MK101 vs MK103

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

Is there any difference between these two besides rate of fire and ammo count? I have read previously that the MK103 has about 100fps less velocity at the muzzle than MK101. Is this modelled in game? If so, is it enough to make the MK101 better for killing medium and heavy tanks? 

[Lusekofte]

The Rheinmetall-Borsig MK 103 ("MK" - Maschinenkanone) was a German 30 mm caliberautocannon that was mounted in German combat aircraft during World War II. Intended to be a dual purpose weapon for anti-tank and air-to-air fighting, it was developed from the MK 101. Compared to the MK 101 it was faster firing, and was originally intended to develop a higher muzzle velocity than the MK 101. Unlike the MK 101, the MK 103 used a belt feed, allowing it to potentially carry a larger ammunition load. The MK 103 used electrically-primed rather than percussion-primed ammunition. The operating mechanism differed from the recoil-operated MK 101 in that it used a combination of gas and recoil operation. After firing, gas pressure served to unlock the breech, while barrel recoil was used to cycle the action (eject spent cartridge and load a fresh one).

 

sourceWiki

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

4 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

The Rheinmetall-Borsig MK 103 ("MK" - Maschinenkanone) was a German 30 mm caliberautocannon that was mounted in German combat aircraft during World War II. Intended to be a dual purpose weapon for anti-tank and air-to-air fighting, it was developed from the MK 101. Compared to the MK 101 it was faster firing, and was originally intended to develop a higher muzzle velocity than the MK 101. Unlike the MK 101, the MK 103 used a belt feed, allowing it to potentially carry a larger ammunition load. The MK 103 used electrically-primed rather than percussion-primed ammunition. The operating mechanism differed from the recoil-operated MK 101 in that it used a combination of gas and recoil operation. After firing, gas pressure served to unlock the breech, while barrel recoil was used to cycle the action (eject spent cartridge and load a fresh one).

 

sourceWiki

 

I've already read this weeks ago. What I'm asking is if there is a difference inside the game in the ability to destroy armoured vehicles between the two since the MK101 allegedly has a bit higher muzzle velocity. 

[Lusekofte]

I use both and have to say I go for more ammo. 
I see no difference. If any it is not noticeable in my point of view. 
But that is a “ feeling”. I am sure the devs have modeled it if more reliable documents than wiki say it has

[216th_Jordan]

The difference is modelled. 

[FeuerFliegen]

On 4/24/2020 at 3:31 AM, 216th_Jordan said:

The difference is modelled. 

 

Thanks for the info!  Nice to know.

 

Can you give us any more details, such as FPS difference, etc.?

 

And is the only difference the FPS?  Identical projectile among everything else?

[Avimimus]

Another significant difference was that the Mk-101 was prone to jamming. In contrast the Mk-103 would go on to get a reputation as the most reliable German cannon...

 

This isn't modelled in the sim... but it would be very interesting as an additional factor (and would also change our perception of the Mk-108 a bit...)

[Night0wl]

Only the HE rounds had a reduced propellant for the mk 103 the AP rounds had the same velocity as the mk101.

 

So the best choice is still the mk103

[Velxra]

Very good information

[Avimimus]

On 5/2/2020 at 1:17 PM, jann3man said:

So the best choice is still the mk103

 

Usually but there are some silver linings:

- The Mk-101 pack is 55kg lighter. This makes it easier to fly.

- Having less ammunition can actually be a benefit as it discourages the player from making too many passes over the target (which isn't safe).

- The lower rate of fire helps counterbalance the reduced ammunition, and some may find it easier to aim.

 

So, it is basically an opportunity to take a smaller ammunition load and this significantly reduces the weight!

 

Of course, the real benefit is that the Mk-101 was introduced earlier... so those who want to have a 30mm cannon earlier in the Campaign ought to appreciate it, as will those who want to be accurate to a period...

 

[Night0wl]

12 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Usually but there are some silver linings:

- The Mk-101 pack is 55kg lighter. This makes it easier to fly.

- Having less ammunition can actually be a benefit as it discourages the player from making too many passes over the target (which isn't safe).

- The lower rate of fire helps counterbalance the reduced ammunition, and some may find it easier to aim.

 

So, it is basically an opportunity to take a smaller ammunition load and this significantly reduces the weight!

 

Of course, the real benefit is that the Mk-101 was introduced earlier... so those who want to have a 30mm cannon earlier in the Campaign ought to appreciate it, as will those who want to be accurate to a period...

 

I agree with the ammo count staying too long especially multiplayer it will cost you. I doubt the 55kg will be noticable though.

[Avimimus]

9 hours ago, jann3man said:

I agree with the ammo count staying too long especially multiplayer it will cost you. I doubt the 55kg will be noticable though.

 

Yeah, a little over 1% in weight savings... but, you know, with that power-to-weight ratio... the placebo effect is nice at least... anything to feel more volant and able to stay off the ground... ?

 

...and deleting the wing guns on the Fw-190A5 saves about 3% in weight... and that seems to make a difference between victory and defeat sometimes... I do get your point though!

[Night0wl]

19 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

Yeah, a little over 1% in weight savings... but, you know, with that power-to-weight ratio... the placebo effect is nice at least... anything to feel more volant and able to stay off the ground... ?

 

...and deleting the wing guns on the Fw-190A5 saves about 3% in weight... and that seems to make a difference between victory and defeat sometimes... I do get your point though!

 

haha i think deleting the wing guns on the fw 190 also reduces drag, try the duck without the 30mm gun and it flies a lot better, the total weight and less drag means a lot (although the wing guns on the fw 190 dont make much drag compared to the ducks mk103

[Avimimus]

                                

2 hours ago, jann3man said:

 

haha i think deleting the wing guns on the fw 190 also reduces drag, try the duck without the 30mm gun and it flies a lot better, the total weight and less drag means a lot (although the wing guns on the fw 190 dont make much drag compared to the ducks mk103

 

I was actually thinking about the Fw-190A5 without the 20mm Mg-FF cannons... the Mk-108 are even heavier! In addition to the effect of drag there is also the fact that removing wing guns shifts the weight distribution towards the center (thus increasing the speed one can start and stop rolling - not that the Fw-190 has a problem with rolling).

 

Anyway, history did show that sometimes 0.5 cal machine guns (or even 0.303) were removed to help with dogfighting... so a percent or two change does seem to matter sometimes.