Question: Accuracy of typical WW2 plane armament (machine guns, automatic cannons)

[kraut1]

Hi All,

Do we have informations how accurate were the typical standard machine guns / automatic cannons of our IL-2 planes in reality?

Maybe under realistic flying conditions?

I ask because there is a possibility to set dispersion angle for each weapon in a Mod.

Many thanks in advance!

 

Added later:

first preliminary results + test Mod here:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/92101-question-accuracy-of-typical-ww2-plane-armament-machine-guns-automatic-cannons/#findComment-1356643

 

Edited July 30 by kraut1

[Bars-]

15 минут назад, kraut1 сказал:

Hi All,

Do we have informations how accurate were the typical standard machine guns / automatic cannons of our IL-2 planes in reality?

Maybe under realistic flying conditions?

I ask because there is a possibility to set dispersion angle for each weapon in a Mod.

Many thanks in advance!

https://youtu.be/Cr8Zur35gY4?si=IQOmDzwdd_QzPWeG

[MDzmitry]

Here's some info on .50cal characteristics, including dispersion. I'd say most weapons were pretty close in this aspect, and the primary influence in regards to accuracy was armament placement. Things like wing flex negatively affected accuracy, meanwhile nose-placed guns were more steady.
Another aspect was overheating under continuous fire, which would affect the ballistics in general as well.

Edited July 30 by MDzmitry

[kraut1]

2 hours ago, Bars- said:

https://youtu.be/Cr8Zur35gY4?si=IQOmDzwdd_QzPWeG

 

2 hours ago, MDzmitry said:

Here's some info on .50cal characteristics, including dispersion. I'd say most weapons were pretty close in this aspect, and the primary influence in regards to accuracy was armament placement. Things like wing flex negatively affected accuracy, meanwhile nose-placed guns were more steady.
Another aspect was overheating under continuous fire, which would affect the ballistics in general as well.

 

1 hour ago, jollyjack said:

So seems then a sort of Highclass Peashooting: 

Hi,

Thanks very much for your support!

I don't want to make it too complex and I want to it use it now for experiments:

In the US bombers video there is one example of a .50 M2 mounted in a real plane, a P38.

Cone of disperson for 75% group 4 mils

Cone of disperson for 100% group 8 mils

 

From my point of view the .50 M2 is a comparable accurate weapon and suitable with it's high muzzle velocity and the comparable heavy bullets for higher distances.

As a compromise between the 75% group (4mils) and the 100% group (8 mils) I have chosen 6mils as default for testing with IL-2.

6 mils are ca. 0.344degree.

in the weapon files:

...\IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Stalingrad\data\LuaScripts\worldobjects\weapons

the default dispersion for all weapons is 0 degree for cold weapons and 0.6 degree for hot weapons:

BulletDispertionAngleData = 0.0, 0.6, 700.0, 3.5 //разброс зафиксированной пушки при 0К нулевой, разброс перегретой 0.6°

 

for simplified tests I have changed them for all weapons to:

BulletDispertionAngleData = 0.344, 0.6, 700.0, 3.5 //ðàçáðîñ çàôèêñèðîâàííîé ïóøêè ïðè 0Ê íóëåâîé, ðàçáðîñ ïåðåãðåòîé 0.6°

 

I will use this for test from now for my missions. A first test was from my point of view successful (visible dispersion, but still hits possible)

One of the reasons to use is for me is that you can watch even in the old  gun camera movies that the tracer rounds have some visible dispersion and on the other hand  It seems to me that AI aims sometimes, especially at the first burst extremely accurate.

Here something for you to try out:

 

Download:

Weapon-Accuracy-Mod-6Mils-dispersion.zip

 

 

Edited July 30 by kraut1

[JFS4_Eisbaer]