PDA

View Full Version : Gun Use Question



e2michaelb
06-23-2005, 03:24 PM
What is the best way to use guns when you have a mix of mg's and cannons? On my X45 stick,I have my trigger set up to fire primary guns; button "A" fires the secondaries or cannons; nothing is programmed to actuate both simultaneously. However, sometimes in the excitement of battle, I forget to trip the cannons when I want all guns firing. Is it better to use all guns at once, or selectively use mg's and cannons separately? I really get screwed up when I fly a Russian fighter where all guns are controlled by the secondary gun switch. Any suggestions out there? Oh yeah, and then there is the P-47, where my setup recognizes only 4-.50's as primary guns, with the other 4 being recognized as secondary guns. I have had instances where I was only firing 4-.50's instead of all 8. Also, when is it advisable to fire only primaries or secondaries?

The_Gorey
06-23-2005, 03:28 PM
if the plane allows you to have seperate triggers... take advantage of it.

use both triggers for shots you are confident on (or when you are close range), and use just one on unsure/luck shots (or when you are farther away).

horseback
06-23-2005, 03:41 PM
If both gun types are set for the same convergence, as with a 7.Xmm MG and cannon type armament, it would be a good idea to use the light machine gunes to make sure you're actually going to hit your target before hitting him with your big guns. Saburo Sakai mentions using this method in his autobiography, and it must have worked for him 50 or 60 plus times. You will always have more LMG ammo than cannon ammo, and the cannon is what knocks 'em down most of the time.

In the cannon or MG only type situation, I'd give some thought to setting my Button 1 assignment to Fire All Guns Simultaneously.

cheers

horseback

jarink
06-23-2005, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by horseback:
If both gun types are set for the same convergence, as with a 7.Xmm MG and cannon type armament, it would be a good idea to use the light machine gunes to make sure you're actually going to hit your target before hitting him with your big guns. Saburo Sakai mentions using this method in his autobiography, and it must have worked for him 50 or 60 plus times. You will always have more LMG ammo than cannon ammo, and the cannon is what knocks 'em down most of the time.

One caveat to that method if that the MGs and cannon will often fly on different ballistic paths (cannons will typically have lower velocity, making them drop faster), making the use of MGs as a spotting gun problematic, especially at longer ranges.

Doug_Thompson
06-23-2005, 04:23 PM
I put cowl or nose-mounted guns at 500m and wing-mounted guns at 200m, regardless of which are the cannon and which are the machine guns.

Yeah, it's a mess sometimes when calculating lead and so forth, but it works for me.

1. I don't turn down head-to-head shots. One of my favorite planes is the LaGG-7. A stream of 20mm going straight from my cowl guns into the other guy's engine can ruin his whole day. Sights set to 500m give me an edge.

German planes have cowl-mounted machine guns and nose-mounted cannons, but limited ammo for the cannon. If I get my hits first, he can't see to shoot me. Too much smoke and engine flame in the way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

2. I fly slower Japanese planes against the American spawn of Pratt and Whitney. Cowl guns sighted long give me a few hits.

I admit that long-range 12.7mm MG hits against a Corsair or a Hellcat do limited damage against those big, tough planes, but they often get the AI pilot's attention. They start evading and the better-manuevering Japanese planes cut corners and catch up until they're close enough to use cannon.

3. Consider the "stream" of the cowl-mounted guns against the "spread" of wing-mounted ones.

Imagine a very big "X", with bullets converging to 200m and spreading out after that. That's the wing-gunned plane. Now imagine a straight line going through the center of the "X." That's the cowl or nose-mounted guns from a plane coming head-on.

Now, the plane with the cowl guns has only a few seconds -- perhaps a fraction of a single second if speeds are high enough -- to get some hits before he flies through the center of the "X" and gets chopped to pieces by converging fire.

Try this stunt with a Ki-43, for instance, and your plane will turn into flaming dust when you hit the converging streams of six .50-cal.

However, I'd imagine there are very few pilots who can keep the smooth aim the need to hit in a head-to-head with wing-mounted guns while MG rounds are slamming into their engine. Even if they keep their nerve, the plane is shuddering from the hits. There's also the fact that the front of the cockpit is just above their engine cowling. A few bullets headed straight for the face can be very distracting.

EnGaurde
06-23-2005, 06:21 PM
I keep triggers separate. In the japanese fighters i always pepper the aircraft with 7.7mm fire due to the large amount of ammo mgs have, then if im lucky enough to get a great shot angle or spot on convergence opportunity ill blip the cannons for sure hits.

Separate triggers give you opportunities, joined do not.


Now, the plane with the cowl guns has only a few seconds -- perhaps a fraction of a single second if speeds are high enough -- to get some hits before he flies through the center of the "X" and gets chopped to pieces by converging fire

Ive often found myself looking between streams of wing gun fire in Zeros or Ki series fighters.

my reaction was something similar to the blond haired brat in The Incredibles when he realises he can run on water? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

if the gunner is clued in on this they often walk the rudder and spray the sky with bullets. That, can get tough to live thru.

But many times ive had corsairs and hellcats and wildcats and thunderbolts and mustangs all get right up close in that zoom, blast away and ill take mebbe 5 or so hits.

its worth remembering, sometimes its better to sit very still rather than run screaming all over the sky.

something like a brawler punching his heart out to the left and right whilst the southpaw nails one right thru the centre?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

EDIT:

found this about wing spread difficulties from another post:


Bill Case
With 8 kills, Case was the third-highest scoring Black Sheep, and he may have been the luckiest. Like most of the experienced pilots who started in August, 1943 he only served with VMF-214 for one tour.
Twenty-two year-old First Lieutenant William N. Case had flown with Greg Boyington earlier in VMF-122. He then served a combat tour with VMF-112 and downed a Zero over Kahili when he was flying with 112. He was one of those pilots who had a sense of invincibility, which he first noticed in a head-on encounter with a Ki-61 Tony. He bore right in, seeing but heedless of the orange and black gunfire he could see coming right at him. Case never wavered, unwittingly playing 'chicken' with the Jap pilot, who pulled up at the last second. Case's first victory as a Black Sheep (his second to-date) came on Sept. 18. He latched onto a Zero that took no evasive action at all, just a long sweeping turn into a cloud. Case was so close, only 50 feet behind, that he could still see his quarry while in the cloud. He fired, but his shots bracketed the Zero, due to the wide 15-foot spread of the Corsair's guns. Finally Case realized the problem and moved the pipper off to one side, allowing three guns on one side to destroy the plane.

seems theres method in the madness?

VW-IceFire
06-23-2005, 06:22 PM
I keep the triggers separate. I never could understand wanting to put them together.

My method for firing varries depending on situation and I'm not sure if I can accurately convey all of my methods here as many are just "instinctual". I actually don't think too much about the combination...I know what I want when I want it.

Goes something like this:
1) If I'm in close range and am almost sure to hit: fire all guns
2) If I'm making a BNZ pass on target: fire all guns
3) If I'm in a close battle but with a high angle deflection thats not guaranteed to hit I'll use only one set of guns: fire machine guns or trigger 1
4) If I want to distract: only one set of guns
5) If I want to find the range to target: one set of guns

It varries. Using the MGs in aircraft like the Zero is an excellent tactic (the Sakai tactic). Also works in the Spitfire Vb. Because if you have such a short ammo time, you want to be sure you're on base. Its not going to guarantee your shot but you know if you're pointing the nose right. Tap the machine guns...check your distance, lead, and effect and then open up with all guns.

spitzfiya
06-23-2005, 09:30 PM
Don't listen to anyone here, Set your trigger to Weapon 1 + 2 and leave it at that.

Seriously your just wasting time, optimum damage, and good shot opurtunities trying to manage each one seperatly. It's to distracting.

Fire in short bursts when you know you can hit and leave it at that.

EnGaurde
06-23-2005, 10:04 PM
Don't listen to anyone here, Set your trigger to Weapon 1 + 2 and leave it at that

to do this, is ignoring the very essence of what you can do with a flight sim, and instead not being able to see past what youre used to from an xbox.

in Zeros particularly, i have used, and still use, mg fire as a "frightener" when the hi speed aircraft start to get away. Some mg rounds into the airframe or over the shoulder almost always force a break, and i can eke back some distance. Ive shot elevators off and cut controls if they dont, and all the while i still have a full quota of cannon shells for when ranges close right down.

and for mg only aircraft, i suppose you could justify using all guns. Or, you could develop your shooting to a point where you dont need all guns to down an aircraft? If i can reasonably expect to shoot a wildcat or p40 out of the sky in a two gunned ki43, then why do you need to employ 6 50s against much less protected aircraft? Why not halve your ammo use, double your shot opportunities?

it is just plain old vanilla ignorance to think that there are no advantages to splitting your guns up.

arcade thinking, ie everything is too complex and therefore lets just ignore all those stupid key bindings, wont get the most out of PF merged.



why learn the wrong way first?

PapaG39
06-24-2005, 02:18 AM
when I used the X45 I had the MG's on the normal trigger & used the "D" button on the throttle for the cannons.
Sometimes when u fly the russian aircraft they only had cannons so this system was easy & fast to use...

idonno
06-24-2005, 02:31 AM
Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Don't listen to anyone here, Set your trigger to Weapon 1 + 2 and leave it at that.

Seriously your just wasting time, optimum damage, and good shot opurtunities trying to manage each one seperatly. It's to distracting.

Fire in short bursts when you know you can hit and leave it at that.


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

han freak solo
06-24-2005, 06:38 AM
Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Don't listen to anyone here, Set your trigger to Weapon 1 + 2 and leave it at that.

Seriously your just wasting time, optimum damage, and good shot opurtunities trying to manage each one seperatly. It's to distracting.

Fire in short bursts when you know you can hit and leave it at that.

I understand what you're saying, spitzfiya. I'm a pretty lousy simmer and I don't get many shots on a target. Sometimes, you have to take 'em out with all you got!

I keep my guns on two buttons, but I typically squeeze 'em together. "Die you gravy sucking pigs!!" --Steve Martin's battle cry

Sturm_Williger
06-24-2005, 07:13 AM
I think that firing both sets of weapons together is a waste of ammo as the cannon drop-off means that 9 / 10 times you are missing with one or the other.

I do fire them both together, but ONLY at ranges of < 100m and ONLY when flying a hub & cowl armed plane ( eg. 109F and later, Yak ). At that range there wont be an appreciable drop off and the convergence is not an issue.

I'm probably going to stop doing this now that 151/20 loadout is fixed and doesn't need "help" from its little buddies. Save that MG ammo for the long spraying session when the cannon is all gone. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Doug_Thompson
06-24-2005, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by EnGaurde:

if the gunner is clued in on this they often walk the rudder and spray the sky with bullets. That, can get tough to live thru.

But many times ive had corsairs and hellcats and wildcats and thunderbolts and mustangs all get right up close in that zoom, blast away and ill take mebbe 5 or so hits.

its worth remembering, sometimes its better to sit very still rather than run screaming all over the sky.

something like a brawler punching his heart out to the left and right whilst the southpaw nails one right thru the centre?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



Exactly. Six or eight .50's send out a stream of lead, but the real danger zone is at about 200m -- even 100m if the guy's a good shot and has his convergence set at short, lethal range.

Somebody should mention that it takes excellent aim, tons of practice and still a fair amount of luck to win a head-to-head. It's not the tactic of choice.

I fell into using head-to-head shots while trying to complete a campaign in a LaGG-3, back in the original Il-2. The only significant advantage the Lacquered Guaranteed Grave had over the Bf 109 was concentration of fire. I used it.

Then opportunities for head-to-head shots kept popping up. I'd be swirling around in a dogfight, see a plane coming toward me and pop him. The practice in the LaGG paid off.

When possible, I use the gunsight view, the maximum zoom view. You don't have to leave it on long. There's little danger of getting surprised while you're "fixated" on the target. A head-to-head pass won't last that long.

Where to aim depends a lot on your plane. LaGG-7's, for instance, drop as you fire. The recoil from those cannons push the nose down.

One thing I've noticed while flying Japanese planes is that 2,000 hp Pratt and Whitney engines are enormous. They look like the broad side of a barn once you're used to shooting at Bf 109's.

There's one other factor to consider -- collisions. They happened all the time whey I first started. I still don't know how to describe avoiding them. My wallpaper on my computer now is a screenshot of me in a LaGG, flying past a Bf 109 that's passing about 10 feet above my canopy, trailing black smoke and metal chunks.

han freak solo
06-24-2005, 10:40 AM
A question about convergence and drop of MG compared to cannon.

In the game, when one sets the convergence of the MG to 300 meters and also sets the cannon to the same 300 meters, doesn't all the ammo fired end up at the same point at 300 meters?

I thought in the game that range and convergence were set together? I'm not taking into account dispersion or energy loss here.

Doug_Thompson
06-24-2005, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
A question about convergence and drop of MG compared to cannon.

In the game, when one sets the convergence of the MG to 300 meters and also sets the cannon to the same 300 meters, doesn't all the ammo fired end up at the same point at 300 meters?

I thought in the game that range and convergence were set together? I'm not taking into account dispersion or energy loss here.

Yeah, that's certainly my understanding.

VW-IceFire
06-24-2005, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
A question about convergence and drop of MG compared to cannon.

In the game, when one sets the convergence of the MG to 300 meters and also sets the cannon to the same 300 meters, doesn't all the ammo fired end up at the same point at 300 meters?

I thought in the game that range and convergence were set together? I'm not taking into account dispersion or energy loss here.
Yes they will all converge at 300m. How exactly they get there and in what capacity is different.

Muzzle velocity, dispersion, and all that factor in.

Abbuzze
06-24-2005, 02:55 PM
Yes,keep them separate, and if you want to learn how to shot take a 109 with 20mm nosecannon and just fire with it!
The MG´s in the 109 are not that good, and also real pilots say that they don´t used them.
But if you fire this single cannon you have somthing like a digital aiming, you hit - or you don´t hit! So you have a REAL good feedback about your aiming, most people with 0.50 troubles see some small parts flying away, but they don´t realise that this were just some lonely two or three bullets hitting the enemy- so they start to whine... :/

learn firing with the 20mm and ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

strewth
06-24-2005, 04:07 PM
I have a Saitek X52 and with a dual pressure trigger, I have MG on the initial pressure while squeezing a bit harder brings in the cannons as well as MG's.

I also have a seperate button for cannon only if req'd.

e2michaelb
06-24-2005, 06:11 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 han freak solo:
A question about convergence and drop of MG compared to cannon.

In the game, when one sets the convergence of the MG to 300 meters and also sets the cannon to the same 300 meters, doesn't all the ammo fired end up at the same point at 300 meters?

I thought in the game that range and convergence were set together? I'm not taking into account dispersion or energy loss here.
Yes they will all converge at 300m. How exactly they get there and in what capacity is different.

Muzzle velocity, dispersion, and all that factor in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would think that bullets of like weight and muzzle velocity would converge at the desired range and at the same point. MG bullets and cannon bullets fired simultaneously would not necessarily converge on the same point unless the target was really close. As distance traveled increases wouldn't the heavier bullets drop more on the way to the target? In order to arrive at the same point, guns would have to be adjustable in the vertical as well as the horizontal to compensate for different trajectories - not so? Of course, nose-mounted guns just may be vertically adjustable.

han freak solo
06-24-2005, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by e2michaelb:
As distance traveled increases wouldn't the heavier bullets drop more on the way to the target? In order to arrive at the same point, guns would have to be adjustable in the vertical as well as the horizontal to compensate for different trajectories - not so? Of course, nose-mounted guns just may be vertically adjustable.

That's exactly what I was meaning. The vertical adjustment would compensate for the different trajectories. I don't know how it was IRL, but it could work like this:

Prop hub gun = limited adjustability, gunsite adjusted to the gun.
Nose cowl guns = adjusted to meet the same point as the prop hub gun.
Wing guns = adjusted to meet the same point as the other guns.

This is a simple minded approach. Again, I'm only writing about the game convergence settings, not real life warbirds.

e2michaelb
06-25-2005, 04:16 PM
I think that if "Realistic Gunnery" is unchecked, a mix of guns can be set to converge at the same point (in game). If it is checked, then trajectories will be individually affected by weight, muzzle velocity and wind effects. I infer this from the fact that the game instructions describe the unchecking process as resulting in all bullets travelling in a straight line.

han freak solo
06-25-2005, 11:46 PM
Originally posted by e2michaelb:
If it is checked, then trajectories will be individually affected by weight, muzzle velocity and wind effects.

This should be true. But, to get all the weapons to hit a particular range and convergence in "realistic gunnery", I would think that the game would more or less model the real life approach of sighting in guns.

Without looking up ballistic info on these guns they may have trajectories like this for a mythical plane with a convergence set at 300 meters.....

Trajectories at 100m 200m 300m 400m 500m, bullet path in inches above or below gunsight aim point.

.50 BMG +0.5" +1.5" 0.0" -17.0" -45.0"

20mm Cannon +2.0" +5.0" 0.0" -25.0" -68.0"

37mm Cannon +2.5" +6.0" 0.0" -38.0" -82.0"

This is just made up info to illustrate the point that trajectories are different and would take different paths to reach the same point of aim. If the game follows this reality, then "realistic gunnery" could acheive the same thing as far as setting up convergences at the same range.

Again, I'm not including dispersion. This is dispersion explained simply.

"Variations in loads (propellant charge weights and bullet masses) cause different times-of-flight from primer ignition to the point in time when the bullet leaves the muzzle. These variations cause the bullet to impact in different locations around the point of aim. The size of the bullet dispersion is called group size." --http://www.vni.com/successes/threerivers.html

e2michaelb
06-27-2005, 09:08 PM
han freak solo:

The validity of your point hinges on whether nose mounted and/or wing mounted guns can be adjusted in the vertical as well as the horizontal - IRL, that is. I don't know if that was possible or not.
Was it?

han freak solo
06-27-2005, 09:51 PM
That I do not know. I would assume so.

Otherwise, it would be a real difficult situation in sizing up a target in your gunsight if your weapons aimed at different ranges but your gunsight only represented one range.

han freak solo
06-27-2005, 09:58 PM
Okay, here is one source that may shed light on convergence. On this P-38 chart, it appears that if the specs on the chart are achieved, the guns find the same point at about 350yds to 400yds. Of course, it doesn't show wing guns or represent a cannon firing through a propeller hub.

http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_031i.html

Here's the whole article, etc.

http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_031a.html

It may not apply to all aircraft types, though.

han freak solo
06-28-2005, 09:21 AM
Back to the original question of having the guns on two different buttons.

I admit that I squeeze both buttons when firing at a target in my sights. I'm not an Ace and this is what I have to do in that fleeting moment when a target is in my gunsight.

After just flyin' a mission in a Bf-109G6, I realized why I do use the separate triggers. I use the machine guns at extreme range when firing tracers over a bandit on the 6 of a friendly to make 'em break away. Comes in handy! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

MADP
06-28-2005, 09:56 AM
I fire all guns with one trigger. I don't touch the trigger unless I know I'm going to clobber the guy. I never shoot past 200m and prefer to be under 100m. If he's filling your windscreen it's kinda hard to miss...

If you read the memiors of the aces of WW I and II, they all say don't fire until you know you can't miss.

han freak solo
06-28-2005, 01:35 PM
Man, this stuff is hard to find.

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

P-51 boresighting chart
http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-51/P-51BSD.gif

P-51 sight alignment chart
http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-51/P-51SIGHTALIGNMENT.gif

EnGaurde
06-28-2005, 03:20 PM
As distance traveled increases wouldn't the heavier bullets drop more on the way to the target?

nope.

in a vacuum all objects fall at the same rate, 9.8ms/s regardless of mass.

given the same trajectory, the falling sooner would, or might, come from a slower velocity therefore less distance travelled out for the same period of time.

if the cannon shells are fired in the same axis as the mg bullets, and all things being equal, then the drop is due to lower muzzle velocity not shell weight. In other words the cannon shells and mg bullets drop at exactly the same rate, should the flight path be equal. One simply makes it further in the given amount of time than the other, hence the perception of earlier drop. I guess in a way it did drop earlier, but that drop had nothign to do with weight.

the same would apply in reverse if the mg bullets were slower / less stable than the cannon.

you shoot cannon higher, as they are slower than mg bullets, and therefore need more time to get to the target, and thus give the illusion of descending before the faster mg fire.

but if you had ballistically matched cannon and mg..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



it would be right to say:


As distance traveled increases wouldn't the slower bullets drop more on the way to the target, due to not getting as far in the same time as the mg shots?

F_vonIzabelin
06-28-2005, 03:50 PM
I calibrate everything at 120m, Fire 1 shoots the whole weaponary, fire 2, only the mg's for pot shots, and fire 3 only cannon, if I am attacking let's say tanks, were mg ammo is useless.
I usally get to those 100m behind him, and open fire with everything.
Mg only is used in attacking bombers, I open up with the mg from a bit longer range, setting the aimpoint, then as I get closer, I pump everything in.

EPP_Gibbs
06-28-2005, 06:31 PM
Only shoot when you're going to hit. That means close. On wing armed planes like the Spit I set the Mg's to 250m and the cannons to 150m. That was I can use the Mg's as frighteners to force a break from a distant enemy, then wait till he's looming large before ripping him up with shells converging on his now very nearby airframe.