Hs-129 tank busting effectiveness

[I/JG53_Kurtz]

I apology if the topic has been already covered, but I reached a high degree of frustration regarding Hs-129 armed with 30 mm cannons against tanks.
I'm quite expert in manouvering, shooting, aiming with the Henschel and I always follow the usual suggestions in shooting at tanks:

 

1. shooting angle around 20-30°;
2. occasional use of flaps in order to slow down the plane and increase accuracy;
3. shots at very close range, every time seeing the ammo impacting against the tank with a high percentage of shots on target;
4. aiming at the top-back side of the tank to disable the engine;
5. other shots to the sides to disable the tracks;

 

Despite all of these measures, even emptying the whole drum of ammo of the Mk103 cannon against one single tank, the best result that i can achieve is to stop the tank from moving, maybe I just manage to destroy a couple of T-34 in tens and tens of tank busting missions, both in single than in multiplayer in servers like Finnish virtual war.

 

Now please, someone could tell me what I'm doing wrong? Anyone has suggestions?

I remember one thread in which players experimented and recorded the number of shots to destroy each type of soviet tank... My experience totally does not match with these conclusions. Had some game update change the effectiveness of the shots and/or resistance of the tanks?

I don't know what to think...

 

Thank you for any comment or suggestion!

Edited July 23, 2024 by I/JG53_Kurtz

[I/JG53_Kurtz]

To further support my observations, look at this statistics, to destroy a human controlled T-34 model 43 it was needed to hit it with a a total of 57 out of 80 30 mm bullets! Executing I think at least 12 attacks:

 

 

Edited July 23, 2024 by I/JG53_Kurtz

[Hanu]

Sadly I've personally given up almost completely all tank pounding. Those cannons aren't worth anything anymore I feel. AP ammo is especially bad. Not sure when the change happened. Small bombs (with direct hits) seem to be only ones that are worth their weight. Even with Ju-88's 1000kg bombs you need to be practically as precise as with 70-250kg's. But with cannons your hope is that you get some hits and then AI kills it (if there are such in the mission) and last human pilot that hits it will get the credit (later on).

Sure, I'm exaggerating a bit, but still that's the feeling after a lot of focusing and attempts (and hits).

[jollyjack]

Pity, i bought that plane for the pea shooting fun, thought it was capable some time ago ...

[I/JG53_Kurtz]

I found that old thread in which one user tested effectiveness of different planes armed with anti-tank guns against a T-34, with the following results:

 

Plane	Gun	Smoking	Killed
Hs129	MK101	7	9
Hs129	MK103	7	9
Bf110	BK3.7	3	4
Ju87	2xBK3.7	-	2
Lagg3	SH37	5	7
IL2/42	2xSH37	3	4

even considering its "ideal" recreated conditions, my experience is totally different, I was forced to shot 57 bullets instead of 9 to destroy the same type of tank! There is definitely something strange here...

Edited July 24, 2024 by I/JG53_Kurtz

[T24_Martin]

@LukeFF is there something in the pipeline to correct this? I have given up shooting at tanks a while ago. I always thought I am doing something wrong, but this seems to be at least a little proof of a potential bug or something similar. 

 

Would b nice to have it fixed. From the book of Hans-Ulrich Rudel it seems to be much more likely to destroy a tank with the 3,7cm guns compared to our simulation.

[LukeFF]

53 minutes ago, T24_Martin said:

@LukeFF is there something in the pipeline to correct this? I have given up shooting at tanks a while ago. I always thought I am doing something wrong, but this seems to be at least a little proof of a potential bug or something similar. 

 

Would b nice to have it fixed. From the book of Hans-Ulrich Rudel it seems to be much more likely to destroy a tank with the 3,7cm guns compared to our simulation.

 

If you can post some track files showing the problem, I can pass them along to our QA guys. 

[I/JG53_Kurtz]

Thank you LukeFF, would be nice to have some support or verification from the team! I will try to record a track, but please, start to take into consideration the data showed in this thread. 57 bullets on target compared to 9 hits from the 2018 test to destroy a T-34.

[LukeFF]

I understand, sure, but the team is going to want more current data than that. A lot has changed with the damage modeling since since 2018. 

[kraut1]

On 7/23/2024 at 9:06 AM, I/JG53_Kurtz said:

I apology if the topic has been already covered, but I reached a high degree of frustration regarding Hs-129 armed with 30 mm cannons against tanks.
I'm quite expert in manouvering, shooting, aiming with the Henschel and I always follow the usual suggestions in shooting at tanks:

 

1. shooting angle around 20-30°;
2. occasional use of flaps in order to slow down the plane and increase accuracy;
3. shots at very close range, every time seeing the ammo impacting against the tank with a high percentage of shots on target;
4. aiming at the top-back side of the tank to disable the engine;
5. other shots to the sides to disable the tracks;

 

On 7/25/2024 at 5:27 PM, LukeFF said:

I understand, sure, but the team is going to want more current data than that. A lot has changed with the damage modeling since since 2018. 

Hi,

I just made a sp test:

A slow moving AI T34 76/43 on a runway.

-Flaps constantly extended 20° during whole test.

-I always attacked from rear.

-I (tryed) to aim a bit higher at top back side / turret, because I think, that the cannon is far below of the sight line.

-After the 2nd pass the tank stopped, after the 4th or 5th pass the tank did not smoke but according to the "Statistics" it was already mentioned as destroyed.

-After the the 6th pass it started to smoke. (I hit this time the top cover of the engine)

-I landed and counted the rounds still available by firing single shots: ca.35

-Because I did not aimed pefectly I suppose that I wasted ca.5-10 rounds.

HS129-tank-test1.2024-07-27_19-18-05_00.zip

And a (boring) video:

 

Edited July 27, 2024 by kraut1

[LukeFF]

Thanks, I will pass this along. 

[HazMatt]

In my experience the German 30mm does not seemed to be modeled accurately in the game. There is another thread about the Minengeschoss 30mm.

 

In my experience I have hit a Hurricane with multiple 30mm hits in a head-on shot with a 262 and had it continued to fly. This doesn't seem to align with the videos of damage tests of the 30mm in videos I've seen online.

 

I also found this when asking chatgtp for what it's worth:

The 30mm MK 103 cannon, mounted on the Henschel Hs 129 ground-attack aircraft during World War II, was primarily used against armored targets. Its high-explosive (HE) ammunition had a reduced load of propellant, resulting in a muzzle velocity of around 860 m/s. The armor penetration for its armor-piercing incendiary (APCR) rounds was approximately 42–52 mm at a 60° angle and 75–95 mm at a 90° angle at a distance of 300 meters

 

I also found this about the T-34 armor:

• Hull Front:
  • Upper part: 47 mm / 60°
  • Lower part: 45 mm / 60°
• Hull Side:
  • Upper part: 40 mm
  • Hull rear: 45 mm
  • Hull top: 20 mm
  • Hull bottom: 15 mm
• Turret Front:
  • 60 mm (round)
• Turret Side:
  • 52 mm / 30°
• Turret Rear:
  • 30 mm
• Turret Top:
  • 16 mm

 

Based on this it appears hull top, and side, as well as the turret top and rear should all be easily penetrated even at 60 degree angles. This is all based on chatgtp which obviously doesn't cite original sources.

Edited July 29, 2024 by HazMatt

[GasTeddy]

On 7/23/2024 at 12:42 PM, I/JG53_Kurtz said:

To further support my observations, look at this statistics, to destroy a human controlled T-34 model 43 it was needed to hit it with a a total of 57 out of 80 30 mm bullets! Executing I think at least 12 attacks:

 

 

 

Statistics rarely tell the truth, as for some reason kills of medium and heavy tanks do not show up as they should. Just yesterday I killed 5 static T34s, got 1 in stats. Player controlled I killed 4 T34s, 1 Churchill and 2 SUs. Got 1 heavy kill and that's all.

 

P.S.  Kills were made with Panzers, not aircraft.

Edited July 30, 2024 by GasTeddy
P.S

[GOA_Karaya_VR]

All 30mm including  Minengeschoss 30mm are broken, same happend to the Mk108, what we have on the simulator is nothing compared to real life damage of that ammo.

 

There are some topics on this forum about this adress and devs never attend this unrealistic behaviour, ( But ironically the .50 was '' fixed'' ).

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daiJ5arnPlw

 

Luke, can you please talk with the team for some answer about this drawback.

 

Kind regards.

[kraut1]

On 7/29/2024 at 5:44 PM, LukeFF said:

Thanks, I will pass this along. 

Here another test from the Pacific:

P39 with 37mm AP ammo

In the game the tank was mentioned in the statictics as destroyed, but it did not smoke / explode:

 

In the reports the hits are listed, I have added the damages and at the end total damage was 0.8147:
mission begin:
T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:0 AType:20 USERID:7774a942-8165-481d-910a-2aab3c2b08b4 USERNICKID:520e6376-c04d-41b3-a53d-2d58c445defe
T:0 AType:0 GDate:1943.6.1 GTime:12:30:0 MFile:missions/test/p39-pacific-tank-test1.msnbin MID: GType:0 CNTRS:0:0,101:1,102:1,103:1,201:2,202:2,203:2,301:3,302:3,303:3,304:3,305:3,401:4,402:4 SETTS:0000000010100001000000011100000 MODS:1 PRESET:0 AQMID:0 ROUNDS: 1 POINTS: 500
T:15 AType:12 ID:33791 TYPE:P-39L-1 COUNTRY:103 NAME:Plane PID:-1 POS(51317.7227,192.5979,408034.3125)
T:15 AType:12 ID:34815 TYPE:BotPilot_P39_USA43 COUNTRY:103 NAME:BotPilot_P39_USA43 PID:33791 POS(51317.8711,192.5182,408034.0938)
T:15 AType:10 PLID:33791 PID:34815 BUL:430 SH:0 BOMB:0 RCT:0 (51317.7227,192.5979,408034.3125) IDS:520e6376-c04d-41b3-a53d-2d58c445defe LOGIN:7774a942-8165-481d-910a-2aab3c2b08b4 NAME:kraut1 TYPE:P-39L-1 COUNTRY:103 FORM:0 FIELD:0 INAIR:0 PARENT:-1 ISPL:1 ISTSTART:1 PAYLOAD:5 FUEL:0.7488 SKIN:p39l1/pacific shark 1 p39l1.dds WM:49
 

Spoiler

T:30 AType:5 PID:33791 POS(51331.8203, 190.8878, 408010.6875)

Attacks:
T:4008 AType:12 ID:18431 TYPE:PzKpfw 38t COUNTRY:201 NAME:Vehicle PID:-1 POS(52313.4102,3.3296,405987.1250)
T:4008 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4008 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4008 AType:2 DMG:0.0315 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.4102,3.3296,405987.1250)
T:4009 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4009 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4012 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4012 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4012 AType:2 DMG:0.0522 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.4570,3.3236,405986.8125)
T:4013 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4013 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4014 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4014 AType:2 DMG:0.1005 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.4766,3.3206,405986.6875)
T:4015 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4015 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4015 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4015 AType:2 DMG:0.0467 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.4883,3.3191,405986.5938)
T:4016 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4016 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4018 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4018 AType:2 DMG:0.0115 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.5234,3.3146,405986.3750)
T:4019 AType:1 AMMO:BULLET_USA_12-7x99_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4019 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:4019 AType:2 DMG:0.0108 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52313.5352,3.3131,405986.3125)
T:4020 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:6208 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:6209 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:8277 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:8277 AType:2 DMG:0.0725 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52360.8125,2.5433,405678.6875)
T:8278 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:9869 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:9869 AType:2 DMG:0.1677 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52377.8438,1.2779,405568.0000)
T:9870 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:11879 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:11879 AType:2 DMG:0.0906 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52399.3398,2.1283,405427.8750)
T:11880 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
T:11880 AType:2 DMG:0.0067 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52399.3516,2.1299,405427.7813)

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:15614 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:15614 AType:2 DMG:0.0351 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52439.4492,4.8671,405166.9688)
T:15615 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:21749 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:21749 AType:2 DMG:0.1646 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52439.6523,4.9737,405164.8438)
T:21750 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
//after this attack total dmg: 0.6052

T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:24489 AType:1 AMMO:SHELL_USA_37x145_AP AID:33791 TID:18431
T:24489 AType:2 DMG:0.2095 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52439.6523,4.9737,405164.8438)
T:24489 AType:3 AID:33791 TID:18431 POS(52439.6523,4.9737,405164.8438)
T:24490 AType:1 AMMO:explosion AID:33791 TID:18431
//after this attack total dmg: 0.8147, tank in statistics mentioned as destroyed

mission end
T:0 AType:15 VER:17
T:27293 AType:4 PLID:33791 PID:34815 BUL:392 SH:0 BOMB:0 RCT:0 (54105.3555,358.0454,403798.0938)
T:27294 AType:16 BOTID:34815 POS(54103.8555,357.8866,403797.5625)
T:27295 AType:7
T:27295 AType:2 DMG:1.0000 AID:-1 TID:33791 POS(54104.1211,357.9557,403797.6563)
T:27295 AType:3 AID:-1 TID:33791 POS(54104.1211,357.9557,403797.6563)

//hits:
.50:  8
37mm: 8

Track:

P39-Pacific-tank-test1.2024-07-30_13-37-30_00.zip

A test video with all 37mm hits in slow motion:

 

Similar as with the HS129 / MK103 an according to the Statistics destroyed tank did not smoke / burn.

Please check, if for each tank type the destruction can be shown for the player at least with some medium smoke or small fire.

Edited July 31, 2024 by kraut1

[jollyjack]

Confirmed, could not blowup one tank with a Hs129 and Mk103. Basically Kraut's mission with some tanks added: Hs129b2 tank busting jj.zip

[LukeFF]

On 7/30/2024 at 11:38 PM, kraut1 said:

In the game the tank was mentioned in the statictics as destroyed, but it did not smoke / explode:

 

Tanks are also counted as destroyed when tracks are damaged or the driver is dead.

[CzechTexan]

While we're on the subject of tank busting...

the Stuka 37mm are not effective vs tanks. 

In the past I could get the tanks to at least smoke... now, nothing.  These hits are from close range with some direct hits on the rear.

Could it be that the ammunition is less effective? OR, tank armor is stronger?

Watch the video...

 

[CzechTexan]

Now compare the previous video with this one (vs. heavy armor Churchills)...

 

[LukeFF]

YouTube videos are fine, but the QA team needs track files to investigate something like this. 🙂

[GOA_Karaya_VR]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

YouTube videos are fine, but the QA team needs track files to investigate something like this. 🙂

 

Luke, can you please send to the devs our restlessness about the 30mm mine ( Mk108 ) and Mk103?.

 

Several years have pass since the devs still on silence about this problem.

 

Regards

[LukeFF]

24 minutes ago, GOA_CompanereKaraya_VR said:

 

Luke, can you please send to the devs our restlessness about the 30mm mine ( Mk108 ) and Mk103?.

 

Several years have pass since the devs still on silence about this problem.

 

Regards

 

I have passed along the reports people have posted here but it's not up to me to decide what will be looked out. 

[HazMatt]

I get the feeling we're wasting our time on this. This doesn't seem to me to be a hard fix. Whatever the variable is in the function that determines the amount of damage that the round causes could be easily modified as it appears to have already been modified since 2018 when it was said to have worked correctly.

 

I just posted in the Minengeschoss post about seeing a Tempest today take at least 4 .30 mm rounds from a 262 and a 152 and kept fighting like we were shooting him with bb guns.

 

The fact that this has been going on so long and has been brought up so many times are the things that makes it the most frustrating I think.

 

[kraut1]

On 8/4/2024 at 9:27 PM, CzechTexan said:

While we're on the subject of tank busting...

the Stuka 37mm are not effective vs tanks. 

In the past I could get the tanks to at least smoke... now, nothing.  These hits are from close range with some direct hits on the rear.

Could it be that the ammunition is less effective? OR, tank armor is stronger?

Watch the video...

 

My second flight with a -F8 with Panzerblitz. Seems to work well. (see 02:30)

 

[CzechTexan]

On 8/25/2024 at 6:45 PM, kraut1 said:

My second flight with a -F8 with Panzerblitz. Seems to work well. (see 02:30)

I guess we should give up flying the Hs129 and Ju87 and start using the FW190.

[kraut1]

21 hours ago, CzechTexan said:

I guess we should give up flying the Hs129 and Ju87 and start using the FW190.

I hope not, a solution for the Hs129 and Ju87 is absolutely required. These planes are very importent for the IL-2 GB simulation.

Here my newest tactic to at least immobilize at tank with one attack:

from the side, low altititude, flaps full down, full throttle, open fire already in medium distance, only 1 very long burst, aim at lower part of turret to hit the side of the tank, gun convergation on 250m.

(I have given up to fire each grenade as accurate as a sniper, just continous fire and you have a real chance to hit 1 or 2 times effectively)

With this tactic a was able to stop a tank with one pass. I have repeated this 3 times.

 

Hi @LukeFF, is it possible that a temporary solution, a patch for the Hs129 / Ju87 is released that increases the effectiveness of the Hs129 / Ju87 or to let smoke each immobilized tank at least a bit?

I think it is very importent for the motivation of the pilots to see at least some minimum effects when they attack and hit.

 

Hi @CzechTexan, I know that you are interested in the eastern front.

Maybe you want to try my Kurland Mod about the "Courland Pocket 1944/45" in Latvija.

It consists of a Mod (modified GUI Map, a german destroyer and some SP missions) and an adapted EMG.

In the EMG the standard loadouts of the FW190-A8 are for the standard -A8 fighter / fighter bomber version.

If you want to create missions with the Schlachtflieger (ground attack) -F8 you can select loadout "camera" for a SC500 bomb and "Cargo" for the 12xPanzerblitz.

Modified GUI Map of Kurland / Kurzeme in Latvija:

 

 

Edited August 28, 2024 by kraut1

[Aapje]

In my opinion, the bigger issue with the video you posted is that the extra fuel tanks don't get punctured.

 

AFAIK, it is actually quite realistic that tank busting with WW 2 airplanes was a pretty hopeless affair, with a lot of claimed kills in reality being at most superficial damage:

 

 

The video mentioned that there is testimony that green crew members would have a tendency to run away from the tank. It is understandable that pilots would interpret this as a kill, but in contrast to a plane, a tank crew can go back into their vehicle after bailing out.

Edited August 28, 2024 by Aapje

[kraut1]

a small attempt to fix the MK103 ammo, but still a bit exaggerated, I will try to optimize:

 

[kraut1]

@CzechTexan@I/JG53_Kurtz@jollyjack@Hanu

This works as a first preliminary solution, still a bit to strong, could be optimized further.

At 05:50 you can see that a KV1-S is not stopped by a hit at the frontal armor.

I am aware of that my ap ammo is only about 50% realistic, but I think it is okay when flying a career, when you have to care that your pilot survives, to avoid that he is shot down by AAA, fighters or,  what is for me most lethal, not to crash into the tank during attack because being too focused to aim.

 

Added later: If required a further version that simulates either a:

CV - Armour Piercing with Cavity Bursting Charge

or a

HT - Hight Explosive Anti Tank (HEAT)

could be tested. The advantage would be a better consideration of the angle projectile to armor plate.

 

I suppose, that with the current AP ammo the armor piercing is simulated well, but damage created inside the tank maybe a bit too less.

 

Or maybe in respect of the simulation the IL-2 stock settings are perfect and realistic, but for gaming a bit too unspectacular.

 

Question: which historical source / gun camera movies do we have of Ju87-G, HS129, IL-2, Yak9-T of tank attacks with auto-cannons do we have? I have seen only 1 or 2 of  very bad quality. Or do we have detailed combat reports?

 

MK103 AT-Ammo-patch-v01.zip

 

Edited August 29, 2024 by kraut1

[kraut1]

 

@LukeFF @CzechTexan@I/JG53_Kurtz@Aapje

Today I flew 2 tests without modification with the HS129 with MK103 vs T70, T34-43 and KV1-s:

The tanks were moving with a medium off road speed.

With 1 ammo load it was possible to destroy ca. 3-4 tanks. All tanks attacked only one time.

-general observation: attacks from side are most effective, attacks from rear seem to be more difficult and not so effective, why?

(This I have observered earlier, in the current test I did not attack from rear)

-ca. 70% of the destroyed tanks neither smoke nor burn, mostly heavy tanks or T34.

maybe the crew was wounded or killed or tracks damaged or engine / gear box damaged without fire.

-KV1-S: KV1-S could be stopped / destroyed by one attack from side, but mostly no smoke.

-T34: in the first mission a T34 was smoking and ca. 5 minutes later the tank exploded.

maybe time until explosions could be shortened as a compromise between simulation and immersion.

-T34: in the second mission 1 T34 destroyed smoking, ca. 10-15 minutes observed but no explosion.

could be realistic, but maybe as a compromise more often a explosion or at least a visible fire.

-T70: in first mission 1 smoking T70 exploded after 5 minutes, in the second mission 1 T70 exploded directly during attack.

 

Conclusion:

With the HS129 it is still possible to fly effective tank attacks.

From my point of view to be checked:

-Time delay of explosion of smoking tanks to be shortened to ca. 2-3minutes after hit for immersion.

-effectivness of attacks from rear / 6'o clock? (But in the current test I did not attack from rear)

-I will try further tactic: Shallow dive to hit the upper engine cover (I still have to learn to aim better during shallow diving)

Track / Reports of second mission:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/9cn3m803u6f83dyhc7guc/track-HS129-tank-test1.2024-08-29_08-41-29_00.zip?rlkey=p6yjtzuc8dz3eauqvd4x8cekx&st=mtd7bo4p&dl=0

MissionReport files.zip

Results after secon mission

Edited August 29, 2024 by kraut1

[LukeFF]

I will pass along the message, thanks.

[LukeFF]

@kraut1, the team looked into this and their conclusion is the gun is working as intended.

[kraut1]

On 8/30/2024 at 5:40 PM, LukeFF said:

@kraut1, the team looked into this and their conclusion is the gun is working as intended.

Hello @LukeFF,

Thanks for your answer!

I accept now that the gun itself is working correctly.

And I think the Armor thicknesses of the tanks are correct too.

 

But I have tested something that is at least for me a bit strange:

Attacks from the side against the middle / front part of the tank are effective - I suppose the crew is hit.

Attacks from the side against the rear part of the tank were the engine is are very uneffective. Same for attacks from rear.

 

I reviewed the values in the e.g.: t34-76-43.txt

 

Crew has a very low values:

damageablePart="crew"
    LifeRate=500        // ôèêñèðîâàííî 500 äëÿ âñåõ
    LifeRateFrag=500

    Armor=0   

 

And the engine has a much more higher value:

[DmgElement = engine]
    damageablePart="engine"
    LifeRate=20000
    LifeRateFrag=10000
    Armor=5      

 That the engine has much more higher Life values than a human being is easy to understand.

But are the values of

LifeRate=20000
    LifeRateFrag=10000

maybe a bit too high?

 

I modified the values to:

 

[DmgElement = engine]
    damageablePart="engine"
    LifeRate=6000
    LifeRateFrag=6000
   (still more than 10 times higher as for the human crew)

 

But with these values attacks against the rear part are more effective, it is possible with one pass to stop the tank and it smokes (only if you aim well and hit more than 1 time).

 

What I did is of course only a preliminary draft, but from my point of view the topic [DmgElement= engine] should be discussed.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/33mmfi0kq5t4o8wswr298/hs129-tank-test1.2024-08-31_19-45-00_00.zip?rlkey=mw1ze9egri0e2aeoo9ydts6hq&st=auhgsjfw&dl=0

Tank-engine-Life-values-patchV01A.zip

 

 

   

 

 

Edited August 31, 2024 by kraut1

[CzechTexan]

I believe that, on some tanks, like the T-34, the rear deck and engine compartment should be made more vulnerable.

As seen in my videos above, the Churchill tank's rear seems more vulnerable than the T-34.

Maybe the T-34 should be looked at, instead of the gun. - Just my humble opinion.

[kraut1]

18 minutes ago, CzechTexan said:

I believe that, on some tanks, like the T-34, the rear deck and engine compartment should be made more vulnerable.

As seen in my videos above, the Churchill tank's rear seems more vulnerable than the T-34.

Maybe the T-34 should be looked at, instead of the gun. - Just my humble opinion.

Sorry for my many posts, maybe a bit confusing.

I found from my point of view the reason for the T34 / KV1:

Not the gun, not the  armor, from my point of view engine is too rugged.

Please see my last post concerning the engine:

"...

But I have tested something that is at least for me a bit strange:

Attacks from the side against the middle / front part of the tank are effective - I suppose the crew is hit.

Attacks from the side against the rear part of the tank were the engine is are very uneffective. Same for attacks from rear.

 

I reviewed the values in the e.g.: t34-76-43.txt

 

Crew has a very low values:

damageablePart="crew"
    LifeRate=500        // ôèêñèðîâàííî 500 äëÿ âñåõ
    LifeRateFrag=500

    Armor=0   

 

And the engine has a much more higher value:

[DmgElement = engine]
    damageablePart="engine"
    LifeRate=20000
    LifeRateFrag=10000
    Armor=5      

 That the engine has much more higher Life values than a human being is easy to understand.

But are the values of

LifeRate=20000
    LifeRateFrag=10000

maybe a bit too high?

 

I modified the values to:

 

[DmgElement = engine]
    damageablePart="engine"
    LifeRate=6000
    LifeRateFrag=6000
   (still more than 10 times higher as for the human crew)

 

But with these values attacks against the rear part are more effective, it is possible with one pass to stop the tank and it smokes (only if you aim well and hit more than 1 time).

..."

 

And you can try my patch of this post and you can easily modify the parameters [LifeRate and LifeRateFrag] as you like:

Tank-engine-Life-values-patchV01A.zip

This patch works really good on my computer.

 

[CzechTexan]

14 minutes ago, kraut1 said:

Not the gun, not the  armor, from my point of view engine is too rugged.

 

And you can try my patch of this post and you can easily modify the parameters [LifeRate and LifeRateFrag] as you like:

Tank-engine-Life-values-patchV01A.zip 10.2 kB · 0 downloads

 

I should have said engine instead of armor.

I think your study is impressive but should be made Standard.

Your download is just a MOD and not everyone will have it. 

[kraut1]

17 minutes ago, CzechTexan said:

I should have said engine instead of armor.

I think your study is impressive but should be made Standard.

Your download is just a MOD and not everyone will have it. 

Yes of course it should be standard.

The Mod was in first line a tool to check my theory.
I have informed LukeFF about that topic and I am waiting for a response.

I think they will react because I have supplied them with detailed data / information.

[Fall_Blau]

Great job on that mod kraut1, hopefully we can get the devs to look into a permanent fix. I just started learning to fly the 129 and was wondering why the cannon was useless, then I saw this thread.

I had a question about installation, my stock GB folder LuaScripts only contains a snap views folder. Can I just drag and drop the worldobjects folder into LuaScripts and the mod will work after hitting enable mods?

[kraut1]

48 minutes ago, sjfosella said:

Great job on that mod kraut1, hopefully we can get the devs to look into a permanent fix. I just started learning to fly the 129 and was wondering why the cannon was useless, then I saw this thread.

I had a question about installation, my stock GB folder LuaScripts only contains a snap views folder. Can I just drag and drop the worldobjects folder into LuaScripts and the mod will work after hitting enable mods?

Yes in general you can install this mod manually as you wrote.

But for the general use of mods I recommend the use of the JSGME Mod enabler.

This small program is standard program to install / deinstall mods and it is used for other flight sims too:

 

 

Edited September 9, 2024 by kraut1

[kraut1]

Only for information,

A patch for all medium / heavy AI tanks is available, until the visible effects of destroyed tanks are improved:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/89351-il2-gb-tank-engine-life-values-patchv02/