AN-M2 AP/API/API-T

[ACG_Cass]

https://history.army.mil/html/books/010/10-9/CMH_Pub_10-9.pdf - The Ordnance Department: Planning Munitions for War

 

I came across an interesting source on some of the different types of incendiary ammunition for the AN/M2 and their development. Alongside some anecdotal quotes regarding their effectiveness. Loooads more stuff in there regarding Anti Aircraft, Air to Ground and Air to Air munitions and their employment (p.401 - 472)

 

Thought it might be useful once the fuelling system update has been finalised to help create a suitable implementation of API. There would be the potential to model different ammunition belts based on the period if that would be possible. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[357th_KW]

Seeing as it looks like fuel system modeling is underway, here's some additional documentation on incendiary ammunition.

 

Effectiveness of Incendiary Ammunition Against Aircraft Fuel Tanks - Oct 1948

 

Effectiveness of Small Arms Incendiary Ammunition at High Altitudes

 

The first document has a series of test results looking at 20mm Incendiary and HE-Incendiary, as well as .50 (and .60) caliber Inc and API-T, complete with probability curves for causing fires vs muzzle velocity, and fuel mixtures in tanks required for explosions.

 

The second looks at some real world results in WW2 and Korea, as well as some interesting testing where a remotely piloted B-17 was rigged to fire into it's own fuel tanks to record the results.

 

 

[[CPT]Crunch]

And that March 45 release just happens to coincide with the, issue, adaptation, and approval of the M3 variant of the .50 Browning air machine gun with a 1150 round per minute fire rate and an increased muzzle velocity.  In September 44, the first of an order of 11,000 M2A1 improvement of the air gun variant M2, with reworked and materially strengthened sear and other improvements to the base M2 were issued which gave a 100 round per minute improved firing rate and greater feed reliability.  The order was cancelled immediately with the approval and production of the all new M-3 in early 45, with less than half the number in the contract delivered.  Little was interchangeable between the M2 to M2A1, and no parts at all to M3 series, an all new gun.

 

Would be nice to have the series by date with the latest fighters, can you imagine a 51D with M3's and APIT's.  Also be nice to see cook offs, the .50 browning air gun was never suppose to be fired to a 150 round burst, or a run away gun was almost certain.

[357th_KW]

From @Han’s dev diary: “As you know, recently we have tuned the damage modeling and achieved very good results. However, the experience of years of work and optimizations in various parts of the project allow us to make a next step in increasing the detail and variety of the aircraft damage modeling.”

 

With the complex fuel modeling off the table for the moment, is it now possible to consider a simplified approach to incendiary rounds?  The document I linked above “Effectiveness of Incendiary Ammunition Against Aircraft Fuel Tanks” contains extensive data of ignition probabilities, which should allow for an accurate representation of incendiary effect.  
 

I’m sure someone will be along to point out that it wouldn’t be “perfect” without a more complex fuel model, but I would then point out that our current HE model isn’t perfect either, and for example doesn’t differentiate between a mine shell or an HEI shell for the MG151.  In this case I’d much rather see a “good” attempt at incendiary (just like we have with HE) rather then nothing.