PDA

View Full Version : Oleg (50`s)



SnailRunner
08-23-2005, 01:36 AM
I doent think they are undermodeled, but can you please syncronice them so the planes doent jump all over the place. It looks like they are firering nice and easy, but the recoil aint matching up. BTW im a "blue" pilot, but there is no way syncronised guns can make a plane jump like it happens on the corsair and the P-51 they have the same effect as if one of them was jammed or something

Siwarrior
08-23-2005, 01:56 AM
recoil is supossed to match up, guns fire randomly, ie failures, guns get old they fire slower etc etc

FritzGryphon
08-23-2005, 02:27 AM
Applies to all guns/planes really.

Even planes with all nose guns jitter left and right when you fire, albeit less. Can't imagine why.

quiet_man
08-23-2005, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Applies to all guns/planes really.

Even planes with all nose guns jitter left and right when you fire, albeit less. Can't imagine why.

shock waves and air disturbance?

personaly I find the "swing" effect wrong
the plane should shake and maybe even jump from time to time, but not this swing effect.

In RL they fired regularely at much larger distances and there is no swing at guncam films even at long bursts.

quiet_man

WWMaxGunz
08-23-2005, 03:40 AM
Makes me wonder if the recoil is modelled down to how fast the sim can 'fire' each gun
and run the calcs along with everything else.

To the original poster; go find any plane that had synchronized wing guns please.

pourshot
08-23-2005, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:

To the original poster; go find any plane that had synchronized wing guns please.

How about the FW190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But yeah I know what you meen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DangerForward
08-23-2005, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by SnailRunner:
I doent think they are undermodeled, but can you please syncronice them so the planes doent jump all over the place. It looks like they are firering nice and easy, but the recoil aint matching up. BTW im a "blue" pilot, but there is no way syncronised guns can make a plane jump like it happens on the corsair and the P-51 they have the same effect as if one of them was jammed or something

I believe the wing 50cals were free firing in real life. Someone posted a doc showing that a while back.

Diablo310th
08-23-2005, 06:34 AM
The problem is we have them firing synch'ed now. We need them to not be so thre is a steady flow of bullets and not groups or packets of rounds going out tehre.

carguy_
08-23-2005, 07:18 AM
Yeah,it really sucks.Machineguns should have great ROF,the main advantage over cannons.Now we have group of bullets shot at the same moment.
IMO that is why ppl feel the .50cal is undermodelled.

Kocur_
08-23-2005, 07:47 AM
Umm...IRL there was synchronisation of guns and propeller in case of fuselage guns only. No synchronisation of wing guns of any kind (with exeption of 40mm Vickers S on Hurri IV). Indeed "theoretical rate of fire" as we read it, say 600rpm for Hispano Mk.II or 800 for .50M2 is only average. There are minimal differencies in amount of propellant in cases, in strenght of springs, mechanizm parts wear, density of grease depending on temperature, etc, etc. The problem is, as said above, that we have synchronisation of wing guns, so that they fire salvos...

SnailRunner
08-23-2005, 08:35 AM
Well atleast im not the only one who thinks there is something wierd...maby my idea was wrong, but alot of great replys...TX all

Jaws2002
08-23-2005, 08:42 AM
I find p-40 to be much more stable then the rest, when firing. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

FI.Spitsfire
08-23-2005, 08:44 AM
Isnt it just the tracer rounds that are in bursts?

Diablo310th
08-23-2005, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by FI.Spitsfire:
Isnt it just the tracer rounds that are in bursts?

No spits......it's all the rounds too.

Kocur_
08-23-2005, 08:57 AM
AFAIK in .50 M2 in the game, every fourth projectile is APIT, i.e tracer. So if you see two tracers you have three more projectiles between them.

faustnik
08-23-2005, 10:13 AM
Change the sim to "arcade" made in conf.ini and do a low level pass firing against the ground. You will see white dots indicating bullet hits. This will reveal the gaps.

p1ngu666
08-23-2005, 11:11 AM
i agree with carguy, the round strength is probably ok, but getting them on target is hard because of the synced creates gaps, and also alot of recoil, u end up with the plane wobbling alot http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

the il2 has unsync guns btw. multigun stuff shouldnt fire all at the same time, for example coastal command beus and mossies would straff ships with 20mm, u can see the rounds dont hit all together in clumps, is a stream.
(dont recommend u do that ingame, as u only have 120 rounds instead of 200-240 or 283 beas actully had..)

Gibbage1
08-23-2005, 03:49 PM
I posted a test a long time ago of a P-47 firing at high deflection at the ground and there were gaps big enough to fit a B-17 in. I duplicated this test with the Hurricane IIB and there was NO gaps. All 12 guns were not synced and spitting a LOT more lead then the P-47. Mig 3 with UB gun pods also had no gaps. Only the US M2 .50 cal has these gaps BUT the P-40! P-40 is NOT synced and those 6 guns take out enemy aircraft faster then the P-47's 8.

If the Hurricane IIB can fire 12 guns at 1200RPM, then the P-47 sure as hell can fire 8 guns at 750RPM.

FI.Spitsfire
08-23-2005, 04:42 PM
I agree I've always thought the p40s 50s were stronger http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Grey_Mouser67
08-23-2005, 06:26 PM
The P-40 is also a much more stable gun platform and I think you'll find that your hit% with it is higher.

I don't want to dredge up the old argument of dispersion, but I think since the dispersion was greatly reduced, these other issues became much more apparent.

I'd say, in a general sense, the "effectiveness" of the HMG's are less than the effectiveness in real life.

Besides high rate of fire and more holes in the aircraft, I've read accounts that HMG's were easier to hit enemy aircraft with as well....probably a function of balistics, dispersion and harmonization...so in real life, there wasn't much difference between the effectiveness of a Spitfire MkIXc's weapons and a Mustang's six guns.

Tune down the pitch and yaw oscillations, dampen the pitch, lose the "all guns fire at once" modelling and leave the ammo strength the same and we'll see immediate improvement with the HMG's effectiveness without actually changing the strength of the round itself.

FritzGryphon
08-23-2005, 06:36 PM
P-40 is NOT synced and those 6 guns take out enemy aircraft faster then the P-47's 8.


The P-40(E) guns are synced, just like the P-47. Only one I know of that isn't, is the P-51. One of the guns fires out of sync with the other 5.

http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/sync1.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/sync2.jpg

Any percieved difference in effectivenes is probably due to handling qualities or the spacing, like Grey Mouser said.

If you can fit a B-17 between these gaps, you can fit an I-16 between the P-47's guns. Like trying to shoot Tie Fighters in an X-Wing. Which is probably why you can set dispersion for inner and outer guns seperately.

DangerForward
08-23-2005, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by FI.Spitsfire:
I agree I've always thought the p40s 50s were stronger http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I think the wing 50cal guns should definitely be unsynced. I double checked Gibbage's test and got the same results. From my testing the P51 had the bullet gaps like all the others but the P40Mod. One thing that exacerbates the P51 is that I shoot at much higher speeds in the P51 versus any other wing 50cal plane, even the P47. It's rare for me to get going as fast in the P40. At high speed any twitch throws off your aim, and the P51 is twitchy anyway. I recently switched to CrazyIvan's stick settings and that helped some, but the problem remains.

HelSqnProtos
08-23-2005, 07:37 PM
~S~ This is quite and interesting thread and I hope the issue gets resolved. Some interesting arguements in here.

S~! to Faustnik, as always very informative sir.

Stanger_361st
08-23-2005, 07:56 PM
Sorry for my ingorance on guns. I was reading a book about Bud Anderson and he said when he was flying P-51 b it was using API. Is this correct? Or was this just for that paticular time. Believe it or not he was going after tanks.

I think the book was Aces of the Eight.

Thanks

HelSqnProtos
08-23-2005, 08:06 PM
S~!

Almost all fighters were using Armor Piercing Incidiary rounds. The main question was in what order , as far as I am aware most planes had a "mixed loadout" of AP, HEI, API ect.... The higher the concentration of a given round will give you different effects under different conditions for different types of targets. I know it sounds confusing but really it is not.

Stanger_361st
08-23-2005, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
S~!

Almost all fighters were using Armor Piercing Incidiary rounds. The main question was in what order , as far as I am aware most planes had a "mixed loadout" of AP, HEI, API ect.... The higher the concentration of a given round will give you different effects under different conditions for different types of targets. I know it sounds confusing but really it is not.

Thanks I was confused with the Jug above showing just AP.

FritzGryphon
08-23-2005, 08:29 PM
In PF the M2 does use HE rounds; you can see them in arcade mode.

I'm not sure which one(s) it is, though. Might be the tracer. It's also possible the 'AP' rounds could actually be API. There's a list somewhere, explaining the belt composition.

Loki-PF
08-23-2005, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
I posted a test a long time ago of a P-47 firing at high deflection at the ground and there were gaps big enough to fit a B-17 in. I duplicated this test with the Hurricane IIB and there was NO gaps. All 12 guns were not synced and spitting a LOT more lead then the P-47. Mig 3 with UB gun pods also had no gaps. Only the US M2 .50 cal has these gaps BUT the P-40! P-40 is NOT synced and those 6 guns take out enemy aircraft faster then the P-47's 8.

If the Hurricane IIB can fire 12 guns at 1200RPM, then the P-47 sure as hell can fire 8 guns at 750RPM.

~S~! Gibb,

Remember wayyyy back during the height of the .50 cal debates? You had a back and fourth with Oleg regarding the convergance of the 50's? You had done tests that showed all other HMG's in the game showed great convergance except the M2 for some reason.

If I remember correctly the reason Oleg said your tests showed that was because you were doing static (land) based tests and the American planes you chose were new models with "springy" landing gear?

You countered with the fact that some/most of your tests were done with US planes from the original FB not AEP so the didn't have the spriny landing gear.

Did Oleg ever reply to that? If not, got any idea why?

p1ngu666
08-23-2005, 09:57 PM
loki, it was dispersion, not convergance, think your getting your words mixed up, like i do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

remmber russian pilot interview, where he explained yak (i think) aparent lack of firepower, but that any amount of guns is useless unless you hit, and less guns means less weight, easier to hit your target in lighter plane http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

hopefully we can get it changed, and for other aircraft with 4 or more of the same gun, like beu, spit Vc(which should be like p47, able to fire 1 set of guns indepentantly..

Badsight.
08-23-2005, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
The P-40(E) guns are synced, just like the P-47. Only one I know of that isn't, is the P-51. One of the guns fires out of sync with the other 5.

http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/sync1.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/sync2.jpg

Any percieved difference in effectivenes is probably due to handling qualities or the spacing, like Grey Mouser said. that the P-40 doesnt have synched M2s has been said for quite a while now , & from my experience with the plane im able to dish out damadge much more eaisly with P-40s than with P-51s or P-47s & hearing someone say the M2 isnt synched on the P-40 makes it easy to believe because of this

so is it just the E ? or are all P-40s firing synched , because too many people say the p-40 hits different than the 47 or 51 for it to be total myth ?!?!?

VW-IceFire
08-23-2005, 10:52 PM
Badsight.

Check out the P-40E Field Mod (this is the Russian version using a Klimov engine). The guns fire in a noticeably unsynced fashion.

The other examples of this are the Spitfire IXe with its two .50cals which are not linked and the P-51D-20 with the two middle guns unlinked. All other .50cal aircraft (including the regular P-40E) are syncronized in terms of when the tracers and other bullet types are fired.

There are odd gaps between groups of bullets that planes can fly through which is why leading a target is sometimes harder.

Kocur_
08-23-2005, 11:29 PM
From TeaWagon's exellent post, quote from: ""Flying Guns of World War II; Development of Aircraft guns, ammunition, and installations 1933-1945" by Anthony G. Williams and Emmanuel Gustin.":

"The .50 in Browning fighter belts in US service started the war loaded with 40 percent AP, 40 percent Incendiary and 20 percent tracer. The tracer fell out of favour when it was realised that it was providing more help to the enemy. By the end of the war, fighters were primarily loaded with the M8 API (which appeared in service in spring 1944), as this proved to be a good general-purpose projectile, although the M23 incendiary also saw some use."

Apparently all planes armed with M2's have the original belting, because we see tracers, which were not present in API-only belting.



Assuming M2 has ROF=800rpm, the pojectile is ~60m away from muzzle, when next comes out of it. So if all 6 or 8 guns are firing salvos and there is some high speed angle movement between firing plane and target, some of those "salvos" might miss...


Im sorry, but M2's armed planes were armed much less effectively than planes with cannons. Sadly M2 ROF=800rpm isnt any leap to most cannons ROF: BH. Mk.II - 600rpm, ShVAK - 800rpm, MG151/20 - 750rpm. One can only wish .50 M3 was in service sooner with its 1050rpm... M2 fires projectile ~twice+ lighter than 20mm cannon, and .50 projectiles do not contain explosive...Ratio of M2/Hispano Mk.II effectivewness is somewhere between 3.3 and 3,6.

Shortest is to check "TABLE 3: FIGHTER FIREPOWER" here: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

FritzGryphon
08-24-2005, 12:44 AM
because too many people say the p-40 hits different than the 47 or 51 for it to be total myth ?!?!?

It is very sad that things will be believed just because they are repeated many times. Especially something as silly as this, which has no basis, and has never had any proof shown.

The answer is very simple. The percieved effectiveness of any weapon has more to do with numbers, placement, convergence and aircraft performance, than actual weapon damage itself.

For example, I find P.11c .30cal guns to be very effective. I once shot down 6 planes in a DF server in one sortie. Does it mean that the P.11 guns are bugged?

A much more logical explanation is that the aircraft is manueverable and stable, and the guns are spaced in a nice pattern. It is easy to score hits, and the guns seem powerful because I get a lot of kills. Most of which were Pkills and fires. Even if I sawed wings off or blew planes up, I still wouldn't base a bug report on one dogfight mission (and even if it was a bug, there's no point to post it in the forums).

Same with M2. Isn't it a coincidence that P-47 seems less powerful, next best P-40, then P-38, then P-80? Each progressive aircraft has a tighter spacing of guns, and in the case of the P-80, is very stable and easy to aim (no torque). Some people might complain 'why are P-80 guns more powerful than P-47, it's bugged...' and all that BS. And, unfortunately, some people will believe it.

These people will repeat the 'bug' wherever they go, because if they are a fan of the particular hardware, it will feed their victim mentality. Eventually it's been repeated enough times, that even reasonable people might believe it; and all this on the basis of some kid and his 'hunch' gleaned from a dogfight mission, months ago.

And then you get misinformed people arguing in threads that go 10 pages or more on some simple thing. If only they spent the time that they waste on writing, on actually testing things in the game. Then you can understand the game and improve your play. If I sound sore it's because most 'discussions' here go on like that.

pourshot
08-24-2005, 01:14 AM
I fly the p40 often and I am of the opinion that it is simply a better gun platform, also in the p40 most of my kills are turning when hit(larger surface area) as compared to low angles of deflection in faster planes like the p51. So basicly I feel they are the same in hitting power.

quiet_man
08-24-2005, 02:02 AM
wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

Gibbage1
08-24-2005, 04:19 AM
Originally posted by Loki-PF:

Did Oleg ever reply to that? If not, got any idea why?

No. His other reason was "engine mounted guns" but the Brewster had engine mounted guns and still had the same spread.

Gibbage1
08-24-2005, 04:24 AM
Originally posted by quiet_man:
wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

6 guns firing at the same time will shake the aircraft more then 1 gun firing at a time. By a factor of 6!

Also, please take a look at this image. Thos shows what me mean about synced and un-synced.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p40e.jpg

Note that these two aircraft are the same, but the Fieldmod has a lesser Russian engine. At one time, all P-40's had unsynced guns, but they were recently converted over to the synced guns. All but the P-40E fieldmod. Just flying the two aircraft, you can feel and tell there is a huge differance in shake, hitting power and gun controle. Try it.

what we want is the P-40E Fieldmod guns on ALL Allied aircraft that use the M2 .50 cal. Look at the gaps in the shots!!! At deflection or snapshots, fighters will slip through EASY! The POINT of MULTIPLE HMG'S IS A STREAM OF FIRE!!! In IL2, that point is nullified, and the recoil is 6-8X worse then it should be.

FritzGryphon
08-24-2005, 04:43 AM
How was it set in real life?

Seems odd that they'd change the P-40s to synchronized, if it's supposed to be the other way.

And it's not "6-8 times the recoil"; I can hardly tell a difference between the two (but a little). There's 6 guns firing, no matter the order. Same number of bullets, same amount of damage that can be done. But aesthetically, it does seem more pleasant to use the unsynced, and seems easier to compute lead with a constant stream of tracers.

Hristo_
08-24-2005, 06:26 AM
Reading the title of this thread, I expected Elvis, Fats Domino and Buddy Holly.

I'm so dissapointed ...

LeadSpitter_
08-24-2005, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
Reading the title of this thread, I expected Elvis, Fats Domino and Buddy Holly.

I'm so dissapointed ...

take your spam fold it in half like a triangle and....

Kocur_
08-24-2005, 08:30 AM
I find it very, very doubtful that virtual recoil we experience is linked with synchronization or desync. of guns in any "real-like" way. If the guns were perfectly synchronised in RL, there would be no yaw at all, because yaw forces created by left/right wing batteries recoils would delete eachother. So there is incoherency in game: synchronization AND yaw.
And frankly: if M2 can shoot from mount on MUTT "jeep" I really dont think that recoil of those mg could create any noticeable yaw on 4-6 tonne planes flying at high speed. I think all that could be felt in RL was shaking or vibration, but if you quote smoe pilot stating the opposite I will feel corrected. Also M2 works on principle of short barrel recoil, so part of recoil is used to operate gun. I.e. if we had soviet UB (gas operated) and M2 weighting the same and fed with the same cartridge, the M2 would "kick" less and its kick would be softer. In UB there is one BIG kick, when recoil is transferred from case bottom to lock, which is locked to receiver, and further to the mount and another when bolt carrier/bolt stoppes in back position, before it moves back ahead. In recoil operated M2 the barrel moves back during movement of projectile inside barrel, with lock locked to the barrel, not to the receiver. Than there is first kick, when after unlocking the barrel stops in receiver, and second, when lock stops. Its much the same in case of Hispano vs. MG151/20 and worse really, because Hispano uses more powerful cartridge.

p1ngu666
08-24-2005, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
How was it set in real life?

Seems odd that they'd change the P-40s to synchronized, if it's supposed to be the other way.

And it's not "6-8 times the recoil"; I can hardly tell a difference between the two (but a little). There's 6 guns firing, no matter the order. Same number of bullets, same amount of damage that can be done. But aesthetically, it does seem more pleasant to use the unsynced, and seems easier to compute lead with a constant stream of tracers.

recoil would be the same averaged over time, BUT a random stream like fieldmod you arent spiking like u would on a normal 50cal plane. field mod would be more consistant ******ation. its like someone stabbing the brakes on and off on a car, rather than smoothly appling them.

watched a **** video at lunch, real history channel stuff, like "the b17s couldnt outmanover the heinkels" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif but had lots of guncam footage, some of surprisingly good quality, some was in colour, from a group in corsica. there was a constant stream of bullets, not the batches we get ingame.

this effects all aircraft with 4 or more guns of same type, 190 maybe not as 2 cannons are sync'ed. cant remmber if new italian mc205 has 3 cannons, ifso thats effected aswell

p1ngu666
08-24-2005, 08:34 AM
good point kocur http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Loki-PF
08-24-2005, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by quiet_man:
wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

6 guns firing at the same time will shake the aircraft more then 1 gun firing at a time. By a factor of 6!

Also, please take a look at this image. Thos shows what me mean about synced and un-synced.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p40e.jpg

Note that these two aircraft are the same, but the Fieldmod has a lesser Russian engine. At one time, all P-40's had unsynced guns, but they were recently converted over to the synced guns. All but the P-40E fieldmod. Just flying the two aircraft, you can feel and tell there is a huge differance in shake, hitting power and gun controle. Try it.

what we want is the P-40E Fieldmod guns on ALL Allied aircraft that use the M2 .50 cal. Look at the gaps in the shots!!! At deflection or snapshots, fighters will slip through EASY! The POINT of MULTIPLE HMG'S IS A STREAM OF FIRE!!! In IL2, that point is nullified, and the recoil is 6-8X worse then it should be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gib,

If I understand what you are saying, then this phenomenon *doesn't* affect other HMG's?

Do you have similar graphical depiction with Russian/German/Japanese HMG's?

HelSqnProtos
08-24-2005, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by quiet_man:
wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

6 guns firing at the same time will shake the aircraft more then 1 gun firing at a time. By a factor of 6!

Also, please take a look at this image. Thos shows what me mean about synced and un-synced.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p40e.jpg

Note that these two aircraft are the same, but the Fieldmod has a lesser Russian engine. At one time, all P-40's had unsynced guns, but they were recently converted over to the synced guns. All but the P-40E fieldmod. Just flying the two aircraft, you can feel and tell there is a huge differance in shake, hitting power and gun controle. Try it.

what we want is the P-40E Fieldmod guns on ALL Allied aircraft that use the M2 .50 cal. Look at the gaps in the shots!!! At deflection or snapshots, fighters will slip through EASY! The POINT of MULTIPLE HMG'S IS A STREAM OF FIRE!!! In IL2, that point is nullified, and the recoil is 6-8X worse then it should be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">A Picture is SOOOOO Worth a Thousand Words........... Nice Job Gibbage.</span>

Gibbage1
08-24-2005, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Loki-PF:

Gib,

If I understand what you are saying, then this phenomenon *doesn't* affect other HMG's?

Do you have similar graphical depiction with Russian/German/Japanese HMG's?

No other aircraft have more then 2 guns with HMG's. Hurricane IIb has 12, and has the same sort of unsynced pattern as the P-40E Fieldmod. Mig 3 with UB gunpods has a pattern, but VERY VERY tight. Turn on arcade=1 and try it out.

Tater-SW-
08-24-2005, 11:41 AM
BUMP.

tater

faustnik
08-24-2005, 11:52 AM
Imagine an a/c armed with eight UBS machine guns. We need a P-47 field mod. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Loki-PF
08-24-2005, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Imagine an a/c armed with eight UBS machine guns. We need a P-47 field mod. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Hows about just a Regular old bog standard GI issue P-47 that had *8* .50's that fired the way they were sposed to?

Or is that asking too much?

p1ngu666
08-24-2005, 04:15 PM
the ubs was a slightly better gun
to have abit of randomness on paired guns would be handy too, for the nose guns as they dont yaw the plane much, on wingguns then we could end up with plane yawing all over the place :\

it would mean ALOT more planes tobe corrected aswell :\

WWMaxGunz
08-24-2005, 05:00 PM
There must have been a decision perhaps because US fighters had more guns on average
so all US planes get bullets in groups.

Or maybe if all guns fire with the same code, somehow US fighter guns use synchronized
fire code and the breaks are for prop interrupt even without the prop! One number may
be all it takes, the one to say what kind of fire.

When they hit near convergence though, it is more likely damage.

No, I am NOT saying it is right. Not after 12 gun Hurricane fires in stream.

FritzGryphon
08-24-2005, 06:07 PM
Anyone know where one could find a video of P47 or P40 M2 tracers firing randomly?

I like the random shooting too, but is it realistic?

DangerForward
08-24-2005, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Anyone know where one could find a video of P47 or P40 M2 tracers firing randomly?

I like the random shooting too, but is it realistic?

Most the guncam films I've seen posted here show a stream of tracers rather than the groups we have, which could be the evidence you're looking for.

p1ngu666
08-24-2005, 07:02 PM
u need straffing videos.

imo proitey should be for aircradt with 3 or more of the same gun, AND those with only 2 guns total

g50,cr42,ki43,la5 series, then with time stuff like zero, 109 190 etc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Badsight.
08-24-2005, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p40e.jpg Gibbage , you know when the change in the P-40s guns took place ?

because its no lie , p-40s used to dish out damadge better than P-51s or p-47s , there is too many people saying the exact same thing for it to be myth

i fly the a particular coop with p-40s , replace with P-51s & you get less kills . . . . . . on average

have the pony & Jug been synched from v1.0 ? because it shows why the P-40 feels different to so many people

those "clumps" of rounds dont cut it , with .50 cals you need that "steady stream" of rounds hitting rather than a group at once

Badsight.
08-24-2005, 10:49 PM
& is the synching accurate ?

i could understand for maybe the P-80

but the P-47 ?

FritzGryphon
08-24-2005, 11:11 PM
Another difference between the P-40E and field mod is ammo.

P-40E has 1680 rounds. Field mod has 1456.

Checked the ROF, and they're the same (if one was prop-synced, it'd be lower).

LeadSpitter_
08-24-2005, 11:24 PM
Yes its realistic, tagert proved me wrong along time ago, i read the inner two browning fired first becuase of thier positioning the to outer which was wrong. Also that the majority of m2s carried gunheaters.

I thought every browning had the same rof but tagert has proved each browning had a slightly different rof which is true, they should fire like the p40 field mod.

Also there nowway to stagger convergence many patches ago oleg has made FIRE MACHINEGUN keypress 1 fire four or two (dep on ac) and cannon fired 2-4 brownings (dep on ac) this was great becuase we can use staggered convergence and still fire all from fire all guns at once like it should be.

FritzGryphon
08-24-2005, 11:38 PM
You can still set different convergence for P-47 inner and outer guns. Not for P-40 or other planes, though.

Gibbage1
08-24-2005, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
& is the synching accurate ?

i could understand for maybe the P-80

but the P-47 ?

Syncing was NOT possible on mecanically fired and loaded guns since there are so many variables. I read that putting a quarter or two behind the bolt spring will add 50RPM! The only guns that it would be possible to sync was the German electricly fired guns (I think the MG151/20 or Mk-108?) since an electric impulse is what fired the shell, not a mecanical part driven by recloil and springs.

Also, having all guns firing at the same time is NOT something you want. You get gaps in the stream like you see in US aircraft and also recloil is concentrated and not spread out. Right now US aircraft are nutered in firepower because of this. Flying with other aircraft with multiple HMG's, you can score hits on high deflections and also "walk" your firepower to the target. Thats not possible with the guns the US aircraft have. Its like the differance between a automatic shotgun at 100RPM and an HMG at 700RPM. It simply does NOT work well in airial combat.

pourshot
08-25-2005, 12:43 AM
Syncing was NOT possible on mecanically fired and loaded guns since there are so many variables. I read that putting a quarter or two behind the bolt spring will add 50RPM! The only guns that it would be possible to sync was the German electricly fired guns (I think the MG151/20 or Mk-108?) since an electric impulse is what fired the shell, not a mecanical part driven by recloil and springs.

You can sync the M2 but it needs a interrupter gear of some kind, not to hard with nose mounted guns but wing root ones would be a little more difficult.

butch2k
08-25-2005, 01:43 AM
You can sync an M2 it was tested but the RoF suffered so badly that it was canned.

Gibbage1
08-25-2005, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by pourshot:

You can sync the M2 but it needs a interrupter gear of some kind, not to hard with nose mounted guns but wing root ones would be a little more difficult.

We are talking two differant things. Prop sync does not sync the firing pins. All guns behind the prop still fired at there differant ROF's, but the "interrupter gear" would stop the firing pins till the prop was clear. This system took the 750RPM gun down to around 400-500RPM. Thats why US aircraft did not use them. Only early war aircraft like the Brewster, P-40 and P-39 were even equiped with them. Only late war aircraft to use them was P-63. P-40's even removed them early in the series.

I think the sync mech used in German nose mounted guns was like a player peano wheel. A wheel connected to the prop with holes in it. Each hole was a trigger for the gun, and there was no holes when the prop passed in front of the guns. This means RPM changed the rate of fire. Low RPM = low rate of fire. A pilot could lower the prop pitch and boost his RPM and get a higher rate of fire. Im not sure if this was used on both the 12.7MM and 7.7MM guns.

Badsight.
08-25-2005, 02:33 AM
flying with the M2 .50 unsynched its eaiser to do critical damage , its that simple

a "stream" of rounds absolutly is more effective than what the other M2 equipped planes are putting out

Monson74
08-25-2005, 04:52 AM
If the P-40 Field Mod can do it it shouldn't be hard to code the rest .50 tossers to do the same. Maybe different with the Jug because it has 2x4 of them I dunno http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Kocur_
08-25-2005, 06:50 AM
There are two separate things: electric operating the trigger mechanism, i.e. electro-mechanical mechanism to "pull" regular, mechanical trigger(and all the rest of regular firing mechanism) and electric firing the electric prime. The first was common, the latter AFAIK only in MG151/20E and MK108.

There are inevitable differencies between ROF of automatic guns of the same type. If you see, say 800rps thats either average or maximum ROF.

In case of M2s Ive seen numbers between 750-850rpm. That might make no or unnoticeable difference in case of 6 or 8 guns only at first shot(s). 750rps means a projectile leaving muzzle every 0,080 sec, for 850rpm its 0,075 sec. Lets say first shots were at the same time exactly. So there will be ~4,35 meters of distance between second projectile of fast and slow gun. The difference between 11th. shots is 0,05sec and 43,5m. So in case of multiple guns of ROF between 750 and 850rpm the longer is the burst, the more its stream of bullets and less salvos.

Kocur_
08-25-2005, 07:20 AM
We are talking two differant things. Prop sync does not sync the firing pins. All guns behind the prop still fired at there differant ROF's, but the "interrupter gear" would stop the firing pins till the prop was clear. This system took the 750RPM gun down to around 400-500RPM. Thats why US aircraft did not use them. Only early war aircraft like the Brewster, P-40 and P-39 were even equiped with them. Only late war aircraft to use them was P-63. P-40's even removed them early in the series.

I think the sync mech used in German nose mounted guns was like a player peano wheel. A wheel connected to the prop with holes in it. Each hole was a trigger for the gun, and there was no holes when the prop passed in front of the guns. This means RPM changed the rate of fire. Low RPM = low rate of fire. A pilot could lower the prop pitch and boost his RPM and get a higher rate of fire. Im not sure if this was used on both the 12.7MM and 7.7MM guns.

There were two basic kinds os prop synchronisation mechanisms. In the first there is, mostly hydraulic, mechanism which disengages plane's firing mech., i.e. pilot keeps tirgger pulled and mech. "un-pulls" it every time prop blade passes before muzzle like you posted above. It slows gun because primes are fired in normal way, i.e. the primer is fired mechanically with firing pin. Most of aerial guns were shooting from opened lock,. i.e, lock was in back position before shot and in the moment of pulling trigger it was released, moved forward, chambered gun, was locked and primer was fired. Its lots of milisecs and many factors to affect moment of actual shot. So to make it safe large margins of error had to be used, as if blades were much wider than they atually were. That meant pauses in burst were longer than needed. Even in case of guns firing from closed bolt there is some danger because of,say, different strenght of hammer or firing pin springs or cleaness of the gun.
In case of MG151/20E problem was solved in much more accurate way. Sunchronisation mech. was electric and did not affect entire gun but firing the primer only. The primer wasnt fired mechanically with firing pin but it was fired electrically, so synchronisation mech. controlled moment of shot directly rather than via gun mechanism. Thus margin of error was much smaller and loss of ROF was dependant almost entirely on width of prop and current rpm.

p1ngu666
08-25-2005, 09:56 AM
i watched a video at lunch, RAF film unit stuff, so all types of guncam, cine film etc, NO footage showed the "matched" or batched fire we get ingame, this was mostly cannon armed planes btw.

also having the guns start rounds different would help aswell

so rather than all guns have tracer, something something tracer

gun1 tracer, something something tracer
gun2 something tracer, something something
gun3 something something tracer something

etc

a good stream, right from the start http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Monson74
08-25-2005, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
i watched a video at lunch, RAF film unit stuff, so all types of guncam, cine film etc, NO footage showed the "matched" or batched fire we get ingame, this was mostly cannon armed planes btw.

also having the guns start rounds different would help aswell

so rather than all guns have tracer, something something tracer

gun1 tracer, something something tracer
gun2 something tracer, something something
gun3 something something tracer something

etc

a good stream, right from the start http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Exactly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Btw - you still have my name spelled wrong in your sig! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

carguy_
08-25-2005, 02:00 PM
BTW doesn`t this issue concern also MG17 armed planes?Or does the blocking meachanism(firing through propeller) sincs the guns???

Kocur_
08-25-2005, 02:34 PM
Guns arent synched with eachother. They are synched with prop blades movement only. If they were synched with eachother, that would only be side effect, and that would mean even greater loss of ROF, because the area where both guns can fire simultaneously between prop blades is much smaller than for one gun. On the other side it could be that error margin in mechanical synchronisator was large enough, to let guns fire simultaneously or almost so, but again, that would be only side effect.
All we need to do to learn this, is to ask some WW2 armourer...

p1ngu666
08-25-2005, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
BTW doesn`t this issue concern also MG17 armed planes?Or does the blocking meachanism(firing through propeller) sincs the guns???

guess u didnt read any of my posts http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

but 109/190 should be one of the later ones tobe fixed to randomise, as they have other guns, is more important for ki43 for example http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

and for rifle calibre guns, rof is twice as much, so gap is half as much.

109s and 190s are some of the least effected by this tbh

carguy_
08-25-2005, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
but 109/190 should be one of the later ones tobe fixed to randomise, as they have other guns, is more important for ki43 for example http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

and for rifle calibre guns, rof is twice as much, so gap is half as much.

109s and 190s are some of the least effected by this tbh

If you flew at least some LW sorties you wouldn`t be talking ****.MG17 has been hardly useful since the start of IL2.VVS have always been envied about their lasers.Just put a stream of green and make sure a LW plane flies into it.
LW doesn`t have any of that.People say "out of ammo" when they stay with MG17 only.
AFAIK MG17 was a weapon used to down aircraft.In the game MG17 is effective only against Migs and wing mounted engine aircraft from distances smaller than 70m.

We have 1000rounds `o MG17.For what?

p1ngu666
08-25-2005, 05:40 PM
well
109/190 has cannon(s)
**** ****, uve dropped behind ki43.
109/190 (early) has two 7.xmm guns, rof about 20rounds per second i think
**** ****, the gaps are less than heavy machine guns
nose mounted guns produce less yaw, droping more...
theres only 2 of them, so less recoil tobe multiplied

simple reasoning, not basis im afraid http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

and yes i know german machine guns are mostly useless, i do fly lw sorties on occasion, and japanease too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif!

of paired hmg, i only do well with the ubs, tbh

"We have 1000rounds `o MG17.For what?" wiley messershimt had a sense of humour. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Gibbage1
08-26-2005, 01:01 AM
2 7.7MG's are going to be almost useless. End of story. 12 .30 cal's in the Hurricane IIB have a very hard time even downing a 109 without PK. Russian green lasers are a differant story all togeather, but they get a lot of burning kills. Its not like the Russian guns are blowing up P-47's. In fact, I could NOT shoot down a P-47 with them at all.

quiet_man
08-26-2005, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by quiet_man:
wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

6 guns firing at the same time will shake the aircraft more then 1 gun firing at a time. By a factor of 6!

Also, please take a look at this image. Thos shows what me mean about synced and un-synced.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p40e.jpg

Note that these two aircraft are the same, but the Fieldmod has a lesser Russian engine. At one time, all P-40's had unsynced guns, but they were recently converted over to the synced guns. All but the P-40E fieldmod. Just flying the two aircraft, you can feel and tell there is a huge differance in shake, hitting power and gun controle. Try it.

what we want is the P-40E Fieldmod guns on ALL Allied aircraft that use the M2 .50 cal. Look at the gaps in the shots!!! At deflection or snapshots, fighters will slip through EASY! The POINT of MULTIPLE HMG'S IS A STREAM OF FIRE!!! In IL2, that point is nullified, and the recoil is 6-8X worse then it should be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always found the "over perfect" (perfect sync, no dispersion) LW MGs an issue and gun setup it is even more an issue for allied HMG only planes.

e.g. if you try russian MG only planes they have perfect dispersion settings, even a bit to good.
Go to QMB, take the I-16/18, fire a long burst and hit pause. Go to external and watch the bullets. A perfect tunnle, attacking head on looks in fact like approching the death star. Death for any 109 engine, be sure.

what I find even more an issue on the allied .50 is the completely same ammo belt for all guns. I think your pictures show only the tracer hits, there are more hits in between by other ammo types. But hitting with only one ammo type heavily reduces the chance for critical hits.

still, wasn't this thread about gun shake?

quiet_man

Badsight.
08-26-2005, 03:36 AM
I think your pictures show only the tracer hits, there are more hits in between by other ammo types. negative

arcade shows "dots" where a round hits

Monson74
08-26-2005, 04:43 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I think your pictures show only the tracer hits, there are more hits in between by other ammo types. negative

arcade shows "dots" where a round hits </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Haven't tested arcade mode yet but try this simple test: In the QMB select a P-51 & a map with loads of water for example Okinawa. Fly at SL & snap off very short bursts. You'll see that the first burst will have tracers on all guns then two guns only & now & then bursts with no tracers at all - but in every case you'll see hits on the water. My point is that this is maybe a merely aesthetic issue.

p1ngu666
08-26-2005, 08:47 AM
arcade mode shows all rounds

Monson74
08-26-2005, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
arcade mode shows all rounds

But every round will hurt - visible or not, right? The pattern of strikes I see on the water looks much to me like the Field Mod example & every one of the splashes on the water would hurt an enemy plane, right? So you can't fly through a stream of .50s without getting hit unless of course you travel incredibly fast. Please educate me if I'm wrong but this looks to me as a visual thing that shouldn't affect gameplay.

WWMaxGunz
08-26-2005, 10:34 AM
Monson, the point is about the wide gaps in spacing of bullets for only that one gun
on only US planes. Unless maybe the Field Mod P-40 is modelled as firing UBS?

SithSpeeder
08-26-2005, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Monson74:
....but try this simple test: In the QMB select a P-51 & a map with loads of water for example Okinawa. Fly at SL & snap off very short bursts. You'll see that the first burst will have tracers on all guns then two guns only & now & then bursts with no tracers at all - but in every case you'll see hits on the water. My point is that this is maybe a merely aesthetic issue. Try l-o-n-g bursts. I just did to see if you were on to something and you are not. The bullets hit the water in synchronized groups, just like the original "P-40E vs P-40E Field Mod" picture posted by gibbage showed on page two of this thread. This is NOT an issue of aesthetics. And, as stated before, Arcade mode shows ALL hits, not just tracers.

Hope that helps.

* _54th_Speeder *

Badsight.
08-26-2005, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by Monson74:
But every round will hurt - visible or not, right? The pattern of strikes I see on the water looks much to me like the Field Mod example & every one of the splashes on the water would hurt an enemy plane, right? So you can't fly through a stream of .50s without getting hit unless of course you travel incredibly fast. Please educate me if I'm wrong but this looks to me as a visual thing that shouldn't affect gameplay. what you see in Arcade mode with the dots is what is actually being fired & then hitting , its the actual rounds strike position recorded

go switch it on in your config INI & do some QMB flying

p1ngu666
08-26-2005, 04:58 PM
its entirely possible for planes to fly through the gaps, as there relativly small (think of wing from 6 oclock)
kocur estimated a 60metres between rounds

average size of ww2 fighter, 10-15metres square (length and wingspan)

so u can fit 4-6 of them between rounds.

its a positive feedback thing, where your chances of a hit are roughly reduced by the amount of guns u have, plus the recoil is worse so itll send u off aim, and the synced tracer is harder to lead with.

few positives are if u hit, ull hit harder, and the bullets form a shotgunish patern, giving u a wider bullet/ shotgun effect.

not worth the trade off tho

Buzzsaw-
08-26-2005, 06:34 PM
Salute

Everyone who actually flew the P-47 talked about how powerful the eight .50 calibres were when they hit and clearly more powerful than a six gun fighter.

But anyone who flys in this Sim will immediately notice that the P-40's six guns are much more effective.

The P-51 doesn't seem to have the benefit of the P-40's six gun advantage though.

The P-47 was noted as the best strafing aircraft of all US fighters by a group of USAAF pilots in a postwar survey, very stable and easy to aim.

A modern evaluation of its gun tracking capabilities reprinted in AMERICA'S HUNDRED THOUSAND said:

"...good air to air tracking, light control forces without retrimming, and crisp and deadbeat control responses..."

Under even moderate elevator inputs, the P-47 in the game bounces around like it is a giant inflatable balloon.

This is a large heavy aircraft, with a very large wing area. It should be very stable with a great deal of inertia against wobble or bounce under small correctional inputs.

Gibbage1
08-27-2005, 01:19 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Monson, the point is about the wide gaps in spacing of bullets for only that one gun
on only US planes. Unless maybe the Field Mod P-40 is modelled as firing UBS?

P40E Fieldmod is modeled with 6 M2's. The Hurricane Fieldmod is modeled with 2 UB's. BTW, its UB and not UBS. UBS is synked for firing behind a prop.

I did some testing and the UB guns have the same packet firing like the P-47 but the spread is tighter. As if the UB's fire at a much higher ROF when in real life it was only slightly higher. 750 to 900RPS.

I also tested the LA7 B-20's and they are all synced togeather and have about the same gap as the P-47. I have not tested the MG151-20 but I feel it will be the same. The Russian "green laser" 7.62's are not synced and the P-11c's 7.62's ARE synced. Hurricane Ib and IIb are all unsynced. Mk-108's are synced.

Whats the point of this?

#1, that unsynced guns are possible in IL2. If online play and the engine can handle 12x1200RPM .303's on a Hurricane not synced, it sure as heck can handle 8x or 6x750RPM.

#2, LMG and HMG unsyncing is VERY important. Cannon syncing is less important.

#3, Even though other HMG's then M2 are synced, there is MUCH less gap. Even MG15 on 109G14 had MUCH less gap between hits then the P-47.

I doubt Oleg will fix this.

Monson74
08-27-2005, 04:12 AM
Ok - I see what you guys mean & I is wrong be sure. But we're talking three different things here: recoil, tracer pattern & sync so I got a tiny bit confused. In RL if you fire 2x3 unsynced mgs the ROF will vary a bit for each weapon & thus the stream or pattern will be randomized the longer the burst is. Even if the belts are made the same way your second burst will be entirely different from the first. The recoil will be spread out to all six guns' positions, the tracer pattern will be totally unpredictable & all guns are out of sync, right?

p1ngu666
08-27-2005, 07:54 AM
i think its bad on beufighter, spitvc. its subjective stuff. and IRL the ammo belts would probably start with a different rounds aswell

Monson74
08-27-2005, 08:15 AM
Just did a test in arcade mode with the Field Mod & it actually does seem like the guns start off being synced & then fall out of sync.

Pingu, you got my nick spelled wrong in your sig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Kocur_
08-27-2005, 08:28 AM
...khem, 7,92mm x 57 Mauser on P.11c...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
08-27-2005, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Monson, the point is about the wide gaps in spacing of bullets for only that one gun
on only US planes. Unless maybe the Field Mod P-40 is modelled as firing UBS?

P40E Fieldmod is modeled with 6 M2's. The Hurricane Fieldmod is modeled with 2 UB's. BTW, its UB and not UBS. UBS is synked for firing behind a prop.

I did some testing and the UB guns have the same packet firing like the P-47 but the spread is tighter. As if the UB's fire at a much higher ROF when in real life it was only slightly higher. 750 to 900RPS.

I also tested the LA7 B-20's and they are all synced togeather and have about the same gap as the P-47. I have not tested the MG151-20 but I feel it will be the same. The Russian "green laser" 7.62's are not synced and the P-11c's 7.62's ARE synced. Hurricane Ib and IIb are all unsynced. Mk-108's are synced.

Whats the point of this?

#1, that unsynced guns are possible in IL2. If online play and the engine can handle 12x1200RPM .303's on a Hurricane not synced, it sure as heck can handle 8x or 6x750RPM.

#2, LMG and HMG unsyncing is VERY important. Cannon syncing is less important.

#3, Even though other HMG's then M2 are synced, there is MUCH less gap. Even MG15 on 109G14 had MUCH less gap between hits then the P-47.

I doubt Oleg will fix this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good work again Gib!

I think that with Oleg the big if's are:

1) That he sees it himself and understands the point.

2) There is time for a change and his people will say so.

Consider that the 151/20 ammo did get sorted out, there is a chance on this as well.

FritzGryphon
08-27-2005, 05:24 PM
Even MG15 on 109G14

109G14 has MG131, no? But you're right, the RoF is higher. (900 vs. 750rpm)

To be fair, these shouldn't be synced either. They'd be synced to the prop, which would put them out of sync with each other.

Really, I don't think any guns should fire synchronously, perhaps save for electrically operated wing guns. Even then, maybe not, depending on how they work.

AlmightyTallest
08-28-2005, 12:09 AM
For anyone interested, here's color guncam of a P-51 strafing a German airfield, you can easily see the pattern of it's rounds in the video. The flash of the .50cal is because the rounds are API and Incindiary and flash after striking.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4168

It's almost 4.0 MB and is named P-51 attack 1.avi

Gibbage1
08-28-2005, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by Monson74:

Pingu, you got my nick spelled wrong in your sig http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

One day I hope to have the honor of having a quote in Pingu's sig. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FritzGryphon
08-28-2005, 12:26 AM
Nice video, thanks for sharing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Gibbage1
08-28-2005, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Even MG15 on 109G14

109G14 has MG131, no? But you're right, the RoF is higher. (900 vs. 750rpm)

To be fair, these shouldn't be synced either. They'd be synced to the prop, which would put them out of sync with each other.

Really, I don't think any guns should fire synchronously, perhaps save for electrically operated wing guns. Even then, maybe not, depending on how they work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for the correction. Yes, MG131. And yes, they do have a faster ROF. By a little over 15% (my math sucks, correct it if its off by a lot). With my VERY ROUGH esimates (I cant do any scientific testing due to the nature of the sim) the spread between 2 MG131's and 8 .50 cal is about 50% shorter between bullet "packets" of the MG131's.

I think Oleg did this to save on IL2's engine having to calculate so many projectiles. 100 rounds PER SECOND (8x750/60) is a lot of ballistics calculations for a computer thats also having to manage the FM, AI, and all other things going in a game. What I think Oleg did was lower the ROF of the M2's, but increased the damage praportionally to save on the CPU usage during heavy battles. Say lower the ROF by 50% and add 50% to the damage of each bullet. That "should" even things our, right?

Now, if this is Oleg's excuse, and it IS a limitation of hardware to calculate the full 100RPS a P-47 can pump out, fine. I will deal with that. The problem is, that the Hurricane IIB has 12 guns firing at 1200 (I think its 1200) RPM. Thats a total of 240 bullets spilling out of the Hurricane IIB every second. 2.4X more then a single P-47!!! And its not synced! Plus!!! I have been on early war servers with many Hurricanes flying and firing and not suffered. Thats what gets me.

Also, its not as if Oleg can say the IL2 engine is not capable of simulating guns out of sync. Since not only does the Hurricane IIB (And Ib) fire unsynced (303's mind you) but the P-40E field mod also fires unsynced. Flying a few quick DF's I found the P-40e Fueldmod an EMENSLY more effective gun platform then the P-40e. Not only is it easier to hit the enemy at high deflections, they wont slip through "birst's". Also, you can "walk" your stream of fire over a close target. "walking" the firepower is a tearm many many US pilots used in many of there books. In close combat, they would fire, and if the bullets were hitting the left wing, they would kick the right rudder and walk that stream right into the cockpit or engine. You simply CAN NOT DO THIS in any US aircraft BUT!!!! The P-40E Fieldmod. With the Fieldmod its EASY!!!

Another BIG BIG factor in it is recoil. The P-40Ee Fieldmod will NOT sway when the trigger is pressed. It will stay rock steady and on target. The P-40E will sway rather bad when fired. Why? The two aircraft are EXACTLY THE SAME IN ALL WAYS BUT THE ENGINE! Engine more weight? No. Engine more HP? No. The diffreance is that the recoil of the 6MG's is spread out on the field mod, were as the P-40E gets KICKED by 6x's the recoil since all 6's guns fire at the same time. Its the differance between a drill and a hammer.

Another thing I noticed is that WHEN you hit with synced guns, it hits HARD. Since all the damage is delivered in 1 packet, and not spread out over area's. The problem? IL2's modeling of AP shells. Everyone knows IL2's DM does not model AP shells well. You rely on small critical parts failing. The problem is, the things you want to hit are small. This is were walking your firepower will come into play. Cant do that with a shotgun.

What the Allies have right now is a .50 cal shotgun that is simply not very effective in air combat. Yes, you can shoot people down with them, but go fly the P-40E Fieldmod and compair how much easier it would be with un-synced guns VS the P-40E. You will be suprised at the differance it makes.

FritzGryphon
08-28-2005, 12:48 AM
What I think Oleg did was lower the ROF of the M2's, but increased the damage praportionally to save on the CPU usage during heavy battles

The game originally saved that way by eliminating bullets.

It no longer does. You can see hits for every round fired, even for the light MGs now. Whether synced or not, there's the exact same number of bullets fired (whether 8 at once, or 8 quickly in a row). No performance difference, just aesthetic.

So ultimately, it should be changed, end of story.

But of course, Oleg doesn't read threads like these, so someone ought to send a concise bug report, preferably in Russian http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

Aaron_GT
08-28-2005, 01:12 AM
I did some testing and the UB guns have the same packet firing like the P-47 but the spread is tighter. As if the UB's fire at a much higher ROF when in real life it was only slightly higher. 750 to 900RPS.

Gibbage, the UBK fires at 1050 rounds per minute.

TheBbrowning .303 fires a little slower than the .30 version by 60 rpm, but I don't know if this is modelled in the sim.

Badsight.
08-28-2005, 01:30 AM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
What the Allies have right now is a .50 cal shotgun that is simply not very effective in air combat. Yes, you can shoot people down with them, but go fly the P-40E Fieldmod and compair how much easier it would be with un-synced guns VS the P-40E. You will be suprised at the differance it makes. this sums up the .50 feeling for me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Badsight.
08-28-2005, 01:32 AM
although for the P-80 , is it meant to have a sort of syncronisation >?

or were those .50s also meant to fire a "stream" of rounds ?

Kocur_
08-28-2005, 02:02 AM
Guys! Please! There is no synchronisation but synchronisation of guns and prop only. No synchronisation systems of guns, which do not shoot through prop disk!

The is only exeption of 40mm Vickers S cannons on Hurricane Mk.IV, to let it fire without yawing due to large recoil of those cannons, when fired not in the very same moment. Note: it took 40mm cannon and its recoil to create need of system preventing recoil from destabilising the plane. I strongly belive, that recoil of 4, 6 or 8 .50 M2's, wherever mounted, could not destabilise WW2 fighter in flight.

Monson74
08-28-2005, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
For anyone interested, here's color guncam of a P-51 strafing a German airfield, you can easily see the pattern of it's rounds in the video. The flash of the .50cal is because the rounds are API and Incindiary and flash after striking.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4168

It's almost 4.0 MB and is named P-51 attack 1.avi

Very nice video. The pattern looks very much like what the Field Mod does only it seems the tracers come from one side at the time only. Clearly it is easier to score some hits with 2x3 unsynced mgs than with an automatic shotgun with a low ROF - that is of course against a moving target.

DangerForward
08-28-2005, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
What the Allies have right now is a .50 cal shotgun that is simply not very effective in air combat. Yes, you can shoot people down with them, but go fly the P-40E Fieldmod and compair how much easier it would be with un-synced guns VS the P-40E. You will be suprised at the differance it makes. this sums up the .50 feeling for me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A couple of days last week War-Clouds(western front) was down, so the 1942 eastern front server got filled. I took the P40Mod and was amazed by how much easier it was to score kills, and unlike when I'm flying the P51, I saw them got down instead of just getting the message. It was great to finally be able to saw off wings and light fires without ten seconds of firing. I could actually clear the tail of teammates before they got shot down. The ease of scoring hits in deflection and tight turns is much greater.

p1ngu666
08-28-2005, 07:29 AM
u might find the p80 better because of gyro gunsite, and the central guns

Gibbage1
08-28-2005, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
although for the P-80 , is it meant to have a sort of syncronisation >?

or were those .50s also meant to fire a "stream" of rounds ?

There is NO reason to sync the rounds, and as we discussed earlier there was also no way with the browning. They all fired at there own ROF's.

WWMaxGunz
08-28-2005, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:
Guys! Please! There is no synchronisation but synchronisation of guns and prop only. No synchronisation systems of guns, which do not shoot through prop disk!

The is only exeption of 40mm Vickers S cannons on Hurricane Mk.IV, to let it fire without yawing due to large recoil of those cannons, when fired not in the very same moment. Note: it took 40mm cannon and its recoil to create need of system preventing recoil from destabilising the plane. I strongly belive, that recoil of 4, 6 or 8 .50 M2's, wherever mounted, could not destabilise WW2 fighter in flight.

Large recoil plus low rate of fire compared to machineguns. 50's firing at 13 shots a second
will tend to balance far more evenly. The more unsynched guns the smoother the balance.
Bofors 40mm fires fast for such a big gun but slow in terms of 2 gun yaw balance.

Recoil balance on P-47 AEP used to seem like it was modelled as maybe 2 per second.

Monson74
08-29-2005, 01:35 AM
Hope Oleg sees this - I've just converted myself to the P-51 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Grey_Mouser67
08-29-2005, 06:28 PM
I think guns can move a plane...I've seen video to this effect...even modern day A-10 Warhogs create enough energy in their Gau's to actually stop the aircraft in mid air if they could hold the trigger down long enough...melt down would occur.

The only question is how much recoil is enough...and how does it figure from a relative standpoint....I am amazed at the killing power of Fw's with so little recoil and take the G-2 and its like firing a lazer...the Lagg is even more stable relative to the strength of the weapons firing from its nose...as much as a P-38 almost. Then fly a Spitfire...holy moly...if a Fw is that stable, then how can a spit wiggle like that??? No physics explanation I can think of...I'm hoping and thinking that Oleg will address this in the next patch.

Kocur_
08-29-2005, 11:12 PM
Who says they cant - in general, 40mm Vickers S cannon was mentioned here. But A-10 is not a very good example here! GAU-8/A is fed with HUGE and very powerful 30mm ammo and fires at 4200rpm. And yes: it produces huge recoil, cant remember it exactly, but if had enough ammo it could stop A-10. Still GAU-8 is mounted in a manner that lets its firing barrel to be in aircraft's longitudinal axis exactly, so that huge recoil does not spoil aiming. And that brought us to Bf-109, LaGG-3, P-38 and any other planes with guns mounted in nose: their recoil, no matter how large, will not cause yaw oscilations, because that force affects the plane in its longitudinal axis, that is unlike gun mounted in wings, which recoil affects horizontal plane stability. The further from lonitudinal axis - the greater momentum is created.
Fw-190A internal pair of cannons is mounted close to fuselage, so their recoil affects aircrafts horizontal stability little. Outer pair of cannons is mounted more or less in the same position as Spitfire's British Hispano Mk.II are. So it may seem Fw190A or Bf-109 with 20mm gun pods should oscilate like Spitfire, but its not the case. Hispano produces much more recoil than MG151/20, there are two reasons: first-Hispano is fed with ammo ( average 845m/s x 0,13kg = momentum 109,85 kgm/s) much more powerful in terms of kinetic energy, than MG151/20 ammo (average 760m/s x average 0,104kg = momentum 79,04kgm/s), second: Hispano is gas operated so entire force of recoil is transreffed from cartridge case to aircraft, MG151/20 is short barrel recoil operated weapon, so part of recoil is used to operate the cannon, and is transferred into aircraft in a "softer" way, as it is divided into part of recoil produced by stopping barrel, and some time later - part produced by stopping bolt. Im not saying that Spitfire should oscilate in horizontal plane as much as it does now, Im saying that however strong it should be, relatively it should affect aircraft armed with MG151/20 less.
On .50 M2: its ammo momentum is 38,27kgm/s and its short barrel recoil operated too...

WWMaxGunz
08-29-2005, 11:39 PM
Compared to the mass and speed of the plane plus the added energy from thrust... or just
figure how many guns to equal the excess thrust alone, which as you slow the plane the
excess thrust from the prop increases so how long to slow the plane?

As for vibration and yaw, more guns and higher fire rates will tend to cancel each other.
Instead we get more guns making worse oscillations. Limitations of the model?