PDA

View Full Version : Is it correct that Me-262 rockets don't have a timer? -nt -nt



XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 07:42 AM
nt = No Text

< !-- sig -->
<HR noshade>
Our conviction is like an arrow already in flight.
Your life will only last until it reaches you.
-
The spice extends life, the spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel. Travel without moving.

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 07:42 AM
nt = No Text

< !-- sig -->
<HR noshade>
Our conviction is like an arrow already in flight.
Your life will only last until it reaches you.
-
The spice extends life, the spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel. Travel without moving.

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 07:46 AM
Thats right.

My understanding is that you would fire all the rockets simultaneously from a particualar range, and the rockets would disperse to give a high probability of a direct hit.

So the way they are portrayed in FB, as accurate single shot weapons, is incorrect.


Then on the second day, it was made bug free, and He saw that it was good.

Message Edited on 07/18/0312:47AM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 07:55 AM
- Thats right.
-
- My understanding is that you would fire all the
- rockets simultaneously from a particualar range, and
- the rockets would disperse to give a high
- probability of a direct hit.

Really? In other planes I managed it quite well to let the missilies explode near the bombers, with a 1.5 timer.
But firing all those 24 missiles at once seems to be a waste for me. But if it was used this way... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

< !-- sig -->
<HR noshade>
Our conviction is like an arrow already in flight.
Your life will only last until it reaches you.
-
The spice extends life, the spice expands consciousness. The spice is vital to space travel. Travel without moving.

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 08:04 AM
I stand corrected, the rockets could be fired one by one, but it was suggested that they be fired all at once to be usefull at long range.

"They could be let off 1,100 meters away from the target - and from this range continued until they represented a field of fire of over 30m x 14m. This meant that by releasing all his rockets at once against a close formation of bombers a pilot couldn't miss!" Johannes Steinhoff

But "conventional" fighters like the Fw190 had also stunning success with this weapon; a group of 24 Fw190 killed without losses 40! B-17G during a strong bomber raid in april, 1945.

If 24 FW-190 killed 40 B-17, they must have been able to fire single (or pair) rockets rather than shoot them all at once at one bomber. A 30m dispersion at 1100m wouldn't be great enough to hit 2 bombers (because the wingspan of B-17 or B-24 is more than 30m).



Message Edited on 07/18/0301:25AM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 01:21 PM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- I stand corrected, the rockets could be fired one by
- one, but it was suggested that they be fired all at
- once to be usefull at long range.
-
- "They could be let off 1,100 meters away from the
- target - and from this range continued until they
- represented a field of fire of over 30m x 14m. This
- meant that by releasing all his rockets at once
- against a close formation of bombers a pilot
- couldn't miss!" Johannes Steinhoff
-
- But "conventional" fighters like the Fw190 had also
- stunning success with this weapon; a group of 24
- Fw190 killed without losses 40! B-17G during a
- strong bomber raid in april, 1945.
-
- If 24 FW-190 killed 40 B-17, they must have been
- able to fire single (or pair) rockets rather than
- shoot them all at once at one bomber. A 30m
- dispersion at 1100m wouldn't be great enough to hit
- 2 bombers (because the wingspan of B-17 or B-24 is
- more than 30m).
-
-
-
-
-
- Message Edited on 07/18/03 01:25AM by
- StG77_Fennec



Well this shows that the range of the R4M is strongly undermodeled, right? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


http://www.bmlv.gv.at/images/flagge.gif


http://www.metalforum-austria.net/vbb/attachment.php?s=&postid=15243

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 05:22 PM
I've seen the range listed as high as 1500 m, and there is no way that would work reasonably in FB. The FB R4M have an approximate burn time of 3 seconds, and in that time they travel about 800 m. When the rockets burn out, they drop like rocks. It's impossible to have a range nearly twice the burn distance. One of these is incorrect. Either the burn distance, or the source which lists 1500 m. Or perhaps the physics of the game, not giving it enough momentum? Anyway, if 1500 m is correct, then these R4M rockets aren't.

By the way, can anyone find the weight of the wooden launching rails? I believe there is a significant error in 262's performance with them. From what I've done so far, it's worse than having twin SC 250s!

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 06:29 PM
An interesting site about unguided rockets.

http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomb5.html#m1

Slightly OT, but a site on German rockets. The Germans even had a rocket that could be launched from a U-boat when under water.

http://www.worldwar.nl/secretweapons/secretgerman2.htm

Another site about German rockets

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/Secweap.htm


Speed loss (Me262, Wikingerschiff bomb rack) with

1 SC250 bomb > -40kph(8700rpm), -35kph(8400rpm)
2 SC250 bomb > -75kph(8700rpm), -65kph(8400rpm)
1 SC500 bomb > -55kph(8700rpm), -45kph(8400rpm)

The Wikingerschiff bomb rack reduced speed by -5kph.(altitude 4000m)

Time to 8000m was 14.3 min. With 2 SC250, the time was 20.5 min.


As for the R4M, they were normally fired in 4 salvos of 6 missles at intervals of 0.07 sec from a range of 600m. The R4M had a max. speed of 525m/s(1700f/s).

ref. "Me262" Vol 2

http://www.stenbergaa.com/stenberg/crandall-stormclouds2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 08:46 PM
I flew some tests, and the numbers for the bombs were right on. I'll post the rocket results in a new thread, since it needs attention, and we're really off topic now.

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 09:06 PM
Stecher_3.-JG51 wrote:
-
-
- By the way, can anyone find the weight of the wooden
- launching rails? I believe there is a significant
- error in 262's performance with them. From what
- I've done so far, it's worse than having twin SC
- 250s!
-
-

Totally agree it can take 200+ Kph off top speed, seems same with Beta08 patch too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 04:04 PM
I'm curious to know: in the patch, will the R4M's on the 262 still be fired one at a time, or will they be fired as a salvo?

I/JG54^Lukas
He 162A-2 Cockpit Modeler

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 04:12 PM
test08

they are released in pairs

http://www.jagdgeschwader53.flugzeugwerk.net/diverses/franky.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 07:34 PM
I like test 08.... its fun

and its better... and faster

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:18 PM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- If 24 FW-190 killed 40 B-17, they must have been
- able to fire single (or pair) rockets rather than
- shoot them all at once at one bomber. A 30m
- dispersion at 1100m wouldn't be great enough to hit
- 2 bombers (because the wingspan of B-17 or B-24 is
- more than 30m).

a bomber was easy pray for 190 and 262, they where well armored and their heavy weapons could kill the bomber gunners in seconds. Shooting down a bomber was counted as easy task for LW pilots.

but the bombers flew in formation, any attacker was under fire from xx MGs from many directions. And shooting a bomber "out of formation" (damaging him enough so he has to leave formation) was counted as the most difficult and dangerous task for LW pilots, even more difficult than shooting down enemy fighters.

the target of the rockets was not to destroy bombers. The fighters fired the rockets outside the range of the bomber guns against selected targets, the rockets would damage/destroy the selected bombers so the remaining formation was unable to give effective cover for each other.

The 24 190 (maybe even not all where equiped with rockets) used the rocket "to break up the formation", the rest was "butcher" work.

I shiver thinking at the poor bomber guys.
However the ones their bombs where meant for had luck.
How crazy humans are /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif



quiet_man

second foundation member of the EURO_Snoopy fan club!

I'm quiet_man, but if I post I post quiet much /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:22 PM
forgot to meantion, this was what I read about the rockets use. But it sounds logical.


quiet_man

second foundation member of the EURO_Snoopy fan club!

I'm quiet_man, but if I post I post quiet much /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 06:07 PM
Did you know you can outclimb and outdive the R4M when going vertical with a 262 (90% thrust)? Imho the former happens to soon while the latter is very close to absurd.