PDA

View Full Version : Gun warping from heat



AVGWarhawk
10-18-2005, 07:48 AM
Oleg, will you incorporate some realism in gun tube warpage, etc. In other words, the guns were fired in 2-3 second blasts. The reason is to save the limited ammo and gun tubes would warp from heat or the rifeling would be destroyed. Any plans on incorporating some aspect of gun damage for over firing your weapons?

AVGWarhawk
10-18-2005, 07:48 AM
Oleg, will you incorporate some realism in gun tube warpage, etc. In other words, the guns were fired in 2-3 second blasts. The reason is to save the limited ammo and gun tubes would warp from heat or the rifeling would be destroyed. Any plans on incorporating some aspect of gun damage for over firing your weapons?

HelSqnProtos
10-18-2005, 03:19 PM
S~!

Hmmmm ..... that is an interesting comment. I like that idea.

However I don't believe you will see that incorporated into PF. However I think it would be an excellent suggestion for B.O.B. Post in the B.O.B. thread, I know CrazyIvan and Oleg read it occasionally. Perhaps you should think about altering your Topic title to Gun Barrel Warping or Damage. I think you will get more views and more response.

Good Luck.

AVGWarhawk
10-19-2005, 12:06 PM
bump

joeap
10-19-2005, 12:10 PM
I agree a great idea for BoB. wait for the whines though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WhiskeyBravo
10-19-2005, 01:55 PM
Hey good idea. The harder you shoot, the sooner you droop!

Or is that a biological function I'm thinking about?

WB.

SeaFireLIV
10-19-2005, 04:10 PM
We should also have gun jams (as in EAW), but who knows if it`ll happen. the whiners won`t like it cos it`ll be no `fun`!

Aaron_GT
10-19-2005, 05:17 PM
I think Oleg has said that in the campaign mode in BoB there will be system failures of various kinds including ones which follow an aircraft through a campaign as it gets more worn out. I certainly hope this will be the case.

stubby
10-20-2005, 05:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
We should also have gun jams (as in EAW), but who knows if it`ll happen. the whiners won`t like it cos it`ll be no `fun`! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gun jams in BoB for early Spits only lasted for a short time. It was quickly remedied. The only way this would work would be in an offline campaign where probablity of jamming could be changed behind the scenes as you progress in the battle. For coops, you really couldn't do it unless the mission maker had some parameter he could factor in to mimic reality for a certain time frame. Like other said though, you would be hard pressed to find Spit pilots in HL that would take up the challenge.

As for overheating - awesome idea. While we're at it, also make the planes less stable as they burn fuel requiring the pilot to switch fuel tanks manually in order to keep the plane balanced.

tigertalon
10-20-2005, 06:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
Oleg, will you incorporate some realism in gun tube warpage, etc. In other words, the guns were fired in 2-3 second blasts. The reason is to save the limited ammo and gun tubes would warp from heat or the rifeling would be destroyed. Any plans on incorporating some aspect of gun damage for over firing your weapons? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I asked for this feature long time ago. Oleg replied, stating that guns have sufficient cooling from airflow, and they would not overheat. However, there are pilot accounts stating contrary...

AVGWarhawk
10-20-2005, 09:58 AM
I undertand it was a problem. I guess at some point you have to draw the line on realism.

x6BL_Brando
10-20-2005, 04:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I undertand it was a problem. I guess at some point you have to draw the line on realism. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Armoury is a hugely complicated subject and a large numbers of man/years have been spent investigating subjects like barrel warpage, cartridge case extraction under heat, premature detonation, rifling wear and so on. And that's just for surface weapons! Even more physical forces can cause problems in aerial combat - the effects of high-G turns on a moving breech-block, the difficulties of positioning ammo-boxes and clearing spent casings, remote triggering - there are literally tonnes of calculations involved in just this aspect of combat aircraft design.

What's worse, from the modellers' POV, is that each change in aircraft design (types, models, variants &c) would almost certainly involve adjustments to the minutiae of efficient gun-operation. That doesn't even include the host of field modifications initiated by armourers on active service - some of which may have become authorised, others not. All in all it's a minefield if you'll pardon the pun, and somewhere that no sane modeller would want to venture. To really pander to the rivet-counters' whims you would need to know things like:

The theatre of operations - cold, hot, dry, wet, dusty etc.
The manufacturer's records (and track record)
The age of the barrel
The age and quality of the ammo
The nature of the different ammo being fired
along with the belt/ammo cartridge ratio
The twist, depth and spacing of the lands
The grade of steel used
plus the conditions of service and the standard of maintenance
even just whether there was sufficient 4x2 and gun oil at a particular field at a particular date.

While I have never worked with aircraft-mounted weapons I have dismantled many Army weapons of the period. A BREN LMG for example comes into over one hundred components, most of which must function correctly for the weapon to achieve sustained operation. All this and we can't even be sure whether the armourer's assistant was suffering a mighty hangover and forgot to clean the No3 barrel in the right wing.

I'm all for initiating even more random stoppages, beyond the gun-jams caused by flak-shrapnel and enemy gunfire, to imitate the kind of thing you seek, but I pray to the gods that we wouldn't have the kind of pedantry that exists about climb rates and turning-circles.

I also agree about over-firing and barrel-damage. Gunnery-training lectures abounded with the kind of information above - and all pilots were schooled in the need for short, controlled bursts - well-aimed, at the correct range & deflection, and so on. How well each pilot did in the heat of battle on that score is undoubtedly another story. There's little doubt that the AI in Forgotten Battles would forever be breaking off and returning home with jammed guns!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Maybe that's why this feature has never been initiated. They're the biggest spray & pray merchants in the game, first favourite candidates for an over-firing penalty if it was introduced. And if there were penalties then yes, the groaning and gnashing of teeth would be heard in outer space.

Raaaaiiiddd would invent a frictionless bullet that would go right round the globe at the speed of a defecating bovine and hit you right between the ears .... ugh!

Pandora's ammo-box I think. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif