Comparing HMG Damage, and issues with .50 cals

[[DBS]Browning]

Amazing there was so little damage, given the fuel tank fire.

I think it is clear that the fire is responsible for the size of the exit holes, where material has been burned away, rather than bent or torn off. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by [DBS]Browning

[ACG_Cass]

7 minutes ago, QB.Shallot said:

Both pictures were pulled from the same article, here's a third with an overhead view:

Thanks, it looks a lot clearer from above. Judging by the warping in the other picture I'd guess there was a fire of some sort as @alpino
suggested rather than explosive damage. It almost certainly has to be mostly kinetic damage as they would have to be using some funky fuses to get it to perfectly detonate on the other side of the wing.

 

[DJBscout]

35 minutes ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Amazing there was so little damage, given the fuel tank fire.

I think it is clear that the fire is responsible for the size of the exit holes, where material has been burned away, rather than bent or torn off. 

 

If you look at the photos, it seems fairly clear that aside from the longest gash, all the holes are primarily bent/torn. The paint is only burned away on the long gash, further indicating the others had a much less intense burn. Even the long gash likely started as a long tear caused by an exiting round, which the fire then expanded somewhat.

 

And again, this is 5 rounds. Between dozens of rounds hitting, the damage would compound rather rapidly. We should not be counting scores of hits for any chance of appreciable aerodynamic damage.

Edited February 16, 2021 by DJBscout

[[DBS]Browning]

I'm not convinced that any damage like this is possible with fire. All of the holes larger than a round have missing materiel and burn marks. 

However, I think we can all agree that this is absolutely the kind of damage we should experience after fires started by 50cals. 

I wonder if fire currently has an aerodynamic effect in the sim. 

[354thFG_Rails]

I’m thinking this is the cause of some of the damage. Also considering those fuel tanks are slightly pressurized to keep head pressure on the fuel I would think that would cause large gashes to occur. Also depending on how quickly the fuel was coming out of the plane the fire could have been very short and didn’t do a tremendous amount of damage. Maybe allowed the skin to warp a little. It would not burn away to that big of a hole. 

[Angry_Kitten]

Makes me wonder where the developers got their .50 bmg ammunition data from.. Civilian reloading magazine charts, or WW2 government contracts?

[NIK14]

17 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Amazing there was so little damage, given the fuel tank fire.

I think it is clear that the fire is responsible for the size of the exit holes, where material has been burned away, rather than bent or torn off. 

 

How is this little damage according to you? Count the entry holes and look at the exists...is that little damage? The main spar is likely shredded, and the bits of the spars were blasted through to the leading edge, hence the multiple holes. Next hard maneuvre and the wing might break because the spar is more or less severed.

Tracers as well...come back to earth m8.

[[DBS]Browning]

Just now, NIK14 said:

How is this little damage according to you?

 

Fuel tank fires typically do enough damage to completely destroy the plane.

[NIK14]

I'm counting 5 entry holes... the main wing spar is likely toast (i.e don't 109 stick stir with the plane), the panels are ripped up on the exit side of the wing and a fire was started....

All that with 5 hits and that's "little" damage according to you?

 

This is not what we see in the game...can we agree on that?

Edited February 16, 2021 by NIK14

[CUJO_1970]

21 hours ago, Cass said:

This always ends up with the same points being made. The number of rounds it takes to fully kill an aircraft are probably about right for .50 BMG.

 

The issue lies with the fact that you can put 40 rounds into a plane with little to no effect only for the 41st round to plonk the pilot on the head or create a fire.

Offline a 109 can be destroyed via pilot or engine kill with as little as 17 hits. It takes an average of 44 hits to destroy any 109 offline - and every time I landed 60+ hits it was accompanied by a wing being blown off, and a couple of times it included horizontal stab along with wing off destruction.

 

Before anyone gets their undergarments in a wad about this, I also agree the .50 needs some adjustment. 

[NIK14]

5 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Offline a 109 can be destroyed via pilot or engine kill with as little as 17 hits.

 

I would've thought one round of .50 cal would easily be sufficient for a PK or an engine kill...

Edited February 16, 2021 by NIK14

[[DBS]Browning]

44 minutes ago, NIK14 said:

This is not what we see in the game...can we agree on that?

 

No... When a wing sets on fire ingame it usually falls off or the pilot burns to death. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by [DBS]Browning

[CUJO_1970]

2 hours ago, NIK14 said:

 

I would've thought one round of .50 cal would easily be sufficient for a PK or an engine kill...

 

17 hits are the total number of hits that occurred, not that all 17 rounds impacted the engine and were required to kill it, or that all 17 rounds hit the pilot and were required to kill him.

 

Also, believing that a single .50 round would easily be sufficient for an engine kill, even a water cooled engine kill, is indicative of the too-high expectations many have for this weapon.

[Creep]

Not trying to be rude, but would @NIK14 and @CUJO_1970 kindly take this most recent discussion elsewhere? I know the mods merged some threads, but this one was created for the sole purpose of sharing the test data that we gathered regarding structural and aerodynamic damage for AP v HE HMGs. We are not concerned with engine damage, nor are we suggesting how many rounds it should take to cause it. 

 

To be perfectly honest, I don't want to give the mods any excuse to lock this thread. It seems like that is the ultimate fate of any discussion regarding this topic lately.

[sniperton]

1 hour ago, QB.Creep said:

To be perfectly honest, I don't want to give the mods any excuse to lock this thread. It seems like that is the ultimate fate of any discussion regarding this topic lately.

You're completely right IMO.

 

But we should be clear about the scheme here:

 

People are discussing topics that they find brisky for the present and the future of the game.

 

Then other people arrive uninvited whom I have good reason not to call a troll.

 

Then the discussion escalates and the mods find an excuse to lock another thread.

 

Deal with it and be on your guard, cheers.

[CUJO_1970]

3 hours ago, QB.Creep said:

Not trying to be rude, but would @NIK14 and @CUJO_1970 kindly take this most recent discussion elsewhere? I know the mods merged some threads,

 

Nope.

 

The mods were the ones that merged the thread, so it seems that no - I won't be taking this discussion elsewhere.

[Tempus]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The mods

Are you accusing everyone that have came here of been a mod? Also... do you have any proof of what you're affirming? 

 

I don't need to be a mod to affirm there's a huge problem in game with something more sofisticated than only an AP 0.50 round AK "Peashot". To be honest I'm not any of those mods you're reffering, but anyway.... GOOOOOOD JOB FELLAS!!!!

 

I'm excited thinking when you're going to present the results of your tests. I'll let you know, in case you've been mistaken, this is IL-2 forum not the competence's one, cause the only two questions I got for you after reading the 17 magic number are:

1- Really???

2 Are you playing same game as us?

 

I would like to know what would be your position if this happened to 13's..... You might would invoke the mods spirits then.  

 

[Creep]

@Tatata_Time just to clarify... a forum moderator merged some random thread from General to this thread

[Angry_Kitten]

2 hours ago, QB.Creep said:

@Tatata_Time just to clarify... a forum moderator merged some random thread from General to this thread

Join the club,,, some how my thread about noticing certain planes had more powerful results with the 50 BMG then other planes do, was stuck into this one. Not my fault, but I am still noticing the 51D has better results then the P40 does.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

Nope, nothing wrong here:

 

 

[TheAngryGamer_VR]

 

[QB.Shallot]

@pocketshaver I have nothing against you or your claim personally. It’s just a shame the mods squashed these threads together. It’s a bad joke to pretend they have anything to do with each other.

 

I will tell you right now that your claim is provably incorrect. If you go into the game files you will see that the P-40 and P-51 share identical weapons with identical properties. They both fire 6x Browning M2’s with a pure AP load. There is no weapons difference.

[357th_KW]

1 hour ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

Nope, nothing wrong here:

 

 

 

I did a couple test runs and I don't think it's bugged like it was before - various structural elements of the plane can be damaged, not just the pilot like last time.  This appears to just be the current DM "working normally".  This of course raises the question of why we've had 10 months of this baloney.

[Angry_Kitten]

1 hour ago, QB.Shallot said:

@pocketshaver I have nothing against you or your claim personally. It’s just a shame the mods squashed these threads together. It’s a bad joke to pretend they have anything to do with each other.

 

I will tell you right now that your claim is provably incorrect. If you go into the game files you will see that the P-40 and P-51 share identical weapons with identical properties. They both fire 6x Browning M2’s with a pure AP load. There is no weapons difference.

Question then good fellow pilot, not trying to be an ass when i say this.. 

 

If 100 rounds from a P51 into the engine of a C47 makes that puppy BURN and BELCH massive black smoke, while 200 rounds from a p40 simply makes a few wisps of fluffy white smoke come out...   I believe there is a difference in damage input. 

 

Got the new patch update,  just flew my 202. The Breda 12.7 are no longer as impressive. very small miniature white puffs now and then. Takes multiple passes to accomplish the same thing a single 100 round pass did 3 days ago. 

 

Still using the bredas and 20mm, i can get 4-5 C47s in a duel.  

[Tempus]

3 hours ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

Nope, nothing wrong here:

Sorry mate I would like to upvote your post,  but I don't want to send a confusing message. Thanks for the vid, but What I've observed there is really upseting in another main release. I only want to welcome A6 to the elitist club of the weird DM: accept your inheritance even if it's bad

[315_R2r]

.... I have not tested that my self, long time did not use .50 but it look at least strange -copyrights to the Drew Maglio

 

 

[QB.Shallot]

@pocketshaver Take the steps to prove it then. Record the flights. Count the rounds hit through tacview or mission logs. I'm telling you're wrong with proof. Repeating your anecdotal claims won't make them anymore legitimate. Take some steps to isolate how you test the weapons, and gather a few data points. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by QB.Shallot

[JG_deserteagle540]

 

.... I have not tested that my self, long time did not use .50 but it look at least strange  -copyrights to the Drew Maglio

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow! Something looks seriously wrong with the inflicted damage of those .50 bullets!

In real life that 109 wouldn't be flying along as if nothing happened after sucking up a ton .50 bullets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sky_Wolf]

A logical explanation for the lack of damage from the .50 caliber ammunition is the firing distance. The video does not indicate the firing distance. If it's 500 m or greater I think the lack of damage is plausible (rounds might just bounce off). 

[RedKestrel]

1 hour ago, Sky_Wolf said:

A logical explanation for the lack of damage from the .50 caliber ammunition is the firing distance. The video does not indicate the firing distance. If it's 500 m or greater I think the lack of damage is plausible (rounds might just bounce off). 

A 0.50 cal bullet still has huge amounts of energy left at 500m, plenty to penetrate aero aluminum. Convergence settings for American fighters were in the ballpark of 350 yards (with a pattern in reality, obviously, not point convergence). 

This is illustrating how the DM currently works with AP rounds; dozens of hits don't produce drag, because each wing  hitbox has a threshold of hits above which drag is induced due to damage. Below that threshold, there is no difference in how the plane flies at all. 

it takes something in the order of 30 hits (!) to a single wing hitbox from M2 AP rounds to begin to induce significant drag from aerodynamic damage. So if you hit the plane with a large number of rounds spread across the 4 wing hitboxes (as looks to be the case here), there is no impact on the plane's speed or maneuverability, even though a plane that has been hit by that many .50 cal rounds would be appreciably slower, and more subject to stalling during hard maneuvering due to disturbed airflow over the wing. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by RedKestrel

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

1 hour ago, Sky_Wolf said:

A logical explanation for the lack of damage from the .50 caliber ammunition is the firing distance. The video does not indicate the firing distance. If it's 500 m or greater I think the lack of damage is plausible (rounds might just bounce off). 

I was in the k-4 on auto level at half throttle against 8 .50s on an ace level p47. If he cant kill me with all his ammo, something is broken beyond measure. To add insult to injury, I then take auto level off and shoot him down with ease 4x in a row.

[Creep]

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

it takes something in the order of 30 hits (!) to a single wing hitbox from M2 AP rounds to begin to induce significant drag from aerodynamic damage. 

Actually, it is far worse.

 

Our testing showed that it was literally not possible to cause an appreciable drag penalty with AP HMG when shooting the wing of a 109 before structural failure occurred. We shifted to using a FW190 D9, and found that it took 80+ hits to cause the same drag penalty you get with a single round of HE HMG ammo.

[RedKestrel]

34 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

Actually, it is far worse.

 

Our testing showed that it was literally not possible to cause an appreciable drag penalty with AP HMG when shooting the wing of a 109 before structural failure occurred. We shifted to using a FW190 D9, and found that it took 80+ hits to cause the same drag penalty you get with a single round of HE HMG ammo.

Ah, my apologies. I got it mixed up with the amount needed to cause structural damage.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

1 hour ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

I was in the k-4 on auto level at half throttle against 8 .50s on an ace level p47. If he cant kill me with all his ammo, something is broken beyond measure. To add insult to injury, I then take auto level off and shoot him down with ease 4x in a row.

What do you make of these videos? If you would like the tracks I have posted a link here: -

 

 

 

 

 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

22 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

What do you make of these videos? If you would like the tracks I have posted a link here: -

 

 

 

 

 

G14? My tests were in the K-4, so maybe that is a difference. The damage in your videos is still underwhelming to say the least though...8 .50s would shred anything flying straight and level in short order, especially a tiny little 109.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

3 minutes ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

G14? My tests were in the K-4, so maybe that is a difference. The damage in your videos is still underwhelming to say the least though...8 .50s would shred anything flying straight and level in short order, especially a tiny little 109

The internals were shredded and the engine and other systems were damaged , and not let's not forget not every round struck the target but the G-14 in all instances was knocked out in fairly short order. If you are so inclined you can download the tracks and check through them yourself . 

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

22 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

The internals were shredded and the engine and other systems were damaged , and not let's not forget not every round struck the target but the G-14 in all instances was knocked out in fairly short order. If you are so inclined you can download the tracks and check through them yourself . 

Is this what we see in game?

 

 

[6./ZG26_Custard]

15 minutes ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

Is this what we see in game?

No, because API isn't modeled.

We should probably expect something more like this.

 

 

[CountZero]

On 1/20/2021 at 6:37 AM, QB.Shallot said:

...

 

I noticed your coments here and in other topic about that belts on German and Russian HMG are with 50% AP HE mix, thats not how its in game, from game files russian 12.7 on fighters in game are 66% AP 33% HE, and German 13mm on fighters are 66%HE and 33%AP , only 50% AP HE split is on HMG on Italian 12.7mm. 

 

Examples:

Spoiler

MC202, 50-50 split in AP HE:
[GunAmmunition=0]    // 200 бронебойных и 200 осколочно-фугасных пуль 12.7х81 (к пулемету Breda SAFAT 12.7)
    ExpendableMass = 33.66    //Вес патрона 84.15г
    ResidualMass = 0    //TODO !!!!!!!!!
    MaxMisFiresInMagazine=0
    MaxRoundsInMagazine=400
    RoundsInMagazine=400
    ReservedMagazines=0
    AmountRoundsWithOneTracer=2    // каждая 2-я пуля с трассером
    object0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_ITA_12-7x81_AP.txt"
    object1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_ITA_12-7x81_HE.txt"
    target0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_ITA_12-7x81_AP.bin"
    target1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_ITA_12-7x81_HE.bin"
    BushConfig = "LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Trash/Batch_case12-20mm.txt"
 

Yak-1b , every 3rd is HE, total ~66-33 split (but same AP+HE+AP variant is on all fighters using russian 12.7):

[GunAmmunition=0]    // 147 бронебойных и 73 разрывных пуль 12.7х108 (к пулемету УБ)
    ExpendableMass = 19.3
    ResidualMass = 21.95
    MaxMisFiresInMagazine=0
    MaxRoundsInMagazine=220
    RoundsInMagazine=220
    ReservedMagazines=0
    AmountRoundsWithOneTracer=4    // каждая 8-я пуля с трассером
    TracerIdx=0
    object0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_AP.txt"
    object1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_HE.txt"
    object2="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_AP.txt"
    target0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_AP.bin"
    target1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_HE.bin"
    target2="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_RUS_12-7x108_AP.bin"
    BushConfig = "LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Trash/Batch_case12-20mm.txt"

 

Bf-109G6, every 3rd is AP, total ~66-33% split (same is on all german fighters using MG131):

[GunAmmunition=0]    // 100 бронебойных и 200 осколочно-фугасных пуль 13х64 (к пулемету MG 131)
    ExpendableMass = 25.0
    ResidualMass = 0.0
    MaxMisFiresInMagazine=0
    MaxRoundsInMagazine=300
    RoundsInMagazine=300
    ReservedMagazines=0
    AmountRoundsWithOneTracer=4    // каждая 4-я пуля с трассером
    TracerIdx=0
    object0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_HE.txt"
    object1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_AP.txt"
    object2="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_HE.txt"
    target0="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_HE.bin"
    target1="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_AP.bin"
    target2="LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Ballistics/Projectiles/BULLET_GER_13x64_HE.bin"
    BushConfig = "LuaScripts/WorldObjects/Trash/Batch_case12-20mm.txt"
[end]

 

By the way same is for 20mm guns, german is 66-33% in favor of HE and Russian side 66-33% in favor AP, Italian RAF and USAF 20s are 50-50% split.

[Creep]

2 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

The internals were shredded and the engine and other systems were damaged , and not let's not forget not every round struck the target but the G-14 in all instances was knocked out in fairly short order. If you are so inclined you can download the tracks and check through them yourself . 

Of course planes can be destroyed with M2 .50 cal. No one is disputing that. How many rounds hit you in those recordings? Where are the log files? How many hits do you think it would have taken to trigger the same outcome if it had been a Yak behind you shooting UBS?

The original intent of this thread was to talk about the huge disparity between AP and HE when it comes to causing appreciable drag on wings/elevator/etc. I can see from your videos that level two aero damage was not present on the 109 wings before structural failure occurred. You do realize that a single hit of HE MG131 cause a big damn hole in the wing of a 109 and that no amount of AP .50 will cause the same size hole before the wing breaks, right? 

It looks to me like you are doing everything in your power here and in the developer thread to protect the current HE meta. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by QB.Creep