Jump to content
von_Michelstamm

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

Recommended Posts

For me 220m works best for nose guns and 250m for high calibre wing guns and 120m for low calibre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Used to shoot with 400m convergence and was crap at it.

 

Now use 150m on all including ground attack and make sure I am close before opening up on my target.  I seem to be much more successful with this approach.

C'est la vie.

 

Word of warning though - up close on VVS planes - be prepared to dodge debris that can render your prop kaput as you hammer them with cannons.👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so after putting a few hours I have a crazy theory:

I’mhaving an easier time killing planes using 150m instead of 400m because they fly differently.

when you set convergence, it also affects the AI plane’s convergence. They’re linked, see for yourself.

at low convergence settings, the AI tries to turn more to get behind you, making it much easier to track and shoot him.

At high convergence settings, the AI will try to level out more to pull away and create distance, meaning he changes his angle off more and is all over the place.

try it and let me know what you think

Share this post


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

Ok, so after putting a few hours I have a crazy theory:

I’mhaving an easier time killing planes using 150m instead of 400m because they fly differently.

when you set convergence, it also affects the AI plane’s convergence. They’re linked, see for yourself.

at low convergence settings, the AI tries to turn more to get behind you, making it much easier to track and shoot him.

At high convergence settings, the AI will try to level out more to pull away and create distance, meaning he changes his angle off more and is all over the place.

try it and let me know what you think

 

My mind is blown by this really odd discovery and/or theory. 

Edited by Geronimo553

Share this post


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

Ok, so after putting a few hours I have a crazy theory:

I’mhaving an easier time killing planes using 150m instead of 400m because they fly differently.

when you set convergence, it also affects the AI plane’s convergence. They’re linked, see for yourself.

at low convergence settings, the AI tries to turn more to get behind you, making it much easier to track and shoot him.

At high convergence settings, the AI will try to level out more to pull away and create distance, meaning he changes his angle off more and is all over the place.

try it and let me know what you think

I’m skeptic all to say the least. How would we objectively evaluate it? Have you got a track file at least?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

 

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.

 

Right. In theory, it looks like this.

 

 

IMG_20190616_0001.jpg

IMG_20190616_0002.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you can see is, 400m convergence is not too bad for deflection shots. The 30mm MK108 has its first crossing of the sightline in 87m and the 20mm MG151/20 in 130m. So in short distances you don't have to aim too low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to use 400m for most aircraft and might use as much as 600m if I know I am going to mostly attack ground targets but for the Spitfire I use 180m (approx 200yds) as the ammo is limited and at that range it only takes a 1 second burst to destroy an enemy. 

 

 It makes snapshots harder but I learned something back when flying DCS (your mileage may vary).  I was doing some testing as some people had suggested the game was not converging properly at the desired distance.  To test it I set 200yds convergence on my spitfire then set out to get some pics of where the tracer was meeting when I shot a target exactly 200yds away.   To do this I had to avoid snapshots and concentrate on getting exactly 200yds on his 6 before shooting and I made an unexpected discovery. Before this testing what normally happened in offline 1v3 dogfights is I managed to fatally injure the first one before his wingmen could get on my six then leave him and do serious damage to the second, sometimes fatal but sometimes only enough to remove him as theat, before running out of ammo.   During the testing I found I was completely destroying all three with ammo to spare despite spending longer setting up each attack and ignoring snapshot opportunities.     It is not always as practical in MP though as the enemy wingmen are better pilots so bigger threats and also if you take too long getting a kill someone else might jump in front and get it first 🙂 but the fact remains that taking a little longer to get it right can work out better than trying for lucky snapshots.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i did something similar. I was trying to get screenshots of burning enemy bombers and fighters with a Spitfire Vb. I set up behind them and discovered the easiest way to set them on fire was with the convergence at 250 meters and shoot them at about 100 to 150 meters. My reflector sight was set to 200 yards. I would fire a short burst of machine gun fire which would hit both wing roots as it was below convergence distance. If it was a twin engine bomber I could kick in a tiny bit of rudder and get one or both engines smoking as well. Once there was a nice fuel leak, a very short burst with the cannons would usually destroy the aircraft by taking off a wing. About 1 in ten times it would burn nicely when the fuel ignited.

 

i discovered that in this way I could regularly kill 4 or 5 fighters or bombers before I ran out of ammo. Now with fighters I try to get under convergence distance and fly to a good position about 100 yards behind, and wait for it to make a turn to get a view of the top or side of the EAC. I get the lead right with the machine guns, then a quick burst of cannon rounds in the wing root or cockpit finishes them. I have been able to take out quite a few 109s with less than 100 .303 rounds after the cannon ammo is gone if I am extremely careful with shot placement. The trick to that is to aim off to one side slightly because one set of guns is going to miss completely in front of a wing while the other one hits the cockpit at close range.

 

In a 109 F or G I would think PK shots are even easier, because you have all the guns in the centerline. I believe that was H-J Marseille’s technique. Get close and wait for them to turn, then aim at the engine or cockpit. It may not work so well in MP, but against the AI, it’s very effective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Sorry guys, but as already said, convergence is just the spot where your bullets actually cross, you do not zero your sight with convergence. It should not affect deflection shooting or anything. If you set your convergence to 200, your bullets will fly, cross their flight paths (not your line of sight!) at 200, will travel futher and reach their original "spread" (?) again at 400. After they reach 400m, they will further spread. 

 

To make it clear another example: Imagine a Plane wich has two Machineguns on each wing tip. If you set your convergence to 50 and press the fire trigger, the bullets will leave the barrel and take their ballistic flight path. BUT the bullet fired from the left wing will cross the bullet fired from the right wing at 50m. At 100m they are still on their usual flight path, butt will now have the maximum spread of their original location (wingtip/wingtip). After 100m, they are STILL on their usual flightpath, but will travel further and further away from each other. 

 

So you do not affect their vertical and horizontal ballistic flight path, you just choose where they cross. 

Edited by HBB*Hunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are you referring to?

 

56 minutes ago, HBB*Hunger said:

Sorry guys, but as already said, convergence is just the spot where your bullets actually cross, you do not zero your sight with convergence.

 

I think we have covered that, and the graphs above give it an even better visual representation. When I referred to adjusting the sight on the Spitfire it just changes the reticle to judge range based on wingspan. You are aware of that feature, right? I don’t use icons with range text when firing. Why would I not adjust my sight to match convergence?

 

here Is convergence information for the FW190 A8 as an interesting comparison. Cowl mounted machine guns and wing mounted cannons. also at 400 meters.

 

B45-D4627-2028-4-B34-AA64-B26-DD22-DD845

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't know but this talk of taking ones time reminds me of

top-gun-2-val-kilmer-iceman.jpgThe ICE MAN

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations, you all just discovered that convergence is all about preference to each pilot, heck I have a friend that uses the maximum available ingame (1000m) and he said that it became much easier hitting his targets.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Congratulations, you all just discovered that convergence is all about preference to each pilot, heck I have a friend that uses the maximum available ingame (1000m) and he said that it became much easier hitting his targets.

 

This post was about why centerline guns would appear to give noticeably different results at different convergence settings, not that different people prefer different settings

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Set mine at 300 and never looked back.  A2G 450 or 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/16/2019 at 4:09 PM, Jaegermeister said:

here Is convergence information for the FW190 A8 as an interesting comparison. Cowl mounted machine guns and wing mounted cannons. also at 400 meters.

 

B45-D4627-2028-4-B34-AA64-B26-DD22-DD845

 

And this wonderful diagram is one of the reasons I believe the FW-190 offered THE best gun convergence solution of all WWII fighters:

 

There are two convergence settings: one is termed convergence and is the range at which the bullets are crossing the sighting line. The second is termed crossover and is the range at which the left and right bullet streams meet. As you see, a convergence of 550 m means that the bullets cross the sighting line at 150m and at 550m. Crossover is set to 400m (outer wing guns), and 600m (inner guns). This means that there is limited, but useful spread of bullets at 150 and 550m. Especially if you look at the wing root 20 mm cannons, you see that the bullets were only 1.5 m apart at 150m distance.

 

The end result is a plane that has two optimal kill scenarios:

 

A) Shooting at long rage (400-600m) with all guns: here, the inner guns are for precision (basically no spread), and the outer guns provide the spread that's useful in landing hits even when aiming was not perfect. This will suit rookies and aces alike.

 

B) Shooting at close range (150 m). Here, the projectiles will cross the sighting line, which helps aiming. Depending on skill and situation, the pilot can decide to use all guns (limited spread from the inner guns, big spread from the outer guns), or only the inner guns (for aces who don't need the extra spread of the outer guns).

 

This makes a lot of sense from a statistical point of view: because it's much easier to hit a close target, and much harder to hit a distant target, and because the projectiles are very effective, it makes more sense to use all guns at big ranges, and only the inner guns at close ranges.

 

In-game, of course, we can't set different convergences for the different guns, or set different values for convergence and crossover. In IL-2 '46 at least we could set different convergences for the different gun groups. I used 550m for the inner guns, and 150m for the outer ones. That basically turned the principles I mentioned above around, primarily setting me up for close-range kill shots with all guns. In the 190s, getting close to the enemy was easy. For the unlikely case of a bandit running at really high speed, I only used the inner guns at long range. This was seldomly deadly, but was more than enough to damage the opponent or force him to maneuver, which allowed me the 150 m all-guns shot.

 

In GB series, I fly the Fws without outer guns most of the time, with a convergence of 550m. It's very useful in close- and long-range scenarios.

Whenever I fly a 190 with outer cannons, I set all guns to 150m, essentially giving up the long range scenario.

 

My advice: think of your kill scenarios and set the guns accordingly.

 

Edited by JG27_PapaFly
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 12:22 AM, Jaegermeister said:

....12 inches above the guns barrels. ...If you zero the guns at 250 meters.....be 12 inches low......at 250 meters........about a foot ......at 400 meters........ drop to 2 feet.......at 450 meters and ......3 feet......at 500 meters.....at 400 meters, you......about 8 inches.....at 250 meters,......8 inches......at 450 meters,.....18 inches......at 500 meters.....at 400 meters.....250 meters would.....Basically a foot at 800 meters.......300 meters......filled the windscreen...

I feel like you need a few more different units of length in there;-)

Share this post


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

I feel like you need a few more different units of length in there;-)

 

I feel like it took you longer to type in all those dots than it did for me to look up the ballistic tables on a German Mauser cartridge. 🙄

  • Haha 1

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...