PDA

View Full Version : Oleg: Can we get corrected R4M rockets on the Me262 pls?



JG52Karaya-X
02-16-2006, 10:40 AM
Hi!

This is a very very old bug - it has been there since the introduction of this plane as a flyable in the sim.

The rockets fly until their fuel is consumed (watch rocket smoke) and then seem to almost immediately stop midair only to fall out of the sky like bricks...
This reduces their effective range to 300m at best whereas in real-life they were used well outside the defensive-fire range of the US heavy bombers (~1000m)

JG52Karaya-X
02-17-2006, 03:21 AM
Please stop the retro rockets on the R4Ms

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

guderian_ente
02-17-2006, 03:52 AM
The rockets fly until their fuel is consumed and then seem to almost immediately stop midair only to fall out of the sky like bricks...

That's........uhh.......weird.

JG52Karaya-X
02-17-2006, 04:01 AM
Yea it looks like taken out of a Warner Bros. Cartoon

JG52Karaya-X
02-17-2006, 09:31 AM
Okay here is a .trk file I've recorded

http://rapidshare.de/files/13479241/R4M_speed_brakes.trk.html

It's me in an Me262A1a vs 4 friendly bombers (B17G). I fire my rockets from ~600 to 700m distance (icons on) - as you can see they rapidly loose speed and simply fall out of the sky...

I've sent the track file also to Oleg personally

PS: The flying looks very shaky - it's pretty hard keeping formation and distance with the B17s and I had to use lots of trim and adjust my throttle several times... wobbles dont make it easier as well http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Oh btw, I've shot down B17 at over 2k distance in an I16Type24 using RS82 rockets http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

volkware.xyz
02-17-2006, 08:49 PM
I agree - this sounds like a fix that needs doing.

Waldo.Pepper
02-17-2006, 11:33 PM
OK I watched the track. that is amazingly dumb. what a bad bug it makes them useless for their intended use.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

BfHeFwMe
02-17-2006, 11:45 PM
Definitly a bug that needs to be fixed, good catch. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Badsight.
02-18-2006, 02:58 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Oh btw, I've shot down B17 at over 2k distance in an I16Type24 using RS82 rockets http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif thats a one in a million you'll never forget

JG52Karaya-X
02-18-2006, 04:51 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 JG52Karaya-X:
Oh btw, I've shot down B17 at over 2k distance in an I16Type24 using RS82 rockets http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif thats a one in a million you'll never forget </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not really - shooting bombers with these RS rockets at 1-1,5k is quite easy for they do not loose altitude until their rocket fuel burns out (~2k distance). Hitting bombers at 2-2,5k distance is more difficult - mostly because the targets are so small and you have to be very gentle on the stick... ballistics are negligible

But back on topic:

I sent Oleg a personal e-mail but he wrote back the following:
"We checked. Doesn't confirmed.
And I don't think you can target for 1000m across gunsight as it was relly designed."

So I sent him another e-mail - now with the track... hope he changes his mind about it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

stansdds
02-18-2006, 05:16 AM
I watched the trak file, but I'm not convinced it's really a bug. Once the rockets expend all of their fuel, thrust stops, gravity and air resistance take over, so the rockets will begin to slow and fall to the earth, this is basic physics. If the rockets actually stopped, then the bombers should have suddenly outpaced the rockets (a warping like effect) and you should be able to catch up to them within a second or so. It looks to me like they just run out of fuel, start to lose speed and begin falling to earth.

JG52Karaya-X
02-18-2006, 06:32 AM
The R4M however is the only rocket that is affected by such a huge speed loss - try out the (B)RS rockets or even the japanese rockets on the A6M7. They all travel quite a long distance after their fuel is expanded.

JG52Karaya-X
02-18-2006, 06:43 AM
Taken from www.luftarchiv.de (http://www.luftarchiv.de)

"Angriffstaktik: Die Me 262 nimmt dieselbe H├┬Âhe wie die Bomber ein und schie├čt aus 600 m Entfernung alle R 4/M Raketen (volle Salve) auf die Bomberformation ab."

Translation
"Combat-tactic: The Me262 takes the same height as the bombers and fires all R 4/m Rockets (full salvoe) at the bomberformation from a range of 600m"

"Durchmesser: 0,055 m
Gewicht: 4 kg
Antrieb: Pulverraketenmotor
Vmax: 900 km/h
Reichweite: 1800 m
Sprengladung: 0,5 kg"

Translation
"Diameter: 0,055m
Weight: 4kg
Propulsion: Powderrocketengine
Vmax: 900km/h
Range: 1800m (!!!!!!!!!!)
Explosive charge: 0,5kg"

The maximum range of the R4M (R = rocket, 4 = weight, M = Minecharge) was 1800m in real life. Our rockets ingame fall out of the sky after just 700m... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif


Pls, Oleg - PIMP my R4M http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

stansdds
02-18-2006, 06:51 AM
Ok, then I would say that their momentum is not being modeled correctly.

AKA_TAGERT
02-18-2006, 02:44 PM
email Oleg at his email addr, talking about it here does nothing! Oleg is very good about responding to *real* bugs, and this looks pretty real!

JG52Karaya-X
02-19-2006, 02:14 AM
Tagert, pls take your time and read the WHOLE thread


I sent Oleg a personal e-mail but he wrote back the following:
"We checked. Doesn't confirmed.
And I don't think you can target for 1000m across gunsight as it was relly designed."

So I sent him another e-mail - now with the track... hope he changes his mind about it

NonWonderDog
02-19-2006, 02:28 AM
Heh, that is goofy. It almost looks like they're shot out of a cannon with a rear-firing rocket motor to slow them back down to the speed of your plane after 600 m. In fact, it looks exactly like that. Weird. Maybe someone filled in the wrong cells on a speadsheet? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Stafroty
02-19-2006, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">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 JG52Karaya-X:
Oh btw, I've shot down B17 at over 2k distance in an I16Type24 using RS82 rockets http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif thats a one in a million you'll never forget </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not really - shooting bombers with these RS rockets at 1-1,5k is quite easy for they do not loose altitude until their rocket fuel burns out (~2k distance). Hitting bombers at 2-2,5k distance is more difficult - mostly because the targets are so small and you have to be very gentle on the stick... ballistics are negligible

But back on topic:

I sent Oleg a personal e-mail but he wrote back the following:
"We checked. Doesn't confirmed.
And I don't think you can target for 1000m across gunsight as it was relly designed."

So I sent him another e-mail - now with the track... hope he changes his mind about it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


hehe, remeber where Oleg himself said, that Rockets in simulation IS like in real, first rockets used in war, didnt go well, because ground crew didnt know how to handle tail fins of the rockets, later they learned how to reload rockets on the planes without twisting and bending those tail fins, that resulted in rockets we got now in game, as they go in RAILS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

and eveyone Bought that, because it was Oman himself saying that.

Jaws2002
02-19-2006, 08:48 AM
I know they had the same balistics with the Mk-108. Was posted here many times. They should have the same balistics.

AKA_TAGERT
02-19-2006, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Tagert, pls take your time and read the WHOLE thread Thanks, but no thanks, I only read the whole tread on threads I give an S about.

Willey
02-19-2006, 10:15 AM
So you give an F about it? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG52Karaya-X
02-19-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Thanks, but no thanks, I only read the whole tread on threads I give an S about.

I'm just glad that some individuals never change http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-19-2006, 04:33 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
I'm just glad that some individuals never change http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif So?

JG52Karaya-X
02-20-2006, 02:01 AM
Keep yourself out of this thread if you're not interested - up your postcount somewhere else

X_Ray_B-S
02-20-2006, 04:14 AM
Hi,

Generalleutnant Adolf Galland "Die Ersten und die Letzten" S. 302

"In den letzten Wochen des Krieges konnten wir einige Flugzeuge mit einer zusa├┬Ątzlichen Bewaffnung ausr├╝sten, die der Me262 eine noch gr├┬Â├čere Feuerkraft gab: R4M Raketen mit einem Kaliber von 5cm und 500g Sprengstoff. Schon ein Treffer davon brachte einen viermotorigen Bomber zum Absturz. Sie wurden in 2 Rosten, die 24 Raketen trugen, unter die Fl├┬Ąchen angebaut. In fieberhafter Eile machten unsere Mechaniker und Waffenwarte ein paar Turbos raketenschie├čklar. Und dann startete ich mit einem von ihnen.
In der Gegend von Landsberg am Lech treffe ich auf einen Verband von etwa 16 Marauders. Im Angriff feuere ich aus etwa 600 Meter Entfernung in einer halben Sekunde eine Salve von 24 Raketen in den eng aufgeschlossenen Verband. Zwei Treffer kann ich einwandfrei beobachten. Ein Bomber steht sofort in Flammen und explodiert nach Sekunden, ein zweiter verliert gro├če Teile des rechten Querruders und der Tragfl├┬Ąche, schert sofort nach unten und zur Seite aus.Inzwischen haben auch die drei anderen mit mir gestarteten Maschinen erfolgreich angegriffen.
Unser Eindruck von der Wirksamkeit der neuen Waffe ist unbeschreiblich. Noch au├čerhalb des Wirkungsbereiches des Bomber-Abwehrfeuers k├┬Ânnen diese Raketen abgefeuert werden. Mit gro├čer Wahrscheinlichkeit trifft eine gut geziehlte Salve gleichzeitig mehrere Bomber. Das ist das Mittel zur Sprenung der Verb├┬Ąnde."

Oberst Johannes Steinhoff, "In letzter Stunde", S. 230

"... Wenn der Viermotorige den Kreis des leuchtenden Reflex-Visieres ausf├╝llte , wenn seine Fl├┬Ąchenspannweite gerade den ├┬Ąu├čeren Rand des Visierkreises ber├╝hte, musste ich die Raketen ausl├┬Âsen. Die Entfernung zum Ziel betrug dann genau 1000m ..."

Sry my english is to bad for a good translation. I hope a other german-speaker here can help me.

cu
X-Ray

AKA_TAGERT
02-20-2006, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Keep yourself out of this thread if you're not interested - up your postcount somewhere else Said the guy/gal who felt the need to up his post count by noting the lack of change.

JG52Karaya-X
02-21-2006, 02:34 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Said the guy/gal who felt the need to up his post count by noting the lack of change.

Feeling better now? Good...


Request stays the same - R4Ms need their realistics effective range of 1800m!

Diameter: 0,055m
Weight: 4kg
Propulsion: Powderrocketengine
Vmax: 900km/h
Range: 1800m
Explosive charge: 0,5kg

See track on page 1 for reference

FliegerAas
02-21-2006, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by Jaws2002:
I know they had the same balistics with the Mk-108. Was posted here many times. They should have the same balistics.

You mix up something. The pilots used the REvi they also used for the MK108 BUT at a larger distance! The quote posted by X_Ray_B-S also shows that.

"... Wenn der Viermotorige den Kreis des leuchtenden Reflex-Visieres ausf├╝llte , wenn seine Fl├┬Ąchenspannweite gerade den ├┬Ąu├čeren Rand des Visierkreises ber├╝hte, musste ich die Raketen ausl├┬Âsen. Die Entfernung zum Ziel betrug dann genau 1000m ..."
This part discribes that the pilot had to fire the rockets when the 4 engined bomber filled out the REVI, because then he was exactly 1000m away.

[...]Noch au├čerhalb des Wirkungsbereiches des Bomber-Abwehrfeuers k├┬Ânnen diese Raketen abgefeuert werden.
[...]
This part says that the rockets could be fired beyond the range of the bombers defensive fire.
This corresponds with what I read at many occasions.

P.S.: My English is a bit rusty, so don't beat me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif.

edited a typo....

Waldo.Pepper
02-25-2006, 08:04 AM
B. U. M. P!

JG52Karaya-X
02-25-2006, 08:44 AM
Got this reply from Oleg himself after sending him a track file of the 4.03 bug:

"No there is no bug they fly for more than 2 km distance
I especially cheked myself right now (because we are doing gold DVD today).

There should be set delay for 1-3 sec maximum and ther should be shootring for the distances which they fly before selfexploded.
This measn from 200 to maximum 500 meters as described in manual for them (as the preferable attack is in front of coming bombers!). You are shooting flying tin the same direction with the great speed, and bombers flying from you...
Rockets fly in such condition (+ speed of aircraft at start ) for more than 2 km, but ypur sped is also not small and rockets have the speed not the supersonic on the second part of flight. simply calculation shows how it will be... just try."

BTW, now in 4.04 the rockets still have the same ballistics but the rocket smoke lasts far longer

Ugly_Kid
02-25-2006, 08:58 AM
Here's some extracts from Schliephake's book "Flugzeugbewaffnung" - a book I can heartily recommend if you want to know something about the aircraft weapon development (mostly from German point though). It covers WWI, WW II and goes a bit to modern times.

Anyway here's a relevant bit for R4M - I am not so keen on translating the whole bit in English but anybody feel free to take a shot.

http://koti.mbnet.fi/hausberg/sim_stuff/page214.jpg
http://koti.mbnet.fi/hausberg/sim_stuff/page215.jpg
http://koti.mbnet.fi/hausberg/sim_stuff/page216.jpg

Essentially the most important bits:

"The propulsion was electronically ignited and accelerated the projectile in 0.8 sec to the final speed 525 m/s (1890 km/h)." Firing a salvo of 24 rockets was done in four intervals of six rockets with a time interval of 0.07 sec. In 1000 m distance the pattern was so that a space of 15 m height and 30 m width was evenly covered. The flightpath over this distance was almost straight (eine gestreckte?)"

"The success with this weapon was that great that the kill ratio was raised to 7:1 for Luftwaffe. Hier Interavia 3): wrote 'One should remember that at the end of 1944 the loss ratio between allied and Luftwaffe was about 1:1. As the first two engined jet Me 262 came operational in the beginning of 1945 - equipped with new 30 mm canons, rockets R4M and automatic sight EZ 42 - the kill ratio grew to 7:1 for Luftwaffe. This was result of new technology that showed superiority to conventional aircraft and weapons of USA and British manufacturers"

Last page says that burning time was about 0.75 sec and range about 1500 m with 525 m/s. 10000 to 12000 of these rockets were produced and some 2500 were fired in operations.

Somehow I have a feeling they were a bit better in aircombat and shooting down bombers than russian RS rockets but I well the game seems to disagree...

jamesdietz
02-25-2006, 10:53 AM
I have never made anywhere near a successful pass usung these weapons( I was spoiled in European Air War when they were amarvelous weapon...) Can anyone give me an idea of how these can be of any use from the 262?

JG52Karaya-X
02-25-2006, 02:24 PM
Well up to now my best method for using them was to come in with high speed from the dead six of a single bomber and fire the rockets straight at him from 300m or less...

Problem is - at that speed I could already use the cannons and it wouldn't make much difference... the R4Ms really lack the ability for use out of the defensive gun range of the bombers!

ECV56_Rolf
02-25-2006, 03:05 PM
From the frontline of the bombers a bit to the side so that they got aligned on your path. You must also be level with them.

Almost a bomber for every shot, sometimes two.

The same works fine for Mk108.

You can also try it from the side with more lead, but you must come at very high speeds.

Here (http://www.ecv56condor.com.ar/%7Erolf/R4M.ntrk) is a sample track http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Waldo.Pepper
02-26-2006, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Got this reply from Oleg himself after sending him a track file of the 4.03 bug:

"No there is no bug they fly for more than 2 km distance
I especially cheked myself right now (because we are doing gold DVD today).

There should be set delay for 1-3 sec maximum and ther should be shootring for the distances which they fly before selfexploded.
This measn from 200 to maximum 500 meters as described in manual for them (as the preferable attack is in front of coming bombers!). You are shooting flying tin the same direction with the great speed, and bombers flying from you...
Rockets fly in such condition (+ speed of aircraft at start ) for more than 2 km, but ypur sped is also not small and rockets have the speed not the supersonic on the second part of flight. simply calculation shows how it will be... just try."

BTW, now in 4.04 the rockets still have the same ballistics but the rocket smoke lasts far longer

If you repeat your tests with the Russian rockets... going slowly from the rear - will they stop, and fall from the sky like the R4M's?

JG52Karaya-X
02-27-2006, 05:02 AM
No, the RS-82 for example will fly absolutely straight up to a distance of ~2 - 2,25km then its rocket fuel burns out and it SLOWLY looses alt and speed but nowhere near the R4M

Stafroty
02-27-2006, 05:16 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
No, the RS-82 for example will fly absolutely straight up to a distance of ~2 - 2,25km then its rocket fuel burns out and it SLOWLY looses alt and speed but nowhere near the R4M

thats because Russian Ground crew understood the importance of the tail fins of those rockets and didnt anymore twist them while handlin and loading them on AC http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

anyway, when you look at the shape of those rockets, its clear to see where the most of the fragmentation effect goes, to sides, like in for of the cylinder, not like in a ball like this game makes everythign to explode.

JG52Karaya-X
02-27-2006, 05:16 AM
Look at this track:

I16Type24 with 6xRS-82, same convergence (500m) and rocket timer (20sec) as with the R4Ms - you'll see that the only problem taking bombers down with that type of rocket is that the Rata isnt that much of a stable platform

the last bomber is taken down from ~ 1,8km

http://rapidshare.de/files/14257328/I16Type24-RS82.trk.html

FliegerAas
02-28-2006, 05:30 PM
bumpf http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Waldo.Pepper
02-28-2006, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Look at this track:

I16Type24 with 6xRS-82, same convergence (500m) and rocket timer (20sec) as with the R4Ms - you'll see that the only problem taking bombers down with that type of rocket is that the Rata isnt that much of a stable platform

the last bomber is taken down from ~ 1,8km

http://rapidshare.de/files/14257328/I16Type24-RS82.trk.html

Just watched this a number of times. I simply cannot see how Oleg can propose the notion that the R4M's are operating properly. I think I understand that he believes that for the R4M's to travel their historical distance the 262 must be going fast. Fair enough! But the behaviour where they drop from the sky at the termination of their motor is the part that is wrong in my opinion.

I wonder if changing this to give them 'correct' behavior will make them unrealistcally effective (similar to the USSR rockets?)

BUMP!

Badsight.
02-28-2006, 09:21 PM
your not the only one Waldo Pepper

NonWonderDog
03-01-2006, 12:21 AM
To be fair, they don't "drop from the sky." They slow very quickly to whatever speed the bombers were going in that track and then stay near about that speed.

I'm sure the rockets *could* go 2 km, they just wouldn't be able to catch a plane from behind past 300 m.

This is probably not correct, anyway. They seem to have way too much drag at high speed.

Stafroty
03-01-2006, 06:33 AM
everything german made has extra ordinary drag http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

they lost the war man!

Philipscdrw
03-01-2006, 06:58 AM
I'd wondered why I couldn't ever be successful with the R4M.

Ugly_Kid
03-01-2006, 11:06 AM
Playing online wars and coops it is interesting to watch how I-16s and whatnots always load up with RS rockets from -39 on and blow transports and bombers to smithereens - really historical. Revolutionary rocket that one.

Now 262 you seldom see anywhere banned on DF servers and there are few scenarios on wars where it's used. Yet, R4M was largely used and very effectively, historically in, -45. Noone bothers to load it up. The weapon is dud and rails are acting airbrakes even after launching...

Yet, what does our "best there is sim" tell - soviets had a way superior weapon already -39. Time to burn some books again...

bazzaah2
03-01-2006, 11:19 AM
certainly the R4M is a pointless, useless weapon in game. I've read accounts that describe them as 'devastating'.

Viper2005_
03-01-2006, 11:52 AM
R4Ms works very well in game provided that you don't attempt to engage targets more than 4-500 m away; this isn't very useful against bomber formations which tend to nail you with their .50s whilst you close the gap.

But on the few online maps which feature the 262, much fun can be had sneaking up P-38s and giving them the good news. The usual chatbar response is:


?


or "similar"... It's so heart warming! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

As such I'm surprise that they're not more popular. They're also very effective against AAA, provided you can get close enough without one of Oleg's elite Snipers PK'ing you... (for some reason they seem to find it easier to PK me in a 262 doing 700 than in a 190 doing 550)

That said, it'd be great to see them fixed so that their 1 km+ range can be exploited, and it'd be great to see the anti-tank version in game.

JG52Karaya-X
03-02-2006, 06:31 AM
Originally posted by Ugly_Kid:
Playing online wars and coops it is interesting to watch how I-16s and whatnots always load up with RS rockets from -39 on and blow transports and bombers to smithereens - really historical. Revolutionary rocket that one.

Now 262 you seldom see anywhere banned on DF servers and there are few scenarios on wars where it's used. Yet, R4M was largely used and very effectively, historically in, -45. Noone bothers to load it up. The weapon is dud and rails are acting airbrakes even after launching...

Yet, what does our "best there is sim" tell - soviets had a way superior weapon already -39. Time to burn some books again...

My words... I don't know wether to http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif or to http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

bazzaah2
03-02-2006, 08:23 AM
I found this quote from one Oberleutnant Gunther Wegmann of JG7 in Encyclopaedia of Aircraft of WW2.

"The effect of these rockets salvoed at a range of about 400m was devastating. Ripped-open fuselages, broken-off wings, engines, scraps of aluminiun and pieces of metal of all shapes and sizes were tumbling around in the air. It was as though some giant hand was emptying an enormous ashtray in the the sky".

I have no idea about ballistics or anything else but this account would seem to indicate that 400m was about the range at which they were used.

And here's one from Lt Fritz Muller (from 'Battles with the Luftwaffe' by Boiten and Bowman)

"..When in the final weeks of the was 12 R4M rockets were mounted under each wing, which could be fired succcessively or as a salvo we felt like being captains of a battleship. There was no enemy aircraft able to survive even a single R4M hit..."

And this too from http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/R4M%20rocket

Only a small number of aircraft were ever fitted with the R4M, mostly Messerschmitt Me 262's, which mounted them on small wooden racks under the wing just outside of the engines. In service, the weapon proved deadly. French ace Pierre Clostermann notes in his book The Big Show that in March 1945, six R4M-armed Me 262s flying out of the Oberammergau flight test center, with Luftwaffe General Gordon Gollob and ace Walter Nowotny at the controls of two of the aircraft, shot down 14 B-17s in a single sortie. In another instance in April 1945, R4M-equipped Me 262s shot down 30 B-17s for the loss of only three aircraft. However, by this point, the war was already over.

More for people's information as much as anything else, but I struggle sometimes to see much of a connection between the weapon we have in game and these accounts. I know, put my books down and never open again. I'll get my coat.

kamo2006
03-02-2006, 09:48 AM
Just a question:
When comparing the RS with the R4M both where launched at the same speed?, I mean, the maximun speed of the i16 is much lower than the cruise speed of the 262, and in order to compare the ballistics, the starting speed of both should be the same. Drag at f.e. 300km/h is not the same as at 500km/h, so the effect of speed decreasing should be much more noticiceable in the R4M.
Just an opinion

Viper2005_
03-02-2006, 12:50 PM
Increased overtake associated with higher launch speed will always tend to be more important than increased drag due to increased peak projectile velocity, since the faster the rockets fly the less time drag has to affect their velocity (rather a glib answer, but the overall conclusion that faster launch vehicles are better will stand up to mathematical analysis if you feel inclined to thrash through the numbers)... Personally I feel more inclined to get myself a beer. It's been a long day!

luftluuver
03-02-2006, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:
French ace Pierre Clostermann notes in his book The Big Show that in March 1945, six R4M-armed Me 262s flying out of the Oberammergau flight test center, with Luftwaffe General Gordon Gollob and ace Walter Nowotny at the controls of two of the aircraft, shot down 14 B-17s in a single sortie. Must have been Nowotny's ghost flying that 262. He died 8 November 1944.

Gibbage1
03-02-2006, 01:54 PM
Fustrating, aint it? To get the good old "you is wrong, be sure!" when every bit of evidence says your correct.

Good luck guys. This wont be easy once his mind is set. Be sure!

kamo2006
03-03-2006, 02:52 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Increased overtake associated with higher launch speed will always tend to be more important than increased drag due to increased peak projectile velocity, since the faster the rockets fly the less time drag has to affect their velocity (rather a glib answer, but the overall conclusion that faster launch vehicles are better will stand up to mathematical analysis if you feel inclined to thrash through the numbers)... Personally I feel more inclined to get myself a beer. It's been a long day!
Yes, you have a point there, especially in the beer subject, but even if mathematically speaking you will have a higher speed in the R4M, the visual effect of speed loosening will be higher, and in the present case, comparing a I16 chasing a He111 with a Me262 chasing a b-17, f.e. you will need in the second case a much more powerful rocket to keep the pace.
Anyway, this is just wondering (I also prefer beer to maths)
Cheers

JG52Karaya-X
03-04-2006, 11:05 AM
Both test were done in the low speed region and at a constant distance to the bomber (around 6-700m, sometimes 1k and more). Of course you could find out by watching the tracks...

Waldo.Pepper
03-06-2006, 01:24 PM
Bump. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
03-06-2006, 03:21 PM
could always do the tests with test runway.

i remmber when u could fire pairs of of r4m, back in the day

JG52Karaya-X
03-08-2006, 02:04 AM
That has been changed a long time ago - somwhere around the release of AEP.

Anyway I've done some testing with the new patch. Oleg seems to have had a look at the R4Ms (even though he wouldn't admit in his e-mails http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif) and these are my observations:

1) The emission of rocket smoke from the R4Ms doesn't stop after a few seconds but continues until the impact (air/ground). Seems a bit odd keeping in mind that the burn-duration of the R4Ms was ~1sec
2) The ballistic curve seems to have been straightened a tiny bit and they do not fire retro rockets anymore http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
3) The achievable range however still seems a bit short

FliegerAas
03-09-2006, 04:28 AM
http://www.basilwhite.com/bmup.jpg

That still sounds a bit odd to me...