WTF is wrong with the armament of the mc 202?

[216th_Jordan]

After the repeated claims of all MC 202 ammo required to down an Il-2 I decided to test it for myself. (Standard weapons, 12.7mm only)

Shot down 3 Il-2 1941 with hits on oil coolers in less than 5 mins (1 min, 3 mins, 5 mins respectively), 1 other lost control after spraying it with about 200 rounds.

 

If claims are made, they should be valid. If I can shoot down 4 Il-2s with MC 202 standard armament and have ammo left and others report all ammo used and the plane still flying the cause is likely less the game. I get the dissatisfaction, but this is just taking time away from real and pressing issues IMO.

[SAS_Storebror]

Maybe the difference is that my test took place online, which officially is invalid.

Doesn't make things better though.

In case the offline results are good but online they're not, to me this would be just as bad.

[TRRA15]

2 hours ago, 216th_Jordan said:

After the repeated claims of all MC 202 ammo required to down an Il-2 I decided to test it for myself. (Standard weapons, 12.7mm only)

Shot down 3 Il-2 1941 with hits on oil coolers in less than 5 mins (1 min, 3 mins, 5 mins respectively), 1 other lost control after spraying it with about 200 rounds.

 

If claims are made, they should be valid. If I can shoot down 4 Il-2s with MC 202 standard armament and have ammo left and others report all ammo used and the plane still flying the cause is likely less the game. I get the dissatisfaction, but this is just taking time away from real and pressing issues IMO.

I've had similar results. On some sorties I was able to bag all 4 IL-2s, though 1 or 2 took a few minutes to eventually crash. I take the optional 7.7mm guns. Sure, not much "oomph" but they don't adversely affect A/C handling in a way noticeable to me, plus they're good at "chipping away" or applying a coupe de grace to an A/C teetering on the edge.

[Avimimus]

The big frustration I find is that aircraft with weak armaments and low closing speeds (I'm looking at you Polikarpov I-16) leave one exposed to the fire of the defensive gunners for a prolonged period of time.

 

It is possible to learn the danger distances and timing of the AI gunners to intuitively game the system... but if one doesn't do that... there is a certain probability of a burst of bullets reaching your cockpit while you are trying to get the right angle/distance on the enemy bomber... so it'd almost make sense to bring AI gunners into the discussion (although I fear it might go off the rails pretty quickly if people are gripping about the DM and the weapon modelling and the AI gunners all at once)... suffice it to say: Extra firepower isn't needed to bring down an enemy bomber, but it sure helps reduce the probability that they are intact long enough to bring you down!

[sniperton]

4 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Maybe the difference is that my test took place online, which officially is invalid.

Doesn't make things better though.

In case the offline results are good but online they're not, to me this would be just as bad.

I must add that he's a crack shot with a 40+ % hit ratio online.

[Godspeed]

On 5/1/2020 at 3:13 PM, P40eWarhawk said:

WTF is wrong with the armament of the mc 202

 

Hot topic since 1941

[Lusekofte]

I kind of do not understand the frustration. Real MC 202 pilots yes, but why hunt IL 2 in a MC 202 it simply do not make sense.

It was a hard plane to shoot down , what said here is just proving the simulation is realistic

[jojy47jojyrocks]

1 hour ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I kind of do not understand the frustration. Real MC 202 pilots yes, but why hunt IL 2 in a MC 202 it simply do not make sense.

It was a hard plane to shoot down , what said here is just proving the simulation is realistic

 

 

Hard plane or not. I do believe IF you do manage to hit the right sweet-spots even with the LMG caliber bullets like 7.7 Italian or the 7.92 German Mauser rounds into the underside of the IL-2 Oil cooler bulge of the IL-2, It has to damage the cooling systems and thereby force it disengage whatever its doing and bug out soon. For player controlled planes...if we have a radiator/cooler damage...the IL2 overheats faster than for what happens for the AI controlled. I could never make it back to base with a radiator damage until it heats up. I believe the damage model and how it affects the AI behavior and handling is inconsistent at present.

 

Directly behind and a bit lower, you can shoot the Oil cooler...

 

I guess only a video clip of shooting out IL-2 radiator with various calibers from LMG and HMG bullets in SP....would put this topic to rest....LOL.

Edited May 6, 2020 by jojy47jojyrocks

[Lusekofte]

3 hours ago, jojy47jojyrocks said:

Hard plane or not. I do believe IF you do manage to hit the right sweet-spots even with the LMG caliber bullets like 7.7 Italian or the 7.92 German Mauser rounds into the underside of the IL-2 Oil cooler bulge of the IL-2,

Depends if the oil cooler is open or shut. 
This game simulate accuratly the steel plates covering it. If it is closed like I do 25% I do not think any 7 mm bullet will penetrate it

[MattS]

21 hours ago, 216th_Jordan said:

 

If claims are made, they should be valid. If I can shoot down 4 Il-2s with MC 202 standard armament and have ammo left and others report all ammo used and the plane still flying the cause is likely less the game. I get the dissatisfaction, but this is just taking time away from real and pressing issues IMO.

 

Well this is not the official developer "Request for feedback on the DM" thread, so nobody who actually matters' time is being wasted, is it? 

 

Personally I've learned a few things over the course of this thread, and am more confident now about the DM than I was when it started. That said, what I've also taken from it is that I'm some noob/crybaby/asshole for asking the question in the first place so I'm not sure the juice was worth the squeeze.

[216th_Jordan]

@MattS

 

Don't worry, its good to inquire. I was personally more referring to other posters jumping/carrying on.

Edited May 6, 2020 by 216th_Jordan

[Lusekofte]

57 minutes ago, MattS said:

Personally I've learned a few things over the course of this thread, and am more confident now about the DM than I was when it started. That said, what I've also taken from it is that I'm some noob/crybaby/asshole for asking the question in the first place so I'm not sure the juice was worth the squeeze.

Do not take things personally. Remember topics like this pop up every second week. And is always based on op own convinced opinion. 
I flown MC 202 as many times I get opportunity online, not too much. But when I do I do not plan for a il 2 hunt. 
At last the dm on IL 2 seem to mirror reality, and topics like this make no sense when the example is it cannot bring down IL 2. Of course you try if you encounter them but if you do , you should also know it isn’t ideal plane for it. 
Standard procedure for IL 2 during attack is to close the Oil cooler to less than 30% 

making it pretty safe for small arm fire. I am not sure how much 12 mm are able to penetrate, they do but my guess first rounds are pretty dampened. I flown IL 2 and PE 2 enough, probably among the most. I know with new dm and before I go down if the fighter pilot attacking me knows what he is doing

[MattS]

1 hour ago, 216th_Jordan said:

@MattS

 

Don't worry, its good to inquire. I was personally more referring to other posters jumping/carrying on.

 

29 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Do not take things personally. Remember topics like this pop up every second week. And is always based on op own convinced opinion. 

 

Yeah, thanks I've been a bit on edge lately ("Corona Crazy" they will probably call it ten years from now) so more perceptive to slights than there is any reason to be. But let's carry on, Stiff Upper Lip and all that ?

[jojy47jojyrocks]

3 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Depends if the oil cooler is open or shut. 
This game simulate accuratly the steel plates covering it. If it is closed like I do 25% I do not think any 7 mm bullet will penetrate it

 

 

I mostly play SP.

 

Are you saying, that the oil cooler of the IL-2, if closed cannot be penetrated by the armour piercing LMG rounds, for example 7.92 Mauser?

 

Its been said that the 7.92 S. m. K. H. rounds can penetrate up to 13-10mm of armour at around ~200m. And we are firing around say approx around ~ 200-300rds into that oil cooler area. So it won't penetrate if closed, right?

 

I guess only a video evidence would put this topic to rest....like using both calibers from LMG and HMG class separately.

Edited May 6, 2020 by jojy47jojyrocks

[Lusekofte]

45 minutes ago, jojy47jojyrocks said:

Are you saying, that the oil cooler of the IL-2, if closed cannot be penetrated by the armour piercing LMG rounds, for example 7.92 Mauser?

I am saying those are there to close a radiator and reduce chance for damage by groundfire. If the 7.92 mauser can penetrate it, it take some shots because the first rounds will Have lost a lot of energy penetrating them. 
It take precision to get several hits in that box and it is no wonder if it is difficult. 
Devs have simulated this effect so I guess ai will shut radiators if attacked

1 hour ago, MattS said:

 

 

Yeah, thanks I've been a bit on edge lately ("Corona Crazy" they will probably call it ten years from now) so more perceptive to slights than there is any reason to be. But let's carry on, Stiff Upper Lip and all that ?

Well I know the feeling. I have been banned here and warned myself a couple of times   So you are not alone 

Edited May 6, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[sniperton]

I would expect that well-placed rounds (of any caliber) into the radiator of any aircraft would have dire consequencies for that aircraft in the long run.

Furthermore, I'm a bit sceptical about the assumption that well-placed rounds (of any caliber) couldn't penetrate any radiator cover even if they are shut (as assumed here withouth proof).

[Raven109]

For what its worth, real life pilots didn't have a lower victory count because planes were more durable, when compared to virtual pilots. They had smaller numbers because of the human factor.

 

1. Virtual pilots have 100s-1000s of combat hours (not flying hours, but actual hours when they are in combat), whereas most of the time real pilots had more boring non-eventful patrols than actual combat. Having this extensive periods of combat practice, gives the virtual pilot a large advantage in taking down its opponent.

2. For the most part, the real pilot's main (personal) objective was to survive, not to get the kill. So, if he thought the situation is too dicey, the real life pilot probably disengaged, where as the virtual pilot goes and fights on till death, because it's fun, and it leads to good videos, and the consequences are a re-spawn and flight to the AO. No fear of death.

3. Virtual pilots have means to adjust the hardware to suit them better (joystick curves, monitors, etc) - this makes it so that someone who can't get along with his favorite ride, can do so after some adjustments. Real pilots had the same hardware, and had to adapt to it. Some did, some didn't.

 

The human factor cannot be easily simulated (if at all), so we won't be able to have a 1:1 victory parity soon between real life and virtual life.

 

Considering these 3 points, virtual pilots get more victories because they had the time to get better at the job, die, respawn, learn from mistakes, and have no fear impairing their aiming. Have a look at real 110s attacking B-17/24s. Some start shooting from 800m. Some yaw left and right while shooting in a "spray and pray tactic", hoping that they will hit something before they disengage.

 

Now look at the P-47 video above. Getting shots in his windscreen, being hunted by a 109, and he still doesn't disengage. Of course the virtual victories will be larger than the real victories.

 

PS: also, let's not forget the different states of mind of virtual vs real pilots. We are at home in a comfortable chair, with our favorite drink next to us, they were on foreign land (hostile some times), were not properly fed, or had a good night's sleep because the enemy had to strafe/arty the airfield during the morning hours, etc.

 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Raven109

[Lusekofte]

27 minutes ago, sniperton said:

I would expect that well-placed rounds (of any caliber) into the radiator of any aircraft would have dire consequencies for that aircraft in the long run.

Furthermore, I'm a bit sceptical about the assumption

I agree on this. But those shutters had a reason. I think aircraft ammo in general have greater velocity and probably will. I am just explaining why it can be difficult

and the shutters are not in 90 degree so they probably deflect 

Edited May 6, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, sniperton said:

Furthermore, I'm a bit sceptical about the assumption that well-placed rounds (of any caliber) couldn't penetrate any radiator cover even if they are shut (as assumed here withouth proof).

 

The oil radiator shutter on the Il-2 was designed to stop small-caliber rounds when it was shut - hence why pilots would close it when starting their attack run.

[Avimimus]

3 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

The oil radiator shutter on the Il-2 was designed to stop small-caliber rounds when it was shut - hence why pilots would close it when starting their attack run.

 

Yeah... I was staring at those armoured slats during my test flights... feeling skeptical about my chances

[Lusekofte]

I think people should consider the state of this sim. And where were at now compared to the start in 2012. 
There has been a massive expansion snd during all this time the game is improved to almost a totai rebuilt. While they continue to produce more. IL 2 is finally the plane it should be, dead meat if not protected, and hard if protected. 
The Macchi is a top notch aeroplan, with one major weakness, its armament. 
This topic give impression that historical correct replicas is wrong. 
You are pointing fingers at a situation Italian pilots had to live with, and say the devs done something wrong. And that is simply wrong

[jojy47jojyrocks]

5 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I think people should consider the state of this sim. And where were at now compared to the start in 2012. 
There has been a massive expansion snd during all this time the game is improved to almost a totai rebuilt. While they continue to produce more. IL 2 is finally the plane it should be, dead meat if not protected, and hard if protected. 
The Macchi is a top notch aeroplan, with one major weakness, its armament. 
This topic give impression that historical correct replicas is wrong. 
You are pointing fingers at a situation Italian pilots had to live with, and say the devs done something wrong. And that is simply wrong

 

 

Yes...I was only reinforcing the fact that the damage model is far from finished or complete. It still has plenty of room for improvements and refining.

 

The Maachi is very good plane and with WELL PLACED rounds from its HMG class 12.7x81SRmm rounds can deal good amount of damage. We do wish we had different ammo choices...like in Clod. But that kind of complex choice would be hard to implement...

[SAS_Storebror]

Don't get me wrong guys, I totally agree that attacking an IL-2 with a Macchi is nonsense - I've performed that test solely for educational purpose. Online. Twice. Never more.

What I tried to get across is, as @jojy47jojyrocks just wrote, the fact that the damage model probably needs a tad more fine tuning, and alongside with it, the disparity between HE and AP ammo (not even speaking about the lack of API here). The balance between HE and AP clearly was wrong before 4.005, but now it feels like the pendulum swung a tad too much into opposite direction.

Now concerning my particular Macchi vs. IL-2 tests, it wasn't the end result that surprised me.

It was the way I achieved it.

That's what seemed inconsistent to me.

I would not expect the radiator to simple "ignore" hits, regardless how many.

And I surely didn't expect to be able to score a PK from dead six eventually after having fired half of my belts from up to 60 degree deflection right into the cockpit department without success before. That looks like an odd chance to me, almost like standing upfront a T-34 with an MG-34 in my hands and putting in belt after belt in the hope of eventually getting through.

 

No doubt this game has made great leaps in the recent years.

I totally agree and I put all my money on it as it's the solely future of WW2 combat flight sims to me. Literally I do, I've grabbed what money can buy here, for a reason.

 

Mike

[MattS]

3 hours ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Don't get me wrong guys, I totally agree that attacking an IL-2 with a Macchi is nonsense

 

The armament is not the reason to fly the Macchi. The reason to fly it is that when the pilot puffs on his massive Vape the cloud goes right out openings at the back of the canopy!

 

 

[Lusekofte]

If I fly a axis fighter it would be either Emil 7 or the Macchi. 
But then again I’ve been frequently seen in a Po 2 , JU 52 , HS 129 too. So I am not known from the top of the list in any stats. 
I fly the MC 202 because it really is a good airplane and fun to fly. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[SAS_Storebror]

Oh yes it is, and it's sturdy.

Much harder to down than a usual 109, except for the odd tail DM thing at the moment...

 

Mike

[Danziger]

On 5/7/2020 at 11:04 AM, SAS_Storebror said:

Don't get me wrong guys, I totally agree that attacking an IL-2 with a Macchi is nonsense - I've performed that test solely for educational purpose. Online. Twice. Never more.

What I tried to get across is, as @jojy47jojyrocks just wrote, the fact that the damage model probably needs a tad more fine tuning, and alongside with it, the disparity between HE and AP ammo (not even speaking about the lack of API here). The balance between HE and AP clearly was wrong before 4.005, but now it feels like the pendulum swung a tad too much into opposite direction.

Now concerning my particular Macchi vs. IL-2 tests, it wasn't the end result that surprised me.

It was the way I achieved it.

That's what seemed inconsistent to me.

I would not expect the radiator to simple "ignore" hits, regardless how many.

And I surely didn't expect to be able to score a PK from dead six eventually after having fired half of my belts from up to 60 degree deflection right into the cockpit department without success before. That looks like an odd chance to me, almost like standing upfront a T-34 with an MG-34 in my hands and putting in belt after belt in the hope of eventually getting through.

 

No doubt this game has made great leaps in the recent years.

I totally agree and I put all my money on it as it's the solely future of WW2 combat flight sims to me. Literally I do, I've grabbed what money can buy here, for a reason.

 

Mike

I don't know if it is a problem with overmodeling the German rounds versus the Allied rounds. I think the problem (at least with .50BMG) is the lack of API rounds and the lack of more detailed convergence options. Just like pre-patch, I never thought they had "nerfed" the mine rounds. They just didn't have the tech to have them modeled properly at the time. Missing pieces have been added slowly but surely (and sometimes a lot at once) ever since this series began. Mostly what these guys need in order to get it right is time, manpower, and plenty of good data. I think the pendulum swinging is more a result of the better modeling of ammunition exposing the need for the API, belt consist options, vertical as well as horizontal convergence options, and convergence options for each gun in order to be able to create the shotgun patterns for maximum chances of rounds hitting the target.

[Guest deleted@134347]

20 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

If I fly a axis fighter it would be either Emil 7 or the Macchi. 
But then again I’ve been frequently seen in a Po 2 , JU 52 , HS 129 too. So I am not known from the top of the list in any stats. 
I fly the MC 202 because it really is a good airplane and fun to fly. 

 

yup, flying these underdog planes brings the much necessary immersion to otherwise overpowered scene with tempests and yak127's.  I especially enjoy mc202 when I get to down the pesky 127's on Berloga..

[Lusekofte]

I always bring bomb with the macchi, and somehow I always get away with it, in fact My only incident was a takeoff accident. 
And it got a beautiful cockpit.  
 

[ShamrockOneFive]

I tried the MC.202 in some tests last night. The IL-2's do absorb quite a few rounds from the MC.202 and they keep on flying but most other planes you just need to hit them a few times somewhere vital. I mean the Breda 12.7mm is the worst heavy machine gun of WWII in terms of just about every variable.

 

I hopped into a P-39 for my next sortie and the dual Browning .50cals chew things up by comparison.

[Thad]

On 5/6/2020 at 1:38 PM, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Well I know the feeling. I have been banned here and warned myself a couple of times.

 

Rightly so, I might add. ?

 

Just kidding.

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, Thad said:

 

Rightly so, I might add. ?

 

Just kidding.

In retrospect I am amazed they let me in again 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I for one am glad they did.

 

I always enjoy, and very often agree with, your observations on the sim.

[Velxra]

15 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

In retrospect I am amazed they let me in again 

 

Only true veterans hold such notch under their belt. ?

[Sublime]

On 5/6/2020 at 1:38 PM, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I am saying those are there to close a radiator and reduce chance for damage by groundfire. If the 7.92 mauser can penetrate it, it take some shots because the first rounds will Have lost a lot of energy penetrating them. 
It take precision to get several hits in that box and it is no wonder if it is difficult. 
Devs have simulated this effect so I guess ai will shut radiators if attacked

Well I know the feeling. I have been banned here and warned myself a couple of times   So you are not alone 

Hes right regarding the OIL radiator but thats only to the FRONT.

If you notice if you close it- the front of the box radiator closes. It was meant to be closed during attacks so a round didnt fly in.  I doubt itd stop a 12.7 but rifle caliber?  Sure.

However the problem @216th_LuseKofte is that Im almost certain all these attacks especially if someone is sniping a rad are from the rear.

You can do whatever you want to the armored oil radiator its not going to move anything in the back of that box - what opens and closes there is the water radiator.

And thats NOT armored.

[216th_Jordan]

31 minutes ago, Sublime said:

Hes right regarding the OIL radiator but thats only to the FRONT.

If you notice if you close it- the front of the box radiator closes. It was meant to be closed during attacks so a round didnt fly in.  I doubt itd stop a 12.7 but rifle caliber?  Sure.

However the problem @216th_LuseKofte is that Im almost certain all these attacks especially if someone is sniping a rad are from the rear.

You can do whatever you want to the armored oil radiator its not going to move anything in the back of that box - what opens and closes there is the water radiator.

And thats NOT armored.

 

Thats not correct.

Oil radiator has shutters in back and front. Water radiator has intake on top of engine cowling (very smart idea!) and outlet is above the oil cooler in the same 'box'  as the oil radiator. You can see if when controlling water and oil radiator shutters separately. The design of the water cooler and it's hiddenness make it very tough to damage while the oil radiator is a little more exposed.

 

If you look closely, the radiator shutters of the oil radiator shut at around 60° angle, increasing effective protection.  In battle its possible to close oil shutters completely for a short time and solely rely on additional water radiator cooling to keep oil temps low.

[Lusekofte]

I am not good in subtile English sentences. So I might have been unclear. 
My comments on shutters on oil radiators was not a fact, but proposal. 
but it git angular shutters behind too. And made of iron. 
angular iron if not stopping it at least do some initial protection. 
I tried multiple times now in a E 7 and Macchi to have longer burst in those damned radiators and I got it steaming but no go in instant shutdown of engine. 
I think you got a kill if you get it to stream smoke. That is the time to focus on another plane and not waist ammo

Edited May 9, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[jojy47jojyrocks]

14 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I tried multiple times now in a E 7 and Macchi to have longer burst in those damned radiators and I got it steaming but no go in instant shutdown of engine. 
I think you got a kill if you get it to stream smoke. That is the time to focus on another plane and not waist ammo

 

 

I am not hoping for instant engine shutdown...was hoping that it would stop its attack runs and just bug out home...hopefully crash when the engine does overheat along the way and pack up if its home base is far. Currently in RARE cases...even triple smoked AI controlled Me-109 can trail you and shoot you down instead of bugging home.

 

Yeah I tried it with LMG cals and HMG clas, and DID manage to make it smoke from the radiator area. But it rarely bugs out home unless we really pound it (if we got 20 mills or 30 mills) or manage to somehow hit the engine block or kill the pilot. The AI IL-2 still keeps with the attack runs majority of the time even when its supposedly trailing smoke from radiator area and so on...

 

I don't know how thick the oil radiator shutter is. But the 7.92 mauser cal...at least the hardened AP rounds could penetrate ~12mm at ~ 200m. Hell..even the 12.7x81SR Breda round should do more damage than the smaller LMG class mauser 7.92 round. At least its own AP variants should.

 

Currently the NEW DM is OK...but STILL has more room for refinements to happen. At present the damage effect is inconsistent on how it affects the AI.

[Lusekofte]

I have stopped using IL 2 online, being one of my favorite planes that hurt a little bit. 
You are correct about inaccurate ai behavior, but my point is this is ai behavior and not the plane dm. 
I will take the IL  2 online and see if there is abnormalities in the DM. I fly IL 2 a great deal in SP. and I haven't noticed Any difference in dm since patch, but I have not had dedicated attacks on me either in this time

[Guest deleted@134347]

5 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I have stopped using IL 2 online, being one of my favorite planes that hurt a little bit. 
You are correct about inaccurate ai behavior, but my point is this is ai behavior and not the plane dm. 
I will take the IL  2 online and see if there is abnormalities in the DM. I fly IL 2 a great deal in SP. and I haven't noticed Any difference in dm since patch, but I have not had dedicated attacks on me either in this time

 

online if Il2 is hit in the tail section it becomes very unstable and it's pretty difficult to land any precise shots on ground targets. Maybe AI would be forced to turn back then.. ?