PDA

View Full Version : P-47 gun convergence



XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 08:37 PM
I have been experimenting a little bit with convergence setting.

Again, I was approaching a lonely Yak-9u from six o'clock high. I always started firing at (more or less) exact convergence range and (almost) always downed the Yak. Of course, I was closing in while firing. I tested convergence settings of 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 220, 240, 260, 280, 300, 350, 400 and 500 meters. I had FB count the number of rounds and number of hits. Eight 0.50 cals have a ROF of 100 rounds per second.

My findings were:

1st:
Number of hits required to shoot the enemy down do not change considerably with the range. I had almost constant numbers from 100 to 500 meters. However, it seem that the kind of damage is different: at long range, the Yak often lost a wing, while at short range it literally disintegrated. This might be due to different hit locations because of dispersion.
2nd:
Firing time. From close range I needed only about 2 seconds of fire, from long range up to 12 seconds. This is not only because it's harder to hit from long distance, it's also because the Yak started limited evasive action sometimes.
Very likely neccessary firing times can be reduced further, because I naturally kept on firing for a short moment after the Yak exploded. This is esp. true for short range fire.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/firing.jpg


3rd:
Hit percentage. After having done some investigation on dispersion I was looking for true hit percentages. These numbers are actually the reason I started testing. As you can see, the shorter the range the better the chance for a hit. This is due to less dispersion and of course better aiming. he highest number is for very short range, 100 & 110 meters is around 27.5 %, the lowest number is about 6.5% at ranges more than 400 meters. As you can see, the likelyhood of hits is decreased drastically with growing range.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/percent.jpg

Conclusion:
The idea behind this test was to find the optimum convergence range. From my tests it appears that 100 is best, but this is not entirely true. With this setting you wont be able to hit anything flying straight and level 200 meters in front of you. So I guess I'll have to do some more test with performance outside convergence. I had mine set to 200 and will likely reduce it, but wont set it as low as 100. Maybe I'll reduce just one set and leave the other at 200.

Also, see here for a more scientific approach on the same issue from warbirds:

http://www.cris.com/~reaper/gunnery/hvz_at.html

It's not exactly the same experiment I did, but very interesting.







Message Edited on 10/15/0308:39PM by JtD

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 08:37 PM
I have been experimenting a little bit with convergence setting.

Again, I was approaching a lonely Yak-9u from six o'clock high. I always started firing at (more or less) exact convergence range and (almost) always downed the Yak. Of course, I was closing in while firing. I tested convergence settings of 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 220, 240, 260, 280, 300, 350, 400 and 500 meters. I had FB count the number of rounds and number of hits. Eight 0.50 cals have a ROF of 100 rounds per second.

My findings were:

1st:
Number of hits required to shoot the enemy down do not change considerably with the range. I had almost constant numbers from 100 to 500 meters. However, it seem that the kind of damage is different: at long range, the Yak often lost a wing, while at short range it literally disintegrated. This might be due to different hit locations because of dispersion.
2nd:
Firing time. From close range I needed only about 2 seconds of fire, from long range up to 12 seconds. This is not only because it's harder to hit from long distance, it's also because the Yak started limited evasive action sometimes.
Very likely neccessary firing times can be reduced further, because I naturally kept on firing for a short moment after the Yak exploded. This is esp. true for short range fire.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/firing.jpg


3rd:
Hit percentage. After having done some investigation on dispersion I was looking for true hit percentages. These numbers are actually the reason I started testing. As you can see, the shorter the range the better the chance for a hit. This is due to less dispersion and of course better aiming. he highest number is for very short range, 100 & 110 meters is around 27.5 %, the lowest number is about 6.5% at ranges more than 400 meters. As you can see, the likelyhood of hits is decreased drastically with growing range.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/percent.jpg

Conclusion:
The idea behind this test was to find the optimum convergence range. From my tests it appears that 100 is best, but this is not entirely true. With this setting you wont be able to hit anything flying straight and level 200 meters in front of you. So I guess I'll have to do some more test with performance outside convergence. I had mine set to 200 and will likely reduce it, but wont set it as low as 100. Maybe I'll reduce just one set and leave the other at 200.

Also, see here for a more scientific approach on the same issue from warbirds:

http://www.cris.com/~reaper/gunnery/hvz_at.html

It's not exactly the same experiment I did, but very interesting.







Message Edited on 10/15/0308:39PM by JtD

Buzz_25th
10-15-2003, 08:42 PM
A more accurate way to test would be to use friedly bombers to shoot at. Then with the use of icons you could hold the distance perfect.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/anderson3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-15-2003, 10:22 PM
Good test but a bit antiseptic. Of course closer is better for gunnery. But in reality, it's highly unlikely you'll be able to waltz up to an adversary and pop him from 100 meters. Unless, he's high on kronic or sleeping it just ain't happening.

Personally, I'm a bit of a contrarian on gunnery. I have them set out pretty far because IRL you need range to hit the enemy, especially when flying a less agile plane, which I often do. Longer ranges allow you to hit from greater angle off. Of course the Faustian bargain is the hits aren't as lethal; initally. Bu with practice you can get PK's or often the kills come later as you've mauled the bandit to the point where he can't RTB.

The final nuance I think is to really lead the enemy in deflection shooting. Imagine where he'll be in a second, fire there and let him fly into your bullet stream. Even at good distances (300-500M) you'll see some damn nasty results.

S!

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 07:01 AM
JtD, I'd just like to say it's great to see you doing all of these tests on the 47 [and Shkas / Mg17 over on the other thread].

Keep up the good work :>


http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 07:31 AM
Very interesting JtD.

I have only been flying the Jug for about a month i think. I would change my convergence sometimes to 300 anyware from 200. I was playing aroung in the QMB and just for fun i set the convergence to 400m. I set up 4 friendly FWD9's and fired from 400m or about. The first plane i fired a quick burst at the wing root to see if my aim was good enough. I then fired a two second burst and i blew it's wing off lol. The others i kind of forget how they went down but you get my meaning.

I then set up 4 more freindly FWD9's and set my convergence to 200. Well i fired at the first plane from about 200m with a three second burst. I blew it to peases. ect.

Then i was thinking. What if i set the first four 50's at 400m convergence and the second set of 50's to 200m convergence. Now i can fire at about 400 and cause damage and i can still use the other set of 50's up close. It will take some practice for me to get use to fireing one set at log range and the other at close up, but so far i like the results.

Zayets
10-16-2003, 07:37 AM
Good stuff although when chassed or when pursuing there's little time to remember any number.

Zayets out

http://www.arr.go.ro/iar81c.JPG

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 07:50 AM
We have found that for online combat 400-500m works very well sure its harder to kill at close range but all you need to do is skid a little with the rudder to fix that.Also as my ride is the p40 I'am allways being out run so longer shots are the norm.

Its rare that you will get to close with the way the sound works in FB so less than 200m is a waste.

No1RAAF_Pourshot
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/CA-15%20Kangaroo.jpg

No1_RAAF

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 09:49 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- A more accurate way to test would be to use friedly
- bombers to shoot at. Then with the use of icons you
- could hold the distance perfect.

I have done stationary test. I'm done with that. Now this was a kind of simulation under combat conditions. I have actually had more surprising six o'clock attacks than accidential friendly fire against bombers. ;-)
feiz wrote:
- Good test but a bit antiseptic. Of course closer is
- better for gunnery. But in reality, it's highly
- unlikely you'll be able to waltz up to an adversary
- and pop him from 100 meters.

I just wanted to know how much better close range is. Like I already said to Buzz, I did surprise a lot of folks on HL and also AI. They were chasing someone else and just didn't pay attention to what happened behind them. In reality this was even more standard. That's why historically most aces flying planes with wing armarment had their convergence reduced from the standard setting. I know that in FB you can achieve good results with a lot of settings, but I prefer one brutal approach, not spray and pray.

clint-ruin wrote:
- JtD, I'd just like to say it's great to see you
- doing all of these tests on the 47 [and Shkas / Mg17
- over on the other thread].

As long as there's just one individual who appreciates these results I'll share everything I find with the community. And with regard to what you posted in the ShKAS/MG17 thread, I hope to reach a point where I only have to type in the URL to throw some facts into a whining contest. Sure, some people won't bother, but I hope some others will.

Maple_Tiger wrote:
- Then i was thinking. What if i set the first four
- 50's at 400m convergence and the second set of 50's
- to 200m convergence. Now i can fire at about 400 and
- cause damage and i can still use the other set of
- 50's up close. It will take some practice for me to
- get use to fireing one set at log range and the
- other at close up, but so far i like the results.
I will probably do the same, but my numbers will more likely be 100 and 200. If I was you I'd still fire both sets on all ranges because dispersion is huge. You don't really have to be at exact convergence range. Firing a set with 200 convergence at 400 meters may still put a hit into a wing and shred it off. In a P-47 you definitly have enough ammo. :-)

Zayets wrote:
- Good stuff although when chassed or when
- pursuing there's little time to remember any
- number.

You will get used to firing at the best range. I can.

pourshot wrote:
- We have found that for online combat 400-500m works
- very well sure its harder to kill at close range but
- all you need to do is skid a little with the rudder
- to fix that.Also as my ride is the p40 I'am allways
- being out run so longer shots are the norm.
-
- Its rare that you will get to close with the way the
- sound works in FB so less than 200m is a waste.
I fly my P-47 in a very strict B'n'Z. Generally I always have the choice whether or not to open fire and if yes, at what range. I almost always will be closing with the enemy. The former decision therefore depends solely on evasive action of the enemy, the latter largely on estimated optimum damage. I can understand that some people get happy with 400 or 500, but this just isn't my style. I hate to be shot down by a (very unlikely) freak shot from miles away, I hate to waste a good surprise by opening fire too early. That's why I dont fire at long ranges.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 10:47 AM
Hi JtD, and interesting research, although somewhat obvious without the numbers (because the closer you are, the easier it is to hit, the more potent the rounds, and the less leading you have to do).

I think what some of the other guys are trying to get at... is that you really have to strike a balance between close and long range shots... because it's not likely if you're fighting anything but a dimwit, that you'll be able to get 100m away from him without having him break. On the other hand, if you fire from too far away like you said... you'll just spoil the kill, and possibly even end up in a precarious situation.


My point is, i've flown the P-47 off and on for a while now (and i'm back on it again, the D-10 to be specific), and i've found that it's pretty effective to have your convergence between 3 and 400 meteres. Also, if you have your guns converging at slightly different distances, you increase your chances of getting hits all around. At that: my convergence settings i use now for the P-47 D-10, are [375m for the M.G. set, and 350m for the cannon set].

Anyways, hope this helps a bit, and good luck with your research!!


P.S. always remember: the P-47's only true enemy, is the FW-190.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 11:05 AM
- pourshot wrote:
-- We have found that for online combat 400-500m works
-- very well sure its harder to kill at close range but
-- all you need to do is skid a little with the rudder
-- to fix that.Also as my ride is the p40 I'am allways
-- being out run so longer shots are the norm.
--
-- Its rare that you will get to close with the way the
-- sound works in FB so less than 200m is a waste.


JtD wrote:

- I fly my P-47 in a very strict B'n'Z. Generally I
- always have the choice whether or not to open fire
- and if yes, at what range. I almost always will be
- closing with the enemy. The former decision
- therefore depends solely on evasive action of the
- enemy, the latter largely on estimated optimum
- damage. I can understand that some people get happy
- with 400 or 500, but this just isn't my style. I
- hate to be shot down by a (very unlikely) freak shot
- from miles away, I hate to waste a good surprise by
- opening fire too early. That's why I dont fire at
- long ranges.


Did I say we open fire at 4-500m , no we dont do that but the chances of a good deflection hit at 1-300m is much better with guns set like this infact we demonstrated this to anouther Aussie squad in a privet game to some suprise.

Also the p40 is hopeless at B@Z , we are cockpit On no external view co-op playing turn fighters so for us it works very well.Perhaps if we get the correct FM for our p40 things will change until then we fight the best way our plane allows ,low and dirty /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

No1RAAF_Pourshot
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/CA-15%20Kangaroo.jpg

No1_RAAF

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 11:25 AM
damn right Pourshot! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Actually I am the one who went first with these ranges for convergence as I found out that my best probability of getting a nice position to shoot is at about 300-400m.

Having shorter convergence range before I found that such short range is very short living (especially if you attack with high speed approach and bombers as you're very often dead meat from gunners if you get too close). 200m range gives a very narrow range of good fire opportunity however something like 500m (which I use now with great success) gives me a very wide range of distances at which I have good firing possition in which my trajectiles will be highly concentrated.

In the end, each to his own... different people have different phylosophy on this and these work like a charm for myself and now my squadmate as well /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<center><font color="lightblue">''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
RAAF Kuky</font>
Get my skins @ IL-2Skins ('http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=Edin%20"Kuky"%20Kulelija&comefrom=top5&ts=1064037392')

Zayets
10-16-2003, 12:15 PM
I am not saying that these numbers are not correct , but I don't think I will take them as a rule. Everybody wants to get as close as possible but this is not something that you can do easy , and more than that is impossible when:
- you don't fly FR servers
- you fly against AI opponents

You can't close in!Is that simple, they see you from at least 1 km and the AI is seeing you by the time you're about to fire.If is a chased plane. But in FR servers is OK , you can close enough for a single 2 sec burst. If you fly offline against novice AI you will always have a handicap. They see through clouds , they know you're there , they have what is called a simplified FM. Basically , they are cheating.

Zayets out

http://www.arr.go.ro/iar81c.JPG

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 01:55 PM
Ive done my own testing & I can splater um @ 500

I normaly use 300 tho /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Works well

<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 02:06 PM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:

-
-
- My point is, i've flown the P-47 off and on for a
- while now (and i'm back on it again, the D-10 to be
- specific), and i've found that it's pretty effective
- to have your convergence between 3 and 400 meteres.
- Also, if you have your guns converging at slightly
- different distances, you increase your chances of
- getting hits all around. At that: my convergence
- settings i use now for the P-47 D-10, are [375m for
- the M.G. set, and 350m for the cannon set].
-
-

Hero, there are no cannons mounted in the P-47. Afaik, setting the cannons only effects only those a/c so fitted.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



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

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 03:04 PM
MiloMorai wrote:
- Hero, there are no cannons mounted in the P-47.
- Afaik, setting the cannons only effects only those
- a/c so fitted.

I think cannon setting is for all weapons you normally fire with Button 2. So half the guns on P-47 should have "cannon" convergence.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 03:26 PM
Have you noticed also that the A1 will break from you just before you reach convergence. One time i had the convergence set to 200 and the A1 one would break at like 250m. When i had the convergence set to 400m, the A1 would break at like 420m. Before when i just use one convergence for all 8 50's, usualy 300m, the A1 would usualy break about 320m.

any one els notice this or am i just crazy. or mayby im just parinoid.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 03:35 PM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:
-
--
--
-- My point is, i've flown the P-47 off and on for a
-- while now (and i'm back on it again, the D-10 to be
-- specific), and i've found that it's pretty effective
-- to have your convergence between 3 and 400 meteres.
-- Also, if you have your guns converging at slightly
-- different distances, you increase your chances of
-- getting hits all around. At that: my convergence
-- settings i use now for the P-47 D-10, are [375m for
-- the M.G. set, and 350m for the cannon set].
--
--
-
- Hero, there are no cannons mounted in the P-47.
- Afaik, setting the cannons only effects only those
- a/c so fitted.



You have a point Milomorai but when you fire using joystick button one, you only use four 50's. By ressing button two you will fire the other set of 50's.

I tride setting the mg convergence at 200m and the connon to 400m. Each set fires at a differnt convergence. I watched where where the bullits crossed, each set of 50's crossed at a differant point.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 03:37 PM
JtD wrote:

-
- I think cannon setting is for all weapons you
- normally fire with Button 2. So half the guns on
- P-47 should have "cannon" convergence.
-
-

That is nice to know./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Just did a quick test and yup can set the inner pair(mg) and outer pair('cannon') to different ranges.



http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



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

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 05:13 PM
The inner MGs are on the cannon button, the outer on the MG button.

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 11:04 PM
I find that a mixed convergence of around 550m for one set, 150m for the other works best with the P-47. Although each individual shot from the guns is unlikely to do major damage or strip a part off, they have enough AP tendency in the game to really mess a plane up from mixed hits. I'm not surprised at all to find that the number of hits before catastrophic failure didn't vary that much in JtD's tests. The .50 cals as modelled in the game aren't really an instant kill weapon, they're far better at damaging a plane until it's no longer flyable through system failures.

Anyhow, just another bump for JtD's tests :>


http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 01:16 AM
Wow,

My Tbolt converge is 180 inner and 170 outer.

Getting kills nicely, and if a slippery 109 trys to scissor past my gunsight at close range it's all over but the crying.

May go back to 400 - 500 just to see........



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 01:49 AM
Something else thats strange, so far when I've used the Default ammo coupled with some bombs and rockets, the guns seem a lot more effective... Might just be me. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 02:09 AM
If you carry heavy payload the aircraft is more stable as it weights more... it has greater inertia, therefore tendency to stay in original position when some force acts on it (MG recoil)

<center><font color="lightblue">''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
RAAF Kuky</font>
Get my skins @ IL-2Skins ('http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=Edin%20"Kuky"%20Kulelija&comefrom=top5&ts=1064037392')

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 02:48 AM
JtD

How do you get FB to give you the gunnery statistics? I have looked for this with no luck.

Thanks!

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 04:01 AM
RAAF_Edin wrote:
- If you carry heavy payload the aircraft is more
- stable as it weights more... it has greater inertia,
- therefore tendency to stay in original position when
- some force acts on it (MG recoil)

Prob is, I dumped the bomb load first, the rockets too. I can imagine those bazooka tubes adding some drag but not much weight when empty.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 10:09 AM
GMichaelP wrote:
- JtD
-
- How do you get FB to give you the gunnery
- statistics? I have looked for this with no luck.
-
- Thanks!

In multiplayer you can open the console (shift+tab). Just type "user xxx STAT" to get statistics of player xxx. You'll get rounds fired, hits, kills and some more. This doesn't work in single player.
There are external tools that allow more, but I don't know their names, what exactly they can do and where to get them.

Zayets
10-17-2003, 10:16 AM
At zeno's warbirds is posted this exempt from the P47 manual. Might not be the D model , but C was almost identic to the early D's.

http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-47/47GECD.gif


Zayets out

http://www.arr.go.ro/iar81c.JPG

XyZspineZyX
10-17-2003, 03:25 PM
Korolov wrote:
- Prob is, I dumped the bomb load first, the rockets
- too. I can imagine those bazooka tubes adding some
- drag but not much weight when empty.

Maybe we can test with just rockets and just bombload.
It isn't impossible that the rocket tubes weigh the
same for game purposes, empty or not. (Possibly not,
but you never know).