effect on controllability, little structural damage as evident during subsequent maneuvers. Aircraft still able to dogfight. Takes a high speed & high G pull out to sever the wing:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MK108 fires 650 bullets every minute this are ~10-11 bullets every second. Do you hear me Devs? How you can believe that wings the whole plane what is made of light weight parts not solid thick armored how tanks are withstand 10-11 bullets hitting the target every second when I press the trigger, specially the control surface (ailerons, flaps), fuel, radiators and ammunition. [edited]

 

LAST WARNING

 

-> I always love the fuel leaks the planes are bleeding as hell but doesn't catch fire when HE rounds explode all around even if I aim their leaks. Explosions from fuel tanks or ammunition are rare - wtf

 

If in 2014 planes catch fire so easily and the kill rate was very high and fast - the majority screamed too realistic - tone it down. Now again, make the planes even more tougher :dash:

 

image.png.967f5f734134f4ad158c27ae87b69799.png30vs20vs50cal.jpg.deaa5d57b874f4c5a782ab17e2e952e3.jpg

Edited by SYN_Haashashin
Devs Bias accusation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Panthera said:

Alright, here's the footage of the 2nd Spitfire test conducted.

 

1 hit to right wing, results: Damage to cooling system, very little to effect on controllability, little structural damage as evident during subsequent maneuvers. Aircraft still able to dogfight. Takes a high speed & high G pull out to sever the wing:

 

There`s the shattered canopy effect again. I`d imagine that if there`s a hole in it, then it had been penetrated by shrapnel which implicates pilot getting wounded. Or maybe it is just a visual effect with no real damage inflicted.

1 hour ago, Livai said:

The MK108 fires 650 bullets every minute this are ~10-11 bullets every second. Do you hear me Devs? How you can believe that wings the whole plane what is made of light weight parts not solid thick armored how tanks are withstand 10-11 bullets hitting the target every second when I press the trigger, specially the control surface (ailerons, flaps), fuel, radiators and ammunition. [edited]

 

-> I always love the fuel leaks the planes are bleeding as hell but doesn't catch fire when HE rounds explode all around even if I aim their leaks. Explosions from fuel tanks or ammunition are rare - wtf

 

If in 2014 planes catch fire so easily and the kill rate was very high and fast - the majority screamed too realistic - tone it down. Now again, make the planes even more tougher :dash:

Keep in mind that DM revision was dictated by overall user feedback which means usage of weapons of all calibres.

 

From the looks of this forum the feedback for new DM is positive especially for lower calibres such as 12mm and 20mm. My experience with it is positive aswell and seems pretty logical that higher rof guns would benefit from a more precise DM. IMO the biggest calibre guns is a bit of an anomaly now. Above ingame tests provided that high calibre hits cause very high shrapnel but very low blast damage which is my experience aswell.  Maybe it just needs some more fine tuning but overall direction of change is correct I`d say.

 

The engine fire/ pk from wing hit effect I`m not a fan of. Now if the wing tear effect - as presented on a Spitfire doing higher Gs - would be result of a one 30mm/37mm hit most of the time then that`s perfectly fine. As in the plane hit is out of the fight and can fly without structure failure only if not maneuvering for a bombrun or a gun solution.

Edited by SYN_Haashashin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mac_Messer said:

There`s the shattered canopy effect again. I`d imagine that if there`s a hole in it, then it had been penetrated by shrapnel which implicates pilot getting wounded. Or maybe it is just a visual effect with no real damage inflicted.  <snip>

 

My own experience flying and getting hit is that you can get damage to the canopy, with the associated wind noise, without necessarily having been hit in your pilot's body.  They are separate areas. 

 

HE shells are sending out splinters at great velocity: even mineshell designs. AFAIK the 3cm in the game is just a 3cm HE shell that works with the same mechanics as other HE shells. (Or have I missed a change in the updates?)   If you are hit within a few meters of the cockpit area taking canopy or pilot damage is perfectly possible in real life.  But it all depends on the angle, and we just do not know enough about the DM to know how much the effect of a specific shot is due to the modeling of individual splinters, taking into account the exact placement of the hit and direction of travel of the shot, and how much is purely due to an RNG.  

 

This bears on the testing generally: you might see a shot hitting a wing at a particular place and think that the result should be such and such based on the pictures we have seen. If the DM takes any hit on a large component and applies an RNG to calculate the damage level, however, there will be no complete correlation between the location of the hit and the number of "hit points" lost.  

 

That is why, unless we have knowledge of the DM's workings in detail, comparing the results of individual hits in game with real test results is pointless. All we can do without that knowledge is to test statistically, as though for the DM a hit on a wing box is just a hit + RNG, wherever we happen to see it hit. 

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the tests above and several hours of online experience post patch, the 30mm MK108 rarely if ever succeeds in severing wings or other large structural parts with the first hit, and often not even the 2nd hit. Just now I had an AI I-16 survive 3 direct hits from my Mk108's, plus several 20mm rounds, it kept flying. In reality said little plane would've been tumbling to earth in several pieces.

 

Same experience vs most planes, the Mk108 is effective at taking out the engines, but severing structural parts is difficult. A direct hit to the rear fuselage of a player flown Spitfire again just had it spew fuel and smoke, bloke kept flying and maneuvering. In short the 30mm HE(M) rounds are doing way too little structural damage, whilst at the same time the shrapnel damage is excessive in that the engine gets struck 75% of the time almost irrespective of shot placement.

 

The damage of smaller guns ingame generally feels ok though. However it would be interesting to test how many hits in general it would take with the 20mm to down a P-47, according to the US OR analysis it would at most take 12 hits.

 

 

Edited by Panthera
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 mm brrrrrt

3900 shots per minute.

Vehicle didnt annihilated into atoms

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Makz said:

30 mm brrrrrt

3900 shots per minute.

Vehicle didnt annihilated into atoms


no explosive bullets.....
armor piercing.
And actually, the car is annihilated to atoms, it will glow fluo green for the next thousend years and be a heat source for the nomads at night....

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont think american pilots are dummies to waste AP round to shoot an automobile.

They have HE rounds for that against soft targets like terrorists.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at least 4 entry points (with no metal blend to outside sign of internal explosion) so 4 pgu-13bHei (note the incendiary in the name but no incendiary effect here) that would make like +/-180gr explosive material.
Now lets put 180Gr C4  in your car and see the result.

Edited by JV69badatflyski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Panthera said:

Based on the tests above and several hours of online experience post patch, the 30mm MK108 rarely if ever succeeds in severing wings or other large structural parts with the first hit, and often not even the 2nd hit. Just now I had an AI I-16 survive 3 direct hits from my Mk108's, plus several 20mm rounds, it kept flying. In reality said little plane would've been tumbling to earth in several pieces.

 

Same experience vs most planes, the Mk108 is effective at taking out the engines, but severing structural parts is difficult. A direct hit to the rear fuselage of a player flown Spitfire again just had it spew fuel and smoke, bloke kept flying and maneuvering. In short the 30mm HE(M) rounds are doing way too little structural damage, whilst at the same time the shrapnel damage is excessive in that the engine gets struck 75% of the time almost irrespective of shot placement.

 

The damage of smaller guns ingame generally feels ok though. However it would be interesting to test how many hits in general it would take with the 20mm to down a P-47, according to the US OR analysis it would at most take 12 hits.

 

 

 

Again it probably comes down to the fact that AFAIK the game does not differentiate between conventional and mineshell effects, or splinters and blast. 

 

The 37mm Flak hits are very plausible and reasonably correlate with the US tests - not an identical munition but very similar.  They also rarely take off a whole structural component, but I have seen them remove the outer wing section with one hit leading to an immediate crash. 

 

I can test 20mm Flak vs P-47 using the same method and count so it will be directly comparable: but it does take a while to do a number of runs. Should be able to post results here in a day or two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

Again it probably comes down to the fact that AFAIK the game does not differentiate between conventional and mineshell effects, or splinters and blast. 

 

The 37mm Flak hits are very plausible and reasonably correlate with the US tests - not an identical munition but very similar.  They also rarely take off a whole structural component, but I have seen them remove the outer wing section with one hit leading to an immediate crash. 

 

I can test 20mm Flak vs P-47 using the same method and count so it will be directly comparable: but it does take a while to do a number of runs. Should be able to post results here in a day or two. 

 

Well Rattlesnake and I will do some tests on the airquake server again, much easier to control the test that way :)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panthera said:

 

Well Rattlesnake and I will do some tests on the airquake server again, much easier to control the test that way :)

 

 

You can control the placement of shots that way, but cannot produce a random distribution as in these automated tests.  Just go Ctrl-F2 from the tank and watch the P-47. It will fly past 5 gun positions, with most hits coming from below and in front.

 

Having run the 20mm Flak 38 version on a dozen planes, the mean number of hits it takes to down a plane is about 2.5, the median about 3.0

 

What is obvious is that hits to the engine are very lethal:  not always immediately, but once the engine is hit and black smoke is seen the plane will crash within a minute or two.  In contrast, so far no plane has been downed by 20mm hits to the structure only, (so far maximum of 4 such hits) although you can see that the AI pilot is not flying smoothly level.

 

I expect the number of hits - if they are random on the target area - will very much depend on the direction of the attack for the 20mm HE at least, given how much more vulnerable the engine is compared to the structure.

 

 

 

 

 

Kill probability vs Flak.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

You can control the placement of shots that way, but cannot produce a random distribution as in these automated tests.  Just go Ctrl-F2 from the tank and watch the P-47. It will fly past 5 gun positions, with most hits coming from below and in front.

 

Oh we can produce a good number of random hits if required, all it takes is a bit of maneuvering. 

 

Also not sure how comparable the ingame flak is to the aircraft guns. I think it's better to be safe than sorry and just do an airplane on airplane test with a human player in each so that all the damage and how it affects the aircraft can be properly assessed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mac_Messer said:

Keep in mind that DM revision was dictated by overall user feedback which means usage of weapons of all calibres.

 

From the looks of this forum the feedback for new DM is positive especially for lower calibres such as 12mm and 20mm. My experience with it is positive aswell and seems pretty logical that higher rof guns would benefit from a more precise DM. IMO the biggest calibre guns is a bit of an anomaly now. Above ingame tests provided that high calibre hits cause very high shrapnel but very low blast damage which is my experience aswell.  Maybe it just needs some more fine tuning but overall direction of change is correct I`d say.

 

The engine fire/ pk from wing hit effect I`m not a fan of. Now if the wing tear effect - as presented on a Spitfire doing higher Gs - would be result of a one 30mm/37mm hit most of the time then that`s perfectly fine. As in the plane hit is out of the fight and can fly without structure failure only if not maneuvering for a bombrun or a gun solution.

 

We have guns that fires up to 20 bullets per second hitting the same place. What damage can be done in one second - whole range of possibilities and outcomes ? - always a good Question! Three MK108 are ~30 - 33 bullets per second. How long can planes withstand this?  Same good Question for lower and medium calibres, too.

 

I like the DM in CloD direction.

 

2 hours ago, Makz said:

30 mm brrrrrt

3900 shots per minute.

Vehicle didnt annihilated into atoms 

 

65 shots per second in the same place result into big bigger holes.  Do this in this game and show us the same holes but not on cars - 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Panthera said:

much easier to control the test that way

 

Except for latency and packet loss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Panthera said:

 

Oh we can produce a good number of random hits if required, all it takes is a bit of maneuvering. 

 

Also not sure how comparable the ingame flak is to the aircraft guns. I think it's better to be safe than sorry and just do an airplane on airplane test with a human player in each so that all the damage and how it affects the aircraft can be properly assessed.

 

I guess best way to compare would be with Flak 36 and the BK 37 in the Bf 110G/Ju 87G. In theory they should be similar to MK 108, since they have similar explosive filler (90 g of HTA), although it may cause a bit more damage since it would have more fragmentation being a bigger round.

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Cpt_Cool said:

 

Except for latency and packet loss. 

 

Well we're only counting registered hits as the video is always from the targets perspective, so any damage dealt is only assessed from the targets point of view. Hence latency & packet loss won't be an issue.

 

Edited by Panthera
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

 

I guess best way to compare would be with Flak 36 and the BK 37 in the Bf 110G/Ju 87G. In theory they should be similar to MK 108, since they have similar explosive filler (90 g of HTA), although it may cause a bit more damage since it would have more fragmentation being a bigger round.

 

The 3.7cm Flak comes in with a probability to kill the P-47 about double that estimated in the US tests, running my tests that give hits at a similar angle.

Interestingly the ratio for the 20mm Flak is about the same: double that of the US tests.

 

I suspect that is because the engine is taking fragment damage rather more often than it should (according to the US analysis), and/or fragments are doing too much damage to engine and related components.  Get a hit in the game anywhere near the engine with a Flak 38 20mm shell and the plane is almost certainly not making it back to base and will usually go down during the test run.  About one in three 20 mm hits is (edit: visibly) damaging the engine in some way.  

 

Given the angle of the hits this might be reasonable - perhaps the game simulation is better than the US analysis.  Anyway, this suggests that there is not a general problem with conventional HE being unrealistically weak in the game, if anything the reverse. 

 

People firing from a plane will usually get hits from the rear and the side, probably usually slightly above.  On average they are going to get more structure hits (and more PKs) and fewer engine hits, so I would expect firing HE would take more hits to down a P-47 than the Flak gets with the same shell. 

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if it HE hits your wing from enemy on your 6 it damages your engine also, i expirianced this when in p-47 and 30 HE hits, and same when in 109 and 23 HE hits me in tests, so when im online and attack 109s i shoot only with my 23 first and when i see hit in wings close to main hull i just leve him if there is no other frendly to steal a kill, after 3.008 i got 3 kills already like that with lagg23 as im guessing from what i see in tests i damaged his engine and hell not make it back if hes more then 5 min from his base, so why risk siting on his 6 and waisting even more ammo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@77.CountZero Yes I am sure they often do: hits on the tail or rear fuselage, however should usually not, and these are partially blocked in an attack from the front.  Setting up flak so that it only fires after a plane has gone past the gun is probably doable in the ME using some triggers, but beyond my limited ME capabilities. 

 

I think your tactic is the right approach: unfortunately people want instant gratification and/or certainty for their stats rather than a probable.  Hence the silly conga line of 109s queuing up to be shot down behind the doomed Peska in the video posted above. When I fly SP I do much the same: anyone smoking or streaming fluids is left until I am absolutely sure that there is no further threat from other aircraft. 

Share this post


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

They have HE rounds for that against soft targets like terrorists.

 

Nope.

No point in taking other than AP rounds at a caliber of 30mm when plinking stuff on the ground.

With depleted uranium or tungsten cores, there's enough secondary *boom* in that round to not need any primary HE rounds at all.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, unreasonable said:

 Anyway, this suggests that there is not a general problem with conventional HE being unrealistically weak in the game, if anything the reverse. 

 

The problem with the ingame damage model is quite clear when looking at it from a realism standpoint, at least when it comes to the mine shells. There simply is a very big lack of blast damage (i.e. local structural damage), whilst there is an excess of shrapnel damage (i.e. damage dealt to parts far away from impact point).

 

The effect of this ingame is that whilst large caliber high capacity HE shells are still effective, it is in a non-realistic fashion. Because instead of causing the immediately crippling or lethal structural damage that they should be doing, these rounds overwhelmingly tend to cripple the opponent via taking out powerplant systems, almost irrespective of hit placement.

 

In reality these large caliber high capacity HE shells bring down aircraft mainly via massive structural damage leading to airframe failure, they don't require striking vitals such as the engine or pilot. they are all about causing structural failure. And as testing clearly shows single wing hits by 30mm HE(M) shells would 99% of the time result in structurally or aerodynamically lethal damage to a fighter and even some medium bombers. Hence this is what we really ought to see ingame. 

 

In short this isn't about wether a particular weapon is effective or not, it's about the type of damage it inflicts.

Edited by Panthera
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Panthera said:

 

The problem with the ingame damage model is quite clear when looking at it from a realism standpoint, at least when it comes to the mine shells. There simply is a very big lack of blast damage (i.e. local structural damage), whilst there is an excess of shrapnel damage (i.e. damage dealt to parts far away from impact point).

 

The effect of this ingame is that whilst large caliber high capacity HE shells are still effective, it is in a non-realistic fashion. Because instead of causing the immediately crippling or lethal structural damage that they should be doing, these rounds overwhelmingly tend to cripple the opponent via taking out powerplant systems, almost irrespective of hit placement.

 

In reality these large caliber high capacity HE shells bring down aircraft mainly via massive structural damage leading to airframe failure, they don't require striking vitals such as the engine or pilot. they are all about causing structural failure. And as testing clearly shows single wing hits by 30mm HE(M) shells would 99% of the time result in structurally or aerodynamically lethal damage to a fighter and even some medium bombers. Hence this is what we really ought to see ingame. 

 

In short this isn't about wether a particular weapon is effective or not, it's about the type of damage it inflicts.

I cannot agree more, last game on Berloga not only I had to pump more than 200(with at least 100 hits, I was really close, but not close enough to use mk108) into LA5 to cause minor leaks and after I got close enough, 4 mk 08 hits into wing root area werent enough to send it into socialist hell.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...