PDA

View Full Version : The MG151 20mm MC is too weak?



Storm_Bird
02-14-2004, 06:50 AM
I think MG151 is too weak in FB. I had shot a Ki-84 at least 10-15 rounds this morning, but it was still flying very well before I shot it! I don't know why, I can shot down a IL-2 with the MG151 easily.

http://www.moxing.net/ww2/plant/german/he162-4.jpg

Storm_Bird
02-14-2004, 06:50 AM
I think MG151 is too weak in FB. I had shot a Ki-84 at least 10-15 rounds this morning, but it was still flying very well before I shot it! I don't know why, I can shot down a IL-2 with the MG151 easily.

http://www.moxing.net/ww2/plant/german/he162-4.jpg

nixon-fiend.
02-14-2004, 07:59 AM
"it was still flying very well before i shot it!"


Yeah, I've noticed this!! It's weird.. Before i open fire on planes, they all seem to be flying quite easily, i mean.. undamaged planes flying perfectly well???

Craziness!

I think it's a bug or something.. Maybe you should email Oleg.

yeah definitely.

JtD
02-14-2004, 08:02 AM
Hmm, if the MG 151 works well against one target and poorly against another, why should the gun be the problem? I suppose you just found some inaccuracies with the damage model, not with the gun.

nixon-fiend.
02-14-2004, 08:04 AM
Moreover, I think the ru_02 pilot is too weak also..

I was flying with the said chap in the cockpit and a hurri mk.I came and killed him.

This is B$ !

The hurri has 303s. Everyone knows the 303s don't do any damage..

.. And he's supposed to be a war-hardened, vodka swilling, well 'ard russian geezer!

Something's not right.

Chuck_Older
02-14-2004, 08:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JtD:
I suppose you just found some inaccuracies with the damage model, not with the gun.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

that's my feeling on it, too

*****************************
the sergeant will for, his sergeant's pay, obey the captain 'till his dying day~ Clash

BBB_Hyperion
02-14-2004, 08:09 AM
The Mg151/20 mm has eastern front ammo belting 50 % AP rounds vs Sturmoviks. That means only half of the Rounds actually do explosive damage rest is amor piercing if it does well i dont know.

Its surely a problem considering that west and eastfront planes are now simulated.

Regards,
Hyperion

oFZo
02-14-2004, 08:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nixon-fiend.:
Moreover, I think the ru_02 pilot is too weak also..

I was flying with the said chap in the cockpit and a hurri mk.I came and killed him.

This is B$ !

The hurri has 303s. Everyone knows the 303s don't do any damage..

.. And he's supposed to be a war-hardened, vodka swilling, well 'ard russian geezer!

Something's not right.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

-oFZo
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigHolland.gif
Founding member and Offical Keeper of The Herbs of the Eurotrolls.

"I have given you all the seed bearing plants and herbs to use." - The Bible

Chuck_Older
02-14-2004, 08:16 AM
I wouldn't say that, rather I would say that the location of FB dictates that we have the Eastern Front loadouts. It's not that we have eastern and western front aircraft, it's that we have loadouts suitable for the location FB is set in, which is more accurate to me than having the sim constantly switching between eastern front and western front loadouts, depending on what plane you hit with your guns. It would be nice to have the best of both worlds, but unfortunately, until we can select the ammo loadout for fixed aircraft weapons like mgs and cannon, we have to use what we have.

*****************************
the sergeant will for, his sergeant's pay, obey the captain 'till his dying day~ Clash

robban75
02-14-2004, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Storm_Bird:
I think MG151 is too weak in FB. I had shot a Ki-84 at least 10-15 rounds this morning, but it was still flying very well before I shot it! I don't know why, I can shot down a IL-2 with the MG151 easily.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Was it online, or was offline against the AI?
The AI doesn't suffer as much as a human player would. Online, damaged wings effectively makes a fighter defensive, some planes more than others. Planes with light ailerons in particular.(Fw 190, Ki-84)
When I damage someones wing online, I get more daring, as the other guy can't do snappy and instant manouvers any more. With the AI one still has to be careful. And yes, the MG151 are quite effective I think! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://members.chello.se/unni/Dora-9-3.JPG

When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!

VW-IceFire
02-14-2004, 08:27 AM
The two syncronized MG151/20's on the Dora are extremely powerful...absolutely nothing wrong with them. As of the 1.1 patch for sure...before that I don't remember but I think their effectiveness was upped slightly. With 1.22...things are more or less right on.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Platypus_1.JaVA
02-14-2004, 10:00 AM
point the hurri's guns on the engines and wings of planes, not on the hull and only fire when within convergence range. If you do that, I can guarrantee that there will be engine fires and wing snaps.

Furthermore, the single 20mm gun of the bf-109's really need alot of aiming. think of it as a sniper rifle. quite deadly but, you really got to aim much more carefully as opposed to the gatling guns wich just requiers you to press/squize the trigger in the hope you hit something.

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/JaVAPlatypus-1java.JPG (http://www.1java.org)

AC_Cobra
02-14-2004, 10:06 AM
Very simple answer here- the Ki84 has a ridiculous damage model....according to this game it would appear the ki84 had far superior armor than the Il-2.

georgeo76
02-14-2004, 10:19 AM
It's all about where you hit, and w/ the 20mm on the 109 you need to hit well.

For example: I've torn the wing off a Jug w/ a very, very short burst of the MG on the 109. While other times I've sunk multiple MK108 shells into a Pony and nothing!

http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/images/buck2.gif
"I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up. "
Fiend's Wings (http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend)

VW-IceFire
02-14-2004, 10:22 AM
Part of that MK108 thing is lag...since the ROF is lower than a 20mm you may experience more trouble with lag and hits not being counted than from a more continous stream of 20mm fire.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Maj_Death
02-14-2004, 11:47 AM
Hits are calculated on the shooters computer so lag has no effect on that. Warping might but I can't hit a warping plane no matter what gun I use so that makes little difference. The problem with guns in FB is damage model inconsistancy. A pair of 20mm MG151's will rip most planes in FB to pieces in short order but some planes seem virtually immune to them such as the Ki-84 and Pe-2. The MK108 suffers the same problem. Most birds are shattered with 1 or 2 hits but some birds like the P-51 require up to a dozen hits from a 30mm. Then of course there is the .303's which are devistating against Bf-109's but totally harmless to everything else. If someone shoots at my 190 with a .303 I usually just let them shoot me. Those pea shooters do no damage to the 190 at all. Same thing happens with P-11 vs yaks, you can pump your entire ammo load into them and it doesn't do anything except cause a small fuel leak.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The F7F Tigercat in Aces Over the Pacific is overmodeled.

Davea011
02-14-2004, 10:21 PM
I'm not going to comment on the online aspects of the game, as I pretty much don't know anything about them, but offline the ballistics seem (to me) to be pretty consistant. I get the feel that the Russian hardware is pretty uber, but the numbers tell us that their stuff WAS pretty uber. Still, when I'm flying around in anything with two or more ShVaks and I'm totally wailing on anything that strays within 1km or so of me, it doesn't seem totally right.

The MG151 is a bit weak compared to some of the other 20mm's. I wouldn't say it's undermodelled. As others have said, you have to aim carefully -- you can't just cover the target with the crosshairs and mash on the button like you can with the IL2. Think wing roots and engines. If the engines are ON the wings, so much the better. Shots aimed at the fuselage will more than likely hit the tail, which isn't a very effective shot with this cannon...at least, it isn't for me. You'll be able to down them eventually like this but it'll use up a lot of ammo, so stick with the vital spots. If you're steady on the stick and don't mind getting your kills poached by others, you can go for the oil cooler shot -- even one hit ought to do the job here. (Unless it's an IL2, in which case it will more than likely complete its mission anyway and fly all the way home.) There are only a few others shots that're this efficient (the pilot and the engine) and they're all more difficult.

And, remember, it could be worse; you could be using a 15mm instead. I, personally, would rather have another two 7.92mm MG's than one of these.

kyrule2
02-14-2004, 10:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AC_Cobra:
Very simple answer here- the Ki84 has a ridiculous damage model....according to this game it would appear the ki84 had far superior armor than the Il-2.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


...and the P-47 has more armor than the Tirpitz http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. Kinda like the old FW-190.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

3./JG51_Hunde
http://www.jg51.com/

clint-ruin
02-14-2004, 11:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
And, remember, it could be worse; you could be using a 15mm instead. I, personally, would rather have another two 7.92mm MG's than one of these.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's strange, but the 15mm is actually a damned effective weapon. From testing it appears to have better AP properties than the UB guns, .50 cal, 151/20 [even vs 20mm AP!], VYa and ShVAK. It's almost completely worthless for blasting pieces of aircraft off, but it can drill through the rear of almost any aircraft in the game and come out through the engine block. Nothing else takes apart a Pe2/3s engines in rear aspect shots like the 151/15, round per round, until you get to the NS-37 and NS-45 APs.

From testing it would appear that damage models are very much weaker against AP rounds than against HE. Presumably much of this is to do with the fact that there is little in the way of 'skin' modelling - no apparent way to blow out panels through pressure or burn canvas.

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

A.K.Davis
02-14-2004, 11:45 PM
Actually, I suspect it's a combination of very high muzzle velocity, HE rounds and high RoF. I don't think it's the AP rounds, because we have been given many more for the MG151/20. I believe Oleg said that only the MG151/20 had the non-standard, greater AP belt composition (for Il-2 interception on East Front). Standard MG151 belt composition was:

4 x HE/I (with tracer)
1 x AP (with tracer)

Assuming this is the MG151 loadout we have in FB, comparing it to the FB MG151/20 (unsynchronized), you have:

-same RoF
-higher ratio of HE rounds
-higher velocity

compared to MG131, you have:
-lower RoF
-higher velocity
-higher ratio of HE rounds

compared to Russian 12.7mm, you have:
-lower RoF
-slightly higher velocity
-HE rounds (UB is AP/I only)

compared to US .50 cal., you have:
-slightly lower RoF
-slightly higher velocity
-HE rounds (.50 cal. is AP/I only)

I'm sure if we had the standard MG151/20 ammo belt composition with the same ratio of HE to AP (4:1) as the 15mm MG151, you would think the 20mm a superior weapon.

--AKD

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

BS87
02-15-2004, 12:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kyrule2:
...and the P-47 has more armor than the Tirpitz http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. Kinda like the old FW-190.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It would seem this way only sometimes. For instance, earlier tonight i was flying my jug, and managed to take an enormous amount of MG151/20 and MG/FF hits from a 190. Next flight he himt me again, only this time with about 6-8 rounds in short succesion. I lost my wing and my tail like butter in a microwave.

clint-ruin
02-15-2004, 01:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by A.K.Davis:
Actually, I suspect it's a combination of very high muzzle velocity, HE rounds and high RoF. I don't think it's the AP rounds, because we have been given many more for the MG151/20. I believe Oleg said that only the MG151/20 had the non-standard, greater AP belt composition (for Il-2 interception on East Front). Standard MG151 belt composition was:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi AKDavis,

Thanks for the ammo belt comparison!

Here's the original Il2s' ammo belt composition data for the 151s:

MG 151
// HET - AP - HE - AP

HE/HET
mass = 0.057
speed = 960.0
power = 0.0019

AP
mass = 0.072
speed = 859.0
power = 0

MG 151/20
// APIT - HE - HE - MG - MG
APIT
mass = 0.115
speed = 710.0
power = 0.0036

HE
mass = 0.115
speed = 705.0
power = 0.0044

MG
mass = 0.092
speed = 775.0
power = 0.0186

____

Dunno what's changed since. I have this odd memory of Oleg having switched 151/15mm to 100% AP/APT at some point, but the message may be well past the 6 month cutoff when the forums moved.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=30310959&r=94310579#94310579

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

A.K.Davis
02-15-2004, 01:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by A.K.Davis:
Actually, I suspect it's a combination of very high muzzle velocity, HE rounds and high RoF. I don't think it's the AP rounds, because we have been given many more for the MG151/20. I believe Oleg said that only the MG151/20 had the non-standard, greater AP belt composition (for Il-2 interception on East Front). Standard MG151 belt composition was:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi AKDavis,

Thanks for the ammo belt comparison!

Here's the original Il2s' ammo belt composition data for the 151s:

MG 151
// HET - AP - HE - AP

HE/HET
mass = 0.057
speed = 960.0
power = 0.0019

AP
mass = 0.072
speed = 859.0
power = 0

MG 151/20
// APIT - HE - HE - MG - MG
APIT
mass = 0.115
speed = 710.0
power = 0.0036

HE
mass = 0.115
speed = 705.0
power = 0.0044

MG
mass = 0.092
speed = 775.0
power = 0.0186

____

Dunno what's changed since. I have this odd memory of Oleg having switched 151/15mm to 100% AP/APT at some point, but the message may be well past the 6 month cutoff when the forums moved.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is the historical information I have on belt comp.:

[/quote]
These are the belt compositions for fighters, used against air targets, as given given in a German manual, published in in 1944. (Ref. 204.) Note that these were more or less advisory: Local commanders were encouraged to determine the armament mix that suited them.

7.92 mm (MG 17)
5 SmK-v
4 PmK-v
1 B-Patrone-v
SmK ammunition was AP with a hard steel core and a lead sleeve. The probable explanation of the acronym is Spitzgeschoss mit Kern, pointed ball with core. PmK also had a steel core, but the core was surrounded by phosphorus, which ignited when the round was fired. Finally B-Geschoß was a Beobachtungs or observation round: It had a small HE charge and some incendiary material, and exploded on contact with the target. In this way the pilot was able to verify that he was hitting the target. During the Battle of Britain, the British used the Dixon-De Wilde round for similar purposes, and pilots generally felt that this was extremely useful.

13 mm (MG 131)
1 Panzergranatpatrone L'spur o. Zerl
2 Brandsprenggranatpatronen L'spur o. Zerl
The 13mm Panzergranatpatrone was a solid AP round. The Brandsprenggranatpatrone was a conventional HE/I round, a bored-out projectile filled with an explosive mixture. German armourers were warned that the first round fired had to be an AP round: The cap over the muzzle had to be destroyed first, and there was the possibility that the HE/I round would go off when it hit this. Note that for both rounds, tracer was chosen (L'spur, or Leuchtspur) but that there was no selfdestruction (o. Zerl, or ohne Zerlegerung).

15 mm (MG 151)
4 Brandsprenggranatpatronen L'spur m. Zerl
1 Panzergranatpatrone L'spur o. Zerl
Rather similar to the 13mm, except that the HE/I rounds now do have self-destruction mechanisms. It was common to use a combined self-destruction fuse and tracer: The projectile exploded when the tracer was burnt out. On some projectiles, special self-destruction fuses were used. They were set to 3 seconds, except before April 1941 when they were set to 1.7 seconds.

The MG 151 was a high-velocity weapon, and for ground attack missions Hartkernmunition, AP with a tungsten core, was loaded.

20 mm (MG-FF, MG 151/20)
2 Minengeschoß m. Zerl.
2 Brandsprenggranatpatronen L'spur m. Zerl
oder Brandgranatpatronen
1 Panzersprenggranatpatrone o. Zerl
oder Panzerbrandgranatpatrone (Phospor) o. Zerl.
Here the Minengeschoß appears for the first time. A version of the 20mm M-Geschoß with tracer did not exist, so tracer was used on HE/I (Brandsprenggranatpatrone) or pure incendiary (Brandgranatpatrone) rounds. The latter was apparently a new development in 1944, intended to replace the less effective HE/I. The fifth round was a semi-AP projectile, explosive or incendiary. Apparently the main reason this was used instead of a solid AP round was that a solid projectile would have been too heavy.

It was recommended that more AP or semi-AP ammunition would be loaded when the probable targets were well-armoured attack aircraft such as the Il-2. On the other hand, against the four-engined bombers of the RAF and USAAF the high explosive types were more effective.
[/quote]

I'm fairly certain Oleg said we had the recommended higher load of AP for Il-2s in the MG151/20, but not in the MG/FF.

Even the original Il-2 belt comp. for the 15mm would appear to be higher in AP than the "standard" load.

--AKD

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