.50 cal damage, or lack there of

[SAS_Storebror]

3 hours ago, HRc_Tumu said:

I think this issue affect to all types of ammo,

You mean MG 131 is too weak as well?

Tell me more.

 

Mike

[HR_Tumu]

 

What I want mean is ... this shield tail works agains 20mm, 37 and 30 mm. And lack of aerodinamical effects ( or very gently effect ) is noticed under 20mm , 30mm and 37 mm too.

On resume. All weapons hit a bugged plane is like a bugged ammo.

I hope i explain better now

[JG7_X-Man]

I have no idea where it was established that it should take  6 - 8 rounds from a M2 .50 cal to destroy an aircraft came from, but let's look at the numbers:

 

 

However, I will agree that it should take no more than 1 - 1 1/2 seconds burst within optimum convergence range to bring down any target.

 

But when comparing the damage inflected by the .50 cal machine gun verses 20mm/20mm cannon - there is no comparison.

 

According to the data stats (# of guns and rounds per min) we can see that the P-51 with it's six guns will send twice as many rounds down range which is very impressive rate of fire.

However, when we look at the difference in the projectile sizes of the 20mm/30mm verses the .50 cal, we see that the 20mm shell is almost 70% larger than the .50 cal.and not to mention the 30mm is almost 90% larger (to put the numbers perspective,100% would be twice the size).

• This means the a single 20 mm round will always do 67% more  damage than 6 .50 cal rounds.
• This means that a single 30 mm round will always be 86% more lethal  than 6 .60 cal rounds.

This is main reason the world switched to the 20mm round as an anti aircraft ordnance.

The .50 cal is good, it's better than good - but in WWII aerial combat, it was "good enough".  The USAAF was just stubborn and didn't make the change until after Korea.

[Eisenfaustus]

Armament also is not only a tactical decision but also a logistical and a financial. If I can use the same spareparts for fighter, bomber and ground forces - that’s a good thing. 
And if I have something that is good enough there is no necessity to switch something better. 
The USAF directly after WWII was subject to severe budget cuts. These played propably a bigger role in the decision for M3 0.50cals which can reuse most parts of the M2 and it’s ammo then their supposed tactical superiority.

Btw 6 M3 in the fuselage mean seriously more firepower then 6 M2 in the wings. 

 

[CountZero]

Hw lucky were americans vs germans then to fight in so big advantage in numbers, maybe if servers have 76 allieds vs 8 axis we can have historical scenarious then online if this 0.50 is historical. Or even better just use Tempests and Spitfires as subs for american crap, imagine if ww2 pilots knew how bad equipment their goverment give them and how low chance they would have if fight on more fair terms, Brits would have to save their behineds ?

[Honza]

14 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

I have no idea where it was established that it should take  6 - 8 rounds from a M2 .50 cal to destroy an aircraft came from, but let's look at the numbers:

 

 

However, I will agree that it should take no more than 1 - 1 1/2 seconds burst within optimum convergence range to bring down any target.

 

But when comparing the damage inflected by the .50 cal machine gun verses 20mm/20mm cannon - there is no comparison.

 

According to the data stats (# of guns and rounds per min) we can see that the P-51 with it's six guns will send twice as many rounds down range which is very impressive rate of fire.

However, when we look at the difference in the projectile sizes of the 20mm/30mm verses the .50 cal, we see that the 20mm shell is almost 70% larger than the .50 cal.and not to mention the 30mm is almost 90% larger (to put the numbers perspective,100% would be twice the size).

• This means the a single 20 mm round will always do 67% more  damage than 6 .50 cal rounds.
• This means that a single 30 mm round will always be 86% more lethal  than 6 .60 cal rounds.

This is main reason the world switched to the 20mm round as an anti aircraft ordnance.

The .50 cal is good, it's better than good - but in WWII aerial combat, it was "good enough".  The USAAF was just stubborn and didn't make the change until after Korea.

Exept it was already stated many times and even in world war II tests that 3-4x .50 cal AP rounds equal one 20mm AP round. P51 will put more than twice weight and energy on target than BF109 with 1x20 and 2x7.62 and P-47 will put more weight and energy into the target than FW190 with 2x20 and 2x7.62... And thats massive difference. No way 20mm AP will do 67% more damage than 6x50 when it equals only to 4 bullets in weight, only HE 20mm is more effective than 6x.50. .50 AP can go through armor plate in 109 over 500meters. Ive never killed 109 while shooting into tail section, it should fly through tail section and penetrate armor plate and kill pilot, never happend to me from direct 6'o clock. All bursts going from side to side from behind will strike armor plate, yet ive never killed pilot or set fire to super flamable MW-50 tank behind cockpit if its plane equiped with one. Noone here is saying that .50s should tear planes more than 20mm he but they should make significantly bigger structural damage than they are doing now, long bursts wont result in high speed loss, even tho if .50 struck wing and hit somethibg in it, itll tear huge chunk out of wing in exit hole or severely damage its structure. Same goes for other plane parts. 109s were fragile plane, prone to every type of damage and they couldnt sustain a lot of fire. Meanwhile in IL-2 they are flying tanks. If 109 can have dmg model turned off if its not accured, dunno why us cant have HE filler in their belts to balance out totally borked .50 damage and missing API and flamable MW-50 tanks in 109G14/K4 and D9. 

The main reason why they switched was jet combat... Jet fighter is significantly more sturdy than small fragile props from 2 WW. And even then it wasnt fast change. Change wasnt due to inefficency in 2WW as .50 proved to be amazing AA weapons on all fronts.

If youve ever been on range and saw one AP .50 going through car doors, you should know what its capable of. It exited with 15x15cm hole.... everything it needed was to hit something else in these doors. Now explain me how it cant hit any strut in wing which is full uf struts, gear, hydraulics systems.... Kinda strange it doesnt rip off huge chunks of wing while exiting it. 

Edited September 7, 2020 by =DMD=Honza

[JG7_X-Man]

22 minutes ago, =DMD=Honza said:

Exept it was already stated many times and even in world war II tests that 3-4x .50 cal AP rounds equal one 20mm AP round. 

I had to search for this but I see where the 3-4 came from.

 

 

It was from a presentation by Commander J.P. Monroe, head of the armament branch of the Bureau of Aeronautics to the Joint Fighter Conference held at NAS Patuxent River, MD in October 1944 concerned the Navy’s upcoming transition from the .50-calibre machine gun to the 20 mm cannon for fighter armament.

 

Quote

Commander Monroe noted that, from a gun “horsepower” standpoint, one 20 mm cannon was equivalent to three .50-caliber machine guns. “The 20 will go through .75 inch of armor at 500 yards, while the .50 cal will go through only .43”. He also noted that the cannon barrel was not as susceptible to being damaged with long bursts like the machine gun’s.

 

Hey can we get that model in the game? 

 

Quote

There were disadvantages, of course. He noted that the time of flight of the 20 mm shell was longer, .75 second for 500 yards as compared to .62 second for a .50 caliber bullet.

 

Quote

The 20 mm installation was also heavier, “one half as much ammunition for the same weight.” The standard of 400 rounds of ammunition for each gun (30 seconds) could therefore not be maintained so only 200 rounds of 20 mm ammunition could be provided per gun.

 

However - this is the most important part of that finding:

Quote

Nevertheless, “The 20 is lethal enough to get far more results out of that 200 rounds than the .50 ever will get out of the 400 rounds.”

 

The issue here is we we talk about KE Kinetic Energy, it doesn't factor in the "explosiveness" of the shell. So where one would think a mere K.E. = 1/2 m v²  will give use a decent metric that will work, the uniqueness of the cannon shell verses the machine gun round is excluded. 

 

This also proves that in 1944 the US Navy, VVS, and RAF were way ahead of the USAAF and has nothing to to with the "switch to jets". The USAAF was just last to see the writing on the wall. Besides when you are flying around with a 10:1 (or more) fighter superiority over Western Europe, why would one think there was a need to change LOL. Lack of foresight!

 

This argument reminds me of the F-15 and why it was built! The USAF were thinking all was well and they had the best in world until the MiG-25 was announced (be it a paper tiger) then they actually had to think and figure out how to beat it! Proof that necessity is the mother of all invention.

[BCI-Nazgul]

This is all well and fine.  I don't think anyone is debating that 20mm is more deadly than .50.  However, once again I need to point out that 6x or 8x M2 .50s in their current state aren't nearly as deadly as the supposedly equivalent 2x 20mm.  In fact, I'd be willing to say that ONE 20mm is much more dangerous than the entire battery of M2 .50s on a P-47 right now.  That's what people that fly the US planes are complaining about.  No one is expecting photon torpedoes on US planes, just something that is close to parity with a couple of 20mms.  I'd be happy as a clam if the .50s on US planes performed 1/2 as well as the over-modeled German 131 or Russian 12.7mm in their current iteration.

[Honza]

8 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

This is all well and fine.  I don't think anyone is debating that 20mm is more deadly than .50.  However, once again I need to point out that 6x or 8x M2 .50s in their current state aren't nearly as deadly as the supposedly equivalent 2x 20mm.  In fact, I'd be willing to say that ONE 20mm is much more dangerous than the entire battery of M2 .50s on a P-47 right now.  That's what people that fly the US planes are complaining about.  No one is expecting photon torpedoes on US planes, just something that is close to parity with a couple of 20mms.  I'd be happy as a clam if the .50s on US planes performed 1/2 as well as the over-modeled German 131 or Russian 12.7mm in their current iteration.

One 20mm? Ive killed multiple fw190s with single 12.7 on yak9 in short burst into wing faaaar more reliable and faster than with p47 or p51. One single 12.7 obliterated wing and 190couldnt pull out of dive or do any sort of maneuvers... One single hmg with super small he filler compared to 8x.50 in p47... I would take 1x12.7 with he round ingame over 8x12.7 ap all the time until they change it and thats simply wrong.

 

No way 1, or 2 or even 4 .50s with he filler would be better than 8x.50 ap. Current he in 12.7 or 13mm is overdone as hell and acts like additional cannon. Many times k4s dont even hit me with 30mm and only 13mm acts like a freaking cannon. Kinda strange, if it was so powerful, why did they changed belt to full incendiary withou he rounds. Il2s dmg model of indestructible bf109, p51s tail that is useless after one single 13mm hit and dmg of 50s are absolute joke. I dobn understand how they can overdo 2 hmgs and absolutely destroy third one which is main weapon for one whole nation... Or why did they introduced new dmg model withou proper api and fuel/mw50 tank  and hydraulics modelling... Thats some major brain moment there from their side... 

Edited September 7, 2020 by =DMD=Honza

[CountZero]

7 hours ago, =DMD=Honza said:

One 20mm? Ive killed multiple fw190s with single 12.7 on yak9 in short burst into wing faaaar more reliable and faster than with p47 or p51. One single 12.7 obliterated wing and 190couldnt pull out of dive or do any sort of maneuvers... One single hmg with super small he filler compared to 8x.50 in p47... I would take 1x12.7 with he round ingame over 8x12.7 ap all the time until they change it and thats simply wrong.

 

No way 1, or 2 or even 4 .50s with he filler would be better than 8x.50 ap. Current he in 12.7 or 13mm is overdone as hell and acts like additional cannon. Many times k4s dont even hit me with 30mm and only 13mm acts like a freaking cannon. Kinda strange, if it was so powerful, why did they changed belt to full incendiary withou he rounds. Il2s dmg model of indestructible bf109, p51s tail that is useless after one single 13mm hit and dmg of 50s are absolute joke. I dobn understand how they can overdo 2 hmgs and absolutely destroy third one which is main weapon for one whole nation... Or why did they introduced new dmg model withou proper api and fuel/mw50 tank  and hydraulics modelling... Thats some major brain moment there from their side... 

When you read DDs from time before 4.005 aim was to reduce effectivnes of AP and buff HE so no suprise 1-2HE guns are so mutch effective compared to any AP. And even before 4.005 , HE ammo was king in game, so that update just incresed devide to point where AP is now useless ,  as you can even cut parts eseyer with HE . Since i first try game and test what ammo should i use HE was clear winner, dont know from who they got idea that it needed to be even stronger to this point its now after 4.005.

Edited September 7, 2020 by CountZero

[6./ZG26_Custard]

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

1-2HE guns are so mutch effective compared to any AP. And even before 4.005 , HE ammo was king in game, so that update just incresed devide to point where AP is now useless ,  as you can even cut parts eseyer with HE . Since i first try game and test what ammo should i use HE

 

20 mm are powerful but the 30 mm HE rounds were truly devastating. Eric Brown witnessed a B-26 under attack from a 262 and he stated that the B-26 was turned into confetti. 

 

The 303rd BG had a 30 ship package (B-17's) flying mission no 248 on 28 September 1944, their target was Krupp Grusonwerke A.G., in Magdeburg, Germany. They lost eleven B-17's. Nine of the twelve B-17's, flying excellent formation in the low Squadron were lost on the first pass by enemy aircraft. That is the kind of firepower that no one in their right mind would want to be on the receiving end of. 

 

This thread has now stretched to 7 pages. The Bf 109 tail issue has already been mentioned by the developers because there was a "major" problem with the complete tail section flying off with even a minor hit. Hopefully this will be looked at sooner rather than later. 

 

As for the .50 cals

 

This about sums it up perfectly.

On 9/5/2020 at 7:08 AM, Eisenfaustus said:

Still the he components of mines should be better at causing fires than the tracer components of ap-t and much better then ap. 

 

that’s exactly why incendiary ammo should be modelled asap. For all guns that used it. 

 

Lets hope this happens asap.

 

Edit: I think if we get API rounds the .50 cal will become extremely effective. 

Edited September 7, 2020 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[BCI-Nazgul]

4 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Edit: I think if we get API rounds the .50 cal will become extremely effective. 

You don't think that the .50 HE is OP now?  Our testing indicated that is equal to the 20mm in disabling aircraft.   That doesn't seem right to me.  I could stretch this a bit further and say that I think all HE rounds are currently too powerful, but I'd be happy just with the .50s having a bit more punch.  I was thinking the other day that 1C took a single pass at modeling HE ammo and never went back to see if what they'd done was right after release.  I mean, I'm sure they did some testing before release and all, but we have a lot more data/experience now.   Honestly, I think that unless you have access to some high powered computer simulations/hardware and engineers that know about a lot about terminal ballistics it's really hard to get this stuff right.   We also don't have a full component model of the planes, so that's another problem even if you could fully sim the rounds.

 

One step at a time I guess.

Edited September 8, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[6./ZG26_Custard]

8 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

You don't think that the .50 HE is OP now?  Our testing indicated that is equal to the 20mm in disabling aircraft.   That doesn't seem right to me.  I could stretch this a bit further and say that I think all HE rounds are currently too powerful, but I'd be happy just with the .50s having a bit more punch.  I was thinking the other day that 1C took a single pass at modeling HE ammo and never went back to see if what they'd done was right after release.  I mean, I'm sure they did some testing before release and all, but we have a lot more data/experience now.   Honestly, I think that unless you have access to some high powered computer simulations/hardware and engineers that know about a lot about terminal ballistics it's really hard to get this stuff right.   We also don't have a full component model of the planes, so that's another problem even if you could fully sim the rounds.

 

One step at a time I guess.

 

I don't think we will ever get 100% accuracy with the current technology that is available in any sim. From what I have read and purely in my own opinion, I don't think the 30 mm are powerful enough and of course the one missing element for the .50's is the API. It really is a balancing act  with software programming, because if you change one element you can end up affecting hundreds of variables.    

I agree with you it's one step at a time. 

[ACG_Cass]

I've dropped this across in the suggestions tab, I think it might help slightly in terms of making 50 cals more effective for the time being. 

 

 

 

I've been trying to do some testing to understand dispersion and where the rounds are actually going. The results seem very inconsistent...

 

https://streamable.com/2pjhlp

https://streamable.com/nf7lar.               (mute these - horrible slowmo sounds)

https://streamable.com/kpptmv

https://streamable.com/338d7y

 

All these were taken in a P-47 with flaps out at 300m, with 300m convergence (Drone section of Combat Box Training). It seems you have to be dead on the money to get hits and even then that isn't enough. Keeping in mind that each of those tracers are accompanied by 6 other rounds, there are certain instances where they don't appear to be being picked up - or are flying somewhere else. Then there are other times where they are clearly hitting in narrow window. I'd questions whether wing-mounted 50 Cals would be accurate to that degree at 300m. The harmonization charts certainly seemed to show they expected a larger pattern. 

 

If anyone knows a simple way of modifying all the rounds to be tracers, I'm happy to do some more testing to see where all of these rounds are going. 

Edited September 8, 2020 by Cass

[sniperton]

1 hour ago, Cass said:

It seems you have to be dead on the money to get hits and even then that isn't enough.

Just as a side note, the DM of the Il-2 seems to be a bit off as shown here:

 

[JG7_X-Man]

On 9/8/2020 at 11:31 AM, sniperton said:

Just as a side note, the DM of the Il-2 seems to be a bit off as shown here:

 Agreed - it's well documented that the IL-2 is most vulnerable when it's oil cooler.

 

In game this doesn't seem to be the case. It might be a netcode issue 

[BCI-Nazgul]

On 9/8/2020 at 7:22 AM, Cass said:

I've dropped this across in the suggestions tab, I think it might help slightly in terms of making 50 cals more effective for the time being. 

 

 

 

I've been trying to do some testing to understand dispersion and where the rounds are actually going. The results seem very inconsistent...

 

https://streamable.com/2pjhlp

https://streamable.com/nf7lar.               (mute these - horrible slowmo sounds)

https://streamable.com/kpptmv

https://streamable.com/338d7y

 

All these were taken in a P-47 with flaps out at 300m, with 300m convergence (Drone section of Combat Box Training). It seems you have to be dead on the money to get hits and even then that isn't enough. Keeping in mind that each of those tracers are accompanied by 6 other rounds, there are certain instances where they don't appear to be being picked up - or are flying somewhere else. Then there are other times where they are clearly hitting in narrow window. I'd questions whether wing-mounted 50 Cals would be accurate to that degree at 300m. The harmonization charts certainly seemed to show they expected a larger pattern. 

 

If anyone knows a simple way of modifying all the rounds to be tracers, I'm happy to do some more testing to see where all of these rounds are going. 

These are great videos.   Everyone should have a look.   If this doesn't convince people that something is not right with the .50s nothing will.  Those planes should have died long before any of those videos ended.

[357th_KW]

21 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

These are great videos.   Everyone should have a look.   If this doesn't convince people that something is not right with the .50s nothing will.  Those planes should have died long before any of those videos ended.

The last video of the 109 shows exactly what I’ve been talking about for months now.  I’d really love to hear some sort of response from the devs on this issue, because it’s just unacceptable in a multiplayer environment.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

3 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

 If this doesn't convince people that something is not right with the .50s nothing will.

I think the vast majority posting on here do realise there is a problem. Two of the biggest issues (in my view) are no complex Gun harmonisation and the second is the lack of API. The third is the tail section of the 109's which has already been mentioned by the devs and hopefully these will be looked into in due course. 

 

It's a poor medium to take any empirical data from other than visually but If you watch real gun camera footage from WWII .50 cal armoured aircraft the vast majority of kills seem to be pilot kills, fires or exploding fuel tanks or ammunition. You rarely, if ever see aircraft falling apart in spectacular fashion from standard AP rounds, which is what we currently have in game.  

 

 

 

 

[C6_lefuneste]

You should also try to fire on train locomotive.

I did not have time to do a simple mission to compare with the same locomotive, but in QMB I can make it stop with a short burst of WWI plane 7mm gun and did not achieve to do the same with the 8 12,7mm guns of p47...

[BCI-Nazgul]

2 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I think the vast majority posting on here do realise there is a problem. Two of the biggest issues (in my view) are no complex Gun harmonisation and the second is the lack of API. The third is the tail section of the 109's which has already been mentioned by the devs and hopefully these will be looked into in due course.

In the films I also noticed that the planes lose control many of the times.   It's hard to say if that is a PK or if something important quit working or the aero damage flipped the plane.   We don't have that with the .50s right now in my experience.  I do tend to agree with you about the API, but I think there are other problems too.   No plane should be able to stand the beating his targets took API non-withstanding.

Edited September 10, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[JG7_X-Man]

3 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

...the vast majority of kills seem to be pilot kills...

 

I will have to disagree only some LOL With gun cam running at 1/2 speed and of the thousands of hours of gun cam footage, it's always the same 10 - 20 reels that always pop-up.

 

With the relativity small area the pilot occupies in the cockpit in comparison to all other vulnerable area of an aircraft, I would say only 10% of all kills are PKs. I think wings ripping off from fuel tanks or ammunition housing exploding are a large number too.

 

If you want to see parts flying off - you have to watch the 20 mm doing "work"

 

 

Edited September 10, 2020 by JG7_X-Man

[6./ZG26_Custard]

7 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

I would say only 10% of all kills are PKs.

I think API would  cause many more fuel fires or exploding fuel and ammunition.

 

 

 

 

 

[Honza]

57 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

With the relativity small area the pilot occupies in the cockpit in comparison to all other vulnerable area of an aircraft, I would say only 10% of all kills are PKs. I think wings ripping off from fuel tanks or ammunition housing exploding are a large number too.

Wrong in case of 109 where pilots basically takes up whole cockpit from side to side and up to down. Basically all 6oclock shots were almost guaranteed pilot kills as .50s could penetrate armor plate in 109 over 1/2 of km. During bodenplatte. Only fraction of shot down germans survived and were recovered or captured. Majority of them died or they went missing and were never found. Its beautiful to watch how only FEW.... FEW!!! Hits on these guncams are resulting in fires, explosions or critically damaged plane. Iam sure our devs reproduced it in game righ?
WROOOOOOOOOOOONG...
This happend to me few mins ago. I hitted outside of conv. and in, hits were basically from engine through cockpit area, wing area and tail section where most hits were and BANG.... magical 10000mm thick armor plate of 109 strikes and deflects all these bullets away from pilot, baaam magical nonexistant DMG model of MW50 strikes and 109 doesnt blow up or catch fire (you dont need API to set fire on MW50 as its highly flamable substance and tracer should be mooore than enough) neither its fuel tank sitting right below pilots and slightly behind him. Fun part??? He flew for good 4-5 mins with leaks and visible engine area hits until he had to crash land and i was credited with kill but the funniest part was when i was hitted by one single HE 20MM into my engine from 190 (keep in mind that HE ammo was next to useless against radial engines) damaged my engine and it stopped working not even after 2 mins... engine know for beign SUPER STURDY and functional after multiple hits and penetrations.
That engine was able to carry P47 all the way home which was hours long way, but here? Not even 2 mins.

I can post video with yak-9 where is clearly visible damage of wing after single 12.7 mm hit in it with HE filler.

And if it wasnt enough that ****** combined it with abusing absolutely broken FM and pulled totally BS neg G maneuver, i was going around 450mph here so he was pretty damn fast. Its already starting to enrage me how broken .50s and 109dmg model is. Its falling apart after few hits like it did IRL especially after igniting MW50 tanks? Hmmm, lets turn off DMG model of major part of that plane, itll surely make things better until we fix it and lets totally break .50cals in proces so that 109 will be even more tanky. 

 

Edited September 11, 2020 by =DMD=Honza

[Honza]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

 

but problem is aim, just aim better:

 

Yeah, thats what everyone says and totally ignores hits into vital parts of plane or pilot area that does nothing..... JuSt AiM bEtTeR, HiT oN CoNvErGeNcE... Meanwhile i sent quite great salvo in it through convergence at pretty damn high speed where controling plane becomes problem and iam confident enough to say that i did 100000times better than average joe in WW2 that just needed to spray a bit to set 109 on fire as he had proper gun synchronization and ammo that did something and was firing on something not made out of titanium.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

8 hours ago, =DMD=Honza said:

 armor plate of 109 strikes and deflects all these bullets away from pilot, baaam magical 

In the video you posted called "absolute joke called 109" you got the kill with a one second burst and a very probable pilot kill. Other than the appalling choice in music, it was a good video showing a good kill, so I'm unsure what you were trying to show?

 

As soon as the 109 pitches down and to the right you have your kill right there.

 

 

 

 

Now, I'll say again I think the vast majority posting here believe there is a problem with the 50's and the tail section of the 109. However, as you have shown they can be shot down, albeit without many fires, explosions and bits flying off. 

 

Edit: It will be very interested to see with further updates what solutions will be forthcoming. 

Edited September 11, 2020 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[SAS_Storebror]

1 hour ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

you got the kill with a one second burst and a very probable pilot kill. Other than the appalling choice in music, it was a good video showing a good kill, so I'm unsure what you were trying to show?

 

As soon as the 109 pitches down and to the right you have your kill right there.

But you did read that the plane was flying for another 4-5 minutes, didn't you?

The pilot kill is exactly what would have been supposed to happen in this situation in real life, instead ingame the pilot not only is alive, he's able to pull hulk-style maneouvres at the very same moment when he's supposed to be dead, too. And keeps flying. And stays alive.

That much for the kill "right there". The fact that he got the kill at all - after 4-5 minutes - is by pure chance.

In other such situations, the 109 jockey simply returns and scores a single-bullet-hit-instant-kill on you.

 

1 hour ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

It will be very interested to see with further updates what solutions will be forthcoming. 

What do you expect?

The game has been turned into a silly 109 party half a year and 4 patches ago.

Nobody who's responsible for changing this is even bothered to drop a single line on the matter.

I'll rather wait for the sun not to come up another time next morning.

 

Mike

[6./ZG26_Custard]

34 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

But you did read that the plane was flying for another 4-5 minutes, didn't you?

So where is the video of that then? All I see is a 109 taken a burst pitching down and spiraling down, looking pretty much dead as a dodo.

38 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

That much for the kill "right there". The fact that he got the kill at all - after 4-5 minutes - is by pure chance.

Again where is the video of this, was it the same 109 or a different 109?

 

39 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

What do you expect?

Hopefully something that will stop the incessant whining, because we have truly surpassed anything that the luftwhiners ever went on about at this point. In all seriousness though, hopefully the introduction of API and the 109 tail issue looked at ASAP.   

[SAS_Storebror]

2 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

So where is the video of that

So you say that @=DMD=Honza is plain outright lying.

Ignorance is a bliss, isn't it?

 

Mike

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Just now, SAS_Storebror said:

So you say that @=DMD=Honza is plain outright lying.

Ignorance is a bliss, isn't it?

 

I'm not saying anyone is lying but if you shoot up a 109 and it fights with you for four more minutes, I'd at least expect to see the whole video, not just 26 seconds. 

3 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

Ignorance is a bliss, isn't it?

Oh yes it is Mike

 

[Cpt_Siddy]

Just aim at the wingtip, guys. Netcode works well on wingtips. 

On 9/9/2020 at 11:25 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

 Agreed - it's well documented that the IL-2 is most vulnerable when it's oil cooler.

 

 

In game this doesn't seem to be the case. It might be a netcode issue 

 

Try wingtips, might work on IL-2, too. 

[SAS_Storebror]

16 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Not hard to fined sortie from that movie:https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/890979/?tour=26

Thanks for the link @CountZero.

This also indicates (with a certain confidence) that the 109 didn't actually get "killed" but rather crash landed - for whatever reason, but unlikely that it's related to the damage inflicted as if that was fatal, it would not have taken 5 minutes to crash - and the kill only got credited because @=DMD=Honza was the only one to damage the plane before.

 

I must say I find it quite nasty that so-called historians tried to make us believe WW2 planes were killed by shooting their presumable vital parts like pilot, engine, fuel tanks etc.

Truth is - as we learned - that wingtips are the key to success.

Now where are all those historical guncam tracks showing the truth?

 

The table has tilted, folks.

The game is rigged.

And nobody seems to notice.

Nobody seems to care.

 

Mike

[HR_Zunzun]

53 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Not hard to fined sortie from that movie:https://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/890979/?tour=26

So 64x0.50AP in central area of 109 and not even scrach on pilot or engine, what use is AP for in merican airplanes if it cant even reach enemy pilot pass airplanes paint ? ?  3x 13mm and 1x20mm and your out in 47, what use is having paper airplane ? ? why fly anything made by mericans they clearly cant even design a proper airplane not to mentiopn engines or guns for war, just look how compact and tuff 109 is.

If only he aimed better and not like a noob at central area of enemy, wingtips wingtips 109 cant fly without them ?

 

I know that the parser doesn´t count the hits correctly (or not neccesarily), but what type of error is induced? Does it miss some of the hits or does it also put hits out of nowhere?

I am asking this because 64 hits with a gunnery accuracy of a 21% would be a laughing joke. According to LW and US Navy that would be the equivalent of a very minimum of 16 20mm hits.

 

[CountZero]

53 minutes ago, HR_Zunzun said:

I know that the parser doesn´t count the hits correctly (or not neccesarily), but what type of error is induced? Does it miss some of the hits or does it also put hits out of nowhere?

I am asking this because 64 hits with a gunnery accuracy of a 21% would be a laughing joke. According to LW and US Navy that would be the equivalent of a very minimum of 16 20mm hits.

 

I use that same stats system for my QM to see how many bulets hit and so on as for some reason game dosent show you gun accuracy after the sortie. And what i could see is all bullets are counted correctly every time i did that in sortie statistic page , and only place where you would not see displayed dmg for every bullet is in sortie log as small damages are not shown. So you wont see dmg% done by every bullet (even though game generates it in log)  because even recoshes would show up. So 21% accuracy in that sortie is correct, 64 0.50AP hit 109, he just hit wrong part hes aim is poor and he needs to eat more carrots and aim for wingtips.

 

PS. that 190 guy had 4% accuracy, but his aim was perfecto ? 

Thats why i like lagg23 your accuracy can be crapy as i usealy have 5-8% at best but my aim is perfect as i usealy need only 1-2 bullet to hit with 23HE (my great aim is to be praised not HE op) and enemy is gone, same you see on axis with 30HE, its all about aim in this game hunt thouse wingtips ? 

Edited September 11, 2020 by CountZero

[Honza]

On 9/11/2020 at 1:18 PM, HR_Zunzun said:

I know that the parser doesn´t count the hits correctly (or not neccesarily), but what type of error is induced? Does it miss some of the hits or does it also put hits out of nowhere?

I am asking this because 64 hits with a gunnery accuracy of a 21% would be a laughing joke. According to LW and US Navy that would be the equivalent of a very minimum of 16 20mm hits.

 

Could you please explain it a bit more as i dont understand that at all. I dont know if youre making fun of me that i had "only" 21% acc and 64 hits that truly can be counted as 16-21 20MM AP hits or the game is joke that this much ammo in small area is not enough. 

 

On 9/11/2020 at 11:36 AM, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

So where is the video of that then? All I see is a 109 taken a burst pitching down and spiraling down, looking pretty much dead as a dodo.

Again where is the video of this, was it the same 109 or a different 109?

That 109 pithced up and flew away as i was not willing to dive after him as there was one 190 in the area that took me with one 20mm and 3x13mm like @CountZeropointed out after climbing after P47 that pulled out of 500mph dive and he was damaged and leaking from our P-51, now tell me what point it is where inline leaking everything can work on full settings, its absolute BS, it should stop in few seconds when overstressed and with damaged cooling. One of the most sturdy fighter of war, probably most of all went down after 20mm and 3x13 mm hits, meanwhile 109 after being hit of equivalent 16-21 20mm AP rounds flew away and crashlanded or simply crashed as pilot is dead. But The main problem is as you said, it should have been pilot kill but it wasnt.

Edited September 20, 2020 by =DMD=Honza

[HR_Zunzun]

6 minutes ago, =DMD=Honza said:

Could you please explain it a bit more as i dont understand that at all. I dont know if youre making fun of me that i had "only" 21% acc and 64 hits that truly can be counted as 16-21 20MM AP hits or the game is joke that this much ammo in small area is not enough.

 

I am more of a joke myself so I try not to do fun of anybody. I was clearly pointing out to the current implentation of part of the DM in the game. 21% accuracy is quite outstanding.

[-250H-Ursus_]

I'm trying to do this post in order to try to compress my thoghts after play with this new DM in this months

 

In general, my opinions are good. This DM is superior than the last one but i think already saw with the new DM.

Off course the good things are noticeable, the aerodynamic impact is better than before, behaviour of 20mm are better than before, and the damage inflicted to the internal modules of the planes are better.

 

But, i think the problems are related to 3 key questions now. Machine guns, big cannons, over 23mm, and the 109 tail section, for worst this 3 things are interlinked one each other and ends to overshadow the good things of the DM and give the exact opposite impression when someone is frustated. The most remarkable one is at this point, the infamous 12,7 problem. So i will divide this in 3 points and explain my thoughts one by one

 

Weak Machine guns and Overpowered Machine guns

The problems with the machine guns are the next ones. Or they are to weak, or very OP. And i gived the example already, the best point of reference of this issue are the American M2 12,7 compared to Russian UB 12,7 or the German 13mm wich is, also, the most acused one of behave like a cannon instead of a MG, when the Russian 12,7 does the same. Both guns are capable of do an insane drag penalty or aerodynamic penalty. In the worst cases, can nullify your options of maneuver like in one hit. While the American 12,7 doesn't do the same. The only excuse one can provide to explain this is the "HE" in Russian 12,7 and German 13mm, and the lack of it in the American one. But that thing doesn't apply very well when you do a 3 second burst in a 109 or a 190 and the plane is able to maneuver like nothing happened, well, not exactly, the structure is affected but the aerodynamic impact cannot beign noticed, and this is noticeable when one is was hitted with a critical burst and does high G turns, that will end in wings ripped off and i can tell that happens, but that is off course a contradiction. Besides that, one can check the guncams of WW2, even if someone tries to criticizes that claiming that "guncams are biased" because it shows the best shoots, you can see how the planes are can be damaged if someone hit them well, and the damage is no joke. Its a good point of reference. Besides that, the lack of API-APIT (M8 and M20) ammo belt are noticeable, but that only applies to 1944-45 American planes. Not before.

 

Big cannons

This is the easiest and self explained one.

30mm and 37mm behaviour is weird since new DM. Now rip off wings and fuselage with those cannons is pretty hard if not impossible. And the wings can only be detached from the plane by make them explode with the 30mm or do a good hit with 37mm, and them pray for the guy does a turn and the G's will do the work.

The problem with this is that the 30mm and 37mm were able to do that with only hit the fighters. There is plenty of photos of the 30mm and 37mm trials, also pilot reports wich tells that a hit of those cannons were equal to critical structure failure.  But in game, you can hit twice, or 3 times a guy with those beasts and the planes are flying. If the pilot is not dead or the plane is not on fire.

 

109F/G/K Tail section problem

The problem is well known. Not by me, but by everyone. The tail section of a 109F/G/K works as a sponge damage. The best way to check it is put the 190 and the 109 tails to the test, just by seeing how the vertical stab of  a 190 can be ripped off with a good 20mm burst can be ripped off, and the 109 never will happen. And by checking with all the guns of the game the 109, shoting from a certain angle, wich is often, dead 6 to pure 6, wich is off course the Tail section from below, the 109 will behave very sturdy. From the high 6 off course will end in dead pilots. But what is the worst of this problem.

 

This problem only enhances the other 2 things wich i already touched. This weird mix of a 109 beign a flying tank and the problems of the 12,7 are the perfect mix for a lot of complains. In my personal experience with the 12,7 109s are the hell itself for try to shot them down, while the 190 are piece of cake besides the null aerodynamic impact. Off course if i'm attacking from pure 6 to dead 6. 

 

And how this is affecting the cannons? The same. But with a cannon you can, at least, start fires, inflict aerodynamic impact, make the 109s "wobble" by themselfs, not induced by pilots trying to save their lifes by that trick. Or you can kill pilots because the fragmentation can kill the pilot. But as i said, you never will be able to rip off the stab, or, as i already told, you will not able to rip off the fuselage with huge cannons like 37mm, or 30mm in some weird 1 v 1 in Berloga, for give an example. But that last point is related to the big cannons problems than 109 tail section problems, since the fuselage can detach, one can see that by ramming the 109, the tail stabs will not separate from the plane, but the entire fuselage maybe yes. In general, this is the most problematic issue of all, and as i said. Is knowed by everyone.

 

I think this is are the more noticeable things i noticed in this months.

 

You guys think the same?

Edited September 12, 2020 by UrsusArctos

[Barnacles]

Pretty much agree with most of that.

 

I think when the DM came out the developers remarked that.

 

1. It was a big change

2. It'd not be perfect and it'd be good to take some time to let the 'dust settle' before making hasty judgement.

 

I've tried to be really objective about this. I've flown both sides extensively, on and off line, and the thing I agree with most is that the current DM is an improvement over the last.

 

I do not want the AP machine guns in the USAAF fighters to become death rays, crippling planes with one or two hits.

 

I do not want the HE machine guns in the VVS and LW planes to act like they're exactly the same as an AP round.

 

But at the moment the difference between the two is excessive. There needs to be a tweak. A small adjustment. Because at the moment HE is so much more effective.

Mostly because one HE 12.7mm can ruin your whole day.

And mostly does if it hits a wing or tail.

Edited September 11, 2020 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[Honza]

52 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

Pretty much agree with most of that.

 

I think when the DM came out the developers remarked that.

 

1. It was a big change

2. It'd not be perfect and it'd be good to take some time to let the 'dust settle' before making hasty judgement.

 

I've tried to be really objective about this. I've flown both sides extensively, on and off line, and the thing I agree with most is that the current DM is an improvement over the last.

 

I do not want the AP machine guns in the USAAF fighters to become death rays, crippling planes with one or two hits.

 

I do not want the HE machine guns in the VVS and LW planes to act like they're exactly the same as an AP round.

 

But at the moment the difference between the two is excessive. There needs to be a tweak. A small adjustment. Because at the moment HE is so much more effective.

Mostly because one HE 12.7mm can ruin your whole day.

And mostly does if it hits a wing or tail.

12,7 / 13mm HEs werent that effective, germans switched to API in later period of war. Actually it should be ingame too, germans shouldnt be able to use 13mm HE filler on late war planes and they should get pure AP-T right now until API is ingame. 
When i flew germans for a bit, its insanely OP, yes, i used word OP in sim. Its total easy mode where i got 6 kills in 45 mins of flying. Only 13mms alone are enough to take down fighters in small bursts... If 8x12,7 AP cant do this, 2x 13mm HE/AP belt certainly CANT do this and it had what, around 1,4 of TNT in each HE round? Thats absolutely nothing.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

Just for the record, I shot down 3x P-47s with only around 250x MG131 bullets in a Dora career. Well I was out of cannon so I used what 13mm bullets I had left probably around 250 or 300.

 

All 3x P-47 had extensive structural damage and the engines of two of them caught on fire. 

 

In another career, I took off in my P-51 with extra .50 ammo. I shot down 3x 109 G14 (all 3 were pilot kills). I unloaded about 600 rounds on a 4th one and it didnt go down because the pilot didnt die. Many pretty nice bursts from many diff angles around my convergence (225m +- 50m). I know visual damage is not everything but this G14 looked like it got damaged by .303 bullets from the turret of an old allied bomber. It was leaking coolant from one radiator but never went down. 

 

Bottom line is, you can shoot down as many P-47s with around 300 bullets of MG131 than 109's with 2050 rounds of .50 right now.

 

Some of you will tell me that one mission doesnt really prove anything but Im sure that extensive testing right now with similar variables would yield similar results.