PDA

View Full Version : The 20mm Ammo count for ALL BF109G is still wrong



XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:52 PM
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hangar/9378/bf109tec.html


http://members.lycos.co.uk/christiandrexler/dens/gustav_ammo.jpg



In all Bf109G or Gustav, the ammo count of the 20mm should be 200, not 150.



I think this one's not so difficult to fix...



Message Edited on 09/08/0302:02PM by TheRealMatrix

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:52 PM
http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/hangar/9378/bf109tec.html


http://members.lycos.co.uk/christiandrexler/dens/gustav_ammo.jpg



In all Bf109G or Gustav, the ammo count of the 20mm should be 200, not 150.



I think this one's not so difficult to fix...



Message Edited on 09/08/0302:02PM by TheRealMatrix

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:08 PM
I think that this page consist much more bugs than you even think.

Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:46 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I think that this page consist much more bugs than
- you even think.
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-

Mr Maddox , what about fixing at last the Bf-109F4 ammo load?

It should have 200 rounds for the MG151-20 instead of only 120 it has now...
This is a 80% undermodelling :-)
It's maybe the easiest bug to fix.
I don't think it will take so much efforts. Only someone is needed to order your programmers to do it...

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 04:52 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I think that this page consist much more bugs than
- you even think.
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-



Hi Oleg!

Thank you very much for reply.


Maybe one or another data in this page is not perfectly accurate, but the ammo count for 20mm is.


Here is a ORIGINAL document from Messerschmitt AG, showing the correct loadout for Bf109F-4:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/christiandrexler/dens/bf109f4_ammo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:00 PM
yup I wondered why this bug exits in F2, F4, G2 and G6-series.. it should be easiest thing to fix.. I could really need those 80 more rounds in my 109 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:26 PM
According to "Warplanes of the Third Reich" by William Green, I will quote:

Page 554; "BF109 F-4. Produced almost simultaneously with the Bf 109 F-3, the -4 differed primarily in that the calibre of its engine-mounted MG151 was increased from 15mm to 20mm, ammunition capacity changed from 200 rounds to 150 rounds. Improved self-selaing was applied to the fuel tank, and pilot protection was revised..."

So, to sum it up, 150 rounds is the loadout of the Bf109 F-4, according to this source.

I think the real thing to understand is that documents can be wrong. Now if someone had an actual technical manual or field manual, we might be cooking with fire!


Fehler



Message Edited on 09/08/0304:29PM by Fehler

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:30 PM
Here I have even a RUSSIAN DOCUMENT which they probably gathered from captured Bf109G-10.



http://members.lycos.co.uk/christiandrexler/dens/bf109g10_ammo.gif



This is cut-out of the full file, which is too large to post, but available for download here:


http://members.lycos.co.uk/christiandrexler/dens/bf-109g-10-3.tif



It also confirms 200 rounds for nose-mounted MG151/20 cannon.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:33 PM
for info fehler

the datasheet above is PART OF EVERY flight manual!

for example, in the G3 handbook, the "ladeplan" is in
manual part IV :-)

more questions ?

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 06:21 PM
Question to Oleg:

Can it be that the original Manuals and blueprints of german WWII planes onla was printed in russia?

How the germans get the thousends of copies from this documents at this time?



Gruß

RogerHawk


http://520082849836-0000.bei.t-online.de/JG68_logo/GreenTigersLogoklein.gif (http://520082849836-0000.bei.t-online.de/index.htm)


<hr>
"Die großen L¶cher in den Fl¤chen sind nicht das Problem. Erst wenn die Dinger fehlen wird mir bei der Sache mulmig."

<hr>

http://www.JG68.de.vu

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:11 PM
Hi Oleg!

You is wrong. Be sure.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:02 PM
Lol, it had to be said /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:05 PM
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:28 PM
So several sources tell us that its 200 rounds. Lets fix it and be done with it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:38 PM
My connection from here is too slow to do a full search.

But I'm 99% sure that this has been reported to Oleg before, and more than once too.

Not only was it reported, but I remember reading that Oleg was "very embarrassed" to find that this incorrect ammo count was there.

Honestly I've no idea why some people get the impression that there's some kind of determination to nerf all of the LW planes ;>

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:02 AM
I called Wily Messerschmitt. He says he'll come over to 1C in his 109 and show them how many rounds are in the gun.

Nice d00d.

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 10:06 PM
this needs an "bump"

good datas, constructive post

wastel

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 10:46 PM
bump.


http://sivusto.servepics.com/~lahnat/werre2s.jpg

v1.11 is nice. But it's still flawed. Please fix (in order of importance): LaGG-3 durability, P-39 climb, MG151/20 ammo count in 109's, downgrade Rata a bit, fix G6 weight, give Emil's automation 200rpm more (now it keeps rpm's at 2300rpm with 110% throttle while 2500rpm is safe), downgrade 190 roll, change B-239 speedometer to metric system. More to follow, perhaps.

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 01:29 AM
Just because me, like all of my teammates, believes deeply in the emormous development possibilities of FB (far superior to every CFS we flew before) , i just express the deep wish of not seeing any other super planes in this simulator. I take also the occasion to testify that FW190, specially of the "A" series , encountered much more overheating probs than the 109's with their water cooled inline engines . What i am saying is almost knew to every aviation historian.
FW109 cooling problem regarded the second line of the cylinders, also if the problem was reduced a bit during the russian campaign.
The only known "problem" for rookie pilots (in the reality" ) was the extreme exhuberance of the Daimler engines , especially on the G Series. This caused a lot of difficulties to young pilots in training ; 109's had the tendence to invert their assests immediately after rapid take offs. Italian Regia Aeronautica pilots experienced this characrteristics over their skin in Germany during the Luftwaffe training .
The game looks really different ; gaining speed with an "all-engined" aircraft like 109 K is not properly comfortable and, at a first look , all the propeller pitch curves seems to be not correct.
Looks like P39 and especially La 7 are made to be dominators in the new 1.11 patch.
I also confirm the general undermodelling of the german planes , including the lack of ammo on the nose mounted cannons that , normally was 200 RPG for the MG151/20.

Expressing my good faith for an invertion of tendence, i express all of my appreheciation to Mr. Maddox for his wonderful work .

Nat Plaia aka I/JG53_Nowotny
Former external consultant R.A.F. Museum , Hendon - London

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 05:46 AM
How are y'all determining the number of rounds carried?

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 05:56 AM
In the console (shift-tab) type "user STAT" and you will get information about how many rounds you have fired.

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 08:45 AM
Bump! Looks like the 109G had 200 rounds of 20mm. Keep digging up evidence until Oleg is comes up with a rational reply. A simple "no I'm not going to fix it, be sure" would get the job done (and further erode his reputation, but oh well)

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 09:31 AM
Oleg should at least answer if this is supposed to be a place to discuss flaws in the simulator. He answers and says "you are wrong" and when you prove HIM wrong there is no more answer.

maybe the whining should be directed towards ubi since it seems things do not get fixed this way.

-pozzu

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 09:33 AM
Bu.... Bu.... Bu..

Kaaaaaa BUMP!

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 11:10 AM
Here is a copy from a examination of a G14 by allied forces
(copied it from the)

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com

they also stated that a 109G was able to carry 200 rounds, but the plane was only fitted with 150 rounds....



A New Sub-Type of the Me. 109G



At 09:30 hours on 22nd July, a Me.109G-14 was shot down by light A.A. fire near Fontenay-le-Poesnel, making a good belly-landing in a grass field, only 800 yards away from the enemy lines. An obstruction post was hit before the aircraft came to rest, and severe damage was done to the starboard mainplane.

This aircraft is the first of its sub-type to be identified, and presents a number of interesting features. At the present stage of the war the most interesting are, perhaps, those which point to the very short time elapsing between its leaving the factory and its destruction. Technically the aircraft is of interest as it was carrying a special tank containing a fluid known to the Germans as "MW50". The power boosting qualities of this fluid will be described under the heading of "Engine" below.

Apart from the fitting of this tank and the installation of FuG 16 ZY, this aircraft is almost identical with the Me.109 G-6/U2.



Identification Markings



+ 7 (black outlined yellow)

Call sign: VW+HO

Works No.: 413601

Maker: Mcu. (ed.note: code for Erla- Leipzig)



Camouflage



Light and dark grey upper surfaces, light blue lower surfaces. The lower half of the fuselage sides mottled with patches of grey and green. The spinner is black with a white spiral.



Engine



DB605 A-1 Tp.

No. 01104968.

Maker: hsr. (ed.note: code for Henschel- Kassel)

Painted on the crankcase cover is: 605 A/m.



This engine has the normal small supercharger and both engine bearers are of light alloy. C-3 (100 octane) fuel is used but additional power for short periods is obtained from an apparatus known as the "MW 50", in conjunction with a boost pressure of 1.7 ata (equals British boost of +9.5). This is a system of delivering methanol and water to the eye of the supercharger from a light alloy tank (probably of 35 gallon capacity) situated behind the normal fuel tank. The methanol tank is built in during manufacture and cannot be removed for servicing. The pressure side of the supercharger is tapped by a pipe which leads via a relief valve to the top of the light alloy tank, so supplying the pressure for feeding the mixture to the engine. A supply pipeline from the tank to the eye of the supercharger carries the methanol and water mixture. In this pipeline there is a solenoid operated valve and a pressure gauge connection. A switch on the port side of the cockpit beading, marked "MW 50" operates the solenoid valve and is a simple On/Off switch. The pressure gauge, reading from 0 to 3 kgs./sq. cm. (0 to 42 lb./sq. in.) is located lower down on the port side of the cockpit. The actual pressure used is between 1.2 and 1.8 kgs./sq. cm. (17 lb/sq. in. -25.6).

It is estimated that the power at sea level, when using "MW 50" with a 1.7 ata boost (equals British boost of +9.5) and 2,800 r.p.m. is 1,770 h.p. The D.B. 605A without the "MW 50" develops 1,450 h.p. at 1.42 ata boost (equals British boost of +5.5) and 2,800 r.p.m. at sea level.



The boost gauge is marked with a series of red lines on the glass, as follows: -



d opposite 1.02 ata. = British -0.2.

30 opposite 1.3 ata = British +3.8.

3 opposite 1.42 ata = British + 5.5.

MW 50 opposite 1.7 ata = British +9.5.



The figures on the glass refer to the time in minutes for the use of the respective boost pressures, the d8 meaning maximum continuous. The rev. counter is also marked opposite the respective r.p.m.

The sparking plugs are of a type not previously fitted to D.B. 605 engines but they were found recently in the Jumo 213. They are Bosch D.W. 250 E.T. (10/1) and are stamped 5Z (this is the manufacturer's date code and indicates May, 1944).

The magneto is marked 9/4040E, Serial No. 453864. Manufacturer cxo under license from L.Z.U.

The flange bears the following markings: BA 13402 cxo 4Z.



Armament



1 x MG151 20 mm. calibre, firing through propeller hub.

2 x MG131 over the engine.

Loading order 20 mm. gun- 1 AP/I, 1 HE/I/T (S.D.)(M. Geschoss) repeating. This order changed later in the belt to- 1 AP/I, 1 I/T, 2 HE/I/T (S.D.)(M. Geschoss) repeating.

Loading order for 13 mm. guns- 1 AP/T, 1 HE/T repeating. Nearly all tracer rounds were night trace, although the aircraft was on a daylight operation.

None of the guns had been fired and its was found that the ammunition tanks had not been completely filled.



Tank capacity Rounds carried

20 mm. ... 200 per gun ... 150

13 mm. ... 300 per gun ... 275

The Revi 16B gunsight was used.



Armour



Pilots bullet-resisting glass screen. The cockpit cover was jettisoned be

JG53 PikAs Abbuzze
I./Gruppe

http://www.jg53-pikas.de/
http://mitglied.lycos.de/p123/Ani_pikasbanner_langsam.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 01:48 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I think that this page consist much more bugs than
- you even think.
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games

Sorry Oleg, but that seems a poor reply to asked question, isn't it? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Actually the hub mounted MG151/20mm has not the quantity of rounds as it should be. Every sources either on the net OR hard prints(books) states the hub gun carried 200rounds. So why is FB missing the full ammo load for the 20mm gun?



"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 01:55 PM
Then you need learning to not waste cannon's ammo by spray over sky. Expertens don't need many cannon rounds to make a score.

Regards
SnowLeopard

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 02:05 PM
WereSnowleopard wrote:
- Then you need learning to not waste cannon's ammo by
- spray over sky. Expertens don't need many cannon
- rounds to make a score.


Is that an argument? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif



"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 02:17 PM
This is from the English translation of the Finnish Bf-109G-6 manual:

http://aa10.aae.uiuc.edu/~bbrought/general/109g6_armament.jpg


Unfortunately I don't have any other sources with me right now - maybe Butch2k knows more?



Message Edited on 09/10/0304:18PM by Oryx

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 02:20 PM
WereSnowleopard wrote:
- Then you need learning to not waste cannon's ammo by
- spray over sky. Expertens don't need many cannon
- rounds to make a score.
-
- Regards
- SnowLeopard

lol ... what a stupid post

... to stay on topic:
The planes in FB should carry the maximum ammount of ammunition.
Lack of supply shouldn't be modeled.

-------------------
http://320015073007-0001.bei.t-online.de/il2-forum/signatur.gif
JG51_Atze

JG51 (http://www.jg51.de)
Virtual Online War (http://www.s-driess.de/vow/index.php?page=homeion=home)
"Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner"

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 04:16 PM
what about a loadout like in the other planes: Extra Ammo.

Several US planes have that selection , so how about make a loadout for that in 109 series !

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 04:23 PM
I believe I have read that loading more then 150 rounds caused jamming - so 150 was a normal load. Russians also had something called "carefull loading" with increase ammo for 37mm cannons of Yak-9T to 32 rounds, there were also possibility to load more ammo for ShVAKs and UB but it was rarely used in real life.

AKA_Bogun

---------------
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.

- Tom Clancy

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 05:02 PM
They had a clip on the Wings channel a while back that was telling about the ground crews and the hardships that the crews had to go through .

Now in this clip a part of it was on arming the aircraft on the ground and some of the problems they incounterd. .

One of the first things that was said was the loadout on the weapons on the 109 and how they had to change the load on some of the aircraft , One was that if they put the full load in the ammo chamber the machine guns would jam from the tangle and twist of the belts that where fed up through the guide.. It was also stated that the loadout was changed in late 41 due to this . IF there was a jam the engine had to be removed from the aircraft to get access to the load box of the machine gun rounds.. I also crosschecked this with the records for the test after the war that the americans did.. and it matched.. so the loadout was changed and they did not use the full load..

This was also done on American aircraft in the war , some of the top planes had to load less in there wings due to jams in the belt feed.. so this is not uncommon for the load out not to match the first tech manul that is put out for a given aircraft


I see that alot of the complanints that go to Oleg on the aircraft that do not take into account of how changes where made in the plane as the war progressed .
Just because you see a data sheet it does not mean it is the latest or the one that was really used..

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 08:44 PM
Cess-Harpoon wrote:
- They had a clip on the Wings channel a while back
- that was telling about the ground crews and the
- hardships that the crews had to go through .
-
- Now in this clip a part of it was on arming the
- aircraft on the ground and some of the problems they
- incounterd. .
-
-
-
- One of the first things that was said was the
- loadout on the weapons on the 109 and how they had
- to change the load on some of the aircraft , One was
- that if they put the full load in the ammo chamber
- the machine guns would jam from the tangle and twist
- of the belts that where fed up through the guide..
- It was also stated that the loadout was changed in
- late 41 due to this . IF there was a jam the engine
- had to be removed from the aircraft to get access to
- the load box of the machine gun rounds.. I also
- crosschecked this with the records for the test
- after the war that the americans did.. and it
- matched.. so the loadout was changed and they did
- not use the full load..
-
-
- This was also done on American aircraft in the
- war , some of the top planes had to load less in
- there wings due to jams in the belt feed.. so this
- is not uncommon for the load out not to match the
- first tech manul that is put out for a given
- aircraft
-
-
-
- I see that alot of the complanints that go to
- Oleg on the aircraft that do not take into account
- of how changes where made in the plane as the war
- progressed .
-
- Just because you see a data sheet it does not mean
- it is the latest or the one that was really used..

Excellent! Thank you for a thoughful reply http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
This is the kind of thing Oleg or one of his people should have said. "You is wrong" is rather unprofessional.

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 10:34 PM
-- One of the first things that was said was the
-- loadout on the weapons on the 109 and how they had
-- to change the load on some of the aircraft , One was
-- that if they put the full load in the ammo chamber
-- the machine guns would jam from the tangle and twist
-- of the belts that where fed up through the guide..
-- It was also stated that the loadout was changed in
-- late 41 due to this . IF there was a jam the engine
-- had to be removed from the aircraft to get access to
-- the load box of the machine gun rounds.. I also
-- crosschecked this with the records for the test
-- after the war that the americans did.. and it
-- matched.. so the loadout was changed and they did
-- not use the full load.


Yup, this sounds exaclty right. I'm betting Oleg's right here.

Official figures RARELY match the way equipment is actually used.

Just ask any early-years Vietnam vet about the official 20-round mag capacity of the original M-16. >http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Stenciled on the side of my Dora:

"Lasst das H¶llentor ¶ffen, es friert hier oben!"
("Leave the gates to Hell open, it's FREEZING up here!")

XyZspineZyX
09-10-2003, 11:43 PM
Ok..if these details are modelled, then please simulate low quality standards in VVS planes or the exhaust smokes in the LA 5 cockpits

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 12:33 AM
Exactly, in a game with no gun jams, there should be full ammo load.

This was not just limited to the bf-109. Other planes guns were more likely to jam if they had too much ammunition. For example, P-47. Yet, P-47 has correct ammo load in FB.

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 01:20 AM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- Exactly, in a game with no gun jams, there should be
- full ammo load.
-
- This was not just limited to the bf-109. Other
- planes guns were more likely to jam if they had too
- much ammunition. For example, P-47. Yet, P-47 has
- correct ammo load in FB.


I disagree. If they had to fly with a smaller load to avoid jams, then that is the way they should be modeled. I already knew about the smaller ammo load of the Finnish 109 G's, but I didn't realize it applied to all F and G series planes. I hope Butch2K weighs in on this. If the P-47 variants in the sim had this trouble and were light loaded in practice, then I hope that is what we have in the sim.

I have an automatic that tends to jam on the first round with a full clip. I always load it with less than a full clip as a result.

Marseille's June 1942 flight in an F-4 had a cannon jam early in an engagement where he downed six aircraft (mostly with LMG's.)

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:11 AM
VVS-Manuc wrote:
- Ok..if these details are modelled, then please
- simulate low quality standards in VVS planes or the
- exhaust smokes in the LA 5 cockpits


If low quality of early war Russian planes need be simulates - why stop there?
Why not program rotten quality of late war German planes?
Why not to program all the troubles with American/British planes, early or late?
They are all well documented.


AKA_Bogun

---------------
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.

- Tom Clancy

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 02:51 AM
Atzebrueck wrote:
- WereSnowleopard wrote:
-- Then you need learning to not waste cannon's ammo by
-- spray over sky. Expertens don't need many cannon
-- rounds to make a score.
--
-- Regards
-- SnowLeopard
-
- lol ... what a stupid post
-
- ... to stay on topic:
- The planes in FB should carry the maximum ammount of
- ammunition.
- Lack of supply shouldn't be modeled.

Okay, if you have a automatic pistol. I bet you will load max full in magazine then you have a shootout. Your pistol may jammed due to spring problem from overmax load as you get shot.

Also If mechanic tell pilot he can fix his Me-109 to carry 300 or 400 round of 20mm cannon instead of safe load of 150. Pilot will said no thank because don't want fly pork.

Also you need to read history books how importand to not waste ammo or will catch in sky full of emeny planes with empty ammo.

Regards
SnowLeopard

Also go check your automatic pistol for your safe.

Message Edited on 09/10/0308:56PM by WereSnowleopard

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 03:27 AM
WereSnowleopard wrote:

-
- Okay, if you have a automatic pistol. I bet you
- will load max full in magazine then you have a
- shootout. Your pistol may jammed due to spring
- problem from overmax load as you get shot.
-

You would be dead wrong! I load it to its max *useful* clip capacity, not what it can carry. That's the way I keep it. That's also the way I used it when I shot it in timed action tournaments.

If it doesn't chamber that first round properly, it's game over. That first round also tends to be the best aimed of the lot...

A jammed gun is just an expensive club.

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 06:06 AM
Ammunition is heavy, especially 20mm stuff, and since it is carried in the nose of the plane, it affects the COG, (center of gravity). Since there are accounts of planes carrying less than full ammo capacity, if would not be unreasonable to assume that there were good reasons for this, namely handling and flight stability? Another possible explanation could be feeding problems when a full ammo load was carried.

British Spitfire Mk Vc's had four 20mm Hispanos, but in squadron service two of the cannon were often removed to improve handling and performance. Since 109's were often going up against superior turning fighters, they might have cut back on ammo load to improve their handling as well. it is not an unprecedented practice. Most 109 pilots did not like the wingpod guns, and had them removed for this very reason.

Since the majority of flights did not result in a complete expenditure of ammunition, a full ammo load might not have been critical, particularly since 109's could disengage anytime they chose by diving away from the majority of allied fighters.


Budanova

XyZspineZyX
09-11-2003, 06:28 AM
They already model the rotten state of German late war production look at how fast the late aircraft heat up and the crappy climb rates.

Glasses-"I may have four eyes but you only have one wing"

"Kurt Tank is your daddy"

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 12:42 AM
Now we know that default factory ammunition amount was 200 rounds.. now some pilots preferred to use 150 rounds? SO what? 200 is the default,, and 200 it should be.. THen there should be weapon arming customization, like ability to choose 150 rounds or 200 rounds. IMHO. How come VVS planes have as much ammo as they should then?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 02:38 AM
Vipez- wrote:
- Now we know that default factory ammunition amount
- was 200 rounds.. now some pilots preferred to use
- 150 rounds? SO what? 200 is the default,, and 200 it
- should be.. THen there should be weapon arming
- customization, like ability to choose 150 rounds or
- 200 rounds. IMHO. How come VVS planes have as much
- ammo as they should then?

If it is on a per pilot basis, then you are correct. If instead, all ground crews were instructed to use no more than 150 rounds for the loadout, then you are incorrect. There is some reason to believe that it is the latter. I have heard that the Finns used less, and I'll wager that it was the "official" max that was in use for all of them at the time. Would like to hear some official word on it.

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 03:12 AM
Vipez- wrote:
- Now we know that default factory ammunition amount
- was 200 rounds.. now some pilots preferred to use
- 150 rounds? SO what? 200 is the default,, and 200 it
- should be.. THen there should be weapon arming
- customization, like ability to choose 150 rounds or
- 200 rounds. IMHO. How come VVS planes have as much
- ammo as they should then

They do not.
But you do not care about VVS aircraft anyway, right? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


AKA_Bogun

---------------
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.

- Tom Clancy

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 04:08 AM
Budanova wrote:
- Ammunition is heavy, especially 20mm stuff, and
- since it is carried in the nose of the plane, it
- affects the COG, (center of gravity). Since there
- are accounts of planes carrying less than full ammo
- capacity, if would not be unreasonable to assume
- that there were good reasons for this, namely
- handling and flight stability? Another possible
- explanation could be feeding problems when a full
- ammo load was carried.
-

In the nose? Sorry but the cannons were mounted behind the engine. In fact the rear of the cannon intruded into the cockpit.

- British Spitfire Mk Vc's had four 20mm Hispanos, but
- in squadron service two of the cannon were often
- removed to improve handling and performance.
-
-

The SpitVc came standard from the factory with only 2 wing cannons, though there was a position for two more.


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 07:28 AM
Strange is that the inboard FW190 gun, a MG151/20E, is the same as the hub gun of the 109. But the Focke-Wulf can load 250rpg without any feeding problems./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



"......und mein Herz steigt wie ein Falke in die Lüfte!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 11:15 AM
Ah, looks like more "Urban Legend" crap to me. Jams are not modeled in the game unless you take hits, so loadouts due to jams should not be modeled either. Anything else is just a crappy excuse so that the person(s) that did the original research wont have to say they are wrong. How can a game model in supposition and subjectivity and be fair? It cant, so unless there is an option to select the ammo amount a full load (From data sheets) is the only option to make things historical and fair. Now, if there was an ammo selection and the pilot knew he had a greater (Like 5%) chance of getting a jam with the full ammo amount, then that would be alright. As long as the 5% was across the board for all planes. While I am on the subject, you know that silly looking handle thing in the pits of most planes? That's a charging handle for the nose firing machine guns. You get a jam, you cycle the machine gun. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didnt. Go model in sometimes into a game and say it's fair.

Interestingly, you know the main reason the P-39 was not accepted by the US, and given to the Soviets? The main nose gun usually became a one shot wonder and was excessively prone to jamming. Now I know the Soviets figured out a fix for the problem and they ended up loving the plane. So, 60 years later you read about P-39's and you think what a piece of crap. You read a Russian book and think, what a wonderful plane. ... "Urban Legend"

The truth is that jams are not modeled, so why should ammunition limits be placed on a particular plane because of some guy's account? Again, it's "Urban Legend".

I have a Glock and have never had a jam no matter what kind of ammo I have shot. I had a Sig and it jammed all the time. I discovered (After I got rid of it) that the recoil spring might have been placed in backwards from the factory - and easy mistake to make. The new owner of my Sig replaced the recoil spring and has never had a jam. So in 60 years, if you read my accounts, Sig's jammed. So you will make a game and whenever you fire the Sig, it will jam. When the truth is I didnt know what to fix. That's what I mean by "Urban Legend". Information, although true by accounts, was based on misinformation or misinterpretation. 200 rounds is what the data sheets say, 200 rounds is what it should be. You cant model in crappy mechanics into the game.

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 12:16 PM
Funny is that some things, as wanna-be poor quality is on windows is modelled on LW a/c but not on russian a/c which were well known for that./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif





"......und mein Herz steigt wie ein Falke in die Lüfte!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 01:50 PM
WereSnowleopard wrote:
- Okay, if you have a automatic pistol. I bet you
- will load max full in magazine then you have a
- shootout. Your pistol may jammed due to spring
- problem from overmax load as you get shot.
Why do you compare a belt fed cannon with an automatic pistol ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


- Also If mechanic tell pilot he can fix his Me-109
- to carry 300 or 400 round of 20mm cannon instead of
- safe load of 150. Pilot will said no thank because
- don't want fly pork.
Did I say, that I want to load 300 or 400 rounds into a 200 round ammunition box ?! 200 rounds should be enough /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif .


- Also you need to read history books how importand
- to not waste ammo or will catch in sky full of emeny
- planes with empty ammo.
Again, this has nothing to do with the ammount of ammunition, which has been available for the MG151/20.

-------------------
http://320015073007-0001.bei.t-online.de/il2-forum/signatur.gif
JG51_Atze

JG51 (http://www.jg51.de)
Virtual Online War (http://www.s-driess.de/vow/index.php?page=homeion=home)
"Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner"

Message Edited on 09/12/0303:02PM by Atzebrueck

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 02:02 PM
if u want fly with 150 rounds then shoot 50 rounds away befor you take off. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
(Somebody posted, it only have 120 rounds, i dont know
but what ever then shoot away 80 rounds befor take of.)
I want see who will do so.

I see just a lot of cheap excuse nothing more.
I was already posting, that ammo issue, right after FB were came out.
Back in IL2 early 109s had 200 rounds
in FB it only have 150(or 120), very strange.
Looks like datas changing here all the time just for fun.

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 02:06 PM
Fehler wrote:
-
-
-
- The truth is that jams are not modeled, so why
- should ammunition limits be placed on a particular
- plane because of some guy's account?
-
-

I like this comment on placing a limit on the ammo load./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif So true.
------------

Now a general statement to all.

Do you know what will happen in the next hour? Well a pilot does not know what will happen once he is airborne. To take less than a full load of ammo would be pure folly. The same can be said for fuel load, but for furballs, partial load is preferable./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

Message Edited on 09/12/0309:28AM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 09:05 PM
Well I'd say: give then a minimum 0f 150, at least. I mean, someone posted the F4 has only 120 now.. what's up with that?

If *officially* they could load 200, but *in practice* they found out staying well below that is the best way to avoid problems, give the 109's at least 150. I don't see the problem there, why not?

And if you can't do your stuff with 150 rounds, then you probably won't be able to do it with 200 either. But that's my personal opinion.

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 10:20 PM
Abbuzze wrote:
- they also stated that a 109G was able to carry 200
- rounds, but the plane [G-14] was only fitted with 150
- rounds....

And that's because of ammo shortage. Some weeks ago, someone posted about 2 Pilots and their ammo. The Rottenführer just had 15 (F I F T E E N) 20mm rounds, no MGs and the Katschmarek just 13mm MGs with 60 (SIXTY) round each. Not very much compared to the capacity of 2x 300 13mm + 200 20mm..... BUT if the shortage is simulated, why not crappy engines?? German planes in the late war and russian planes up to 42/43, overheating... less performance, lower structural limits etc... So fill them up or do all the rest... filling those guns will be much easier to do /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif .


<hr>

<p align=center style="width:100%; filter:glow[color=#33CCFF, strength=2)">

<img src=http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/willey110.jpg border=0 alt="Hier geht's zur I/JG78"> (http://www.jg78.de)

</p><font color=59626B>

XyZspineZyX
09-12-2003, 10:37 PM
pipgig wrote:
- Back in IL2 early 109s had 200 rounds

In Il-2 it was like this:
109F and G-2 - 200 rounds MG 151
109G-6 and up - 150 rounds MG 151/20
FWs - 200 rounds in the inner wing guns (instead of 250)
^^and all the counters showed the actual loading correctly

FB:
all 109s - 120 MG 151; although counter shows 150
FWs (since 1.1) - 250 rounds in the inner guns; although counters just show 200.

What's wrong now?

Bf-109s should have 200 rounds in the nose MG 151, or at least like it was in Il-2.
FWs: FW A-4 was correct in Il-2. 200rpg in the inner guns. 60 rpg in the outer guns. 900rpg in the MGs. FW A-5 is similar, differece: 250rpg in the inner guns, like ALL following models. 90rpg in the outer guns (MG FF/M - so 50% more than in A-4). Furthermore the Doras still have WAY too much MG ammo! Looks like 900rpg instead of 475rpg... Somehow a) no VVS players whine about that /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif , b) Maddox didn't fix it until now.

Another BIG wrong thing in the FWs is the ammo counter itself!! It should show all wing cannons, and NOT the MGs!
Source: http://www.rafiger.de/Homepage/Pages/Schiessfibel.html
http://www.rafiger.de/Homepage/Literatur/Galland.jpg



<hr>

<p align=center style="width:100%; filter:glow[color=#33CCFF, strength=2)">

<img src=http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/willey110.jpg border=0 alt="Hier geht's zur I/JG78"> (http://www.jg78.de)

</p><font color=59626B>

XyZspineZyX
09-13-2003, 01:57 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
- In the nose? Sorry but the cannons were mounted
- behind the engine. In fact the rear of the cannon
- intruded into the cockpit.

Saying "the nose" was a bit of a misnomer, I should have said forward of the COG. The difference here being between wing mounted guns and nose mounted ones. Of course weight forward of COG is not as serious as weight behind it, but it still affects balance. Weight of ammo is still a factor as well, but according to various posts it appears that jamming was the main reason for the reduced ammo load in 109's.

If the rear of the cannon intruded into the cockpit, it certainly does not show up in any photos of 109 cockpits I have seen. Should maybe check those schematic drawings?

MiloMorai wrote:
- The SpitVc came standard from the factory with only
- 2 wing cannons, though there was a position for two
- more.



According to "SPITFIRE The History" by Eric B. Morgan and Edward Shacklady, the Spitfire VC came from the factory with three different wings, the A,B and C (universal). The C wing had 4 x Mk1 or MkII Hispano 20mm cannon with 60 rpg, as well as positons for Browning .303's which allowed the plane to be armed as an A, or B wing, hence the name 'universal'. The B wing has 2 x 20mm and 4 x .303 mg, while the A wing had 8 x .303 mg.

It was a standard practice in Malta to remove two of those cannons on the Spit VC, (the principal variant used in the Mediteranian), according to George Beurling and Robert McNair in their memoirs.

Incidently, it is possible to stuff 2800 rds of .303 into an "A" wing Spitfire Mk1, V or IX, but they only carried 2400,(because of jamming!) and are modeled as 2400 rds in every flight sim I have seen.

Budanova

XyZspineZyX
09-13-2003, 12:55 PM
my 2 cents:

-the ammo counter in the Fws shows the MGs and wingroot cannons- THATs right ! i have a picture where you can clearly read that below the counters.
btw its logical, as the outer wing MG-FF are a choice if installed ore not !

nevertheless, it shows only 200 rounds for the MG151/20- it has 250 in its store

-the 90rounds store for the MG-FF in the outer wings , i think its the same rumor like the engine cannon of the 109E-3 ! a 90round magazin would be to big that it fits in the outer wing !

-my last test shows me 150, not 120, round in the MG151/20 in all 109s
200 in the F-2s MG151/15

-the G14,G-10, K4 have still 80 rounds in its MK108 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
G6 and G6Late are OK with their 65 rounds

http://www.jagdgeschwader53.flugzeugwerk.net/diverses/franky.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-13-2003, 02:03 PM
Budanova wrote:

-
- If the rear of the cannon intruded into the cockpit,
- it certainly does not show up in any photos of 109
- cockpits I have seen. Should maybe check those
- schematic drawings?
-


Better take a closer look./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif See that shroud just in front of the stick, that cover is for the cannon. It is between the rudder peddles./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Are you saying the gunpods also effected the CG? For they were in the same fore/aft position, though slighty more forward, as the central cannon. The central cannon and ammo were over the thickest part of the airfoil. That is close enough to the CG, for me, that they would have had a minor effect on CG balance. The 400L fuel tank, below and behind the pilot, would have more effect on CG than the cannon.



- According to "SPITFIRE The History" by Eric B.
- Morgan and Edward Shacklady, the Spitfire VC came
- from the factory with three different wings, the A,B
- and C (universal). The C wing had 4 x Mk1 or MkII
- Hispano 20mm cannon with 60 rpg, as well as positons
- for Browning .303's which allowed the plane to be
- armed as an A, or B wing, hence the name
- 'universal'. The B wing has 2 x 20mm and 4 x .303
- mg, while the A wing had 8 x .303 mg.



Well here you are wrong. You have misread what was said. The 'C' in the designation refers to the type of wing attached to the fuselage. ie Va(all mg), Vb(4mg, 2 cannon), Vc(4mg, 2 or 4 cannon) The true universal wing was the 'E' though.


-
-
- It was a standard practice in Malta to remove two of
- those cannons on the Spit VC, (the principal variant
- used in the Mediteranian), according to George
- Beurling and Robert McNair in their memoirs.
-
-

Why install 4 cannons if once the a/c got to an operational unit, 2 are removed? Beuriling et el removed the cannons because of an ammo shortage. It also gave the a/c a better RoC and 2 cannons could do the job required. Noting this, the factory installed only 2 cannon subsiquently.


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
09-13-2003, 05:23 PM
JG53Frankyboy wrote:
- my 2 cents:
-
--the ammo counter in the Fws shows the MGs and wingroot cannons- THATs right ! i have a picture where you can clearly read that below the counters.
- btw its logical, as the outer wing MG-FF are a
- choice if installed ore not !

Proofs???

http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/a6ac.jpg


http://www.focke-wulf190.com/starrbewaffnung2.htm
^^
"So und nun noch die Munitionsanzeige, jeder kennt sie aber die wenigsten wissen wirklich was sie anzeigen sollte. Denn auch hier irrt der Computerspieler. Diese 4 Balken zeigen nicht wie oft angenommen den Munitionsbestand der MG's und der Kanonen an, sondern nur den der 4 Kanonen. Die beiden inneren Balken die Restmunition der Linken und rechten Flügelwurzelwaffe und die beiden ¤ußeren der Restmunitionsbestand der ¤ußeren Flügelwaffen. Die beiden MG 17 der A-6 hatten jeweils 900 Schuss Munition."

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

--the 90rounds store for the MG-FF in the outer wings , i think its the same rumor like the engine cannon of the 109E-3 ! a 90round magazin would be to big that it fits in the outer wing !

http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/a5speed.gif


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

-
--my last test shows me 150, not 120, round in the MG151/20 in all 109s
- 200 in the F-2s MG151/15

Hmm could be... that 120 were in 1.1b IIRC

-
--the G14,G-10, K4 have still 80 rounds in its MK108

Yep, funny... like the MG 131 ammo in the Doras... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


<hr>

<p align=center style="width:100%; filter:glow[color=#33CCFF, strength=2)">

<img src=http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/willey110.jpg border=0 alt="Hier geht's zur I/JG78"> (http://www.jg78.de)

</p><font color=59626B>

Message Edited on 09/13/0306:24PM by Willey

XyZspineZyX
09-15-2003, 03:07 AM
ok, gotcha /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BUT, trust me, i have a picture in a book, where you can clearly read below the counters MG17 anf MG151. its called an A-2 picture. perhaps something changed from the A-5 to the A-6 , because of the bigger amount of rounds in their outer MG151/20 ?


about the 90rounds for the MG-FF in A-5 , hm, looks like official. but have still my doubts because of the big magazine! its a round magazine, so it would be realy big in comparison to the 60 rounds ?! have to search photos of A-4s and A-5s if the magazin bulges of the MG-FF are bigger .
nevertheless, i would take 90 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.jagdgeschwader53.flugzeugwerk.net/diverses/franky.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-26-2003, 08:27 PM
Well, I think these obviously historically correct EVIDENCES are worth a reply...