Jump to content


Recommended Posts


First and foremost, this is not a comment on the DM. 


I originally added something in the suggestions thread regarding this. After testing the dispersion levels back then, they did seem correct but couldn't really judge to the inability to test accurately. 


After doing some digging around the game files I can see that all M2 .50 equipped planes have the same values for dispersion levels:


CarriageAdditionalBulletDispertionAngle = 0.019100955, 0.03820191

// Ref from Browning M2.50 in bursts on P-40: full circle diameter 8ft at L = 2000ft (CV = 0.667td.).

The spread at zero heating in degrees is taken equal to half of the burst firing.


I assume with regards to the P40 ref this is from a test or some kind of documentation that was conducted or sourced. However According to Air Forces Manual No. 64 (May 1945): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wyygNo7LGMlHQ74k16CL4XhTuBvROMvH/view?usp=sharing


"The cone of bullet dispersion from a Cal. 50 fighter machine gun is about 4 mils for 75% of the rounds"


An 8ft diameter at 2000ft works out as almost exactly 4 mils of dispersion. So if this is how they are implemented and all the rounds are falling within this diameter then the dispersion levels currently in place are too small. 


Unfortunately this doesn't give us a solution, as actually working out what dispersion levels would allow 75% of the rounds to fall within a 4 mil cone is a bit more of a problem. I don't think you would need to be too particular on this, adding 10-20% to the dispersion cone would definitely get close to that and would have a massive impact on their effectiveness. 


I know there are a lot of discussions around the effectiveness of certain weapons platforms. The point convergence we currently have implemented can really dilute the advantages of having a gun platform that's 6 or 8 strong. If it's a case of adjusting these values to create a larger pattern and closer align the in-sim planes with their accurate real life counterparts, it would be a good "quick win" that would hopefully silence some of the discussions. 










Edited by Cass
  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure what "CarriageAdditionalBulletDispertionAngle = 0.019100955, 0.03820191" actually means?


4 mils = 0.225 degrees = 0.00393 radians


If it is the angle off from directly ahead,  2 mills = 0.1125 degrees = 0.00197 radians so none of these fit these numbers at all.  Perhaps it is an additional % angle applied to a base number somewhere else? 





Edited by unreasonable
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've definitely made some assumptions based off the reference. I have no idea what the actual values are related to as they will likely have something to do with the way it has been implemented into the engine.


Tested and confirmed 4 mils out to 2000ft

Edited by ACG_Cass
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I have seen how the british air ministry decided that the bullets from an RAF fighter should/would stay inside an 8' tall by 12' wide rectangle at the convergence range. Was in a air combat video made with il2 products on youtube. 


In ROF we have a sort of saying.....  HOPEFULLY the bullets will land somewhere inside the white circle in the aldis sight when you fire.



how do i get to download that to my PC.... i cant figure out how to get into google drive using a yahoo account

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ACG_Cass changed the title to Dispersion
  • 4 weeks later...

Don't want to just post the same post but additional info has come up showing an example of dispersion levels in the same document that show a typical cone:



  • Upvote 1
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...