Discussing the DM update!

[oc2209]

6 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I did my own tests... A B-26 down in flames with 3x30mm rounds. I shot down two Mosquitoes with 2x30mm rounds each, and one with a single 30mm round. I'm not sure what people are complaining about. All done in single player.

 

Getting kills with the 30mm isn't the point, as much as how it's accomplished. As I explained in another thread, the 30mm only gains comparable historical efficacy by having an unrealistically large and lethal shrapnel blast radius. Thus most kills come from pilot deaths or fuel ignition, rather than catastrophic structural failure.

 

The unrealistic aspect of the 30mm's performance is in scenarios like this:

 

Spoiler

 

Clearly, no plane could survive being hit in the same location by that many shells.

 

Yet, had I not hit the periscope with a lucky shot, the pilot wouldn't have been killed, and the plane would've 'absorbed' 5x30mm shots without suffering catastrophic failure.

 

It came down to dumb luck and shrapnel to secure a kill.

 

6 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Honestly, I suspect that not every Mk-108 round would detonate within the wing - some would fail to detonate or detonate after passing through. So the idea that a fighter might survive contact with three or so 30mm rounds without being destroyed seems quite plausible

 

No, it really doesn't seem plausible at all. You're assuming an extremely high incidence of detonation problems. You're further assuming that the sim is currently modelling such behavior; which I highly doubt.

 

Do you have any data on detonation rates, or are you just trying to play the devil's advocate here?

 

If 3-5x30mm hits was often enough to down a B-17, there is absolutely no logical reason to extrapolate that same level of survivability to a single-engine fighter.

[Denum]

7 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I did my own tests... A B-26 down in flames with 3x30mm rounds. I shot down two Mosquitoes with 2x30mm rounds each, and one with a single 30mm round. I'm not sure what people are complaining about. All done in single player.

 

Honestly, I suspect that not every Mk-108 round would detonate within the wing - some would fail to detonate or detonate after passing through. So the idea that a fighter might survive contact with three or so 30mm rounds without being destroyed seems quite plausible - just as sometimes a B-17 would be taken out by a single 30mm hit. I haven't tried it against fighters recently though... as it would be harder to fire short bursts and know for sure how many hit.

Because they think a single test (incidentally the only thing they've been able to provide) is an adequate benchmark. 

 

What's extremely amusing is so far, is just opinions. No data. No attempt to present data. Just "I thinks" which we learned isn't going to get you much attention. 

 

I'm in the same boat as you. Sometimes I one shot enemy planes. Sometimes they need a few extra. It's the same with the .50s. Sometimes 40 rounds and I've got my kill. Sometimes it's 100+. Neither seems unreasonable. As one average it's on the lower end of the scale for rounds landed to aircraft destroyed. 

 

I spent some time trying to find after mission photos of Blenheim that were similar to the B17.

 

They are very few and far between and the Blenheim saw pretty significant use throughout the war in a variety of roles. 

 

Its losses were significant and was in the top 3 for airmen lost and in some theaters it was losing more aircrews then other aircraft. Some sources claim it lost the most aircrews out of all RAF aircraft.

 

Judging from the lack of photos and the track record. Pretty safe to assume if you were engaged by enemy aircraft. You died. Your crew died. 

 

 

 

Neat to see some of these aircraft survived direct hits from 88mm or other aircraft. 

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

If it ain’t a Boeing, I ain’t going.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

2 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Clearly, no plane could survive being hit in the same location by that many shells.

If it the hits where in opposite sections of the fuselage neatly separated I could see it being ripped out, but closer together at one side I would expect it to be a similar situation as this


Large chunk of side skin ripped out but still held on


Another thing I would have expected is a fuel tank fire as around that section is where one of the main fuel tanks is for the Arado

Edited October 1, 2022 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[the_emperor]

6 hours ago, oc2209 said:

Honestly, I suspect that not every Mk-108 round would detonate within the wing - some would fail to detonate or detonate after passing through. So the idea that a fighter might survive contact with three or so 30mm rounds without being destroyed seems quite plausible

 

The German probably used the most sophisticated fuzes (boresafe & selfdestruct) with the highest reliability, beeing able to trigger at ~200m/s.

Compared to the simple percussion fuzes used by allied the which did have a chance of failing (depending on strike angle and/or velocity, and even failing totally if velocity is to slow).

But I think that cant be replicated in the game, and probably shouldnt at this point.

And the germans were the only nation that deployed delay charges to their fuzes. 

Edited October 1, 2022 by the_emperor

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, the_emperor said:

 

The German probably used the most sophisticated fuzes (boresafe & selfdestruct) with the highest reliability, beeing able to trigger at ~200m/s.

Compared to the simple percussion fuzes used by allied the which did have a chance of failing (depending on strike angle and/or velocity, and even failing totally if velocity is to slow).

But I think that cant be replicated in the game, and probably shouldnt at this point.

And the germans were the only nation that deployed delay charges to their fuzes. 

 

Mk-108:

"Left, the AZ 1587 (Anchlagzünder 1587 / Impact fuze 1587) a non self destruct impact fuze. Functioning of the fuze. An aluminium firing pin housing, containing the firing pin (see right side above the shell), is held out of line of the detonator. To enable the firing pin to pierce the detonator, it has to move 2mm to the center. A ball on the bottom of the fuze also prevents the firing pin to move to the middle. The ball on its turn cannot move upward, held in place by two centrifugal pins (one at 180º each) which are pushed inward by a brass coiled spring. The ball lies in the right one of two equaly sized holes that are drilled slightly overlapping. The right hole, holding the ball however is drilled 2º outward toward the top. After firing, the pins are thrown outward by the centrifugal force, the ball however is held back until acceleration decreaces. The ball than starts "climbing up the wall" of the 2º drilled hole due to the centrifugal force, towards the top of the fuze, where it falls in the recess of the firing pin housing. The weight of the ball, swung outward by the centrifugal force will now slide the firing pin housing outward (in this picture that would be to the right), placing the firing pin over the detonator and under the hammer pin above it. At impact the hammer pin forces the firing pin into the detonator.

In the middle, the ZZ1589A (Zerlegezünder 1589A / Self destruct fuze 1589A). Functioning of the fuze: The firing pin is placed in a housing with six holes drilled in a radial pattern in the body. These hold a small ball each. Around the body,a grooved steel ring is placed, The inner groove machined in diameter to receive just under half the diameter of the balls. A strong spring on top of the housing wants to press the firing pin into the detonator, but is prevented from this by a brass coiled roll. After firing , the centrifugal force forces the balls into the groove, the brass foiled roll starts to unwind, forming a hole large enough to let the firing pin and the housing pass. The balls, forced into the grooved steel ring now "lock" the firing pin housing in place. If a target is hit, the firing pin will simply be hammered down into the detonator, exploding the shell. If no target is hit, a moment will come where speed and spin will decreace. At the moment that the downward pushing spring overcomes the locking force generated by the balls in the groove, the balls will be pushed back in the housing and the firing pin will be driven into the detonator.

Right, the ZZ1589B Internal parts and working as the ZZ1589A , differs only in a smaller fuze body."

 

 

 

[oc2209]

14 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

If it the hits where in opposite sections of the fuselage neatly separated I could see it being ripped out, but closer together at one side I would expect it to be a similar situation as this

Large chunk of side skin ripped out but still held on

 

But is that one or two hits to that same location, or more? I would guess it's two at most.

 

Also, we've observed in the sim that a much smaller-than-B-17 fuselage can absorb 4+ hits.

 

15 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Another thing I would have expected is a fuel tank fire as around that section is where one of the main fuel tanks is for the Arado

 

Exactly.

 

You can also put 30mm rounds directly above/around the tank behind a P-51's cockpit and similarly not start a fire. Yet an impact 10+ feet from a fuel tank will often start a fire.

 

This is the realism problem in a nutshell.

 

I have also noticed many times, situations where an engine takes a direct 30mm hit and keeps running as if nothing happened; but if that hit was beside the engine, on the wing, say, the shrapnel effects would do a more consistent job of damaging the engine and causing it to seize quickly.

 

We can all see from these pictures that the real-life shrapnel radius and effect is quite minimal. That's what the sim should be trying to replicate. Instead of mid-wing hit = dead pilot or fuselage tank fire.

 

I'm perfectly okay with scenarios where a single hit on the trailing edge of a wing, or the tip of a stabilizer, fails to do catastrophic damage. I'm not debating that point at all.

 

What's ridiculous is when the same location--often a critical location in terms of structure or fuel/engine vulnerability--takes 3+ hits and still fails to develop serious damage.

[oc2209]

Here's a quick example (1 of 2 attempts; the first involved me hitting the target with 2x30mm before colliding with him and crashing; he didn't crash) of the apparent randomness of 30mm strikes to or near vital areas:

 

Spoiler

 

 

So, we have 2 impacts within ~6 feet of each other, that did nothing in terms of causing the plane to crash.

 

Only the 3rd managed to mysteriously detach both flaps without harming the pilot or fuel tank between said flaps.

 

Go figure.

[oc2209]

Here's a few more oddities.

 

This one is a 30mm striking the nose beneath the prop, or the prop itself, from head-on:

 

Spoiler

 

 

It apparently registered as a prop strike, since there's no DVD marker on the nose structure.

 

Here's a prop strike that stopped the engine in one hit (evidently):

 

Spoiler

 

 

Here's an example of how most 30mm kills are made:

 

Spoiler

 

 

So, prior to this recording's start, I hit this plane once in the belly scoop. Now, my AI wingman hit him 3 times; twice in the wing and once in the prop. For all that, it's a pilot kill from relatively far-off impacts that does the plane in.

 

Finally, here's a good example of two issues: excessive structural resilience, and fuel tank fires that aren't really near the point(s) of impact:

 

Spoiler

 

 

So, the fuel tank on the opposite side of where the shells actually impacted--that's the one that catches fire.

 

And then the tail takes an extreme amount of abuse at its narrowest point, but of course will never break in half:

 

Spoiler

 

3x30mm hits in a, what, 3 or 4 foot radius? And all there is to show for it is a cracked horizontal stabilizer.

 

Again, the realism question here isn't about the aggregate kill potential of the 30mm, as much as how these kills are achieved.

 

Because widespread shrapnel is doing the lion's share of the work--rather than explosive force to the immediate impact area--you get a lot of inconsistent and odd results.

[the_emperor]

11 hours ago, oc2209 said:

Because widespread shrapnel is doing the lion's share of the work--rather than explosive force to the immediate impact area--you get a lot of inconsistent and odd results.

 

Seems like it.

the probleme is that the german M-Geschosse dont rely on Shrapnel damage (thin walled shells, only the fuze has some frag potential), but on a delayed blast&pressure effect (and incendiary with the HA41 explosive) to destroy the load bearing structure and sheeting of "modern" WW2 aircrafts.

As far as I can asses this with my limit knowledge, it looks like, the game currently cannot depict such a damage/ammunition.

The only main frag does occur from the aircraft's own blasted structure.

But I also want to express, that I am currently very happy with the new DM, of course there is always something to improve ?

[oc2209]

10 hours ago, the_emperor said:

But I also want to express, that I am currently very happy with the new DM, of course there is always something to improve ?

 

Yeah, I should also point out that I'm not complaining. I'm just analyzing the cause/effect of 30mm performance.

 

As I said, the aggregate kill potential matches common-sense expectations most of the time.

 

Given that some planes (like the IL-2) can break in half from far less damage than most others, this seems to be a damage model issue that's specific to each plane individually. The P-51 seems to resist losing pieces of its tail (both the stabilizers and the elevators/rudder) more than some planes, etc.

 

Therefore, the solution would probably entail a lot of work, i.e, modifying each plane's damage model to work better with a modified 30mm round. In other words, it's more trouble than it's worth at the moment.

[oc2209]

Based on admittedly limited testing, I'm wondering if the 30-37mm HE shrapnel effects were adjusted (reduced) in the latest patch?

 

Observe:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Another direct cockpit hit with seemingly little collateral damage:

 

Spoiler

 

 

I didn't make any recordings of the German 30mm at work, but it seems to behave similarly to the Russian 37mm.

 

If so, this would be exactly what we (or at least myself) were hoping for.

 

Note that the second recording was made before today's hotfix that got rid of the extraneous tactical markings on skins that already have them.

 

 

[oc2209]

Okay, this is weird.

 

Given the rate at which pilot kills occurred before, especially from 30mm wing hits, here's an example where it takes nearly a direct hit to kill the pilot:

 

Spoiler

 

 

And this one's a riot. 3x30mm HE to the wing, the same wing, and the pilot survives! Not even a brief loss of consciousness.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Of course, when his plane augers in from having no aileron control and/or lift in the port wing, well, he doesn't survive that part.

 

Anyway. My experience so far seems to indicate less shrapnel. I'm okay with the wing not breaking off--because it was functionally worthless.

 

*Note: just to be perfectly clear, I'm not complaining about these results.

Edited October 13, 2022 by oc2209