PDA

View Full Version : 50-cal BB guns



Blindman-
07-09-2009, 06:21 PM
I was watching Dogfights the series on the History channel the other night and saw 2 Hellcats sink a Destroyer Escort and then turn around and shoot down 5 Rufes between them before returning to their carrier (without mentioning being out of ammo). In this game others and myself have dumped an entire load (6 guns at 300 rounds per gun) of 50-cals into a FW 190 (also has happened on Raidens, and Franks as well as others) without a kill. While I expect that 1/2 - 3/4 of them missed it still seems that even 1/10 of 1800 rounds should have done the job. I know that Iím taking my info from a bunch of old guys, but all the American pilot interviews that I have seen have described their armament as more than deadly (paraphrasing of course) and more than enough to down 3-5 German or Japanese planes.

While I admit that I am saying this mainly to complain, I would also like to hear the other side of the story if there is one.

danjama
07-09-2009, 06:22 PM
Here we go again. Just look at the last few pages, theres a good 10+ pager for you...

M_Gunz
07-09-2009, 06:27 PM
At least he picked the right name for himself!

Now let's see here, what's the difference between two hot pilots IRL and a virtual gamer besides IRL and the game?
Damn, I'm just stumpified!

WTE_Galway
07-09-2009, 06:28 PM
Maybe some day someone will do a mod for "proper" 0.50 cal where you do not need to aim and merely pulling the trigger will cause all enemy planes within 500 meters to disintegrate and destroy Tiger tanks by bouncing shots down the main gun barrel.

But till then, as Danjama, says the most recent huge thread on the topic is only about a week old.

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Here we go again. Just look at the last few pages, theres a good 10+ pager for you...

I asked for the other side of the story, not condemnation. If you would care to post a link I promise I will go read it.

BTW, just for my own curiosity if you can only post an oppinion I would like to know what planes do you fly "in-game".

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
At least he picked the right name for himself!

Now let's see here, what's the difference between two hot pilots IRL and a virtual gamer besides IRL and the game?
Damn, I'm just stumpified!

Has our friendly community degraded to this? If so then perhaps I need to move on. : (

Ba5tard5word
07-09-2009, 06:45 PM
.50 cals are like applying giant scissors to an enemy plane if you're at 250m or closer in.

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Here we go again. Just look at the last few pages, theres a good 10+ pager for you...

AS M-Gunz stated, my name is accurate, so can you tell me which of these threads are you refering too?



The most overated aircraft? SILVERFISH1992 14 177 Thu July 09 2009 17:35
by SILVERFISH1992 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/1411060465would (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1411060465http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1411060465would) you like negative time compression for bob? Page 1 2 3 raaaid 42 819 Thu July 09 2009 17:24
by M_Gunz http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/6671032967Check (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6671032967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6671032967Check) out my new campaign set: "The Pirate Menace" Ba5tard5word 18 479 Thu July 09 2009 17:02
by UnknownStranger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/7211038077Anybody (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7211038077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7211038077Anybody) ever have this happen? Fokker_Fodder 7 436 Thu July 09 2009 17:02
by Blindman- http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...981061177Offliners.. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9981061177http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9981061177Offliners..). MODS + DCG = new game experience DKoor 15 386 Thu July 09 2009 16:57
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/9071040867Uber (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9071040867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9071040867Uber) planes Page 1 2 3 BillSwagger 44 1456 Thu July 09 2009 16:27
by Waldo.Pepper http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/1531083177The (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1531083177http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1531083177The) YAK is awsome AllorNothing117 15 223 Thu July 09 2009 16:21
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/8511077767WWII (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8511077767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8511077767WWII) QUIZ, air war related - PART SIX Page 1 2 ... 9 10 blairgowrie 181 3913 Thu July 09 2009 15:16
by Rock_Kettler http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/8921024177soon (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8921024177http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8921024177soon) New il2 movie The fall of Luftwaffe Budau Isidor ysydor201988 0 24 Thu July 09 2009 14:59
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../9171011757UberDemon (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9171011757http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9171011757UberDemon) Web Site? woofiedog 10 1136 Thu July 09 2009 14:32
by Bearcat99 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/5001051177Level (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5001051177http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5001051177Level) Bombing in OTHER Flight Sims? ytareh 9 289 Thu July 09 2009 13:55
by staticline1 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/5401052827Duxford (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5401052827http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5401052827Duxford) Flying Legends Page 1 2 3 general_kalle 45 3732 Thu July 09 2009 13:49
by trumper http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/9821006667For (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9821006667http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9821006667For) Good Pilots Page 1 2 ... 4 5 Scolar 86 3011 Thu July 09 2009 13:48
by ROXunreal http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/5121052967You (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5121052967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5121052967You) know you play IL-2 too much when... Page 1 2 3 4 bopop4 68 2367 Thu July 09 2009 13:09
by Friendly_flyer http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/4301028077Great (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4301028077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4301028077Great) combat footage RepublicofTexas 8 419 Thu July 09 2009 12:56
by Friendly_flyer http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/8361082177Online (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8361082177http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8361082177Online) Vids: Midway, P-47s Attack, Bazookas & B-58s On the Deck zeno303 2 78 Thu July 09 2009 08:59
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/7511058967Newbie (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7511058967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7511058967Newbie) says hi with Online troubles Page 1 2 3 bailout99 47 1022 Thu July 09 2009 06:31
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...871048077Right-Drift (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7871048077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7871048077Right-Drift) Tendency Avivion 15 393 Thu July 09 2009 06:13
by M_Gunz http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/8011017077Slovak (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8011017077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8011017077Slovak) national uprising campaign? Metatron_123 1 115 Wed July 08 2009 17:46
by WTE_Galway http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../1291095867Lancaster (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1291095867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1291095867Lancaster) gizmo60 16 834 Wed July 08 2009 14:13
by Mr_Zooly http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/1771036077Figther (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1771036077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1771036077Figther) combat tactics in the Battle of Britain Page 1 2 Wildnoob 38 989 Wed July 08 2009 11:18
by Wildnoob http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/5941009077Book (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5941009077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5941009077Book) presentation at Duxford Flying Legends 2009 Thijs_L 1 149 Wed July 08 2009 05:41
by CUJO_1970 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/7161062077tactics (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7161062077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7161062077tactics) for unarmed 190 d9 raaaid 11 556 Wed July 08 2009 05:38
by Sturmtrooper http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/6371037767Why (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6371037767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6371037767Why) Russian fighters got such a bad reputation Page 1 2 3 Freiwillige 48 2327 Wed July 08 2009 05:14
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...110283/m/4631084077A (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4631084077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4631084077A) question about gunsights, in-game and in real life. Woke_Up_Dead 6 379 Wed July 08 2009 03:46
by STENKA_69.GIAP http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../8821078077Duplicate (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8821078077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8821078077Duplicate) Bf-109 grip... potver 2 249 Wed July 08 2009 02:41
by potver http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/4081048077Target (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4081048077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4081048077Target)'s Distance Unit of Measure Avivion 1 140 Tue July 07 2009 23:41
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...2821063077Mudmovers! (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2821063077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2821063077Mudmovers!) info on '46 IL-2, IL-10 tips, info? Saburo_0 17 397 Tue July 07 2009 21:38
by JtD http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/6451072077Planes (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6451072077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6451072077Planes) their pilots hated Page 1 2 ROXunreal 37 1309 Tue July 07 2009 20:24
by horseback http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/7481021077Il-2 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7481021077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7481021077Il-2) Sturmovik guide/tips? Saburo_0 5 297 Tue July 07 2009 19:20
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/5951097077P-40 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5951097077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5951097077P-40) Training video. Jimston2008 2 132 Tue July 07 2009 18:46
by Jimston2008 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/6181080077Youtube (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6181080077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6181080077Youtube) USAAC training videos Freiwillige 1 163 Tue July 07 2009 17:06
by Jimston2008 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/1761037767Mustang (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1761037767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1761037767Mustang) blues Page 1 2 3 4 Freiwillige 66 2322 Tue July 07 2009 15:39
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/9761066967Warbird (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9761066967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9761066967Warbird) desktops ROXunreal 11 467 Tue July 07 2009 14:59
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/3421051077Storm (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3421051077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3421051077Storm) of War Status?? bobbrunn 6 491 Tue July 07 2009 09:34
by Daiichidoku http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/8861060077Whats (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8861060077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8861060077Whats) the p-11, P-39, p-63, p-80 like? AllorNothing117 17 495 Tue July 07 2009 03:55
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...10283/m/3441084077FM (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3441084077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3441084077FM) changes between 4.07, 4.08, 4.09? Woke_Up_Dead 5 317 Tue July 07 2009 00:02
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/9591010077Need (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9591010077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9591010077Need) help finding a P-39 campagn. Freiwillige 17 324 Mon July 06 2009 20:34
by Freiwillige http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/3191086667P-39D1, (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3191086667http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3191086667P-39D1,) D2, N1, Q1, Q10, P400 Jimston2008 18 936 Mon July 06 2009 17:48
by berg417448 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/3361074077How (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3361074077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3361074077How) do I get rid of Boonty Box? crdreamcat 3 186 Mon July 06 2009 17:41
by danjama http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/3041060344IL2 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3041060344http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3041060344IL2) Ultimate Edition download Mirtma 10 1005 Mon July 06 2009 16:39
by danjama http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/6031064077windows (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6031064077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6031064077windows) media player files BillSwagger 2 89 Mon July 06 2009 16:30
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/1051070077Teaser.. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1051070077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1051070077Teaser..). ClearDarkzz 10 471 Mon July 06 2009 15:53
by danjama
Tips to fly the p51! Page 1 2 ... 5 6 GH_Klingstroem 115 14652 Mon July 06 2009 15:11
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/8241004967The (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8241004967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8241004967The) best online fighter pilots are from.... Page 1 2 danjama 38 1616 Mon July 06 2009 14:11
by Bremspropeller http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/4471023077Amazing (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4471023077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4471023077Amazing) Discovery About Track IR ? ytareh 9 369 Mon July 06 2009 13:56
by Urufu_Shinjiro http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/7931047967Knights (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7931047967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7931047967Knights) of the Sky.... Page 1 2 Bearcat99 24 965 Mon July 06 2009 13:19
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/6591077457West (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6591077457http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6591077457West) Coast Invitational PaulWF 13 826 Mon July 06 2009 08:26
by saipan1972 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/5431023667Horten (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5431023667http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5431023667Horten) 229 V3 Page 1 2 ... 5 6 Uppiski 104 3843 Mon July 06 2009 07:19
by Bremspropeller http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/4801038967Your (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4801038967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4801038967Your) desktops this month? Part 2 blairgowrie 10 421 Mon July 06 2009 05:13
by steiner562 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/2941057967DUEL: (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2941057967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2941057967DUEL:) Bf-109 vs P-38 Page 1 2 DKoor 30 1123 Mon July 06 2009 03:12
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3351061077Hyperlobby (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3351061077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3351061077Hyperlobby) Access clubracer993 1 148 Sun July 05 2009 23:03
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/5751020867What (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5751020867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5751020867What) was the deal with the J2M? Page 1 2 Ba5tard5word 37 1656 Sun July 05 2009 21:59
by WTE_Galway http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/7551011867Logitech (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7551011867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7551011867Logitech) G940 review from a '46 simmer... Bearcat99 13 741 Sun July 05 2009 17:16
by Saburo_0 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/3941021077Gotta (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3941021077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3941021077Gotta) love the sea gladiator part 2 stugumby 0 112 Sun July 05 2009 15:54
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/3331010077Site (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3331010077http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3331010077Site) Listing All Planes 'Crashes' in Ireland WW2 ytareh 5 200 Sun July 05 2009 15:08
by ytareh http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/3801088947Now (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3801088947http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3801088947Now) typing "pacific-fighters.com" takes me to UBI.com Choctaw111 15 1164 Sun July 05 2009 10:40
by wheelsup_cavu http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/6701078967Icefires (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6701078967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6701078967Icefires) missions Muddy17 2 206 Sun July 05 2009 07:42
by VW-IceFire http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/2341089637Saturday (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2601013236/m/2341089637http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2601013236/m/2341089637Saturday) Coops with UBI Zoo Page 1 2 ... 7 8 blairgowrie 158 13695 Sun July 05 2009 04:01
by blairgowrie http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/4521082967IL2 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4521082967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4521082967IL2) Server commands EoW_Maverick 2 258 Sun July 05 2009 00:32
by EoW_Maverick http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/9101017967Things (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9101017967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9101017967Things) that go POP on an Il-2 ROXunreal 15 516 Sat July 04 2009 23:23
by M_Gunz http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../1781008967Something (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1781008967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1781008967Something) to think about Bremspropeller 3 255 Sat July 04 2009 19:02
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/9851057567TCL-Team (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9851057567http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9851057567TCL-Team) Combat League TCL-Bearitall 3 277 Sat July 04 2009 18:35
by TCL-Bearitall http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/4521048967{VIDEO} (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4521048967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4521048967%7BVIDEO%7D) destructivness of the 20mm Freiwillige 1 244 Sat July 04 2009 17:43
by ROXunreal http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/6831054967Hawker (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6831054967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6831054967Hawker) Typhoon in Action Gammelpreusse 6 405 Sat July 04 2009 17:21
by BillyTheKid_22 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/8321012262Your (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8321012262http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8321012262Your) desktops this month? Page 1 2 ... 15 16 F0_Dark_P 315 20186 Sat July 04 2009 16:33
by blairgowrie http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/4361051967The (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4361051967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4361051967The) Pony's fuel tanks question. Page 1 2 Freiwillige 22 697 Sat July 04 2009 12:37
by horseback http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/2581080467SHOW (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2581080467http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2581080467SHOW) N TELL! Pics of your HOTAS/Rudder pedal setup? Page 1 2 3 Superjew1 43 3149 Sat July 04 2009 05:55
by JG52Uther http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/4361005967Angels (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4361005967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4361005967Angels) and Airspeed - P-40 in combat PDF PaulWF 8 323 Sat July 04 2009 02:21
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...83/m/7561023737While (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7561023737http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7561023737While) we're waiting for BoB SoW: WWII BBC RAF Broadcasts. Updated 4 7 09. Page 1 2 RedToo 32 3959 Sat July 04 2009 01:22
by RedToo http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/7641078867Need (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7641078867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7641078867Need) help finding particular plane. roadkill0000 19 598 Sat July 04 2009 00:43
by Trefle http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/1801082967Take (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1801082967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1801082967Take) off in multi engine aircraft Klussdog 11 462 Fri July 03 2009 23:47
by Kettenhunde http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...110283/m/8671002967I (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8671002967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8671002967I)'m back! Here's a quick question. AllorNothing117 19 497 Fri July 03 2009 23:02
by Tully__ http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...5581045967Collection (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5581045967http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5581045967Collection) of FW-189 shots 1943 mandrill7 2 208 Fri July 03 2009 19:18
by Choctaw111 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/1861056917Red (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1861056917http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1861056917Red) Terror Campaign [WIP] Screenshots Page 1 2 3 4 CUJO_1970 63 4646 Fri July 03 2009 16:49
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/1231048567RAF (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1231048567http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1231048567RAF) medals help DKoor 10 536 Fri July 03 2009 13:33
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/1531062867Yaw (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1531062867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1531062867Yaw) settings J_Weaver 11 383 Fri July 03 2009 11:14
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...10283/m/2091056867to (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2091056867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2091056867to) my fellow Canucks jensenpark 11 490 Thu July 02 2009 18:41
by DrHerb http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/66810866677.62mm (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6681086667http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/66810866677.62mm) vs 12.7mm Balistics Page 1 2 Jimston2008 26 1424 Thu July 02 2009 15:56
by Choctaw111 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/7861046767Rote (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7861046767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7861046767Rote) 7 at Airpower09 Steiemark, Zeltweg Manu-6S 9 537 Thu July 02 2009 15:45
by Redwulf 32 - Nis http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...451036867Controlling (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4451036867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4451036867Controlling) Trim funkster319 10 455 Thu July 02 2009 13:30
by DuckyFluff http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...10283/m/8671005867Is (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8671005867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8671005867Is) there a way to disable muse view in game? Odie1974 6 360 Thu July 02 2009 12:47
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...10283/m/1171038867My (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1171038867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1171038867My) Favourite Warbird In The Metal! ytareh 10 552 Thu July 02 2009 09:57
by Bremspropeller http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/9991048767The (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9991048767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9991048767The) most hillarious IL-2 movies of all times! "Kamikaze n00bs" and "Kamikaze" Page 1 2 rnzoli 23 1613 Thu July 02 2009 05:45
by KG26_Alpha http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru.../m/2201067867Burning (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2201067867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2201067867Burning) Streak campaign trouble - Running out of fuel 3rd mission. Jimston2008 7 329 Thu July 02 2009 04:42
by Feathered_IV http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/5741078867Imperial (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5741078867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5741078867Imperial) Japanese Navy carrier Akagi pre-Pearl Harbor scenes Wildnoob 3 368 Thu July 02 2009 03:23
by steiner562 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...m/7111048867Mosquito (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7111048867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7111048867Mosquito) question....Operation ______? nickdanger3 3 388 Thu July 02 2009 01:45
by KG26_Alpha http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/2511067867Are (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2511067867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/2511067867Are) Dynamic Campaigns worth playing? Jimston2008 9 426 Wed July 01 2009 23:19
by DKoor http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/7961038767How (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7961038767http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7961038767How) far off are the press in regard to SOW doogerie 8 621 Wed July 01 2009 23:00
by Chivas http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3/m/5101084867Saitek (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5101084867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5101084867Saitek) X65 - New HOTAS? Sokol__1 10 1863 Wed July 01 2009 20:32
by Bearcat99 http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/3811006867The (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3811006867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3811006867The) fall of Luftwaffe ysydor201988 10 660 Wed July 01 2009 15:53
by BillSwagger http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...283/m/1391005867RAAF (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1391005867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1391005867RAAF) Sabre WTE_Ibis 3 297 Wed July 01 2009 15:38
by WTE_Galway http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...0283/m/3901001867New (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3901001867http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3901001867New) Server idea BillSwagger 19 450 Wed July 01 2009 12:21
by Aviar

Scolar
07-09-2009, 06:48 PM
I wouldn't use the program Dogfights as a basis for historical accuracy if my only other option was a pile of turd on a stick!

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by Scolar:
I wouldn't use the program Dogfights as a basis for historical accuracy if my only other option was a pile of turd on a stick!

And what sources do you consider reliable Scolar?

I would like to think that the History and Military channels (and the old guys at the VA) would be a little more reliable than a turd on a stick.

danjama
07-09-2009, 07:04 PM
Happy? (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6691098257)

25 pages for you, is that enough?

Now can we lock this?

I fly all planes, from B25, to IAR, to RWD, to FW190, and you guessed it, P51/P47/Hellcat...

There's also several topics on why the history channel dogfights are not reliable sources...

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 07:07 PM
On the military channel a few months ago they showed a 50-cal put a 5-second burst into a car. This is the closest I have come to personal experience and it tells me that a 50-cal will tear up a vehicle made of iron and sheet metal. I have extracted from this that the damage to aluminum and tubular steel would be extensive and that 4-6 of these guns acting together could tear up any plane in short time.

Perhaps those of you that argue that the 50-cal topic is invalid think they were using trick photography.

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Happy? (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/6691098257)

25 pages for you, is that enough?

Now can we lock this?

I fly all planes, from B25, to IAR, to RWD, to FW190, and you guessed it, P51/P47/Hellcat...

There's also several topics on why the history channel dogfights are not reliable sources...

Thanks for the link. I wasn't researching threads back to April.

Please do not be so rude as to lock this.


*off to read 25 pages of what I hope is more information than opinion*

danjama
07-09-2009, 07:13 PM
Well as you can see it started in april and ended May 25, only a month and a half ago...it was on page 6.

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 07:26 PM
Damn danjama, when you said 25 pages you weren't kidding!

I am still on the first page and am very impressed and very pleased with some of the posts.

If this is such a common topic I request that said post be made sticky. If you do then I will retract my request to keep this thread open.

danjama
07-09-2009, 07:30 PM
I can't lock it, i'm not a moderator.

Trefle
07-09-2009, 07:35 PM
Blindman , i agree with you that 0.50cal lacks effectiveness ingame mainly because of incorrect ammo load-out and aircraft DM simplified .

Although i advise you to set convergence to 130-160 meters and you will notice better efficiency (i use 130-140 ) , ingame 0.50 cal still works well against Japanese planes for instance

But , there is a MOD being worked on by the Il-2community that will add new versions and more realistic P-51 Mustang with the correct ammo load-out for .50cal (with APIT) , cause as it stands currently , .303 is more efficient at setting planes on fire .

ImMoreBetter
07-09-2009, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by Blindman-:
On the military channel a few months ago they showed a 50-cal put a 5-second burst into a car. This is the closest I have come to personal experience and it tells me that a 50-cal will tear up a vehicle made of iron and sheet metal. I have extracted from this that the damage to aluminum and tubular steel would be extensive and that 4-6 of these guns acting together could tear up any plane in short time.

Perhaps those of you that argue that the 50-cal topic is invalid think they were using trick photography.

This is true.

But if you filled the car with 20mm... I would bet you it would look even worse. I don't think anyone can deny that the .50 is powerful, but keep in mind that the standards of firepower between combat on the ground and combat in the air are different.

There are two major reasons why the .50 in the sim does not live up to real life expectations.

You can shoot a car with a .50 until the door disintegrate, but if you don't hit the engine/fuel tank/other vital part, the car is not dead. Same with an airplane, and also the same with the supposed weakness of the .50s in game. .50 caliber bullets do not explode things apart, it must directly hit parts to take them out. There simply are not enough of those parts modeled into the game to hit. You are hitting mostly empty space. Keep in mind that this is an aging game.

Second is the ammo belting on the .50 in game is not correct. The incendiary effect of the .50 cal was the most damaging aspect in real life, which would set fire to the fuel tanks. The incendiaries in-game are extremely lacking.


Also, even the .50s in game can be quite deadly, you just have to use them correctly. Like I said before, a .50 bullet does not explode the target like a 20mm shell does. Because of this, cannons do more structural damage. This means a hit virtually anywhere does damage. If you want to be successful with the in-game .50s you must aim very precisely with them.

Convergence is another BIG factor. If you want to do damage with a piercing round, you need to get as many hits as you possibly can. If you are not at convergence, you are not shooting at that potential. Real life pilots mention convergence a lot, there is a reason for this.


There you go, that is the TLDR version of all the .50 cal threads I ever bothered to read.

Trefle
07-09-2009, 07:50 PM
Good post ImMoreBetter , spot on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WW2 planes were basically like flying fuel tanks with complex network of tubes , wires , pipes ,fabric etc.. , they were very vulnerable to 12.7mm high velocity inciendiary bursts etc..

In game , all this is simplified with " target boxes" on the aircraft , so it's understandable that it's harder to make damage with them in the sim as you have to fill those "target boxes" with bullets if you want to register decent damage , which means ImMoreBetter is correct to say one has to be more accurate . Then there is the issue of ammo types but hopefully , with Mods this will be overcome

Loco-S
07-09-2009, 07:57 PM
You can't compare a computer simulation played in the comfort of your living room, ( even tough its the best we have given the technical limitations of not having stereoscopic, peripheral and depth perception visibility on a two dimensional monitor), also, you dont have the perceptions of hand/ aircraft "feel", you can not react as fast as you would do in a real airplane, the sim is not calibrated in "real" terms, the damage modeling is good, but not real, as far as I know, aluminum shear/rivet deformation, structural stress, structure deformation, reduction of strength due to metal annealing due to fire, shrapnel, collateral (ricochet)damage due to bullets "bouncing" inside the structures,damage to minor but important elements of airframe/ engine, etc has not been modeled, or is very simplified to specified "areas" in the code, in the game you can get away with things that will kill you very fast and in a very gruesome way in real life, just try a "fast landing" in game, where you take the whole runway and then the field, most of the times you can walk away, in real life it means for someone else having to call your relatives to collect whats left of you, in game you can't sneak to 5, or 500 feet and open fire, like in real life,you are in your living room, with your joystick and rudder which have no "feel/connection" with the rest of the plane, . you can not "taste" the engine sounds/attitude/fuselage noises/smells/feeling of "G's" or lack of them, you are basically watching a fast movie with no clue other than a couple of speakers and a monitor which has a de facto "tunnel vision" included.

just try this, if you live in the US, go to any flight school and take an "introductory flight" ( they are cheap, maybe 50 bucks for half an hour "hop"), and you will see that the whole thing is diametrally opposed to anything you believe you can do in IL2.

those guys in the film you saw, had more flight training/ tactical training/ and recklessness ( due to having to fight or die) in their bag than most of any civilian pilot you will ever know

Bearcat99
07-09-2009, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by ImMoreBetter:
This is true.

There are two major reasons why the .50 in the sim does not live up to real life expectations.

You can shoot a car with a .50 until the door disintegrate, but if you don't hit the engine/fuel tank/other vital part, the car is not dead. Same with an airplane, and also the same with the supposed weakness of the .50s in game. .50 caliber bullets do not explode things apart, it must directly hit parts to take them out. There simply are not enough of those parts modeled into the game to hit. You are hitting mostly empty space. Keep in mind that this is an aging game.

Second is the ammo belting on the .50 in game is not correct. The incendiary effect of the .50 cal was the most damaging aspect in real life, which would set fire to the fuel tanks. The incendiaries in-game are extremely lacking.


Also, even the .50s in game can be quite deadly, you just have to use them correctly. Like I said before, a .50 bullet does not explode the target like a 20mm shell does. Because of this, cannons do more structural damage. This means a hit virtually anywhere does damage. If you want to be successful with the in-game .50s you must aim very precisely with them.

Convergence is another BIG factor. If you want to do damage with a piercing round, you need to get as many hits as you possibly can. If you are not at convergence, you are not shooting at that potential. Real life pilots mention convergence a lot, there is a reason for this.

There you go, that is the TLDR version of all the .50 cal threads I ever bothered to read.

I agree with this 100%. Not only that there are several other factors and they are all related..

1-How many of those bullets are actually hitting?
Just because it looks like you are dumping a load into a plane doesn't mean you are...


2-The aircraft you are flying.
Try this.... go up in a P-40... late model with 6 50s... and take on a target or two preferably an inferior one for testing's sake. See how much damage you do. Next take up a P-51D in the exact same QM. I can pretty much guarantee that you will do more with the P-40. Why? Because it is a much more stable gun platform in this sim than the P-51D. The P-51 B,C & MkIII are also more stable. This touches on the precision thing that IMB is referring to. Bullets that do not hit thier target might as well be bbs for all the damage they will do.

3-Stick settings.
This actually touches on the above point.. but if your plane is flopping around like it is on the head of a pin... your shots will be far less accurate.

4- Online or offline.
Online marksmanship is determined by other factors like the your connection, the connection of your host, the connection of your target. IMO online testing is not as fully valid when assessing the modelling of any weapon in this sim. Offline you will find you do much better. IU suggest you dl either Sturmolog (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=353) or MLR (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=357) to get a better assessment of just how many bullets are actually hitting before you coe to any conclusive opinions about the 50s...


For those of you who had nothing but snide comments to add to this thread... you need to either back up & regroup, or stay out of the thread. If all you want to do is stir up the pot please do it elsewhere. Yeah.. I know... these threads come up... and does get old... but everyone is entitled to not only their opinion but the right to express that opinion without being treated like some kind of putz. While I am sure that there are many "kids" around here... please keep in mind that we are a very diverse group of people here.. we have parents,grandparents,veterans, doctors,lawyers,technicians,college professors,policemen, welders and all other kinds of folks here.. but more than 2/3 of this community is over 30.... so if you wouldn't want someone speaking to you like you are some kind of snot nosed punk with a chip on their shoulder and an uninformed opinion, then don't treat others here that way. If you cant come correct then please.. don't come at all. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

I see no need to lock this thread.. we can just let it die.... if that is to be it's fate.

BillSwagger
07-09-2009, 08:42 PM
Dogfights is a good show, but its still a TV program, so its difficult to take what they say beyond face value.
Unlike cannons, with machine guns you have to focus your shots on the engine or cockpit for an immediate kill, as hitting wings or the tail might make for a longer chase.
I used to think the 50s were weak until i started aiming more for the front of the plane rather than the tail. Also hitting at convergence is going to improve your odds.

With that said, there are still planes like the FW that will absorb 50s like they are BBs, to the point of absurdity. Over half my ammo load has been spent on various FW encounters with a 12 -14% hit percentage.
I've even experienced this using 20mm, blow after blow with the hispano on the F4U-1C, and the plane continues to fly reasonably well.

There are also many random occurrences with in all plane sets, where one shot takes out a cable or pilot, but this resistance is a pattern that i see with in the FW plane set and the Ki-84 (has a wooden tail). I pretty much know that if i cant get a pilot kill then im looking at unloading what ever ammo i have left.


Anyway


You want to read a good post.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3110283/m/3321026667 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3321026667)
its only a two pager...=)
read it here, i think its pretty accurately modeled in game, i just think the DM is a bit off on a couple planes.



I did the math and explained some encounter reports to help support or repute any myths/truths about the 50 cal gun.


As for hitting bombers with 50s, that goes with the whole API modeling problem that is already being worked on in some modding circles.

Its really tired topic for the vets of the game, but its one that always pops up because of the newer players constantly coming to the game.

Blindman-
07-09-2009, 08:50 PM
Many thanks to all for the help and info. To all that have read this kind of thread TOO many times before I thank you for your patience.

Zeus-cat
07-09-2009, 09:18 PM
You think 1/2 to 1/4 of your bulllets hit the target? Wow, that's incredible shooting. I kept track of my squad's gunnery accuracy for about a year and I think our best pilot was over 10% only a few times. And he was a great shot!!!

Aerial gunnery is very difficult, in this game and in real life. However, a few well-placed rounds will cripple an enemy aircraft. My guess is you are hitting non-critical areas and only doing superficial damage.

My experience with this game is that gunnery accuracy by AI and humans far exceeds real life. There were some missions were a large percentage of aircraft were lost by one side or the other, but this was not common. In IL-2 it is common for my squad's coop missions to have 50-75% losses on BOTH sides. That is not realstic or sustainable in real life.

idonno
07-09-2009, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
For those of you who had nothing but snide comments to add to this thread... you need to either back up & regroup, or stay out of the thread. If all you want to do is stir up the pot please do it elsewhere. Yeah.. I know... these threads come up... and does get old... but everyone is entitled to not only their opinion but the right to express that opinion without being treated like some kind of putz. While I am sure that there are many "kids" around here... please keep in mind that we are a very diverse group of people here.. we have parents,grandparents,veterans, doctors,lawyers,technicians,college professors,policemen, welders and all other kinds of folks here.. but more than 2/3 of this community is over 30.... so if you wouldn't want someone speaking to you like you are some kind of snot nosed punk with a chip on their shoulder and an uninformed opinion, then don't treat others here that way. If you cant come correct then please.. don't come at all. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif



Amen! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

VW-IceFire
07-09-2009, 10:45 PM
Couple of key points to take away...

1) Aim and groupings of shots on a specific area are crucial for a kill. The same number of shots but scattered across the plane are not

2) Convergence is extremely important.

3) In real life a damaged plane was often considered a kill initially because: A) the enemy pilot bailed out not wanting to take any further chances B) the kill was not actually made and the "kill" flew home with damage C) the "fog of war" always makes things difficult to take into account and so even a completely honest fighter pilot may not remember exactly the sequence of events.

Generally speaking do not trust what you hear about on the Military or History Channels. They are great for entertainment and they do surface level history but some of the shows screw things up so badly and misrepresent what happened so completely that its often disheartening for an enthusiast like myself.

The best sources are peer reviewed papers, historical documents, biographies and autobiographies, and so forth. Often it takes multiple sources to get a historical fact in true context. The TV guys often don't have time to do the real research so accuracy is often horrible.

JtD
07-09-2009, 10:45 PM
Recently, I'm averaging 30 hits for a kill. With my shooting (in)accuracy, that's easily good for 6 kills in a F6F. As a sidenote, it doesn't have 300 rounds per gun, but 270 on four and 400 on two of them.

I've seen US guncam footage where the results looked exactly like what we have in game, but apparently it are the clips that show dozens of Japanese planes light up that are considered to be the norm.

Jaws2002
07-09-2009, 11:50 PM
was watching Dogfights the series on the
History channel the other night and saw 2 Hellcats sink a Destroyer Escort and then turn around and shoot down 5 Rufes between them before returning to their carrier (without mentioning being out of ammo). In this game others and myself have dumped an entire load (6 guns at 300 rounds per gun) of 50-cals into a FW 190 (also has happened on Raidens, and Franks as well as others) without a kill.

The Rufe is really easy to kill in this game. is quite easy to kill five of them with a .50cal armed plane.

deepo_HP
07-10-2009, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
You want to read a good post.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3110283/m/3321026667 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3321026667)

I did the math and explained some encounter reports to help support or repute any myths/truths about the 50 cal gun.


kocur did a more appropriate math, imo. and comes pretty close to game and real life reports

BillSwagger
07-10-2009, 01:38 AM
yeah

i think i was trying to demonstrate that it was possible to get 10-20 kills with a full ammo load of 8 50 cal guns on a P-47.
Of course the 20 kills would be if every 1-2 second burst landed squarely on the pilot or vital part. Which a lot of times they do, but to do this with every 1-2 second burst isn't humanly probable, but mathematically, it is possible.
The most kills i've gotten in a sortie is 7, and this was no strain. I had ammo left. How much i dont know, i dont keep a stop watch of how long my bursts are, but if the ammo loads and firing times are accurately simulated it is more than possible to score double digit kills in one sortie, if you discipline your shots and accurately deflect.
To give you an idea, i usually return to base because of fuel, or damage, not ammo.

Id just hate to see the misinterpretation of encounter reports. For example
http://www.wwiiaircraftperform...-boyles-28july43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-boyles-28july43.jpg)
On the surface it reads 900 rounds spent, and one kill. But the report explains the shots were deflected until the stream met the FW, then it was immediately seen bursting into pieces.
I should not have to connect 900 rounds of ammo into an FW to bring it down.

You can read more of the encounter reports in that post, and you will see the numbers of ammo spent vs kills, but also read the actual detail to get a better picture beyond the statistical jargon.

The game actually does a good job of modeling the 50 cal, its just lacking the fire element when attacking certain bombers.
Like i said, i question the DMs of some planes, but it seems trivial to dispute too much over.



kocur did a more appropriate math, imo. and comes pretty close to game and real life reports

Can you point out Kocur's math, i just want to make sure we're on the same page.

Kocur_
07-10-2009, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Id just hate to see the misinterpretation of encounter reports. For example
http://www.wwiiaircraftperform...-boyles-28july43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-boyles-28july43.jpg)
On the surface it reads 900 rounds spent, and one kill. But the report explains the shots were deflected until the stream met the FW, then it was immediately seen bursting into pieces.

It seems you linked wrong report, not one you intended to, as in the above the pilot says the fired from dead astern between 400 and 50 yds. And he spent 1095 rounds.


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
You can read more of the encounter reports in that post, and you will see the numbers of ammo spent vs kills, but also read the actual detail to get a better picture beyond the statistical jargon.

You are right. One should read the reports, not just take numbers, to exclude both cases similar to what you mention and cases where a claim is made upon something like "he the disappeared into clouds flying without control".


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
The game actually does a good job of modeling the 50 cal, its just lacking the fire element when attacking certain bombers.

I agree. Sometimes, with luck, all it takes is a short burst, particularly in case of accurate high deflection shooting which bypasses pilot's armour and gives good chances of hitting engine, also area of fuel tanks 'visible' for bullets is greater. But in most cases, particularly from dead astern, it takes a good while of shooting before something definite happenes. Generally speaking, it takes more time shooting .50s for a kill, than in case of cannons. And that is just right.


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">kocur did a more appropriate math, imo. and comes pretty close to game and real life reports

Can you point out Kocur's math, i just want to make sure we're on the same page. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It must be this (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3321026667?r=7361027667#7361027667), at bottom of the page you linked.

ROXunreal
07-10-2009, 04:14 AM
In this game others and myself have dumped an entire load (6 guns at 300 rounds per gun) of 50-cals into a FW 190 (also has happened on Raidens, and Franks as well as others) without a kill. While I expect that 1/2 - 3/4 of them missed it still seems that even 1/10 of 1800 rounds should have done the job.


Yeah and my FW190 being hit by a <1 second .50 cal burst ended up with pilot dead or controls severed countless times.

HetzerII
07-10-2009, 06:38 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
3) In real life a damaged plane was often considered a kill initially because: A) the enemy pilot bailed out not wanting to take any further chances B) the kill was not actually made and the "kill" flew home with damage

Imho thats one off the biggest problems. People tend to rather burn and die in their plane than to bail out. I think if you actually sit in a burning plane or a plane with a shreded wing and you still have enemy above/around you, you will simply bail. Online you often see people fighting even with planes almost not airworthy anymore. Sure its easy when you sit in a virtual cockpit but i expect that in the real situation many people would bail much much much earlier than we see online. And thats pure BS...

I would like to see something like automatic bail funtion for the future.

Jimston2008
07-10-2009, 06:45 AM
I've really began to favor the 6X 50.cal configuration more then anything after playing for a few months now. I've done lots of practice and experimenting with so many other aircraft, and when it comes down to it, I'm much more effective with six 50's then anything else.

I fly the P-40E more then anything and have really taken a liking to the very stable gun platform at my disposal.

The last mission i had played last night in a 75th RAAF player made campaign, had proved great with my P-40E. After much experimenting, i've settled down with a convergence of 175 meters to 185 meters max.

I'm not the greatest pilot, but was able to take down two Japanese fighters, two bombers, while getting another KI fighter smoking heavily while having torn off it's vertical stabilizer. I still had ammo left, but was running low on fuel and needed to butg out back to base. I still had a good 6-7 seconds worth of trigger time left.

Jimston2008
07-10-2009, 06:53 AM
In my opinion, it's of the utmost importance that you find the most proper convergence settings.

I find that trying to snipe from several hundred meters tends to be useless a large percentage of the time. What you need is to get in close.

if you're convergence is set to far, like 300 meters for example, you then find most of your rounds flying past the outside of you're enemy's wings, while also flying over your target.

175-185 meters is my sweet spot, but then again i fly the P-40E, which happens to be a very stable gun platform.

I will move onto the most advanced version eventually, but for now i'd like to master this version, regardless of how long it takes.

I know most veteran pilots probably believe the P40 is a useless aircraft when it comes to online dog fighting, but i prefer the aircraft in which i enjoy flying the most, not caring if it's the best.

I will never follow the crowd that fly's nothing but 109's and 190's. I will always stick with the one i love most, not the one thats most popular and uber. Plus i can't stand the gun sights and cockpits of german fighters.

DKoor
07-10-2009, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by Blindman-:
In this game others and myself have dumped an entire load (6 guns at 300 rounds per gun) of 50-cals into a FW 190 (also has happened on Raidens, and Franks as well as others) without a kill. While I expect that 1/2 - 3/4 of them missed it still seems that even 1/10 of 1800 rounds should have done the job. Don't want to be rude in my comment, but 1/2 or 1/4 fired/hit ratio you can only have in your dreams http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
I play the game long, long time and I've yet to see a player with 25% accuracy on regular basis. Or near it. I've seen players having around 25% accuracy in single sortie or 2-3 TOPS.

I consider a fair shot above 3%, good above 5%, excellent above 7%, above 10% - one don't want to meet that guy flying for the opposite side (as it is doubtful if he's a human http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif ) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

That goes for all aircraft, all guns, regardless...

Bearcat99
07-10-2009, 07:21 AM
As I said Wayne... DL sturmolog... it is the older and simpler of the two programs I mentioned in my above post.. but it will track your hits.. and you will be surprised at just what your hit percentage really is... dont go by the visual damage or what you think is happening.. especially online.. if you have 2 guys & a host on DSL in a server with 24 planes.. your hit percentage will drop considerably. Try it.

M_Gunz
07-10-2009, 09:21 AM
Did all USAAF pilots get such great results every time they used 50 cals? No. Not by a longshot.
With an arcade game we should expect to be super aces, best of the best, do the things they show on the shows.
Should I expect to equal the best in a combat flight sim with decent realism? No.
Should I blame the sim? No.
And the fact is that when I do things right it doesn't take a lot to disable most planes or kill the pilots.
OTOH if I don't then it may take a lot of ammo. Historic check shows that was the case IRL.

Set up to host your own coop mission on LAN with you as the only human pilot and check your gunstat for hits.

Zeus-cat
07-10-2009, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blindman-:
In this game others and myself have dumped an entire load (6 guns at 300 rounds per gun) of 50-cals into a FW 190 (also has happened on Raidens, and Franks as well as others) without a kill. While I expect that 1/2 - 3/4 of them missed it still seems that even 1/10 of 1800 rounds should have done the job. Don't want to be rude in my comment, but 1/2 or 1/4 fired/hit ratio you can only have in your dreams http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .
I play the game long, long time and I've yet to see a player with 25% accuracy on regular basis. Or near it. I've seen players having around 25% accuracy in single sortie or 2-3 TOPS.

I consider a fair shot above 3%, good above 5%, excellent above 7%, above 10% - one don't want to meet that guy flying for the opposite side (as it is doubtful if he's a human http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif ) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

That goes for all aircraft, all guns, regardless... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The numbers DKoor mentions are essentially what I have seen too. People THINK they are getting a lot more hits than they really are.

Blutarski2004
07-10-2009, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Did all USAAF pilots get such great results every time they used 50 cals? No. Not by a longshot.
With an arcade game we should expect to be super aces, best of the best, do the things they show on the shows.
Should I expect to equal the best in a combat flight sim with decent realism? No.
Should I blame the sim? No.
And the fact is that when I do things right it doesn't take a lot to disable most planes or kill the pilots.
OTOH if I don't then it may take a lot of ammo. Historic check shows that was the case IRL.

Set up to host your own coop mission on LAN with you as the only human pilot and check your gunstat for hits.


..... Most fighter pilots rarely hiy anything. The >>average<< fighter pilot might score about 1 or 2 pct hits, which means that he used up his entire ammo load for one kill. It's easy but dangerous to confuse ace gunery skills with the norm.

Blutarski2004
07-10-2009, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
Recently, I'm averaging 30 hits for a kill.


..... which is pretty much spot on with respect to historical lethality, at least according to my homework.

Blutarski2004
07-10-2009, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
1) Aim and groupings of shots on a specific area are crucial for a kill. The same number of shots but scattered across the plane are not.



..... Don't mean to sound disputatious, but I ran across this interesting item recently:

Taken from "OPERATIONS ANALYSIS IN THE U. S. ARMY EIGHTH AIR FORCE IN WORLD WAR 2", page 93 (You can find it at Books.Google.com)":

Quote -

... All of the American planes - both fighters and bombers - were heavily armed with .50-caliber machine guns. It had become standard practice to use mixed ammunition consisting of armor-piercing (AP), incendiary (I), or a combination of armor-piercing and incendiary (API) projectiles. Taylor said "there was a great deal of voodoo about the selection of these."

The British had collected and analyzed a great deal of German aerial equipment. They calculated, for instance, the relative vulnerability of different portions of a plane to different kinds of ammunition. For example, in a given type of German bomber, 20 percent of the target might be vulnerable to incendiary ammunition (I), 30 percent to armor-piercing (AP), and 50 percent to armor-piercing, incendiary (API) ammunition. Accordingly guns would be belted with ammunition in the ratio of 2-I to 3-AP to 5-API cartridges. Besides this, there were arguments as to whether you should put all five API together or distribute them in some other way.

What should have been obvious, but clearly was not, was the fact that if any plane was more vulnerable to any one kind of ammunition than the other it was a pure dilution of ammunition to put in any except the most effective. Ralph Johnson, who was the first one of us to notice this fact, was so dumbfounded that he was almost afraid to mention it. When it was brought up at the top echelons they were skeptical at first. Then when they saw the truth of it, even the 'high command' had a terrible time in convincing the squadrons at the fighting level that they should stop this silly dilution of ammunition.

The section's first report was written by Ralph Johnson on "Mixed Beltimg of Ammunition for the P-47" and was dated 21 July 1943.

The analysts visited a number of fighter and bomber bases to convince the appropriate people that the analysis was valid. The effort paid off; two groups agreed to participate in an experiment. One group loaded ammunition the way the analysts recommended, all API, and another group loaded ammunition in the mixed-belt manner. Both groups went out on fighter escort for the same mission of B-17s.

As luck, or statistics, would have it, the group with API ammunition clobbered the German fighters whereas the group with mixed ammunition had poor hunting. None of them stopped to think about the luck or what it would be like tomorrow with the group positions reversed or a variety of other things. The result was that there was not enough API ammunition in all the UK to supply the overnight demands of the VIII FC [Fighter Command]. Nevertheless, knowledge and acceptance of these results came about slowly in come commands, and not at all in others.

The validity of the section's work on ammunition belting was established both theoretically and experimentally back in the States. Dr William L Duren Jr, a mathematician and outstanding gunnery operations analyst with the Second Air Force in the United States, specialized in gunnery problems of the B-29. In his memoir, however, he told how he also tried to act as liaison between mathematicians in civilian research centers writing papers that "would never be read" and the military men for whom they were intended. Duren gave an example.

"Jacob Wolfowitz had written an elegant statistical analysis of the question, what was the best mixture of the several available types of ammunition to load on the belts of the .50-caliber machine gun against enemy fighters. His answer was clear cut, >>based on his assumptions<<. The conclusion was that the belts should be loaded 100 percent with the one API (armor-piercing incendiary) type. The assumptions, based on actual experiments at Wright Field, were that serial correlation in several successive hits was small or zero and thus that the probability of a kill in any shot was independent. Under these conditions the belts should be loaded entirely with bullets that had the highest probability of downing the fighter with one hit. This, the Wright Field tests showed, was the API. Not only did the ordnance sergeants not read Wolfowitz's report, but, in defiance of orders from the top, they considered it their right to load those guns as they deemed best. Each one had his own mixture formula including tracers and incendiaries as well as armor-piercing bullets. On each base, I undertook to "sell" Wolfowitz's result. The argument could be put on a common sense basis, free of the technical statistical qualification. But I do not know how successful I was."

I will add a personal note on the ammunition belting procedures. Because I was the bombardier, I was also the gunnery officer of the crew. However, the crew had nothing to do with selecting the ammunition for the belts of our machine guns. We shot, as the occasion arose, whatever ammunition was provided for us. Our most memorable gunnery episode occurred on 2 November 1944 while bombing the synthetic oil refineries at Merseburg-Leuna near Leipzig, Germany. Of 1,100 heavy bombers in five seperate forces sent to Germany that day, 683 B-17s were sent to the notorious Merseburg oil refineries. A major air battle lasting forty minutes took place between the escorting fighters of the Eighth Fight Command and the Luftwaffe in the Merseburg area. Hundreds of fighters on both sides were involved. The largest formation of German fighters encountered during the Merseburg battle was a force, mostly Me-109s, estimated at 150, 200, or 250 planes. The largest group of German jet fighters yet to be encountered, about fifteen Me-163s, rose to attack the bombers that day. At least nine broke through our fighters and made individual passes at the B-17s. Two attacked our group, the 493rd Bomb Group, and one made two passes, from behind and overhead, at our squadron. I vividly recall the Me-163 - a flying wing - going over us twice with trajectories of tracer bullets from our guns, especially the top turret guns, apparently going through the plane. Yet the fighter flew away without disintegrating. As late as 2 November1944 and probably for the rest of the war, the ordnance sergeants of the Eightth Bomber Command were still mixing or diluting the ammunition in the ammunition belts. Although the glowing, visible tracers made us feel that we had come close to our target, if all our bullets had been API's we might have destroyed our adversary.

Blindman-
07-10-2009, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by Zeus-cat:
You think 1/2 to 1/4 of your bulllets hit the target? Wow, that's incredible shooting. I kept track of my squad's gunnery accuracy for about a year and I think our best pilot was over 10% only a few times. And he was a great shot!!!



I am sure that you are correct here. My gunnery skills are mediocre at best. I did however have a rare opportunity once to sit on the tail of a 190 and empty the majority of my ammo into his left wing root. I was in a P-40 (not sure which version) and initially must have taken out his controls as he stopped evasive maneuvers. Once I noticed this I came in close (about 150 m, which is under my convergence at 200 m), took careful aim (the P-40 is very stable) and let loose with a 1 sec burst. When this did nothing I repeated, aiming at the same spot; and then repeated this again and again until my guns were dry. I did see allot of flashes and debris coming off of him but he just kept going as if nothing had happened.




Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
C) the "fog of war" always makes things difficult to take into account and so even a completely honest fighter pilot may not remember exactly the sequence of events.


I have always been amazed at how much detail these pilots remember. I can barely remember the details of a mission right after flying it.


Again, thanks to everyone for such excellent info and a chance for me to see the other side.



[BearCat, Iím having a bad vision day and both of those links look to me like they require and are missing their mirrors. Is it me? They sound like excellent utilities.]

ROXunreal
07-10-2009, 01:01 PM
Yeah I find that when I do my best shooting online the gunstat says 10%, even though I think I hardly missed a shot. I don't even look when I suck, but I'd say that it's around 5% then.

Edit: no wait, server stats say 10.40% average, not bad for playing only a few months online with joystick http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Open pit though

M_Gunz
07-10-2009, 02:12 PM
If you want to know better info, IL2 provides you with track playback that you can review your gunnery if you make tracks of that.
You put all the toggles on manual and you can play, pause, pan, change point of view and playback speed and even get arrows
showing the direction and location of every hit you make if you edit conf.ini to say arcade=1, it only adds arrows and word
balloons and in game makes white dots show on the enemy plane where you hit. IL2 has very good training aids.

It's very important that you make in-game start and stop tracks to make ntrk files for playback. The others don't always
playback exactly the same.

I use arcade=1 for track playback only as it ruins the game but it's good during gunnery practice missions. I found from
the start that shots I was sure from back in the pit would hit passed about 1 foot or so over and under the wing or fuselage
when viewed close from the target looking back at my plane shooting. It helped me being able to see the sight and major
instruments in finding out where my shots were going and sometimes why. P-51's with the little slip ball under the gunsight
are the best since you can zoom more and still see your coordination to fly and aim the plane better.

Anyway watch the hits and remember that the arrow is the direction of the hit only, the shot may have been stopped but the
arrow still goes all the way through the plane. When you find something real that is acceptable, which has already been
done here, then make a screenshot for the forum collection. Hey, maybe a tread of such screenies with scores of 50 cal hit
arrows on the wing tanks of some Zippo bomber and still no fire even though IIRC we have 2 out of 5 API now.

Then you should ask about mods on Hyperlobby chat since there you can be told where to look and maybe get all API .50s.

DKoor
07-10-2009, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
If you want to know better, IL2 provides you with track playback that you can review your gunnery if you make tracks of that. +1
------------------------
Re-Play your NTRK then, after you see some gunnery, press SHIFT+TAB and type the following;

user DKoor STAT

(it's case sensitive, instead of DKoor type other pilot that flies on the track).
If you type only;

user STAT

...it will show all pilots who flew on the track.

Just divide number of shots that hit the target with those fired... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Ba5tard5word
07-10-2009, 05:51 PM
I used to think .50 cals were terrible, then I started using limited ammo, which forces you to get as close as possible to your target because your bullets do a heck of a lot more damage and naturally you'll get more hits in. Now I only fire when at 250 meters or closer. .50 cals work a LOT better at that range and frequently I'll get kills with just one burst because I'll knock out the engine or slice off a wing. Now I have a lot more respect for 50's.

I still hate .30 cals and Breda 12.7mm's though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

danjama
07-10-2009, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
I used to think .50 cals were terrible, then I started using limited ammo, which forces you to get as close as possible to your target because your bullets do a heck of a lot more damage and naturally you'll get more hits in. Now I only fire when at 250 meters or closer. .50 cals work a LOT better at that range and frequently I'll get kills with just one burst because I'll knock out the engine or slice off a wing. Now I have a lot more respect for 50's.

I still hate .30 cals and Breda 12.7mm's though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

+1

good advice, if only more would follow it, or listen.

M_Gunz
07-10-2009, 06:20 PM
My beef is with wing guns, they have limited effective shooting ranges, convergence +/- some. Shooting while closing fast
on a target (coming in at an angle to some point ahead of the target you can be closing fast, throw a dive into that), it
limits your trigger time near convergence wickedly. Your closing speed influences travel time of the shots, complicating
the best range to shoot problem and you end up wasting ammo just covering the guesswork.

With nose guns you don't have horizontal convergence that you have to fire at or near to get really effective results.
You do have bullet travel time to hit deflection shots complications but only in aim high or low, faster close means lower
aim than otherwise since the range is effectively less.

Nose guns are good from muzzle to max effective range. Only thing wing guns do better is allow more guns at higher ROF,
which ain't bad.

Bearcat99
07-10-2009, 07:10 PM
The links are good BM..

BillSwagger
07-10-2009, 07:12 PM
a couple things:

1. Wing mounted 50s have the benefit of spread.
If i set my convergence (p-47) at 275M and 250M,
when deflecting shots at 400m, the bullets are spread out, so i'm effectively spraying the target.
Keep in mind the engine and cockpit is the bulls eye.
It takes one bullet in the engine, to get it smoking, and even if you only wound the pilot, it will be much harder for him to fly.

2. Convergence

Early war 50 cal is more effective in closer range, but later years can do as much damage at longer ranges.

I avoid setting my convergence under 200M because longer shots will go wide when trying to deflect.

Full Switch and Closed **** Pit Views.
Its also my observation that a longer convergence can be beneficial since it can be more difficult to follow a shot as you target gets closer.
There are people who set there convergence at 400M, and can be very effective with their sniping in a closed pit enviornment.
You try to get with in 200M of a target and land a good burst in a closed pit with 50 cal, and its quite a task.


Note:
I've found the 250-275 is a good balance of power and spread.
I've also read the factory convergence of the P-47 was 273.

Airmail109
07-10-2009, 07:23 PM
I've had 6 kills online with a P-51B (4 .50s), never had a problem with .50 cals.

Having said that most people shoot from dead 6, when I did a fair bit of flying I developed a slashing technique where I'd be crossing enemy head on from above or to the side and most of the rounds would hit the engine or the cockpit.

SILVERFISH1992
07-10-2009, 07:26 PM
I dont like the sounds of .50 cals. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

Trefle
07-10-2009, 08:30 PM
The way i experienced in game , i personally do really much better with convergence between 130-160 meters , i can't snipe nor make head-ons (except the close range ones during manoeuvers) , but when i get close to firing position and the ennemy aircraft almost fills my sight , 1 second burst is often enough to kill the pilot or his engine , 2-3 seconds burst can even cut his wing or make structural damage if i'm lucky or accurate enough .

Every time i put long convergence while riding the Mustang , it went bad for me cause i start shooting when very close and with 300meters convergence , my fire is not concentrated at close range and thus i need far more firing time on target to make decisive damage than when i use 130-140 meters convergence . The only plane where i use 300meters is the P-38 because everything is in the nose . IMO it's all down to each pilot's style , if you start firing from afar , say 300meters , then use 300meters convergence but be aware that the more you close-in , the less effective will be your fire , well that's what i felt

BillSwagger
07-10-2009, 09:27 PM
that the more you close-in , the less effective will be your fire ,

Its not less effective in terms of damage, but accuracy is less pin pointed.

Your right, it is more preferred style or method.
When i'm closing in under 150M, I need to sweep to the side to prevent collision any how.
By offsetting convergence (if possible) you create multiple convergence zones.
I've set the convergence of the outside guns narrower than the inside guns, so they converge at about 150-200m (on one side, 4 guns).

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

I find that on some planes i can take both wings off with a good solid burst if i aim down the middle when they are 150-100M.

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r201/spre77/33.jpg


Its still not my preferred method, but combat doesn't always play into preferences, so its good to have and practice sweeping to the side to get a good shot off.

Trefle
07-10-2009, 11:50 PM
Good observation and nice screenshot Bill , you were darn accurate to take out those 2 wings at the same time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It's interesting that it work out for you like this , i know many pilots do the same as you do so it's surely a good idea/strategy that you have and use

But it doesn't work well for me , cause i tried to make a "kill zone" like you by setting different convergences to inner and outer guns in the P-47 QMB right now , but it seems half my guns are not hitting my target optimally , i mean it means more dispersion .
I agree you are more likely to hit your target if it is within the killzone , but you don't hit it at convergence with all your guns but instead only with half of them ( since half your guns have different convergences , your target is either at convergence of one half or the other ) .

I prefer not to waste ammunitions from far (and stay unnoticed ) and when i'm at convergence point , say 140meters , then i unleash the power of 8 guns at convergence on my target , all my guns are hitting at optimal distance which makes far more damage to the target , it also means i can destroy it with less ammos and firing time cause i'm closer and at convergence.

I think it also depends the planes , recently i fly the P-51 almost all the time offline and with only 4 guns , i noticed that with 120meters convergence , my ability to destroy a target as quick as possible has increased . With 200m convergence , i need sometimes 3 passes to register a kill on a fw-190 , with 120meters convergence , one pass is very often enough to wipe it out of the sky . Same with the P-40 , before i was using 250meters , but since i use 130 meters with the P-40 , it packs impressive punch at close range and i love it

But i understand that with the Jug , since you have 8 guns , you can afford to have longer convergence settings , especially since the Jug should be kept capable of making head-on attacks and engage ground targets which requires longer convergence to be more effective

BillSwagger
07-11-2009, 12:37 AM
my convergence in that photo is 273M (inner guns) and 265M (outer guns).

You have to shoot straight down the fuselage and it works, for the most part, but i have yet to do this against an FW even though they have thin wings too, they dont get clipped so easily.


At the 273/265 convergence, the bullets are still tight enough at 200M as they are at 350M, so that tends to be where i practice most of my aiming.

I've also used 200/150M convergence, but i notice in a chase or head on, my bead goes wide when i normally could hit more viral parts of the plane using my 273/250 convergence.

I actually started with 500/400, but found that they do not have the same punch at that convergence, but they are still effective.

I ended up with 275-250, not only is it a good balance of power and spread, but it also happens to be where most of my opponents are easily hit in a chase.

At 100M, my opponent turning and twirling around requires many more adjustments and correction than if he has a bit more distance in front of me.

Its what works for me. In real life the muzzle velocity of an M2 50 cal is only slightly slower at about 1000ft (300M) than it is at 3ft from the gun.

The idea that it would make a significant difference between 150 or 250 convergence is either video game hype, or the fact that people tend to land more shots because its closer.
It might not have anything to do with convergence.

DKoor
07-11-2009, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
My beef is with wing guns, they have limited effective shooting ranges, convergence +/- some. Shooting while closing fast
on a target (coming in at an angle to some point ahead of the target you can be closing fast, throw a dive into that), it
limits your trigger time near convergence wickedly. Your closing speed influences travel time of the shots, complicating
the best range to shoot problem and you end up wasting ammo just covering the guesswork.

With nose guns you don't have horizontal convergence that you have to fire at or near to get really effective results.
You do have bullet travel time to hit deflection shots complications but only in aim high or low, faster close means lower
aim than otherwise since the range is effectively less.

Nose guns are good from muzzle to max effective range. Only thing wing guns do better is allow more guns at higher ROF,
which ain't bad. +1 to all.

That is essentially why I don't get how people can put their convergence below 200m then BnZ E/A at 300+kph more than E/A speed (meaning ultra fast overtaking), one needs to get really close and that also means danger of collision because who knows what kind of defensive maneuver will E/A conduct leaving little time for reaction. Especially true in late war.

Somewhere in region of 250-350 would be just fine... simply give user more effective firing time.
I've put lesser conv's in early war, even below 200m, but from all my experience so far below 200m conv's aren't more effective than higher conv's.
.50cals are strong enough to do mortal damage well up to 300m. We just need to hit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
a couple things:

1. Wing mounted 50s have the benefit of spread.
If i set my convergence (p-47) at 275M and 250M,
when deflecting shots at 400m, the bullets are spread out, so i'm effectively spraying the target.
Keep in mind the engine and cockpit is the bulls eye.
It takes one bullet in the engine, to get it smoking, and even if you only wound the pilot, it will be much harder for him to fly.

2. Convergence

Early war 50 cal is more effective in closer range, but later years can do as much damage at longer ranges.

I avoid setting my convergence under 200M because longer shots will go wide when trying to deflect.

Full Switch and Closed **** Pit Views.
Its also my observation that a longer convergence can be beneficial since it can be more difficult to follow a shot as you target gets closer.
There are people who set there convergence at 400M, and can be very effective with their sniping in a closed pit enviornment.
You try to get with in 200M of a target and land a good burst in a closed pit with 50 cal, and its quite a task. +1

JtD
07-11-2009, 03:18 AM
I fly B'n'Z with a convergence of 200m usually, sometimes just 150 and it works quite well. I'd figure an effective range of about 200m (convergence distance plus/minus half convergence distance) which more often than not is good for a firing window of 2+ seconds, which means 150+ rounds with a 6 gun layout and 200+ with a 8 gun layout which translate into 20-30 hits which usually mean the other fighter is out of combat. Maybe still flying, but certainly not in a competitive condition.

I find if you set convergence higher and start firing from further away, you tend to miss a lot more. This means that you may get the same number of hits in the attack, but you invest more ammo and the other pilot has more time to react. There is a difference between landing 25 hits within two or within three seconds.

slipBall
07-11-2009, 03:34 AM
The three factors to high hit ratio and greater success

1-Watch that turn and slip indicator from takeoff till landing...it is the number 1 guage that you should monitor at all times during the flight. At gun firing, if your aircraft is "crabbing" then your hit ratio will be very low

2-Have self control on the trigger...firing at or near convergence, will increase your hit ratio

3-Lead your target...you must shoot where the the target will be

JtD
07-11-2009, 03:46 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:

...1-Watch that turn and slip indicator from takeoff till landing...it is the number 1 guage that you should monitor at all times during the flight. At gun firing, if your aircraft is "crabbing" then your hit ratio will be very low...

Watching instruments in combat is a great way to get shot down. So maybe this is good advice for a training mission, but in a fight you can either do the proper things intuitively or not at all.
I also consider altitude and speed indicator a lot more important than slip, though in the context of shooting accuracy you're most likely right.

slipBall
07-11-2009, 03:58 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:

...1-Watch that turn and slip indicator from takeoff till landing...it is the number 1 guage that you should monitor at all times during the flight. At gun firing, if your aircraft is "crabbing" then your hit ratio will be very low...

Watching instruments in combat is a great way to get shot down. So maybe this is good advice for a training mission, but in a fight you can either do the proper things intuitively or not at all.
I also consider altitude and speed indicator a lot more important than slip, though in the context of shooting accuracy you're most likely right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I'm not suggesting guage fixtation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif...a centered ball will also max out your possible speed...for me speed is more of a feeling and a given knowing that my aircraft is flying straight

WTE_Galway
07-11-2009, 04:28 AM
well slip (and firing in convergence as well) is a huge problem when defection shooting or using ammo that does not have the shotgun effect of guns like 0.50 cal

slip and convergence is far less of a problem shooting from the 6 with multiple small calibre machine guns

However the payoff with dead six shooting with small calibre ammunition is it is far less effective in terms of hits needed for a kill ... hits tend to skim the surface and have less effect or slam into armor or need to pass thru too much non vulnerable stuff first

I have often wondered if part of the issue with 0.50 cal is the its popularity with people that can't defection shoot and like to park directly behind a target and sit on the fire button

Trefle
07-11-2009, 04:44 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
That is essentially why I don't get how people can put their convergence below 200m then BnZ E/A at 300+kph more than E/A speed (meaning ultra fast overtaking), one needs to get really close and that also means danger of collision because who knows what kind of defensive maneuver will E/A conduct leaving little time for reaction. Especially true in late war.

Convergence of 130 meters for instance , you have enough time to disengage even if you bounce your target at high speed , a 1 second burst at short convergence is quite deadly , also it's all question of preparing the manoeuvre and being used to it . When you bounce the target , either it has seen you and usually she manoeuver way before you get 150meters in her six , or the target didn't see you and she will not understand what happened until you open fire but it will be too late

But yeah , you need to get close and make sure the ennemy plane almost fills your gunsight , like real pilot accounts and books talk about


Originally posted by DKoor:
Somewhere in region of 250-350 would be just fine... simply give user more effective firing time.
I've put lesser conv's in early war, even below 200m, but from all my experience so far below 200m conv's aren't more effective than higher conv's.
.50cals are strong enough to do mortal damage well up to 300m. We just need to hit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .



Effective firing time is less important than effective damage on target IMHO , especially if it wastes many ammos and notify the ennemy that you are in his six 300-400 meters away .

If you use short convergence , the surprise is total and as soon as you open fire it's over for him , even if it's a half second burst cause it does a lot of damage not only because you are close from the target but because your fire is concentrated . Moreover if you set convergence at long distance , when you close-in to your target your fire is not concentrated enough so you need far more ammos and firing time to cause the same damage as with shorter convergence .

Unfortunately , i don't know where to host track , but if someone makes a quick test in QMB , take a P-51B or P-40E and put 120meters or 130 meters convergence and engage 2 focke wulf 190 , then do the same with 300 or 400 meters convergence and let's compare for instance how many passes and bullets you need , even at high speed , to down a 190. Unless you are a true sniper and maintain the 300 or 400 meter distance when firing , chances are you will make damage with less bullets and firing time when using the shorter convergence (of course if you shoot from close )

JtD
07-11-2009, 04:44 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:

I'm not suggesting guage fixtation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Your advice sounded a bit like that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
07-11-2009, 06:26 AM
You can feel the off-center pull of slip when you're in the moving plane and you can't in a sim.
A slip indicator on the speedbar would have been nice to make up for that. Just a bar with numbers and a "ball".

It can be done with devicelink and something like UDPSpeed (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Knowledge_Base&file=print&kid=377&page=1), check out the small instrument set down at the bottom, there is a little slip indicator to use.

DKoor
07-11-2009, 06:38 AM
Originally posted by Trefle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
That is essentially why I don't get how people can put their convergence below 200m then BnZ E/A at 300+kph more than E/A speed (meaning ultra fast overtaking), one needs to get really close and that also means danger of collision because who knows what kind of defensive maneuver will E/A conduct leaving little time for reaction. Especially true in late war.

Convergence of 130 meters for instance , you have enough time to disengage even if you bounce your target at high speed , a 1 second burst at short convergence is quite deadly , also it's all question of preparing the manoeuvre and being used to it . When you bounce the target , either it has seen you and usually she manoeuver way before you get 150meters in her six , or the target didn't see you and she will not understand what happened until you open fire but it will be too late

But yeah , you need to get close and make sure the ennemy plane almost fills your gunsight , like real pilot accounts and books talk about


Originally posted by DKoor:
Somewhere in region of 250-350 would be just fine... simply give user more effective firing time.
I've put lesser conv's in early war, even below 200m, but from all my experience so far below 200m conv's aren't more effective than higher conv's.
.50cals are strong enough to do mortal damage well up to 300m. We just need to hit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .



Effective firing time is less important than effective damage on target IMHO , especially if it wastes many ammos and notify the ennemy that you are in his six 300-400 meters away .

If you use short convergence , the surprise is total and as soon as you open fire it's over for him , even if it's a half second burst cause it does a lot of damage not only because you are close from the target but because your fire is concentrated . Moreover if you set convergence at long distance , when you close-in to your target your fire is not concentrated enough so you need far more ammos and firing time to cause the same damage as with shorter convergence .

Unfortunately , i don't know where to host track , but if someone makes a quick test in QMB , take a P-51B or P-40E and put 120meters or 130 meters convergence and engage 2 focke wulf 190 , then do the same with 300 or 400 meters convergence and let's compare for instance how many passes and bullets you need , even at high speed , to down a 190. Unless you are a true sniper and maintain the 300 or 400 meter distance when firing , chances are you will make damage with less bullets and firing time when using the shorter convergence (of course if you shoot from close ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Can I see some of your tracks mate (online/offline)?
Especially those where you wait to close up on bandit well less than 200m before you fire http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

You can upload the track here;
http://www.datafilehost.com/
...it is really easy. Copy/paste the link here afterward.

I think you misunderstand the whole concept in my post, but I would still like to see your tracks.

Bearcat99
07-11-2009, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:

...1-Watch that turn and slip indicator from takeoff till landing...it is the number 1 guage that you should monitor at all times during the flight. At gun firing, if your aircraft is "crabbing" then your hit ratio will be very low...

Watching instruments in combat is a great way to get shot down. So maybe this is good advice for a training mission, but in a fight you can either do the proper things intuitively or not at all.
I also consider altitude and speed indicator a lot more important than slip, though in the context of shooting accuracy you're most likely right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The thing is that in the real world much of what is translated by instruments was also translated by the body... not so in this sim.. therefore in this virtual world.. speed & slip must be monitored .... I turn on the cockpit lights when in a plane that has the backlit instruments to help me see these things...

Oh.. I just realized that Gunz said exactly that...... I also think that for effective A2A with .050s convergence should be 175-225.. at least for me.

BillSwagger
07-11-2009, 08:06 AM
i think its less an issue with convergence than the fact that it's just easier to land more shots when you are closer.

I think the impact damage of one bullet hitting at 150m is about the same as at 250m.
The damage from a bullet begins to drop above 300M, and more significantly above 500m.

I dont have any tracks, but last night i flew a quick sortie online in a P-47D10. At 273/260 convergence, I exploded an A6M and a Spitfire with a 1 to 2 second burst each.
Its interesting because there are those little flashes when you get hits. Then as you fly past the fragments, there is a brief puff of fire from the engine igniting, then the plane immediately explodes, all with in a couple seconds.

Their distance was somewhere between 200m and 300m during the bursts.

I can't really make the argument that 200/150 convergence isn't more effective, but i think if you consider that you are just landing more bullets in that range because you are, in fact, closer, then convergence isn't the issue.
Its your aim... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif
Mine aim is hot and cold, but when its on, everything blows apart as it should, except those pesky 190s.

slipBall
07-11-2009, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:

...1-Watch that turn and slip indicator from takeoff till landing...it is the number 1 guage that you should monitor at all times during the flight. At gun firing, if your aircraft is "crabbing" then your hit ratio will be very low...

Watching instruments in combat is a great way to get shot down. So maybe this is good advice for a training mission, but in a fight you can either do the proper things intuitively or not at all.
I also consider altitude and speed indicator a lot more important than slip, though in the context of shooting accuracy you're most likely right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The thing is that in the real world much of what is translated by instruments was also translated by the body... not so in this sim.. therefore in this virtual world.. speed & slip must be monitored .... I turn on the cockpit lights when in a plane that has the backlit instruments to help me see these things...

Oh.. I just realized that Gunz said exactly that...... I also think that for effective A2A with .050s convergence should be 175-225.. at least for me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Very true Bearcat...having the ball not centered while on the trigger, is like shooting a rifle, useing one only of the two iron sight's...do I hear MISSED! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Trefle
07-11-2009, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
You can upload the track here;
http://www.datafilehost.com/
...it is really easy. Copy/paste the link here afterward.

I think you misunderstand the whole concept in my post, but I would still like to see your tracks.

Ok no problem my friend , thanks for the link http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I uploaded one track i just made now (4.09b1m version ), it is P-51B with 120m convergence , i engage 2 Focke Wulf 190 and down them both in one pass . I could not reproduce this with 300m convergence .
http://www.datafilehost.com/download-8b9b9465.html


I upload another track again against 2 Fw-190, where it is less ideal scenario (i need 2 passes on each aircraft ) , i tried to move at the last moment on purpose (to show that you have margin to move ) and used 130m convergence . I can reproduce this ( 2 passes to get a kill ) with 300m convergence but i need more ammos and firing time to cause the same damage .
http://www.datafilehost.com/download-9545466a.html

Billswager , it's not only because you get closer that you make more damage , but because the fire is concentrated on a narrower zone (at convergence distance ) , if you take 3 stones from close range and throw them aiming at someone's face , he'll have more pain if both 3 stones land on his forehead than if 2 of your stone hit his chest and only one hits his forehead , primitive example , but that's an image i could think about to illustrate my point .

BillSwagger
07-11-2009, 03:09 PM
well, im glad you were able to show this can be done.

Now, historically where were the convergences set on P-51s and P-47s???

I only ask, because i'm certain they were able to down an FW-190 in one pass with a longer convergence than 150 meters. To put it in perspective 300M is only 984 ft. 150 meters is 492 feet.

Also,

You do have to be a better aim at 300M than 150M...no doubt....but is there really less of a punch???(not knocking your skills)
For example....This isn't saying much, but online i made a pass on a ki-84, lit up its engine with a quick burst (1 second) then immediately came across an la-7 and lit his engine up with a 1 second burst. Two planes in one pass, spread apart from each other going opposite directions.
Both were deflected shots from the side from 250-400M. If your method is to get right up on your kill, then i can see why you'd favor 150M, but i don't see it being a good tool for deflection shooting or longer range shots.

Trefle
07-11-2009, 03:14 PM
I don't know about historical settings , i guess it depended the pilots although i often read in veteran interviews that they waited for the ennemy plane to fill their sight ("fire when you can see the rivets" ) before opening fire .

You are right mate , there are a couple of disadvantages when using short convergence , you cannot be effective at head-ons (but with liquid cooled engine on the Mustang , i prefer to avoid it anyway ) , and it's true that you cannot perform long/medium distance deflection shots , you have to wait for the last moment , but with a plane that is often faster than the opposition and retains energy well , you often manage to get close enough

M_Gunz
07-11-2009, 03:18 PM
When your shots look like they're going off to one side, you're either turning or out of coordination. Rudder away from the
side the tracers curved off towards if you think you should be flying where your sight is pointed.

When firing up or down 30 or more degrees, aim a bit low. The bullet path is no longer aligned directly across gravity, that
affects bullet drop against the view in the gunsight.

When you are closing so fast that from 500m in to 200m takes like 2 or 3 seconds then there's less than 2 to veer off collision.

I don't mind firing a long ranging burst. If he reacts I get to see what direction and speed from a rapidly closing distance.
I got the smash advantage just by choosing my target. My oblique approach adds heavily to the closing speed, I work to cross
his circle while flying a lower energy, less turning path that pays me off with speed and the occasional deflection shot.

When I've very, very close and have wing guns, I sweep the wings back and forth and one set of guns get pretty good concentration
at a time, bursts not hosing. Of course that also bleeds my energy but there you have it, what's getting hits on and enemy worth?

DKoor
07-11-2009, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by Trefle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
You can upload the track here;
http://www.datafilehost.com/
...it is really easy. Copy/paste the link here afterward.

I think you misunderstand the whole concept in my post, but I would still like to see your tracks.

Ok no problem my friend , thanks for the link http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I uploaded one track i just made now (4.09b1m version ), it is P-51B with 120m convergence , i engage 2 Focke Wulf 190 and down them both in one pass . I could not reproduce this with 300m convergence .
http://www.datafilehost.com/download-8b9b9465.html


I upload another track again against 2 Fw-190, where it is less ideal scenario (i need 2 passes on each aircraft ) , i tried to move at the last moment on purpose (to show that you have margin to move ) and used 130m convergence . I can reproduce this ( 2 passes to get a kill ) with 300m convergence but i need more ammos and firing time to cause the same damage .
http://www.datafilehost.com/download-9545466a.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I simply didn't like the idea to hold my fire that long... but you convinced me!
This convergence is good for P-51B, I played with low convergences and yes, I got good results.
In track conv is 120m - I engaged four Ai aces, FW-190A5 jabos, and shot them all down in combat. I think I even had some ammo left http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif . And these are about one of toughest planes regarding DM (if we disregard pct of my gunnery and look the part where I hit E/A's).
Several aspects could be seen on track... first I bounced the schwarm, then I engaged them up close.

http://www.datafilehost.com/download-dd3d185f.html

I will try that vs bombers too to see what kind of results can be expected http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .


Originally posted by Trefle:
I don't know about historical settings , i guess it depended the pilots although i often read in veteran interviews that they waited for the ennemy plane to fill their sight ("fire when you can see the rivets" ) before opening fire .

You are right mate , there are a couple of disadvantages when using short convergence , you cannot be effective at head-ons (but with liquid cooled engine on the Mustang , i prefer to avoid it anyway ) , and it's true that you cannot perform long/medium distance deflection shots , you have to wait for the last moment , but with a plane that is often faster than the opposition and retains energy well , you often manage to get close enough
This actually holds true to several accounts... in my P-51D time, I never really tried to dogfight, unless absolutely necessary because I regard all enemy to be more agile on lower speed. Mustang Mk.III/P-51B-C are different than P-51D, much more stable.

It is a matter of preference, but good part is that if you were good with 250+ conv settings you'd only be better with 120+ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .

I also have an idea... while P-51 (D especially) is known in game as not exactly the best gun platform (stability wise), lowering the conv can rectify the problem to a great degree.
If you manage to put several bullets thru one DM box from really close distance (a task not so hard now) that should matter greatly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .
At least holds true in theory.

One can learn something new every day.

Trefle
07-11-2009, 04:02 PM
Glad to know this Dkoor , i guess it depends to each one style , but i agree with you when you say that hitting DM boxes at short convergence and close range is very effective in-game (especially online against humans, makes better efficiency for me , the first burst on target often destroys their controls or wound the pilot ) and saves ammo , i'm downloading your track at the moment http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EDIT : here's one track i made with P-47 , 120m convergence, two 190-A5 are downed in one pass and with little ammo (short but sustained firing time) , we can see in slow motion the concentrated hits in vital parts of the target plane . Just a test though , usually i use 160m with the Jug

http://www.datafilehost.com/download-330f21d7.html

Tully__
07-11-2009, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
You do have to be a better aim at 300M than 150M...no doubt....but is there really less of a punch???(not knocking your skills)
Yes. The game models ballistics reasonably well, including drop in bullet velocity. It's not so important with the cannon using explosive ordinance as most to the damage is due to the explosion, not the bullet kinetic energy. With the machineguns though, the closer you are the more kinetic energy is available at the target.

For soft targets (pilot, cooling system) the critical range is likely to be fairly far out, but for any part of the target that's armoured you'll need to be pretty close.

Blindman-
07-11-2009, 06:24 PM
IU suggest you dl either Sturmolog (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=353) or MLR (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=357)


Barry, my eyes are better today and I still donít see the actual link. Yes on the first page there is the initial link (Download Now) that works but it takes you to the actual download page where the link to download the file is missing.

http://mission4today.com/uploads/downloads/images/2009/07/4023_page%201.jpg


http://mission4today.com/uploads/downloads/images/2009/07/4023_page%202.jpg


Am I still missing something? (god I hope itís not one of those days?)

Ba5tard5word
07-11-2009, 06:25 PM
I've never paid attention to the slip ball, I just play it by ear...generally I do ok.

Tully__
07-11-2009, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by Blindman-:

Am I still missing something? (god I hope itís not one of those days?)
No, you're not. There are currently no mirrors listed for either of those downloads. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

wheelsup_cavu
07-11-2009, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Blindman-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> IU suggest you dl either Sturmolog (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=353) or MLR (http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=357)


Barry, my eyes are better today and I still donít see the actual link. Yes on the first page there is the initial link (Download Now) that works but it takes you to the actual download page where the link to download the file is missing.

Am I still missing something? (god I hope itís not one of those days?) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I went to the link for the MLR homepage that is shown on the M4T download page and the download is available on MLR's site.
http://www.thinking-board.net/MLR/en_index.htm


I can't help you with Sturmlog because there is not a link to follow. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif


Wheels

Blindman-
07-11-2009, 08:16 PM
Thanks Tully and many thanks Wheelsup for finding me that link.

WTE_Galway
07-12-2009, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
well, im glad you were able to show this can be done.

Now, historically where were the convergences set on P-51s and P-47s???

I only ask, because i'm certain they were able to down an FW-190 in one pass with a longer convergence than 150 meters. To put it in perspective 300M is only 984 ft. 150 meters is 492 feet.



Joe Foss used 50m ... but that was unusually short.

When talking convergence harmonisation comes into it.

The following link is harmonisation for USN post 43 ... I have not yet found a similar article for the airforce.

http://www.researcheratlarge.c...PatternBoresighting/ (http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Aircraft/1943PatternBoresighting/)

Trefle
07-12-2009, 06:34 AM
Good link WTE_Galway , it is interesting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
50m convergence of Joe Foss seems really short , but in real life , it's very likely gunnery in the air is much more dfficult than what it seems in Il-2 , so it's understandable .

In the tracks i posted yesterday , for example this one with 120m convergence : http://www.datafilehost.com/download-8b9b9465.html , you need 4.09 version

We can see in slow motion (1/4 speed when watching the replay) how the P-51's 4 guns all hit vital parts almost constantly from close range , so like said Tully , close range + short convergence means i have maximum velocity + concentrated fire from my MG (and it saves ammo)

i could not reproduce this with 300m convergence (downing one of the toughest fighter , 190A5 , in one pass and relatively short firing time ) , which means for me that in order to get the "Maximum Power" out of the Browning 0.50cal machineguns , one should use short convergence and hit his target from as close as possible with the P-51 but also other planes like USN birds IMHO

JtD
07-12-2009, 10:31 AM
Trefle, this is a short track illustrating extra hitting power from close up. I knew it from the past, it still works and I don't have to think of something new. The downside is it is not with the .50 cal but with the German 7.92mm MG17. You can see in the attached track that I got really close and gave him a very short burst and it immediately started to burn. I'm almost 100% certain that you cannot set an I-16 on fire from 6 o'clock if you shoot from further away.

i16fire (http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/tracks/i16fire.trk)

It's in the trk format which is smaller and allows you to watch it with Arcade=1 enabled in the conf.ini, so you can count the hits if you want to. It does have issues with correct playback and if it doesn't work on your computer I can also give you a ntrk version.

Counting the arrows this were 36 hits out of 36 fired.

M_Gunz
07-12-2009, 11:10 AM
I'll try to get this right to left, P-47 at top of page

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

Muzzles at inches from plane center 107.8, 113.8, 118.8, 125.8. Along the line of fire, what ranges is the converge
within 3 feet total, 18 inches per side? For the inner 2 it's converge +/- 16.7%, the next 2 it's 15.8%, next 2 15.2%
and last 14.3%. With 4 inner guns at 250 yd converge would get the 3 ft wide aim from 210 to 290 yds, an 80 yard window.
With outer guns at 350 yds you get 300 to 400 yards. Longer converge range stretches the 3 foot pattern window.
I went with outer guns in each set ranges rather than average distance, I wanted all the fire but scatter in the 3 ft wide.

But it does show that inner guns should only be used at range inside 350 yards and outer guns maybe 250 to 450, just
to widen things especially where using all the guns would easily justify one set being just a little wider focussed.
The ranges I'd most want to shoot are between 250 and 350 yards effective which is subject to change due to relative
speed of shooter to target and range of the shot, both having the effect of extending effective range more than
enough to miss. People like to park close off six o'clock at a more or less constant range and shoot because it's
easier not deal with all that, range is range near co-speed and following.

That's not bad but consider that nose guns are tight from start to end.

Trefle
07-12-2009, 12:41 PM
From the link WTE_Galway posted , i think what the Admiral said at the end is spot on in-game :


9. Nothing in this technical note obviates the necessity for accurate shooting at close ranges to obtain optimum results. There is no substitute for marksmanship. Pilot aiming error increases with range and with approaches requiring high deflection shooting. Pattern boresighting can assist the average pilot in deflection shooting and should increase the effectiveness of the expert pilot at long ranges. However, even with this increased effectiveness, the chance of getting a "kill" with accurate shooting at close ranges is so much greater, pilots cannot afford to discontinue the timetested practice of getting in close where the most effective shooting is possible.


RALPH DAVISON
Rear Admiral, USN
Assistant Chief of Bureau


For the convergence , as you said M.Gunz , when you can set different convergence to inner and outer guns (like Bill Swagger does with his P-47 ) , it's probably a good compromise to have the most chances of hitting your target , but i thought it would be at the slight expense of hitting power (cause at best , only half your guns would hit the target at convergence , since half your guns have different convergence ) .

With the razorback Mustang however , what convergence do you use M.Gunz (ingame ) , a shorter one like Joe Foss in real life with his Wildcat (which also had only 4 guns ) or a longer one ?

I tended to think that a closer range convergence would help maximising the power of the .50 cal in order to have concentrated fire in addition to the fact that it makes more damage at close range

WTE_Galway
07-12-2009, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Trefle:
Good link WTE_Galway , it is interesting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
50m convergence of Joe Foss seems really short , but in real life , it's very likely gunnery in the air is much more dfficult than what it seems in Il-2 , so it's understandable .


well not 100% sure that was that was the precise convergence but he claimed to start shooting no furhter out than 100 yards and fire all the way down to 50' ... note that even in the USN and USMC (which was Foss) there were squadrons using much much longer convergences ... it seemed to be up to the squadron leader


This is the relevant bit of the Foss interview ...


Originally posted by Joe Foss :

GUNNERY

Q. What do you think of the use of tracer? Did you use your tracer for sighting?

A. Yes, sir. To start out I used the sight. After I got started, however, I just dropped my seat clear down so that I wouldn't have my neck stuck out and just barely looked over the edge. Then I used my tracer altogether, but, I had previously used the sight enough to know right where to shoot. As for deflection shots, I'd always lead enough so that I'd never underlead. I'd always over-lead. When you overlead, you just ease forward on your stick and you can always see as far as the axis where he's going to go. You shoot in front of him and just ease forward on your stick. He flies right into it - you see your tracer work right on him. And on the tail end shot just give a burst of tracer, If it's over or under, you just go up or down. I never wanted to sit up high enough to look at the sight. I just stayed down. To start with, I flew around looking in the sight. It works fine, as far as the sight goes; but after a while you don't need it. Is fact, I don't believe any of the boys that had been in combat a lot were using it; they all slid away down in the seat.

Q. Depended entirely on tracer?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. How close do you have to come to do effective damage?

A. When we started out, all our shooting was out of range. We would begin on the enemy a quarter of a mile away, and by the time we actually got into range we'd used up our ammunition. Then we started getting in there from 300 yards to 50 foot off, and really started hitting them. Then we moved it down so that we'd shoot right at 100 yards - then you can't miss. If you're off to one side or the other, just kick it on. If you shoot too far off, you scare 'em! If you keep your tracers out of there - the Jap pilot shoots. I've seen him shoot half a mile off; they just keep shooting until they go on range, and they're still shooting whan they pass you. They really get rid of the ammunition! I talked to the boys when a new outfit would come in. When you talk to a man before he goes out the first time, it doesn't do any good; but after he's been out the first time or the first two times, then you can talk to him. He knows what you're talking about. I'd just tell them, "Get in there, really get them in your sights, and really shoot close." I told one group that, and every flight scored on the trip. They'd all had a couple of combats before; they were shooting away out of range - 500 or 600 yards.



full interview ... http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Aircraft/VMF-121/

Bearcat99
07-12-2009, 10:17 PM
AHH!! I see what you mean now Wayne.. I thought the link was active... I havent found it anywhere either (Sturmolog..)

M_Gunz
07-13-2009, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Trefle:
From the link WTE_Galway posted , i think what the Admiral said at the end is spot on in-game :

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> 9. Nothing in this technical note obviates the necessity for accurate shooting at close ranges to obtain optimum results. There is no substitute for marksmanship. Pilot aiming error increases with range and with approaches requiring high deflection shooting. Pattern boresighting can assist the average pilot in deflection shooting and should increase the effectiveness of the expert pilot at long ranges. However, even with this increased effectiveness, the chance of getting a "kill" with accurate shooting at close ranges is so much greater, pilots cannot afford to discontinue the timetested practice of getting in close where the most effective shooting is possible.


RALPH DAVISON
Rear Admiral, USN
Assistant Chief of Bureau


For the convergence , as you said M.Gunz , when you can set different convergence to inner and outer guns (like Bill Swagger does with his P-47 ) , it's probably a good compromise to have the most chances of hitting your target , but i thought it would be at the slight expense of hitting power (cause at best , only half your guns would hit the target at convergence , since half your guns have different convergence ) . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I said is that the bullets don't have to be at converge to be effective. A circle as wide as a fuselage will do.
Then I showed what the range window when both sets of guns would be that effective. And the total range where at least
one set of guns is in that 3ft or smaller circle is much wider than all guns set to one convergence.


With the razorback Mustang however , what convergence do you use M.Gunz (ingame ) , a shorter one like Joe Foss in real life with his Wildcat (which also had only 4 guns ) or a longer one ?

About 300m for boom and zoom, no less than 250. When I'm closing at over 100m/sec I want to get my shots in before it's
time to veer off colliding with the target. At 200m to go I have less than 2 seconds to clear the target, is that really
a good time to start shooting? As I'm closing so fast, a 300 yard shot would take long enough that the closing speed
brings the target over 30 meters closer. So I trigger a short burst at 340m to check aim, correct as needed and fire
for effect since about one second later I need to exit behind my target and circle a bit to check the damage.
I'm not nearly so good as Erich Hartmann who would turn into a target from off a wing at 50m or less, fire and exit.
Certainly not with a P-51.

I don't worry about the power of the .50's so much because the parts of the planes I shoot and the angles I shoot at
are almost always unarmored or lightly armored and have critical parts open to damage. Deflection shooting does that
if you aim at all well. It only takes one hit on a critical part and the target is seriously damaged.
13 rps x 6 guns x 1 full second is 78 bullets looking for trouble, I usually get something to smoke or die.

I do split the P-47 guns up.


I tended to think that a closer range convergence would help maximising the power of the .50 cal in order to have concentrated fire in addition to the fact that it makes more damage at close range

Yes that is true. I just find that convergence range limits where all your shots come together can limit your tactics.
No way *I* could start shooting no farther than 150m out when I'll close that gap in about 1 second, that's how long of
a burst could I get in before adding my prop to the job. Maybe you can, maybe you fight differently than BnZ.

I don't like slowing down for a target, it throws my trim off and blows my energy.

BillSwagger
07-13-2009, 06:36 AM
http://images.chron.com/blogs/txpotomac/ross2.jpg



This thread made me sit down and play with my convergence offline, again.
I set up a 300kph chase between a P-47D22 and a friendly 190A5 Alta.
I shot at it for over an hour adjusting different convergences (120)(270)450) every 10 or 15 minutes, and even played using only 4 of the 8 50 cal guns to get a better idea of what is more effective.
I would only begin to shoot at the target at about 300M, for i feel that any further than that requires a steadier shot, not to mention it gets much tougher to follow the tracers, so it wouldn't relate well to most combat situations.
I primarily shot down the center of the fuselage.

In conclusion:

I think i learned that maybe another way to look at convergence is consistency of hitting power vs consistency of range.

Do you want all your hitting power focused, with a shorter range (short convergence) or do you want it evenly spread out over your bead (long convergence)??
Keeping in mind that i was able to disable controls or kill the pilot more consistently at longer ranges using longer convergences, where on the other hand, i was able to kill the engine or saw a piece off the plane at shorter convergences.
No matter what you decide, a well placed shot at about 200M seems to have the same effect no matter what convergence you use, with a huge exception for 700M where the shots almost seem to go around the target at 200M.

I was able to consistently ignite the engine at every convergence at about 170-200M

It really comes down to flying style and preference. I hate the lack of range, so even after careful consideration i still opt for a convergence in the mid 200s.

There is more that i could share, but i think folks should find what works best for them.

VW-IceFire
07-13-2009, 07:29 AM
Its always good to go back and adjust your convergence a bit. I like to have mine a bit further out as well...240 to 275 is what I like to have. Thats usually when I feel like I can hit a target with the first shot anyways so its the ideal range for me.

Interesting that you found the guns to be effective inside of that no matter what the convergence was. I suspect that if you are good and understand whats happening then that is the case...but if you have your convergence at the default 500 meters the average pilot will miss most of their shots at close range.

BillSwagger
07-13-2009, 09:39 AM
A major deciding factor is just looking and seeing what distance i was engaging at and at what distance i can accurately hit my target.

What i've also noticed is using a longer convergence might not mean I actually intend to hit a plane at 400M.
What it does is give the bead a gradual slope toward the middle of my shot so that i can effectively hit my target with a balanced burst.

Assuming the guns are 20ft apart (P-47), here are some numbers on how long the bullets are traveling with in a 3ft diameter from each other.


bullets will travel inside a 3 ft radius for about
150M convergence, 49 meters

250M convergence, 75 meters

350M convergence, 105 meters

450M convergence, 135 meters

550M convergence, 165 meters

650M convergence, 195 meters

750M convergence, 225 meters


I haven't done a proof since high school, but this kinda shows what i'm trying to explain.

deepo_HP
07-13-2009, 11:48 AM
hi billswagger,

the dispersion of the guns gets worse on longer ranges. the longer the distance, the wider spread are the bullets.
then, aiming at all gets less safe at distances... inaccurate gunsight, unstable platform, and any input (or movement of target)will have more effect to bring you out of aim. you said so in your other post as well.
this means of course, the nearer the target, the better the shot - in general.

now convergence...
of course, the longer the convergence, the smaller the angle gets. however, as you calculated, with 350 conv, the 3ft diameter lasts from 300m to 400m, with 450 conv from 390m to 520m - i don't think, that this will help to counter the above mentioned side-effects at all.


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Keeping in mind that i was able to disable controls or kill the pilot more consistently at longer ranges using longer convergences, where on the other hand, i was able to kill the engine or saw a piece off the plane at shorter convergences. i am not sure to understand it right. you mean, you are able to have a higher rate of hitting any part on long distance, for spread and randomness - and you had been able to hit protected parts by better aiming and concentrated fire on short range?


Originally posted by BillSwagger:
No matter what you decide, a well placed shot at about 200M seems to have the same effect no matter what convergence you use,...
I was able to consistently ignite the engine at every convergence at about 170-200M. i think, a well placed shot out of convergence can only happen with one side of weapons, and then perhaps with tracers rather than gunsight. otherwise it is not 'placed'.
hitting the engine at 170m with all weapons and by gunsight is hard to imagine, if convergence is set different (like 300m). do you mean, you had less chances to hit the engine with proper convergence?

i tried some simple grafics for 3 convergence-settings. i also considered, that the target will move further during bullet-flight (30m at 420kmh, bullets 950m/s).
the scale is as good as the pixels allow.

http://www.dadatainment.info/wb/conv150.gif
http://www.dadatainment.info/wb/conv250.gif
http://www.dadatainment.info/wb/conv450.gif

imo, generally a near target is better than a good convergence-setting and far away target. always. but for reason, which have nothing to do with convergence.
i think, the use of gunsight is unreliable without convergence, since none side of weapons will hit the spot.
does anyone know the average dispersion of 8 guns on convergence?

RPMcMurphy
07-13-2009, 01:25 PM
Scroo the fifty caleeber. I use a phased plasma-rifle in the 30 watt range. I would then typically toorminate this thred imeediataly before it can reproduce."
http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo71/11072008/term1.jpg

horseback
07-13-2009, 01:26 PM
A couple of years back, I ran the numbers for the convergences of the P-51B and -51D models and the P-47, using the scale drawings and a modeler's scale ruler to approximate the basic distances involved.

I also used the scale drawings and the ruler to determine the fuselage widths of the Bf 109 and the Fw 190A/D. It worked out to around three feet, or about one meter.

Since I'm at work, the exact numbers are not at my fingertips, but the gist of my fiddling around with graph paper, straight edge and protractor was that assuming 'point' convergence, (that is, that the in-game convergence for US fighters is set for all the guns to hit a very small circle at the given range) meant that all the bullets should strike within a circle about the width of the standard German single seater's fuselage from about 100m to 300m if you set the convergence at 200m.

Obviously, you can extend that 'killing zone' a bit with the P-47's dual convergence option.

I've found that the effectiveness of the fifties is greater at the near range of the killing zone, especially if you use your rudder a bit to see-saw the bullets across the target, but it's absolutely deadly within the 160-240m range if you stay on target for a full second or two (not just 'tapping the triggers' like you would with the 190), even at a dead six.

The real P-51B/C/D and the P-47 had their guns mounted on the same plane, rather than on the plane of the wing angle (dihedral), so the elevation angle should be very close for all guns, and give you a relatively consistant 'loft' as range increases. With experience, you can use that property to 'chip away' at a target's performance and bring them in range for the coup de grace.

cheers

horseback

BillSwagger
07-13-2009, 02:09 PM
Nice illustrations.



Originally posted by deepo_HP:
hi billswagger,

the dispersion of the guns gets worse on longer ranges. the longer the distance, the wider spread are the bullets.

This does depend on convergence. A shallower convergence will cause shots to go wide at longer ranges, which i believe is what you are describing.



then, aiming at all gets less safe at distances... inaccurate gunsight, unstable platform, and any input (or movement of target)will have more effect to bring you out of aim. you said so in your other post as well.
this means of course, the nearer the target, the better the shot - in general.

agreed


now convergence...
of course, the longer the convergence, the smaller the angle gets. however, as you calculated, with 350 conv, the 3ft diameter lasts from 300m to 400m, with 450 conv from 390m to 520m - i don't think, that this will help to counter the above mentioned side-effects at all.

Agreed.
You would need to find where you are most comfortable shooting range is, and work off of that.
Some people are very effective at 400M, some people prefer to hit at closer range.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Keeping in mind that i was able to disable controls or kill the pilot more consistently at longer ranges using longer convergences, where on the other hand, i was able to kill the engine or saw a piece off the plane at shorter convergences. i am not sure to understand it right. you mean, you are able to have a higher rate of hitting any part on long distance, for spread and randomness - and you had been able to hit protected parts by better aiming and concentrated fire on short range?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm certain i could have hit the plane further than 300M, but there are too many variables in a combat situation where shooting beyond 300M becomes difficult to test. So i limited the distance to begin shooting to about 300M with all convergences.
With longer convergence i was able begin hitting the plane at about 300M, where immediate effects were noticed. Sometimes leading to a pilot kill, disabled controls, or even fire. Placement of the shot was down the middle of the aircraft.

Closer convergence (120M) for obvious reasons, the shots went wide. I made the point to mention i was able to ignite the engine or saw off a piece of the plane more consistently as the plane came with in 170M, however this doesn't always translate to more kills at that convergence, because of its limited range and spread. I also noticed a shorter trigger pull with faster results, but i noticed i could get similar results firing with longer convergences at slightly longer distances.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
No matter what you decide, a well placed shot at about 200M seems to have the same effect no matter what convergence you use,...
I was able to consistently ignite the engine at every convergence at about 170-200M. i think, a well placed shot out of convergence can only happen with one side of weapons, and then perhaps with tracers rather than gunsight. otherwise it is not 'placed'.
hitting the engine at 170m with all weapons and by gunsight is hard to imagine, if convergence is set different (like 300m). do you mean, you had less chances to hit the engine with proper convergence?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope. I was able to ignite the engine no matter what convergence at a distance of 170m to 200M, although it is also true i was not always hitting the plane at proper convergence. I said 170 to 200, because it seemed to lean toward 170 with shorter convergences, and was closer to 200M with longer convergences. These are averages as well, cause many times i was igniting the engine at 210 and 220 with the 450M convergence.
As for placement, at 200M, it wasnt difficult to get a bead on the plane aiming down the middle of the aircraft. I know we calculate with the assumption that target is dead center in front of us, but in most cases the pitch and yaw of the planes are different causing the bead to hit at a slight angle. So now I would calculate how long the bullets are with in a 5 ft diameter. (60% more than at 3ft)
I'm just explaining what i saw. The trigger time was nearly the same in each instance while igniting the engine.
Now, the closer the plane got, under 170M, the shorter convergence showed its advantages.



imo, generally a near target is better than a good convergence-setting and far away target. always. but for reason, which have nothing to do with convergence.



I actually offset my P-47 convergence cause i find i get more consistent results, but there is a threshold i mentioned at about 200M. I believe it to be pointless to have a convergence longer than 400M, if you intend to shoot at aircraft, and even 400 is on the long side. But, there are people who use this and are actually quite good.

As for the spread and dispersion there is a level of randomness to it, and the longer the shot the more dispersion, but its still a relatively tight cone.

M_Gunz
07-13-2009, 05:04 PM
It's not really useful to fire at ranges where the strike takes so long to hit that the target can jink out of the fire.
If the target flies steady or it's a bomber the that range will be longer. Better bomber busters (sy it 3 times fast)
were able to take on bombers from beyond the tail gunners range of 500m high over Europe.

Deepo, real nice but a couple points, the first being the smaller one;
When you know that your converge will straddle a target, you can aim to one side a tiny bit and get half your fire on it
solid. But to do that at all you have to be firing from dead six. Try from the four or five, you'll get no straddle!
More like a rake but not a straddle. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Deflection works better there and gets those unarmored spot hits.

What range you set should match your style of flying and fighting. There is no one "right way" to set convergence.

WTE_Galway
07-13-2009, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by RPMcMurphy:
Scroo the fifty caleeber. I use a phased plasma-rifle in the 30 watt range. I would then typically toorminate this thred imeediataly before it can reproduce."
http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo71/11072008/term1.jpg



haha ... so you mean the 21st century equivalent of a mk103

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y101/clannagh/ammunition.jpg

horseback
07-13-2009, 07:37 PM
Damn.

That thing looks more like a spear than a bullet.

No wonder I could never hit anything with it.

cheers

horseback

deepo_HP
07-13-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by horseback:
Damn.

That thing looks more like a spear than a bullet.

No wonder I could never hit anything with it.

cheers

horseback

no, just wrong understanding of se apparatus of se mk-103:
don't use it like other cannons. approach your target slowly from a level high 6. when you release se trigger, se geshoss will fall out of se cannon and drop on se target.

deepo_HP
07-13-2009, 08:27 PM
hi mgunz,

rgr that.
i think, i have misunderstood billswagger in some points anyway. the illustrations should just show very oversimplified the proportions of bullet-stream and target.

so i would conclude, that 6-8 guns in outer wings need at least some experience or individual style added to convergence? like, opposite to 2 inner guns/cannons, the gunsight is less an aimpoint than a general marker, from where to start the appropriate pattern of bullet-stream.

M_Gunz
07-13-2009, 11:55 PM
Yes harmonization patterns included moving muzzles to make a pattern in at least some cases, there are records
showing the guns pointing to disperse all the shots to fill a circle at harmonization range or make a box.
How much angle is 1 or 2 foot over at 600 feet range? So many bullets, random factors, shots go thick in a
tight group relative to the target and something should give.

If it's about bullet energy, look at what the Hurricanes used to down bombers at 200+ yards in 1940.. .303s.

BillSwagger
07-14-2009, 06:33 AM
They also could adjust the bore of the barrels.

I think its preset in game, but they were able to use point convergence, where bullets would hit with in the same square foot at 300M.
I think once the API rounds were more common place they used a different boring for wider spray patterns because it was taking less bullet impacts to bring a plane down.

Hopefully my explanation of my experiences with different convergence settings is more understandable now.

I wasn't trying to make an argument or convince people what is better, i was simply describing what i saw, and the tendencies and results with the different convergences.

It is over simplified to a degree, so that there is no special skill or practice needed other than to aim down the middle of the aircraft. I think the average user could get the same results i did.



Deflection shooting is a whole other animal.
That takes practice and skill, and a more advanced player. There are different degrees of skill required depending on the angle and speed of the shot.
Having not tested deflection results i cant say what is more effective, however the shot you never land is never effective.

What i do know is 50 cal tracer rounds can be difficult to see at longer ranges, especially in a turn. Lining up a shot at 300M at 45 degrees deflection can be tough.

There is more arc to the bullet travel, so having a shorter convergence might actually cause your bullets to go wider, at less distance than they would in a straight line shot.

These are others things to consider as you play with you convergence settings.

M_Gunz
07-14-2009, 10:30 AM
Bill, you mean adjustable boresight? That's looking down through the barrel to line up where it is pointed.
The bore is the hole down through the barrel and while they get a little bigger through wear it's not adjustable.
Yeah there's a scan been around of a chart that got held out in front of the plane and the guns would be boresighted
onto different + marks to make a pattern. Adding dispersion including bullet yaw effects and the bullets hit all over.
It don't matter, shootin is the fun part!

Deflection takes practice but that practice can be on just about anything. You need to get a solid feel for range and how
long a shot takes to cover that range including your close-rate. Once you can guess pretty close you watch the target move
across your view and fire so when your shots reach a point ahead, so does the target. You fire a touch early just to be
sure, 1/4 second is fine - the target can't react that fast - and if the shots are off a bit then correct and give it 1/2
second by which time you need to maneuver to prevent ramming or popping out in front of the target.

With wing guns, you want your wings lined up on the same plane the target is moving. You don't want to shoot above and below
where you aim cause you banked to shoot. With nose guns you can be aligned how you want.

With deflection you can close on a target moving faster than you are. Crossing a circle is shorter than going around it.
With deflection you can be faster than your target and still not pass in front of the target, like in yoyo and barrel attacks.

Don't have the tail, tail gear, tail structure, seat armor or anything behind it in my way when shooting from the side.
30 cal will do at decent range through cockpit plexi and fuselage nose. Pilot, instruments, engine all loaded with easily
damaged critical hit 3D parts. Some planes cover more but none are tanks.

BillSwagger
07-14-2009, 10:41 AM
i wasn't sure how to interperted "bore" but it was intended to give better bullet spread rather than having them all hit at the same point.

I'm not sure what they did on the aircraft, but isn't it true that if the barrel widens just a hair or two, as the bullets travel through it, doesn't that increase the dispersion??

M_Gunz
07-14-2009, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
i wasn't sure how to interperted "bore" but it was intended to give better bullet spread rather than having them all hit at the same point.

We've been saying the same thing, if that's what you mean. Yeah, not all pointed to hit the same spot.


I'm not sure what they did on the aircraft, but isn't it true that if the barrel widens just a hair or two, as the bullets travel through it, doesn't that increase the dispersion??

Get out the micrometers and you'll find that hair from certain parts of the body might be only .001" thick by .003-.004" wide.
I think that barrels would melt quicker than they do if that were true. The give would be on the order of mechanical
strain, much smaller. The outside of a bullet is lead or copper because it is softer than the barrel and deforms to fill
the grooves and seal against pressure from behind. The bullet gives before the barrel but it does push on the barrel and
makes a lot of heat through friction. I'm not even sure what you'd measure the deformation with. A strain gauge?
If the barrel is over-hot and still being used then who knows, but that's how you wear the things out quickest!

There's a whole WWII study on PDF about .50 cal bullet yaw and the effects on penetration of armor plate. In the data
it's easy to see that a lot of the .50's they used came out of the muzzle and put on some yaw; the tip of the bullet
circles around the true path, the center of mass follows the true path. Considering that nothing is made perfect, this
is true to some degree of all bullets and looking into shooting match articles the same subject comes up. The bullet
leaves the path-control of the barrel and establishes it's spin center, before the bullet is clear there may be some
force of the difference push the back edge of the bullet against the barrel and the bullet gets a tiny side vector component
and a bit of yaw that makes it do a gyro dance until it settles. The .50 bullet is turning at over 13,000 rpm.

FI.Spitsfire
07-14-2009, 12:32 PM
I use a 180 convergence for mg's.
I can set up a QM with a P51D-5NT and either a friendly FW190 A-6 or a friendly dora and repeat this scene every time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v487/Spitsfire/p51converge.jpg

If you want you can do it to enemy planes as well!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v487/Spitsfire/p51converge2.jpg

IME they are very effective at convergence, not very effective when not at convergence(unless you get a lucky pk).
Down side is that you can't hit a plane that is to far beyond the convergence setting should you need to!

BillSwagger
07-14-2009, 02:02 PM
This coincides with everything i've said about convergences under 200M.

I was able to get similar consistency using just 4 guns at 150M convergence.

I think there is a threshold at about 170-180M, where the bullet impacts are significantly greater.
My guess is you could do the same damage with 230M convergence, firing at 170M range.

BTW, i was testing on a 190 A5 alta if that means anything, using 1943 50 cal (p-47d22)

I think the most resistant plane to 50 cal (impact) is the Hellcat, but i kept lighting its engine up at 250M....so it wasn't really a good test plane.