20 mm 151's not consistant

[Mandoble]

It is my understanding that HE rounds of 151/20 were normally not Mine, the opposite applies to MG-FF were 100% of the rounds were mine shells. So, even with worse ballistics and RoF, actually 190A3 MG-FF could be more lethal than 151/20 when it hits.

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, Mandoble said:

It is my understanding that HE rounds of 151/20 were normally not Mine, the opposite applies to MG-FF were 100% of the rounds were mine shells. So, even with worse ballistics and RoF, actually 190A3 MG-FF could be more lethal than 151/20 when it hits.

Nope

mg-ff normal he and so (not in game)

mgffm (the ones in game) and 151/20 both had historically available regular he/ap and mine. The 151/20 later additionally incendiary 

[Mandoble]

11 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Nope

mg-ff normal he and so (not in game)

mgffm (the ones in game) and 151/20 both had historically available regular he/ap and mine. The 151/20 later additionally incendiary 

And wasn't A3 MGFF always the M variant by default? It was my understanding that the mine was the safest projectile to preserve the life of the gun compared with the older heavier shells.

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, Mandoble said:

And wasn't A3 MGFF always the M variant by default? It was my understanding that the mine was the safest projectile to preserve the life of the gun compared with the older heavier shells.

Indeed - and the Bf 109 E-3 and  the only single engine frontline fighter equipped with the non-mine-capable mgffs I know of.

Not sure which 110 c model switched to mines but the E certainly used mgffms as well. 

[Cybermat47]

31 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Indeed - and the Bf 109 E-3 and  the only single engine frontline fighter equipped with the non-mine-capable mgffs I know of.

Not sure which 110 c model switched to mines but the E certainly used mgffms as well. 

I believe it was the C-4.

[Mandoble]

11 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Indeed - and the Bf 109 E-3 and  the only single engine frontline fighter equipped with the non-mine-capable mgffs I know of.

Not sure which 110 c model switched to mines but the E certainly used mgffms as well. 

What I mean is that 190A3 MGFF (M) was using only minengeschoss rounds, and so it could effectively cause more damage than 151/20 AP/HE rounds when hitting.

[JG27*Kornezov]

I think German rounds are more effective in deflection shooting than from shooting from dead 6 o'clock. The Russian rounds are super deadly from dead six o'clock as they have more penetrating rounds that go deeply through the plane. Sometimes when the Russian plane hits in deflection the wing it just go through, while the German round makes more structural damage. 
From tactical point for a German is better to get a deflection shot at minimum 30 degree angle off than to park at the dead six where the ennemy plane will eat half of the ammo before going down. 

Edited April 6, 2021 by JG27_Kornezov

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, Mandoble said:

What I mean is that 190A3 MGFF (M) was using only minengeschoss rounds, and so it could effectively cause more damage than 151/20 AP/HE rounds when hitting.

According to German manuals both 20mm cannon were belted the same way:

L.Dv 4000/10 (1942/43): m/m/i/i/ap

Horrido - des Jägers Schießfibel (1944): m/i/ap against heavies, m/m/m/i/ap against everything else

[RyanR]

14 hours ago, JG27_Kornezov said:

I think German rounds are more effective in deflection shooting than from shooting from dead 6 o'clock. The Russian rounds are super deadly from dead six o'clock as they have more penetrating rounds that go deeply through the plane. Sometimes when the Russian plane hits in deflection the wing it just go through, while the German round makes more structural damage. 
From tactical point for a German is better to get a deflection shot at minimum 30 degree angle off than to park at the dead six where the ennemy plane will eat half of the ammo before going down. 

 

I totally agree. The ShVAK is a silent killer. A good burst isn't as visually stunning as the German 20mm's, but almost always something important breaks on the enemy planes. I was surprised when my Russian Stalingrad career finished up with more kills than the German Stalingrad career I flew prior.

 

-Ryan

[oc2209]

On 4/7/2021 at 6:18 AM, RyanR said:

 I was surprised when my Russian Stalingrad career finished up with more kills than the German Stalingrad career I flew prior.

 

Now that's something I've never managed to do; despite my preference for the Yak's handling over the 109's.

 

In a 109F-4, I average between 3 and 5 kills per sortie. Closer to 3 than 5, so the typical true average is usually a little under 4. Once I move on to the G-6, especially when the 30mm becomes available, I tend to increase my average to a little over 4, where it stays even through Bodenplatte (though, due to various save errors, I've never made it through a Bodenplatte career; usually only a month or two at most).

 

In Yak-1s through 7s, I'd be lucky to average 2 kills per sortie. In Yak-9s, even 3 per, consistently, is difficult for me. 4 kills in one sortie is kind of a big deal. Also, the AI in a 109 is much more likely to bounce me in a Yak, damage me, and thereby cut my sortie short.

 

My issue, I believe, is that 109s are harder to catch up to in a Yak, than vice versa. In a 109, I can quite literally tuck my nose under my target's tail before I fire. I can hang with any Russian plane in a turn, at any speed. Only with the La-5FN does this become difficult. I face very few Yak-9s in my German careers, so it's kind of a non-issue.

 

By contrast, chasing 109s in a Yak usually means you'll be further away when you fire. The 109 has a bit more oomph in terms of acceleration, and the AI uses it pretty well. So firing from a greater average distance + faster rate of fire + lower ammo count = more wasted shots for me in the Yak.

[Avimimus]

On 4/7/2021 at 9:18 AM, RyanR said:

I totally agree. The ShVAK is a silent killer. A good burst isn't as visually stunning as the German 20mm's, but almost always something important breaks on the enemy planes. I was surprised when my Russian Stalingrad career finished up with more kills than the German Stalingrad career I flew prior.

 

-Ryan

 

Hmm... and the 23mm Vya can send an AP round through the tail and the entire aircraft to hit the pilot in the front. Almost no visible damage... just a bomber losing control.

[gimpy117]

42 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

My issue, I believe, is that 109s are harder to catch up to in a Yak, than vice versa. In a 109, I can quite literally tuck my nose under my target's tail before I fire. I can hang with any Russian plane in a turn, at any speed. Only with the La-5FN does this become difficult. I face very few Yak-9s in my German careers, so it's kind of a non-issue.

magic wing slats right? never mind wing loading or extra slat drag. apparently according to some people on here slats are "free lift" and produce no negative effects until past critical angle. 

 

funny how the La5 doesn't have magic pitch authority 

[oc2209]

3 hours ago, gimpy117 said:

magic wing slats right? never mind wing loading or extra slat drag. apparently according to some people on here slats are "free lift" and produce no negative effects until past critical angle. 

 

funny how the La5 doesn't have magic pitch authority 

 

The only real advantage the slats confer is to reduce the sharpness of a stall and incipient spin effects. The 109 doesn't turn any better than a Yak or Spitfire if the pilots are both human, because humans can push the latter planes to their limits. The AI, for whatever reason, doesn't turn the Yak or Spit to the maximum. Especially the Yak. Probably something to do with how the AI handles G-load. Point being, the 109 F-4 can turn inside any Russian plane when the AI's piloting said Russian plane. Barring, as I said, maybe the Yak-9 Series 1. But as other Yaks are far more commonly encountered in career mode, it's not a problem.

 

The La-5 was never a good turner. It's an adequate turner. It handles a lot like a Fw-190, except its slats keep it from spinning like the 190. That's about all there is to it.

[Mac_Messer]

3 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

The only real advantage the slats confer is to reduce the sharpness of a stall and incipient spin effects. The 109 doesn't turn any better than a Yak or Spitfire if the pilots are both human, because humans can push the latter planes to their limits. The AI, for whatever reason, doesn't turn the Yak or Spit to the maximum. Especially the Yak. Probably something to do with how the AI handles G-load. Point being, the 109 F-4 can turn inside any Russian plane when the AI's piloting said Russian plane. Barring, as I said, maybe the Yak-9 Series 1. But as other Yaks are far more commonly encountered in career mode, it's not a problem.

 

The La-5 was never a good turner. It's an adequate turner. It handles a lot like a Fw-190, except its slats keep it from spinning like the 190. That's about all there is to it.

Yak driving AI goes for sustained turn + flaps while 109 AI goes for maximum possible turn and levels out upon glocking. If you follow the 109`s flightpath you will glock aswell but the 109 will gain distance from better acceleration. The easy way to counter this is to cut through AI`s maneuver (lag pursuit for example) because AI doesn`t know what to do in that instance. Works for most AI driven fighters.

7 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Hmm... and the 23mm Vya can send an AP round through the tail and the entire aircraft to hit the pilot in the front. Almost no visible damage... just a bomber losing control.

That is the real winner weapon ingame. Even AP ammo often causes engine fire/failure, while HE produces damage closer to 30mm HE.