PDA

View Full Version : Detonation of ammo in Damage modelling?



Bull_dog_
04-06-2004, 08:32 PM
I've been wrestling with a couple of contradictions and am wondering if anyone has any insights...

1) In FB, it would be crazy to fly a 109, Ki or Fw without Mk108's due to their killing power. In WW2, they were reserved primarily for bomber killing...not for attacking fighters...why since the weapons are so deadly wouldn't they be standard issue on all aircraft (late model 109's apparently do have mk108's in nose). What is different in real life from the game or maybe an error in one of my stated assumptions?

2) I watch guncam film of Fw's that have their wings being shot off... if you watch closely, it appears that sometimes the wing actually explodes rather than being sawed off. I'm wondering if a 20mm or .50 cal bullet strikes a cannon shell (20 or 30mm) did it actually detonate the shell and blow off the wing?

I've never really read that, but then again dead pilots don't tell many tails either so I wonder if ammo was detonated with any regularity... I know drop tanks were lit up when pilots didn't drop them.

Bull_dog_
04-06-2004, 08:32 PM
I've been wrestling with a couple of contradictions and am wondering if anyone has any insights...

1) In FB, it would be crazy to fly a 109, Ki or Fw without Mk108's due to their killing power. In WW2, they were reserved primarily for bomber killing...not for attacking fighters...why since the weapons are so deadly wouldn't they be standard issue on all aircraft (late model 109's apparently do have mk108's in nose). What is different in real life from the game or maybe an error in one of my stated assumptions?

2) I watch guncam film of Fw's that have their wings being shot off... if you watch closely, it appears that sometimes the wing actually explodes rather than being sawed off. I'm wondering if a 20mm or .50 cal bullet strikes a cannon shell (20 or 30mm) did it actually detonate the shell and blow off the wing?

I've never really read that, but then again dead pilots don't tell many tails either so I wonder if ammo was detonated with any regularity... I know drop tanks were lit up when pilots didn't drop them.

Bearcat99
04-06-2004, 10:09 PM
Hot lead + wings full of fuel(fuel vapors)= Kaboooom!!

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

Fillmore
04-06-2004, 10:45 PM
I'm pretty sure 109s and 190s did not have fuel in their wings.

I know there is a 190 variant that has additional armour in a lot of places, and one of those places is the ammo boxes in the wings.

I have always wondered if maybe those one-shot critical hits that we see taking out FW190 wings with one bullet are a hit to the ammo box, rather than to a wing spar as others seem to think.

clint-ruin
04-06-2004, 10:54 PM
Fuel based explosions are modelled both from direct fire strikes, and from fuel/coolant system fires progressing long enough to cause an explosion.

Ammo based explosions do not seem to be modelled in FB. Gun jams due to damage seem to be about it. There's no reason why firing at ammo stores wouldn't set it off - unarmed bombs could be detonated by shooting at them, and there's a great deal less protection around most fighters ammo belts than the thickness of most frag bombs.

The reasons for sticking with certain kinds of armament for fighters are varied, usually coming down to the combat doctrine of the force involved vs their strategic situation and supplies. If a weapon is extremely effective in combat that's great, but it does no good if it's also extremely expensive and unrealiable in the field, or too hard for average pilots to use.

From butch2ks most recent post about 30mm effectiveness:

According to Report 30 from Luftwaffe "Schiesschul" :
2 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a fighter
3 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a twin engined aircraft
4 exploding 30mm round necessary to shot down a four engined aircraft

Also according to this report :
@100m expenditure of 11 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter
@200m expenditure of 34 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter
@300m expenditure of 64 30mm rounds where required to shot down a fighter


There was a post a while ago saying that the Yak9T required 31 shots on average to down an enemy plane, without specifying whether that was from the UBS or NS-37 or both at the same time. From memory there were only 32 rounds of NS-37 ammo carried. I don't think the range or type of target was specified, unfortunately.

For interceptors / point defense it probably makes sense to use larger cannons, especially if they're likely to encounter bombers. For anything tasked with long endurance missions a greater number of smaller weapons [and more ammo] is probably more useful, both for use in multiple engagements and for the weight reduction.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
04-07-2004, 12:51 AM
FW-190 did not have fuel in wings, just to clarify. The armor plating for the ammo stores was used on Sturm aircraft with 30mm cannons but was located in front of the ammunition storage to protect from return fire from bombers. The wingroot 20mm cannon ammunition was actually stored inside the fuesalage and fed down through a belt.

I agree ammunition damage/explosions would be cool, and it would apply to all planes I suppose depending on where you hit. Maybe in BoB.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

GK.
04-07-2004, 01:07 AM
seems like a bogus report. 64 30mm shells is an awful lot of ammo regardless of a few hundred extra meters. I believe there was a test done by the british which demonstrated that 1 (exploding) 30mm shell was enough to blow a spitfires tail off.

clint-ruin
04-07-2004, 01:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GK.:
seems like a bogus report. 64 30mm shells is an awful lot of ammo regardless of a few hundred extra meters. I believe there was a test done by the british which demonstrated that 1 (exploding) 30mm shell was enough to blow a spitfires tail off.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think that's surprising at all from the ranges given - 10% of shots fired hitting was pretty excellent marksmanship for WW2 era planes, and that holds true here more or less at 100m. When you factor in that the MK-108 was particularly awful in terms of muzzle velocity it's unsurprising to see the hit ratio drop off sharply as range increases.

2 rounds required to down a fighter seems excessive, but this figure might be for a "guaranteed" kill, or factor in that one of the hits may be an HEIT shell rather than MG. Wasn't specified in Butch2ks post.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

VW-IceFire
04-07-2004, 08:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GK.:
seems like a bogus report. 64 30mm shells is an awful lot of ammo regardless of a few hundred extra meters. I believe there was a test done by the british which demonstrated that 1 (exploding) 30mm shell was enough to blow a spitfires tail off.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Apparently that test was highly artificial. They placed the round inside of the Spitfire and detonated it. That would count as slightly lucky in an actual battle (i.e. some rounds would explode after passing through the plane).

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

S77th-brooks
04-07-2004, 08:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GK.:
seems like a bogus report. 64 30mm shells is an awful lot of ammo regardless of a few hundred extra meters. I believe there was a test done by the british which demonstrated that 1 (exploding) 30mm shell was enough to blow a spitfires tail off.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think that's surprising at all from the ranges given - 10% of shots fired hitting was pretty excellent marksmanship for WW2 era planes, and that holds true here more or less at 100m. When you factor in that the MK-108 was particularly awful in terms of muzzle velocity it's unsurprising to see the hit ratio drop off sharply as range increases.

2 rounds required to down a fighter seems excessive, but this figure might be for a "guaranteed" kill, or factor in that one of the hits may be an HEIT shell rather than MG. Wasn't specified in Butch2ks post.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>so y is there the need to have trace rounds in load out and AP and not just HE or are they just trace and HE rounds ,i would take all HE if could then ,at short firing distances we no were the rounds will go ,we have a gun sight, last thing i want with this sniper gun is a waste of a good hit,on the 108mk

clint-ruin
04-07-2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S77th-brooks:
so y is there the need to have trace rounds in load out and AP and not just HE or are they just trace and HE rounds ,i would take all HE if could then ,at short firing distances we no were the rounds will go ,we have a gun sight, last thing i want with this sniper gun is a waste of a good hit,on the 108mk<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Mk108 we have in the game alternates between HEIT and MG rounds. The really damaging ones are the MGs, but the HEITs will also do a fair amount of damage to whatever they hit - advance a few damage stages or get an engine smoking, even if they don't blow a wing off.

There are cases where the 30mm MG shells will explode on a plane and the plane keeps flying, albiet with a fair whack of damage. Not always, but occasionally. It's not a guaranteed one shot one kill weapon, but it's close to it [roughly in line with the NS-37 and M4 for effectiveness]. Given that you will usually get a couple of hits in a burst it becomes a very effective weapon at short range. At longer ranges the slow firing high velocity cannons like the NS series and MK103 become much more effective.

The real problem people tend to have with it is that the HEIT rounds are the only ones that show a visible tracer, and the impact explosions for HEITs look exactly the same as the M-Geschoss explosions [unless you have arcade mode on]. HEITs, according to Isegrim, aren't really all that much more damaging to a plane than a solid 20mm hit, but they make an awfully big bang for one. So you're trying to hit with a round you can't see that makes an explosion that looks the same as the less damaging rounds. Not ideal.

There's no AP round loadout for the MK108 guns in FB [and its speed is slow enough that it wouldn't do a lot of good if it had them], but you will get APT rounds in the belt with the MK103s.

MK 103
// APT - MG - MG - HE

APT
mass = 0.502
speed = 752.0
power = 0.0

MG
mass = 0.330
speed = 900.0
power = 0.072

HE
mass = 0.455
speed = 800.0
power = 0.024

MK 108
// HEIT - MG

HEIT
mass = 0.455
speed = 500.0
power = 0.024

MG
mass = 0.330
speed = 525.0
power = 0.072

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

S77th-brooks
04-07-2004, 10:32 AM
is shell load out diff on the eastern front then was in the west and now we moving there do you think this should charge too now

Jippo01
04-07-2004, 11:34 AM
One very explosive thing on board planes was the oxygen reserves.


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
www.ju88.de.tf (http://www.ju88.de.tf)

Fennec_P
04-07-2004, 01:12 PM
From looking at the dev updates, it looks like ammunition and gas canisters will be modelled in BoB, at least visually, but maybe also functionally. You can see ammo belts modelled in the Hurri, and the gas cylinder on the CR.42 (?).

I know what you mean about the exploding ammo. There is that one video in particular where the FW-190 is hit on the outboard left wing, right where the MG/FF would be on a A4/A5, and there was a big explosion that blew the wing off. Given that it was only a 50cal hit, something spicy must have gone off.

Also, lots of USA bombers were lost due to hits to the oxygen system. Not because the oxygen blew up, but because the lack of oxygen would knock the crew out. When you read about combat reports, it was one of the most common systems to fail.

GK.
04-07-2004, 01:18 PM
Well that report makes a little more sense if you say that it is just "expendature" of ammo and you assume that some of the ammo doesnt actually hit the target.

The problem in AEP is that planes are taking cannon rounds (not just 30mm) and flight performance is not affected. A plane that takes 1 exploding round should be affected in some way or another.

Also, ive seen guncam footage on the history channel of 50 cal rounds hitting planes from 500m+ and doing significant damage. Short bursts.

Rumor is that this is being addressed in the elusive upcoming patch.

DangerForward
04-08-2004, 10:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jippo01:
One very explosive thing on board planes was the oxygen reserves.


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
http://www.ju88.de.tf<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I recently read a great book on first Schweinfurt by Martin Middlebrook. Many of the really terrible fires on the hit B-17 were from oxygen bottle fires. It's described as a blow torch. I've always wondered if that was modelled in the game.

DangerForward

Gunner_361st
04-08-2004, 11:08 AM
"In FB, it would be crazy to fly a 109, Ki or Fw without Mk108's due to their killing power. In WW2, they were reserved primarily for bomber killing" -Bull dog

I would say the first statement is false and the second true.

The MK108 as noted was very destructive and effective, despite having a poor muzzle velocity of around 505 meters/second, the rate of fire of 10 rounds per second compensating somewhat.

As for being "crazy" not to take 30mm cannon when it is optional, I'd say do more gunnery practice. If aim well, you can shoot down tough planes like the P-38, P-47, Fw-190, KI-84 with only rifle-caliber machine guns. Hit the pilot, a fuel tank, or the engine enough times and thats it, he is going down! The plane will not be obliterated but it will probably be on fire, and thats really all you need.

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

P.S. - Will change the size of my sig shortly, Tully, sorry.

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg