PDA

View Full Version : Powerful evidence for the MG151



x__CRASH__x
12-06-2004, 02:13 AM
Oleg, take note please.

Graphs are nice, but here is a graphical comparison of the 20mm weapons in IL-2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/porkedgun.jpg

Members of CWoS did the research. Thanks to Robban for graphing our conclusions.

carguy_
12-06-2004, 03:22 AM
Somehow by clicking on this post I didn`t expect anything else.

Fornixx
12-06-2004, 03:40 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

nicolas10
12-06-2004, 05:08 AM
My research on the matter results in pretty much the same concushion.

Nic

Willey
12-06-2004, 04:32 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

x__CRASH__x
12-06-2004, 04:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by carguy_:
Somehow by clicking on this post I didn`t expect anything else. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You disagree with the conclusion?

3.JG51_BigBear
12-06-2004, 11:22 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gifIt all makes sense now.

Hunde_3.JG51
12-06-2004, 11:33 PM
Track sent, I'll let you know what kind of response I get from "the big O."

With "Arcade=1" you can clearly see that the feathers are hitting but causing random damage. It must be an armor-piercing vs. HE thing, maybe the feather composition/ratio is porked.

x__CRASH__x
12-07-2004, 12:19 AM
I'd like to know what kind of bird these pillows are made from before I call "fowl"

crazyivan1970
12-07-2004, 01:17 AM
You can quietly choke with pillow ya know crash http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

x__CRASH__x
12-07-2004, 02:20 AM
I would figure you would know, since you have extensive experience biting one.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Daiichidoku
12-09-2004, 02:11 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

widgeon
12-09-2004, 04:22 PM
Finally, data that makes sense.

Widgeon

USAflyer
12-09-2004, 09:32 PM
This clown has been constantly spamming the boards and deserves a vacation.

VW-IceFire
12-09-2004, 09:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by USAflyer:
This clown has been constantly spamming the boards and deserves a vacation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
We find this clown very funny and stunningly accurate...do enjoy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Targ
12-10-2004, 11:49 AM
Thanks crash, it all makes sense now. There is know way that Oleg can deny this..

Hptm.Keule
12-10-2004, 05:24 PM
I am with you crash!
Good evidence!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

WUAF_Darkangel
12-10-2004, 08:22 PM
From:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-pe.html

Hispano mkII:

prjectile weight: 130g

rpm: 600

muzzle velocity: 880m/s

ShVAK 20mm:

projectile weight: 95g

rpm:800

muzzle velocity: 770m/s

MG151/20:

projectile weight: 105g

rpm: 750

muzzle velocity: 725m/s

hispano vs mg151

130x600= 78,000 105x750= 78,750
750/78000x100= 0.9615 (rounded down)

i.e. the mg151/20 produces a bit more than 0.9615% extra explosives than the hispano mk2 (assuming the weight of the projectile casing was negligible for both shells), however hispano shells r significantly faster than mg/151/20 shells. So im not surprised if the hispano does more damage than the mg151/20

ShVAK vs mg151

800x95= 76,000 750x105= 78,750
2750/76000x100= 3.618 (rounded down)

i.e. the mg151/20 produces a bit more than 3.618% extra explosives than the ShVAK (assuming the weight of the projectile casing was negligible for both shells), however ShVAK shells r a bit faster than mg/151/20 shells. So these 2 guns shouldn't be very different from each other.

Enofinu
12-11-2004, 05:31 AM
Darkangel, you too count it too much on Kinetic energy.. now, tell me, what parts can stop MG151/20 API ammo when hit? does it go thru wing??
does it go thru fuselage on side hits? engine? pilot seat armor? fueltank?

HE ammo doesnt need much Speed, All Ke is needed that it just goes thru plane skin, covering plates of strugture, nothing more, and there it should then pop of. in otherway, if your rounds are too fast, they fly thu it completelly and blow up out from plane structure.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
12-11-2004, 06:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Darkangel:
... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you missed the most important point (oleg missed it too).
The German Airforce used PTEN instead of TNT for the explosive charge.
PTEN equals TNT by 1,5(not sure ATM, need to look it up EDIT: search funktion of the board is ****ed...). > 1g PTEN does has the same explosive energy as 1,5g TNT.

so we would have

MG151/20:
projectile weight: 157,5g TNT (=105g PTEN)
rpm: 750
muzzle velocity: 725m/s

so we have:
MG151/20
157,5x750= 118125
Hispano
130x600= 78,000

(btw i would take mass*velocity)

that is quite a difference.

NN_EnigmuS
12-11-2004, 04:21 PM
if someone know about armored tank is a Pz3 can be destroye by spit 20mm gun lol as i easily can destroye a pz3 with 2s burst in 3.02bm

i ve try the same with mg151/20 of stukad5 and the result is nothing at all with all the ammo you want

and yeah where i must shoot at sherman or t34_76 with stukaG1 lol i ve try it online last time and men got no result at all even from behind on those one and all heavy tank(as a t34-76 must not be much armored than a pz3 in reality i think)?

OldMan____
12-11-2004, 04:43 PM
Due to the way as solids interact and energy is transmited (transmission of energy is not instantaneous) you should use mass*speed as a measure of damage capability.. never mass*speed squared.

LLv34_Flanker
12-11-2004, 05:13 PM
S!

OK, not being rude this time. Was out of line earlier http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif The modelling of guns is strange in IL2-series, so much difference online and offline.

In many discussions with squad mates and other online pilots it has been concluded that this game does not simulate the blast effect(pressure) correctly, but relies very much on velocity(kinetic energy) thus giving advantage to guns with high muzzle velocity.

MG151/20 was equipped with one of the best, if not the best, HE ammo Minengeschoss. When using a delayed fuze this round penetrated thin aircraft skin and detonated inside structure causing considerable damage and fire.

Add here that when something explodes in an almost closed area, like fuselage, the pressure rises very rapidly adding to the damage the ammo itself does. Easy comparison would be a balloon full of nitrogen. If U blow it in open area it just makes a bang and that's it. Blow it up inside a car for example and the difference is huge: windows fly out, interior is trashed and even structure re-shapes. Just because of pressure rising rapidly inside it.

So if the game would model the damage done by HE ammo more precisely the frustration levels of many Bf109/Fw190-pilots would for sure be lower when they could cause catastrophic damage with less ammo than now required for a kill.

Conclusion...Adding damage effect of chemical energy to the existing AP/shrapnel damage the DM would be more extensive thus giving a more real picture of destructive power a cannon has over a machine gun for example. My .02"...

Gunner_361st
12-11-2004, 06:55 PM
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Another excellent link about WWII Aircraft Weaponry.

Sometimes I think that old damage models of some aircraft may seem why the MG-151/20 in IL-2 lacks the punch that calculations and historical accounts seem to credit it. But, there may be other things at play here.

Hopefully this post will stay positive and objective. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sig.Hirsch
12-11-2004, 07:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gunner_361st:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Another excellent link about WWII Aircraft Weaponry.

Sometimes I think that old damage models of some aircraft may seem why the MG-151/20 in IL-2 lacks the punch that calculations and historical accounts seem to credit it. But, there may be other things at play here.

Hopefully this post will stay positive and objective. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it's true , thx for the link m8 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

x__CRASH__x
12-11-2004, 09:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by USAflyer:
This clown has been constantly spamming the boards and deserves a vacation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gentleman,

I hope you will join me in helping UASflyer by giving generously. He is in dire need of surgery. Removing the stick from his a$$ will take considerable fundage, considering it's size, and his n00bness level does not allow him the opportunity to solicite the funds effectively for himself.

It is the Christmas season. Let's lend a hand.

Send all donations directly to Oleg's paypal account.