PDA

View Full Version : firepower



VIGOR1994
05-10-2009, 12:16 PM
I cant decide?

b2spirita
05-10-2009, 12:22 PM
http://bp2.blogger.com/_CbwnjooteyI/SFn1pi49FyI/AAAAAAAAQy0/1ry7qTDuRAk/s400/40.jpg

Might just be the best installation, with the fw190 and fb versions of the mossie a close second.

ytareh
05-10-2009, 12:26 PM
That is a total no brainer unless the extra weight of the cannons is to be factored in and most would still go for them ...
Then again I would NEVER pick the 4 cannon Spit Vc over the faster 2 cannon and 4mg one ...(well maybe if JUST fighting against bombers...)

VIGOR1994
05-10-2009, 12:30 PM
.50 cals have better range.

b2spirita
05-10-2009, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
.50 cals have better range.

If i remember correctly, the USN calculated that one 20 mm equalled three .50s...

VIGOR1994
05-10-2009, 12:47 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Xiolablu3
05-10-2009, 01:51 PM
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/8123/picturevq1.jpg

50 cal and 20mm

TinyTim
05-10-2009, 01:55 PM
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.

VW-IceFire
05-10-2009, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.
Most of the 4x20mm armed aircraft have more than 60 rounds.

The Tempest, for instance, carries 200 rounds of 20mm ammo for each Hispano V.

AllorNothing117
05-10-2009, 02:06 PM
Personaly I'd have the cannon if I was online. I don't useually need more than 60 rounds anyway and Cannons require much less skill and don't require perfect convergence. So even I can get one kill before I crash and burn! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ofline I'd have tha machine guns cos theres more Ammo and I could get more kills against the stupid AI that fly in a straight line even on ACE!

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

staticline1
05-10-2009, 02:28 PM
Attacking bombers, 20mm. Dogfighting .50's.

TinyTim
05-10-2009, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.
Most of the 4x20mm armed aircraft have more than 60 rounds.

The Tempest, for instance, carries 200 rounds of 20mm ammo for each Hispano V. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, but HurriIIc for example has only 91 IIRC. I'd think twice when choosing between it and a P-40E (ignoring all other characteristics of both kites). Doesn't the spitVc even have 60rpg for it's 4 hispanos?

Tempest however has one of the best air to air punches in the sim IMO. I personally tend to prefer nose concentrated weapons (no convergence issues, easier aiming for deflection shots at long ranges...), but 4 hispanos with 200 rounds each are very hard to resist. Only P-47 with extended ammo comes close IMO.

Jaws2002
05-10-2009, 04:08 PM
Dude. please!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Single 20mm Hispano off a burried p-38 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p8h43TRXwk)


3x20mm Hispanos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc9E8_ZuESQ&feature=related)

TinyTim
05-10-2009, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by Jaws2002:
3x20mm Hispanos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc9E8_ZuESQ&feature=related)

That's a Yugoslavian M-55 "trocevac", isn't it?

Jaws2002
05-10-2009, 04:39 PM
Yep. Three hispanos strapped togheter= Heck of a whalup! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Jaws2002
05-10-2009, 05:02 PM
BTW did anyone save the stuf that was posted at "Ring's P.R.O. Doc's Research Page"?
There was a ton of great data in there. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

ImpStarDuece
05-10-2009, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.
Most of the 4x20mm armed aircraft have more than 60 rounds.

The Tempest, for instance, carries 200 rounds of 20mm ammo for each Hispano V. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, but HurriIIc for example has only 91 IIRC. I'd think twice when choosing between it and a P-40E (ignoring all other characteristics of both kites). Doesn't the spitVc even have 60rpg for it's 4 hispanos?

Tempest however has one of the best air to air punches in the sim IMO. I personally tend to prefer nose concentrated weapons (no convergence issues, easier aiming for deflection shots at long ranges...), but 4 hispanos with 200 rounds each are very hard to resist. Only P-47 with extended ammo comes close IMO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spitfire Vb had 60 round drum magazine, Spitfire Vc had 120 round belt feed. Later Marks all had 120 cannon rounds, until the Spitfire 21, which had 150 rounds per cannon.

I have also read that late war Spitfire IXe flew with 140 cannon rounds per gun.

WTE_Galway
05-10-2009, 05:52 PM
I would have to say neither ... nose mounted mk108 for me

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y101/clannagh/ammunition.jpg [/QUOTE]

VIGOR1994
05-10-2009, 06:04 PM
I agree http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

ImMoreBetter
05-10-2009, 07:17 PM
50cal cuz it haz api-api-api-api fomrulaz!

VIGOR1994
05-10-2009, 07:45 PM
I thoght the mk108 was bigger then the mk103 though?

Choctaw111
05-10-2009, 07:46 PM
By kinetic energy alone, the 20mm has about 2 1/2 times more power. Then you must figure in that it also has much more HE power than the 50. Sure, you will have a larger ammo capacity with the 50's, hence more trigger time, but I would rather have the increased hitting power of the 20mm. That way when I am squeezing the trigger, more destructive power is leaving my guns per unit time.

triad773
05-10-2009, 07:48 PM
20mm FTW http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

VW-IceFire
05-10-2009, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.
Most of the 4x20mm armed aircraft have more than 60 rounds.

The Tempest, for instance, carries 200 rounds of 20mm ammo for each Hispano V. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, but HurriIIc for example has only 91 IIRC. I'd think twice when choosing between it and a P-40E (ignoring all other characteristics of both kites). Doesn't the spitVc even have 60rpg for it's 4 hispanos?

Tempest however has one of the best air to air punches in the sim IMO. I personally tend to prefer nose concentrated weapons (no convergence issues, easier aiming for deflection shots at long ranges...), but 4 hispanos with 200 rounds each are very hard to resist. Only P-47 with extended ammo comes close IMO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh yes...if faced with the option of Hurri IIc and P-40E...I'd pick the P-40E for overall duration of firepower any day.

All C wing/armament type Spitfires had 120rpg per cannon regardless of the number of cannons installed. It was fairly common for the 4 cannon Spitfires to have two cannons removed (plus associated ammo) because this weighed allot for the power the Vc had on hand (plus its handicap with the Volkes air filter).

VW-IceFire
05-10-2009, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
I thoght the mk108 was bigger then the mk103 though?
The MK103 shell and cannon are far larger.

Sillius_Sodus
05-11-2009, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
Ammosupply?

If I'd have to choose between 6x.50 cals with 400 rounds each (say, corsair), and 4x20mm with 60 rounds each, I'd take the .50 cals. But in most cases I'd take 4x20mm. Generally it's believed that 6x.50cals equals 2x20mm by weight of fire.
Most of the 4x20mm armed aircraft have more than 60 rounds.

The Tempest, for instance, carries 200 rounds of 20mm ammo for each Hispano V. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The MC205 also has loads of 20mm ammo http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

JtD
05-11-2009, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Oh yes...if faced with the option of Hurri IIc and P-40E...I'd pick the P-40E for overall duration of firepower any day.

I don't think I would, I don't like to spend much time on a target anyway, I rather have a short firing window and make it count. Three times the firing duration don't really help if you need four times as long for each target.

TinyTim
05-11-2009, 09:19 AM
Generally I'd agree JtD, but I don't think 4 hispanos offer you 4 times shorter time needed to deal comparable damage to 6 50cals. This would imply that a single hispano deals as much damage per time unit as six .50 cals wouldn't it?

Btw, thnx Ice and ImpStarDeuce for claring up the ammocount on Vc. I was avoiding flying this plane like a plague being under wrong impression it only had 60 rpg.

JtD
05-11-2009, 10:40 AM
Maybe I was a bit optimistic. But it's not referring to the rounds hit, but to the rounds fired. Longer firing solutions tend to be less accurate.

Jaws2002
05-11-2009, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by ImMoreBetter:
50cal cuz it haz api-api-api-api fomrulaz!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

WOLFMondo
05-11-2009, 10:47 AM
20's all the way. Not that much difference between them and a .50 round except it packs 2.5 times the power.

TinyTim
05-11-2009, 11:30 AM
VIGOR1994, I think a much more fruitful debate would follow if your options were 2x20mm and 6x.50 cals. You'd also have to include type of the cannon, ammocount and positioning of weapons to make it easier for people to make up their minds. For example - generally I'd take wing-mounted 6x.50 cals over wing-mounted 2x20mm, but if the 20mm had a large ammosuply and were mounted in (or close to) a nose (examples - Ki-100, Fw190D with 250 rpg, even La-7 with 200rpg and two sniper ShVAKs), I'd go for cannons no doubt, since there is no fighter with nose mounted 6x.50 cals (A-20J doesn't count http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).




Originally posted by JtD:
Maybe I was a bit optimistic. But it's not referring to the rounds hit, but to the rounds fired. Longer firing solutions tend to be less accurate.

Really? Why (do you think) so? Maybe people get comfortable with long firing time and take more risky shots, resulting in lower hit ratio? This would be interesting to know.

JtD
05-11-2009, 11:52 AM
If you bounce someone and he reacts, you may get all the necessary hits from the 20mm, less like from the .50. Needless to say, he's easier to hit as long as he flies straight and level.

Likewise, in a deflection shot with the bandit disappearing under your nose, the longer you don't see him, the less accurate the fire.

And then indeed, the longer firing duration makes you take less effective shots - from further away, less likely to hit, etc.

Maybe you can take a fast moving ground object and make a pass against it, fire a 1 sec burst and check the hit pattern and then a 3 sec burst and check again. I'd be very surprised to see the same hit ratio again, and if it's just for recoil.

Xiolablu3
05-11-2009, 01:03 PM
I think the Spit Vc(4 cannon) carries 100rpg?

DKoor
05-11-2009, 01:50 PM
I don't mind.
It all really boils down to get close and let the poor fellow have it.
.50cals, 20mm, something else - doesn't matter, he will be dead.

VIGOR1994
05-11-2009, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim
I'd go for cannons no doubt, since there is no fighter with nose mounted 6x.50 cals

The YP-80 has nose mounted 6x.50 cals.

TinyTim
05-11-2009, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim
I'd go for cannons no doubt, since there is no fighter with nose mounted 6x.50 cals

The YP-80 has nose mounted 6x.50 cals. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, true, my bad. I don't really fly jets often. But I know that P-38 carries an incredible punch even when firing only 4 machineguns. Awesome for sniping.

VIGOR1994
05-11-2009, 03:29 PM
I somtimes fly jets but not often.

Kurfurst__
05-11-2009, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
I thoght the mk108 was bigger then the mk103 though?

The MK103 shell and cannon are far larger. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The shell was the same size on both cannons, I guess you meant the cartridge. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WTE_Galway
05-11-2009, 06:57 PM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
I thoght the mk108 was bigger then the mk103 though?

The MK103 shell and cannon are far larger. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The shell was the same size on both cannons, I guess you meant the cartridge. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed ... Though i vaguely recall reading somewhere there were specific anti tank armor piercing 30 mmm shells which were only available in the mk103.

In game the mk108 is the better choice against other aircraft because it seems to hit low armor targets like planes just as hard as the mk103 but has more ammo and a higher ROF.

VW-IceFire
05-11-2009, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
I thoght the mk108 was bigger then the mk103 though?

The MK103 shell and cannon are far larger. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The shell was the same size on both cannons, I guess you meant the cartridge. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh yes...cartridge. Brain's been replacing words on its own recently http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
05-11-2009, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VIGOR1994:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim
I'd go for cannons no doubt, since there is no fighter with nose mounted 6x.50 cals

The YP-80 has nose mounted 6x.50 cals. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, true, my bad. I don't really fly jets often. But I know that P-38 carries an incredible punch even when firing only 4 machineguns. Awesome for sniping. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The YP-80 can really cause total havock with those 6 .50cals arranged like that. Only a few hits with those and most planes do go down very quickly. Still...its more time on target than 4 cannons.

The thing is that early in the war a crippling blow can be considered causing an engine failure or a major fuel leak. By the end of the war the crippling blow is more along the lines of airframe destruction. Thats how I see it anyways. Later on the weapons don't cripple so much as they anihilate.

WeedEater9p
05-11-2009, 11:25 PM
Fifties are a lot better in strafing runs then 20mm. Better RoF and more RpG = less trigger time on soft targets and more ammo depending on how accurate you are.
Fifties will also smoke 109s and burn Zeros just fine. It's those pesky 190s that are a pain.

WTE_Galway
05-11-2009, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
Uh, true, my bad. I don't really fly jets often. But I know that P-38 carries an incredible punch even when firing only 4 machineguns. Awesome for sniping.

The P38 was one of the most stable gun platforms in the US arsenal.

When Kelly was asked why the p38 had the engines rotating "backwards" (the p38 has two critical engines with the contra-rotation making asymmetric flight worse rather than better) his reply was simply "it was the most stable configuration for shooting".

Kocur_
05-11-2009, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
The thing is that early in the war a crippling blow can be considered causing an engine failure or a major fuel leak. By the end of the war the crippling blow is more along the lines of airframe destruction. Thats how I see it anyways.


I see it that way too. It started a little earlier, in early and mid 1930s, when all-metal, often radial engines powered, fast bombers and fighters appeared. Everyone noted that just mgs would have a very hard time killing such planes. Radial engines were almost invulnerable to bullets, modern airframes - unlike 'classic' framework ones - could not be destroyed by lucky hit at framework junction, crew armour was more and more popular and even selfsealing fuel tanks appeared. Thus worldwide searching for cannons for fighters in mid 1930s.
Cannons shells were capable of causing airframe kill, if numerous nad concentrated enough, and could cause all other kinds of kills by fragments and blast acting on pilot, control system or tanks and do that in far shorter time than mgs. Soon (or from the beginning, as in case of British 1936 iirc requirement of 4 cannons), in search for decreasing shooting time cannons were numerous enough to provide firepower that was capable of causing quick catastrophic failure of airframe, which of course made other effects just side effects...
In case of large caliber cannons, from 30 mm up, "anti airframe" character was more apparent.

jamesblonde1979
05-12-2009, 01:14 AM
Give me twenties any day, wham bam thankyou mam and get out before the traffic.

WOLFMondo
05-12-2009, 01:20 AM
Originally posted by WeedEater9p:
Fifties are a lot better in strafing runs then 20mm. Better RoF and more RpG = less trigger time on soft targets and more ammo depending on how accurate you are.
Fifties will also smoke 109s and burn Zeros just fine. It's those pesky 190s that are a pain.

A plane mounted .50 has about the same ROF as a Hispano MkV. Depending on the M2 version the MkV even has a higher ROF. Shame the only plane to use them we have is the Tempest V.

Beirut
05-12-2009, 03:52 AM
Gimme a dozen .303s. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

That'll settle his -109 hash.

ImpStarDuece
05-12-2009, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:

A plane mounted .50 has about the same ROF as a Hispano MkV. Depending on the M2 version the MkV even has a higher ROF. Shame the only plane to use them we have is the Tempest V.

Hmmm, the only other RAF aircraft to get the Hispano Mk V during the war were the Spitfire XXI, the Tempest II and the Westland Welkin.

None of these three saw much active service in the period, although with all the Russian and German 1946 aircraft, a Mk XXI and a Tempest II would be quite a qelcome addition.

Otherwise, the only other prop jobs the Hispano V appeared on were the Hornet & Sea Hornet (which would give the Do-335 and early jets a real run for their money), the Fury and Sea Fury, the Spiteful and the Bristol Brigand (which actually flew during 1944, a 360 mph attack fighter with 4,300 hp).

WOLFMondo
05-12-2009, 11:38 PM
Heres hoping a Seahornet and Seafury turn up in the Korean sim.

WTE_Galway
05-12-2009, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Heres hoping a Seahornet and Seafury turn up in the Korean sim.

They have a Seafury in a private collection in Toowoomba, which I was lucky enough to get a look through a few years back. I was inquiring about getting a tail wheel endorsement in their Stearman (USN livery) at the time ... the Seafury is a massive aeroplane, it would be a bit scary to fly in real life.