Jump to content
von_Michelstamm

Is there any real difference up close between 150 and 400m convergence on nose/fuse guns?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I’ve been Switching back and forth between 150 and 400m on the f4. 

Seems I hit more during deflection shooting between 300 and 50 m with a convergence of 150 vs 400.

With 400 I feel I have to be more precise.

Am I totally imagining things?

The guns are so close to each other and don’t seem to be arcing any differently, I’d be surprised to see any difference at these ranges...

Edited by von_Michelstamm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In game, the convergence will horizontally intersect and vertically intersect to meet the set range zero. So your zero will move up/down depending on the range zeroed. Nose mounted weapons will still converge on the range selected. Though wing mounted weapons will show the most dramatic differences. Typically wing mounted weapons will have a low convergence around 250-300. While nose mounted weapons will have a higher convergences range. Pretty much find what works best for you. Lately I've settled on 410m instead of my usual 430m or 500m as I mainly fly 109s and 110s. Just do lots of practice runs in quick missions againsts A20s or IL2s and you will find what works best. :fly:

Edited by Geronimo553

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

I’ve been Switching back and forth between 150 and 400m on the f4. 

Seems I hit more during deflection shooting between 300 and 50 m with a convergence of 150 vs 400.

With 400 I feel I have to be more precise.

Am I totally imagining things?

The guns are so close to each other and don’t seem to be arcing any differently, I’d be surprised to see any difference at these ranges...

I believe the convergence setting also sets the VERTICAL convergence of the guns, like sighting in a rifle. The bullets path follows a ballistic trajectory, not a straight line, so there is some arc to it. The bullet will only cross the crosshairs of the reticle at two points in its path, as it goes up into the peak of its trajectory and then again as it falls back down.  Like this:                                       

     
If you set the gun convergence to 150 metres, in level, unloaded flight the bullet stream will pass through the crosshairs at 150 metres. If you set it to 400, it will pass through the crosshairs as 400 metres. So if you aim dead on at a target at 400 m and your convergence is set to 150 m, the bullets will drop below the target. If you aim at a target at 200m with a convergence at 400m, the bullets will go too high (depending on the ballistics). 

trajectory.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It didn't look like the cannons (in particular) were arcing any higher at the farther convergence, almost as if vertical convergence wasn't being applied at all. The difference must be pretty subtle at these ranges. I thought at 400m i'd clearly see the tracers cross the crosshairs twice, instead of shooting out dead on and then dropping off.


Presumably at 400 i'm simply leading ever slightly too much compared to shorter convergence.
I do well at the 150, but i'm trying to move to 400 to be more historical and more versatile vs bombers and ground targets.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

It didn't look like the cannons (in particular) were arcing any higher at the farther convergence, almost as if vertical convergence wasn't being applied at all. The difference must be pretty subtle at these ranges.

 

Get right behind the six of a plane at 100m with a 500m convergence zero and you will in fact shoot over the plane if the plane is in center of your reticle. To hit the plane you would in fact have to aim low and typically that will cause you to crash into the plane. The scale of zeroing the weapons is actually very accurate in game. Hard to notice until up close and personal with your opponent and scoring hits becomes near impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

It didn't look like the cannons (in particular) were arcing any higher at the farther convergence, almost as if vertical convergence wasn't being applied at all. The difference must be pretty subtle at these ranges. I thought at 400m i'd clearly see the tracers cross the crosshairs twice, instead of shooting out dead on and then dropping off.


Presumably at 400 i'm simply leading ever slightly too much compared to shorter convergence.
I do well at the 150, but i'm trying to move to 400 to be more historical and more versatile vs bombers and ground targets.
 

Well the first 'zero' of the arc can be pretty close to the muzzle of the gun, especially with the site so far back, its probably imperceptible. Every bullet/gun combo has its own trajectory and some are much flatter than others. When I sighted in rifles the rule of thumb was that when the gun was sited in for 200 yards, bullet trajectory would first cross the site at 20 yards from the muzzle (something like that, is been a few years). So that is so close it may not really be noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Geronimo553 said:

Lately I've settled on 410m instead of my usual 430m or 500m as I mainly fly 109s and 110s.

 

curious, why 410 instead of 400? what does that extra dime get you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

 

curious, why 410 instead of 400? what does that extra dime get you?

 

In my many hours and hours of graphical testing I also played around with my convergence. I noticed I tended to hit the target more often and where I wanted by using 410m. Too me 400 felt to low, so I used 450m then I kept missing up close and dropped it down to 430m noticed more hits but missed while super close. In my mind I can almost perfectly picture where bullets will impact using 430m. But the problem is, with 430m I will shoot over my target if I am in too close of range. I noticed I stopped shooting over the target once I selected 410m. I guess it is a personal preference thing. This was solely playing around in quick mission using various 109s. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll play around in the 400s. My nightmare is still hitting a plane with 5 degrees angle off or less,  at around 100m or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

i'll play around in the 400s. My nightmare is still hitting a plane with 5 degrees angle off or less,  at around 100m or less.

 

Yeah give it a shot! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's probably been beaten to death, but i'd love to be able to check an 'advanced' box and set vertical and horizontal convergences for each gun. I hope they add that and firing patterns at some point. Heck, being able to save convergence for each aircraft, too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

it's probably been beaten to death, but i'd love to be able to check an 'advanced' box and set vertical and horizontal convergences for each gun. I hope they add that and firing patterns at some point. Heck, being able to save convergence for each aircraft, too.

 

 

The different convergence for each gun has indeed been talk about to death.

 

But having it save the convergence for each plane or even all of your settings you last used for that plane would be brilliant. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a stupid question but are rockets affected by convergence setting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Horna said:

Maybe a stupid question but are rockets affected by convergence setting?

 

That is not a stupid question. I have been wondering this. 

 

I know you can change the distance some of the explode at 800m etc. So in that case do they converge at that distance. 

 

For contact fuses do the rockets converge at the gun convergence setting or some arbitrary distance? 

 

Share this post


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

 

That is not a stupid question. I have been wondering this. 

 

I know you can change the distance some of the explode at 800m etc. So in that case do they converge at that distance. 

 

For contact fuses do the rockets converge at the gun convergence setting or some arbitrary distance? 

 

 

2 hours ago, Horna said:

Maybe a stupid question but are rockets affected by convergence setting?

 

I do not believe so, just ran a test of 100m vs 1000m convergence and they appear to not change.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I’ve messed around with 400, and it’s harder to make snap shots, and angle off seems a lot more important.

 

I think I’ve figured it out. 

With 150m, the rounds cross and you get a spread of mg at longer distances, almost like a shotgun. That means you score visible hits easier. It’s also easier to walk the cannon in, since you instantly see that you’re hitting with something.

At closer range, youre of course doing the expected damage.

there maybe something else going on with the cannon too based on the different arc, I’m not sure what.

the advantage of this is you don’t have to fly differently with wing guns and you’ve more of a chance to damage something.

trade off is strafing and bombers, though haven’t tested the latter much.

Edited by von_Michelstamm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See i've been playing with convergence and i have to say I can't hit a thing, the odd clip or stray round fine, but i find my guns are dry before anything gets shot down.

clearly this is all the fault of my poor convergence settings...

 

hilarity aside fiddling with them may help me hit something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Many people set a long convergence and fire close in because it reduces the amount of lead they need to have while shooting in a turnfight.  Note:  I am not saying it is a good idea or even that it really helps.   I don't do it.

Edited by 56RAF_Roblex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the ballistics are modeled correctly, the MG17s would be shooting a 7.92 x 57mm Mauser 181 grain bullet at about 2800 to 2900 FPS. I don’t have the exact dimensions but let’s say the reflector sight is mounted approximately 12 inches above the guns barrels. 

 

If you zero the guns at 250 meters, you will be 12 inches low at point blank range, on target at 250 meters, and hitting about a foot low at 400 meters. That will drop to 2 feet low at 450 meters and then 3 feet low at 500 meters.

 

if you zero the guns at 400 meters, you will hit about 8 inches low at 250 meters, on target at 400, 8 inches low at 450 meters, and 18 inches low at 500 meters.

 

vertical sighting at 400 meters appears to give you about half the variance over the usable range of the guns that sighting in at 250 meters would.

 

your horizontal spread is going to be negligible. Basically a foot at 800 meters.

 

i don’t have the ballistics on the cannon shells but the drop will be much more significant since its a heavier shell at a lower velocity. You would be better off using the cannon at under 300 meters to insure hits in the area of the machine gun rounds. 

 

Erich Hartmann said his secret to success at shooting down so many enemy fighters was to wait until they filled the windscreen to fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jaegermeister said:

Erich Hartmann said his secret to success at shooting down so many enemy fighters was to wait until they filled the windscreen to fire.

That is actually the way to go (at least for me) with german cannons.

i have convergence at 400m after testing it from 180-450m. I never actually shoot at 400m, especially with the 30mm. Mostly i shoot at 200-250m (i guess). And it works like a charm. A lot comes down on how you approach targets. Unsuspecting guys from a lower 6 approach i tend to aim just a bit lower, so that the center of the revi is below their tailsection. But of course, pulling deflection shots is more a gamble than actual aim. That‘s more shooting by feeling and observing your shot to correct accordingly.

Which will get better the more you train it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Edit... I would think you would aim a little high at very close range..

Edited by Jaegermeister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using 400meters for everything, works well for me. Leading shots are rather easy against heavy maneuvering targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that guns mounted through the prop hub (such as on the Yak or 109) can't be set for vertical convergence.  It's straight ahead. What you get is what you get.  

The cowling-mounted MGs however, might still be adjustable.  I'm not sure about that though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Jaegermeister said:

Edit... I would think you would aim a little high at very close range..

Not when i am lower than him. Because i need to pitch slightly up to him, which is why i start firing when the crosshair is just below his tail. The crosshair and shots will move up as i gain altitude and thus the shots will be on target. Also accounted for his forward momentum, the bullets will go where he will be, not where he is now.

Edited by =FC=SteelFalcon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, =AVG77=Mobile_BBQ said:

I'm pretty sure that guns mounted through the prop hub (such as on the Yak or 109) can't be set for vertical convergence.  It's straight ahead. What you get is what you get.  

The cowling-mounted MGs however, might still be adjustable.  I'm not sure about that though.  

 

in game you set all guns you have on airplane to vert+horizontal covergance with that one option, so even guns that pass true engine are tilted up for desired conv, easy to see if you go with 100m conv and test it, and then 1000m and test it youll see big differance in game for all guns on airplane.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Erich Hartmann said his secret to success at shooting down so many enemy fighters was to wait until they filled the windscreen to fire.

 

I think it's also the reason Hans Joachin Marseille was so successful with so little use of ammo. 

 

To be clear then: if you are a close-shooter, it is preferable to have convergence set farther if you want the bullets to fly straighter, and closer if the idea is to increase lead? 

Share this post


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

...

To be clear then: if you are a close-shooter, it is preferable to have convergence set farther if you want the bullets to fly straighter, and closer if the idea is to increase lead? 

 

Its oposite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

Its oposite

 

Right. Typo of my part. Tks!

 

Edit: this may be a very dramatic thing to consider in some poor visibility planes, like the La5, where it feels you are constantly firing below what you can actually see because of the bulky engine. Setting convergence farther can help, with the trade-off that you have to focus on shooting mostly during tight turns.

Edited by danielprates

Share this post


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

i don’t have the ballistics on the cannon shells but the drop will be much more significant since its a heavier shell at a lower velocity. You would be better off using the cannon at under 300 meters to insure hits in the area of the machine gun rounds. 

 

Yes, and in fact, for planes with wing-mounted MG FFs like the Bf 109 E, the recommended convergence setting was 200 meters. It was similar / same for the early 190s fitted with the MG FFs. 

 

The MG 17s were typically set to fire straight ahead, i.e., parallel convergence. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use 600 for everything across the board (except the stukas bk37 pods), seems to keep everything pretty flat shooting and gives the mk108 a little extra loft. Maybe against an i16 in an emil it makes it a little tricky but otherwise it works good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with the Emil is that the cannons are much further out in the wings, making horizontal convergence much more important too a point that I almost completely disregard the vertical side of the convergence. But ultimately its down to preference to the pilot, some people like to shoot very up close, while others like to "snipe".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Willy__ said:

The thing with the Emil is that the cannons are much further out in the wings, making horizontal convergence much more important too a point that I almost completely disregard the vertical side of the convergence. But ultimately its down to preference to the pilot, some people like to shoot very up close, while others like to "snipe".

I guess im a better shot than pilot so i know what camp im in

Share this post


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

it is preferable to have convergence set farther if you want the bullets to fly straighter...

 

 

3 hours ago, Joeasyrida said:

I use 600 for everything across the board (except the stukas bk37 pods), seems to keep everything pretty flat shooting 

 

It’s important to understand that convergence doesn’t make the guns shoot any flatter, it just changes where in the arc of the bullets trajectory your sight reticle is. The sight is fixed, so you have to adjust the gun instead of the other way around.

 

If you split the difference between the highest and lowest points in the arc within the usable range of the guns, you will have the least amount of variance above or below the sight reticle. When you are shooting at an engine or cockpit about 3 or 4 feet high, 1 foot above or below is still a hit. 3 feet high or low is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Melonfish said:

See i've been playing with convergence and i have to say I can't hit a thing, the odd clip or stray round fine, but i find my guns are dry before anything gets shot down.

clearly this is all the fault of my poor convergence settings...

 

hilarity aside fiddling with them may help me hit something.

 

Bind the time controls someplace easy to reach, and Make a quick mission with 8 enemy planes vs you, turn on invulnerability, unbreakable, and unlimited ammo. Targets everywhere you look. When you’re in firing distance, slow things to 1/2 or even 1/4 speed and fine tune your leading. 

Then, pick one or two angles you’re best at killing with as your fail safes for serious games, while you expand to Others in practice. At least that’s my gameplan!

it has helped me a lot. I can do 3 p40s without going dry in a few minutes, compared to much worse results a couple of months ago.

Edited by von_Michelstamm
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

 

It’s important to understand that convergence doesn’t make the guns shoot any flatter, it just changes where in the arc of the bullets trajectory your sight reticle is. The sight is fixed, so you have to adjust the gun instead of the other way around.

 

If you split the difference between the highest and lowest points in the arc within the usable range of the guns, you will have the least amount of variance above or below the sight reticle. When you are shooting at an engine or cockpit about 3 or 4 feet high, 1 foot above or below is still a hit. 3 feet high or low is not.

I'm aware projectiles travel in a parabolla.  It is easy to aim low when very close and nice to not worry about it when further out.  I do alot of jabo sorties so I also need the range for shooting aa and the like.  The further range also seems to help with deflection shots where you can barely see the target over the nose.  Use what you hit with.  Maybe I'm in the minority but when attacking bombers I dont like to get to close and most fighter jocks wont let me close enough to use 200-300m, as preferable as that range would be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been setting planes with wing guns such as the I-16 and Spit at around 300m and practicing getting close enough to use it effectively.  There's still a good tight spread out to about 400m after the left and right bullets converge.  For the through-the-prop nose firers (Yak, I09) I set to 400m.  After reading this, I might set it out to about 500m and try it. 

 

One thing those cannons can do is short burst long shots at better than 700m if your opponent is level enough or you have the right trajectory relative to the target.  Trying longshots like that in a wing-firer kinda wastes ammo.  But, you can get a 109 running out ahead of you, lead him just far enough, take a quick burst, and maybe get lucky with a couple of hits.  Surely, 109s can do the same and they've got more ammo.  Added to that, the 109 is a good bit more stable and the cannon has better hitting power and accuracy.  They can pull tighter-trajectory off-angle longshots farther out from the target than a Yak.  It certainly would explain a lot of the PKs I've taken from it.  lol  

Not that I don't think the Yak couldn't hit in the same type of longshot,  But it's often times too unstable in shots like that to do nothing more than waste ammo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk about convergence and you guys whacking foes left and right with your calculated meters is exactly why I'm terrified to jump into multiplayer - just sayin'.

 

I'll stick to careers with the AI since they can't spread rumors of how sucky I am with my "convergence ineptitude".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, BornToBattle said:

All this talk about convergence and you guys whacking foes left and right with your calculated meters is exactly why I'm terrified to jump into multiplayer - just sayin'.

Give it a go, it‘s more fun than you think. Yes the learning curve is steep at the beginning, but most importantly is not shooting but being able to manage your plane and energy without having to think about it too much.

the shooting comes automatically.

i only started MP 3 months ago and it really improves over time. I‘m at a total of less than 400hours in total of which MP is maybe 50%.

good thing in MP is that the enemy does not always know you‘re there. In fact, shooting Ai is harder in my opinion as they see you at all times, no matter what. No sneaking up on them. But players... ;) good feeling haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, =AVG77=Mobile_BBQ said:

I'm pretty sure that guns mounted through the prop hub (such as on the Yak or 109) can't be set for vertical convergence.  It's straight ahead. What you get is what you get.  

 

10 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

The sight is fixed, so you have to adjust the gun instead of the other way around.

 

In fact the engine mounted 20mm gun of the 109s was fix installed, as it fired through the propeller hub and was installed about two meters behind it. For convergence setting the Revi glass was swung down until the sightline crossed the 20mm projectiles trajectory in 400m dissstance. So the pilot did not really look horizontally through the Revi, but a few degreeze down. The machine guns were then set to hit the sightline in 400m.

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...