Gun jams

[No.23_Starling]

Hi all, I’d like to see where the devs stand on simple RNG modelling of more serious gun jams. All our misfires can be cleared in seconds, and jamming was a big issue ww1 jockies faced.

 

WoFF model it excellently where your pilot has to hammer away at the jam sometimes taking a minute or two to clear.

 

It doesn’t seem like a huge effort to code as misfiring already exists, and it would enhance the realism, plus hopefully reduce the urge to spam long range hosing of bullets and reward better gunnery. I’m sure the community has data on jam frequency to model the RNG - I’ll check my library.

 

Rummy

Edited July 10, 2023 by US103_Rummell

[Zooropa_Fly]

Do we / they want 'random' failures though ?

For realism the same could be applied to engine and structural failures.

Variable plane performance could also be introduced, but is it desirable ?

 

Such things could cause dis-satisfaction in the MP arena..

 

S!

[No.23_Starling]

2 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Do we / they want 'random' failures though ?

For realism the same could be applied to engine and structural failures.

Variable plane performance could also be introduced, but is it desirable ?

 

Such things could cause dis-satisfaction in the MP arena..

 

S!

Set it as a server option.

 

As for engine failures, WoFF model this too and even factor historical reliability eg the direct drive Hispano vs the geared version, but I can’t see us getting that ever.

 

Our engines can get permanently damaged by abuse (over rev) but the guns generally don’t. I’ve never damaged mine from overheating despite the pop up message.

 

The DM also factors relative structural strength already and that has been in MP from the outset.

[Avimimus]

The answers I've been given (and not directly by the devs), are that there isn't enough data on gun jams to do it realistically, and people don't like their missions being ruined by random events.

 

I did start working on a gun-jam mod for WWII (unfinished). It would also seems like it might be possible to replace misfires with longer but less frequent jams through modding (However, doing so would get rid of misfires).

 

I'd also like to see it as an option. However, I think this would require adding a dedicated programmer to Flying Circus... there are a lot of things that could do with improvements - for instance, wind limits the ability to lean out of cockpits in WWII planes, but it doesn't impact the reloading of Lewis guns in WWI planes (in spite of plenty of textual evidence of pilots having to reduce airspeed or face a lot of difficulty with the reload process in real life). The same goes for the impact of gee forces on the ability to clear a misfire - it should be more difficult to pull a sharp turn if you only have one hand on the stick.

 

There are a lot of these little things that could be improved. I suspect they are pretty distracted by the upcoming module though.

 

5 hours ago, US103_Rummell said:

It doesn’t seem like a huge effort to code as misfiring already exists, and it would enhance the realism, plus hopefully reduce the urge to spam long range hosing of bullets and reward better gunnery. I’m sure the community has data on jam frequency to model the RNG - I’ll check my library.

 

If anyone has this data for WWI (or WWII) - I'd enjoy seeing it.

[No.23_Starling]

53 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

The answers I've been given (and not directly by the devs), are that there isn't enough data on gun jams to do it realistically, and people don't like their missions being ruined by random events.

 

I did start working on a gun-jam mod for WWII (unfinished). It would also seems like it might be possible to replace misfires with longer but less frequent jams through modding (However, doing so would get rid of misfires).

 

I'd also like to see it as an option. However, I think this would require adding a dedicated programmer to Flying Circus... there are a lot of things that could do with improvements - for instance, wind limits the ability to lean out of cockpits in WWII planes, but it doesn't impact the reloading of Lewis guns in WWI planes (in spite of plenty of textual evidence of pilots having to reduce airspeed or face a lot of difficulty with the reload process in real life). The same goes for the impact of gee forces on the ability to clear a misfire - it should be more difficult to pull a sharp turn if you only have one hand on the stick.

 

There are a lot of these little things that could be improved. I suspect they are pretty distracted by the upcoming module though.

 

 

If anyone has this data for WWI (or WWII) - I'd enjoy seeing it.

Thanks for this.

 

Making it an option and perhaps an adjustable scale with RNG would be a sensible solution and then let map creators make a decision, a bit like the flak severity. 
 

I doubt they have data on ww1 flak accuracy either so we let the map owners make that call. 
 

There is no reliable data on ww1 parachute reliability but we’ve them in game anyway (with 100% reliability).

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, US103_Rummell said:

Our engines can get permanently damaged by abuse (over rev) but the guns generally don’t. I’ve never damaged mine from overheating despite the pop up message.

 

From what I remember about when the feature was implemented, overheating only affects the accuracy of the weapon, which generally makes sense. As someone who was an armorer in the military, I can tell you these weapons are designed to sustain very high temperatures. Most jams are going to come from mechanical design issues or something wrong with the ammunition, not overheating. 

 

Case in point (excuse the pun): ? this is a 7.62x51 shell casing that a few weeks ago got jammed in my M1A. The extractor was unable to grab hold of the casing and the only way I was eventually able to remove it was to push a cleaning rod down the bore.

 

Otherwise, going back to the original subject - I like the idea, but IMO ideally this is something that should be set up as a configurable option by the player.

 

[No.23_Starling]

35 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

From what I remember about when the feature was implemented, overheating only affects the accuracy of the weapon, which generally makes sense. As someone who was an armorer in the military, I can tell you these weapons are designed to sustain very high temperatures. Most jams are going to come from mechanical design issues or something wrong with the ammunition, not overheating. 

 

Case in point (excuse the pun): ? this is a 7.62x51 shell casing that a few weeks ago got jammed in my M1A. The extractor was unable to grab hold of the casing and the only way I was eventually able to remove it was to push a cleaning rod down the bore.

 

Otherwise, going back to the original subject - I like the idea, but IMO ideally this is something that should be set up as a configurable option by the player.

 

This is freaking cool.

 

Leon Bennett devotes a chapter to gun reliability in Gunning for the Red Baron. As you say, a lot of jams are mechanical with issues from cartridges and fabric belts. Both the Vickers and Lewis manuals describe the main jam types and how to clear them. He actually highlights the issues at the opposite end where guns overcool at sustained high alt. I’m guessing that’s harder for you to simulate.

 

The great Cecil Lewis talks about the frequent jams and how 56sq would spend hours before patrols loading their own belts rather than leaving it to the armorers:

 

Cecil Lewis also talks to the hazard of changing a drum on the Lewis Gun; in WoFF you have to manually pull down the mount and push back up which can take anything up to a minute and prevents you from dogfighting. That always felt more real than RoF and FC where you can change it whilst looping and pulling Gs.
 

In WoFF I’ll get around 1 jam per 200 rounds which normally take between 20 and 60 seconds to clear. 

 

100% agree it should be a user defined option.

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, US103_Rummell said:

He actually highlights the issues at the opposite end where guns overcool at sustained high alt. I’m guessing that’s harder for you to simulate.

 

Yes, it probably had to do with the grease they used to lubricate the weapons becoming like sludge the higher up they went.

[Trooper117]

I've seen that interview with Cecil Lewis a few times... I've also read his book 'Sagittarius Rising' first published in 1936. He also went on to be one of the founders of the BBC.

An amazing man, and if you haven't read his book on his experiences in the RFC during WWI, I encourage you to do so.

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, it probably had to do with the grease they used to lubricate the weapons becoming like sludge the higher up they went.

 

Yes. I had thought of making a mod to reverse the temperature effects and simulate overcooling being a problem. Not sure if anyone is interested though?

 

 

  

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

From what I remember about when the feature was implemented, overheating only affects the accuracy of the weapon, which generally makes sense.

 

From the research and experimentation done - we're pretty certain that there are two temperature points for each gun. There is a misfire chance for each temperature point. The high temperature point has a much higher misfire chance. The simulation probably interpolates - but I'm not certain how.

 

Overheating impacts muzzle velocity / dispersion, and also impacts misfire chance. These are two separate effects which were coded back in the Rise of Flight days.

[Guest deleted@219798]

Perhaps the pilots could be equipped with hammers to bash the guns or will they just bang with their fists? 

[No.23_Starling]

9 hours ago, kestrel444x500 said:

Perhaps the pilots could be equipped with hammers to bash the guns or will they just bang with their fists? 

In WoFF you can hear the hammering but can’t see it. The pilot will also curse if they can’t clear it after a couple of attempts. Immersion.

[Raptor341]

This should 100% be included as a simulator. I have always been a fan of jamming, system failures, and random failures because it helps create that immersion and adds important detail that is otherwise lost.

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Still remembering when they introduced misfires about 6 months ago.  Disastrous, and despite numerous reports, it still took a long time to get them to acknowledge, and then fix.  In no hurry to go there again.

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

It was a year ago.  My bad.  You should remember it Luke..

 

 

 

[No.23_Starling]

9 hours ago, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

Still remembering when they introduced misfires about 6 months ago.  Disastrous, and despite numerous reports, it still took a long time to get them to acknowledge, and then fix.  In no hurry to go there again.

It happened after every other shot though. In WoFF it’ll only happen 1-2 per mission, but when it does it takes a while to clear 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Well....it's not the concept I'm concerned with, it's the implementation.

[Avimimus]

On 7/19/2023 at 5:25 PM, US103_Rummell said:

It happened after every other shot though. In WoFF it’ll only happen 1-2 per mission, but when it does it takes a while to clear 

 

Shouldn't a serious gun jam be something like once every ten missions? Flying at high altitude increasing those gun jam rates, and some guns/time-periods having even lower rates? But a true jam should be pretty rare...

 

Misfires (like we have in the sim) might happen once or twice per mission. Although I wonder if they were even that high - lots of aircraft had inaccessible guns, and if misfires were as common as they are in the sim, one would expect that they wouldn't both to carry more than forty rounds per gun.

 

 

 

[No.23_Starling]

14 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Shouldn't a serious gun jam be something like once every ten missions? Flying at high altitude increasing those gun jam rates, and some guns/time-periods having even lower rates? But a true jam should be pretty rare...

 

Misfires (like we have in the sim) might happen once or twice per mission. Although I wonder if they were even that high - lots of aircraft had inaccessible guns, and if misfires were as common as they are in the sim, one would expect that they wouldn't both to carry more than forty rounds per gun.

 

 

 

Not an easy one to model and you’d need a setting to adjust. The available data from sqdr diaries is patchy and some pilots were far more careful with arming their own guns than other - see Lewis talking about the 56sqdr rules on checking every round.

 

At the very least you’d want the Lewis reloading to be more realistic than it is now. You can change drums in high G dogfights. In WoFF it’s a 30-60s distraction