PDA

View Full Version : Kinetic damage at range



LLv34_Stafroty
04-15-2005, 06:53 AM
Noticed one day, that range doesnt affect at all when hittin planes at extreme distances. No differencies witht damage and hitting speed of KE ammo.

I had German Jet, flew over 900kmh IAN and had mate with US Jet firing at me at long range, his rounds flew just bit faster than my jet, some 20kmh faster only, like that pilot would actually catch one with hand, easily. well, one of those slow moving rounds touched my plane, i got instant fuel leak rightaway, it was bit odd.

so mr. Oleg, are you gonna make better ballistics and KE formulas for BoB?

BBB_Hyperion
04-15-2005, 07:40 AM
Thats funny mv 890 m/s for Browning M2 cause the only US Jet is the YP80 in this game. Thats 3204 km/h so which jet is close to this speed i wonder a little bit faster were the bullets .)

And the range when the drag drops the bullet to that speed of your plane you can calculate yourself .) But its not that close as may think.

Tipo_Man
04-15-2005, 07:56 AM
Wow... you are joking, right?
"some 20kmh faster only"- do you imagine how slow is that?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
It's about 6meters per second....
You tell me it took 2 (two) seconds to the bullet to pass from your tail to your bow!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

AFAIK all shells in the sim are modelled till they loose some percentage of their speed. Generally all 12,7mm bullets disappear after 2-3 kilometers. At that range they fly with at least 400-500m/s... It's about 1500km/h ...

I hope your school teacher is not reading this...

And kinetik damage IS modelled quite correctly in the sim.... Just try head on attacks and you'll notice it.

Atomic_Marten
04-15-2005, 08:24 AM
LOL

Hey, I have just remembered story in which one guy is claiming that he can shoot himself with his own MK108s while flying ME163.
I didnt try that tho. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Choctaw111
04-15-2005, 08:46 AM
I am big on ballistics. If they are wrong then it makes the sim not so attractive to me. I have been trying to figure out if the velocity of the bullets are increased with the forward speed of the AC. When a 50 cal round is fired it is traveling at about 2,000 KM an hour plus you must also add the speed of the AC. If you are firing rearward from a gunners position then you subtract that speed of the AC from the overall velocity. This will make quite a difference when you calculate the overall Kinetic Energy. Also you must factor in the speed of the AC that you are hitting and his relative velocity compared to your AC. If the AC is flying toward you the KE will be much greater and also allows you to open fire from much greater distances. What we need is a formula (if we don't have it yet) that calculates the velocity of the bullet to include the speed of your AC firing forward of backward and the relative velocity of the target AC to your AC. We would then see some very realistic results...

Fehler
04-15-2005, 09:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
Noticed one day, that range doesnt affect at all when hittin planes at extreme distances. No differencies witht damage and hitting speed of KE ammo.

I had German Jet, flew over 900kmh IAN and had mate with US Jet firing at me at long range, his rounds flew just bit faster than my jet, some 20kmh faster only, like that pilot would actually catch one with hand, easily. well, one of those slow moving rounds touched my plane, i got instant fuel leak rightaway, it was bit odd.

so mr. Oleg, are you gonna make better ballistics and KE formulas for BoB? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Per hour versus per second.. Now if you were in a SR-71 Blackbird.. perhaps.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Amon26
04-15-2005, 06:23 PM
I remember the days when there were no kinetics, it was either you hit the bubble or missed the bubble. Hit the bubble enough times, plane disappears and an explode-sprite shows up. Its kinda cool we can discuss details like this nowdays and sometimes I wonder what we'll be talking about in sims 8 years from now.

"A piston blew out of my engine and when it did, the shrapnel came through the window and a piece got jammed in my pilot's left shoulder, but he was still able to control the throttle fine...WTF?!" ^_~

Jetbuff
04-15-2005, 09:00 PM
While I'm having trouble swallowing stafroty's numbers, he does have a point. Even in the original manual I remember being shocked by the statement that at 500m a bullet may even bounce off of human skin due to loss of KE! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

However, in FB, the effective range of most weapons (low and high MV alike) appears to extend well up to ~1000m which I find curious. At a 1000m, I would expect only explosive rounds to do any damage and then only on the surface of the plane due to low penetrative power. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
04-15-2005, 10:56 PM
That really depends on the bullet Jetbuff and its MV as well someone stated above plane speed adds to bullet speed when shooting forward.

(But the speed of the target needs to be substracted from the bullet speed to get bullet impact kinetic energy)

You cant generalise that for all calibers and ammo types.

LEBillfish
04-16-2005, 12:12 AM
This is interesting, and I understand it, and I'd say we all know the initial post was just a simple misunderstanding....So on to the next question...

"How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

WWMaxGunz
04-16-2005, 01:40 AM
I was in a small town in Delaware back in the 70's when a tennis player in a match jumped
up to make a shot and fell dead. He was hit in the side of the head by a .22 LR that a
kid had fired from a garage at a bird on the mailbox and missed, over half a mile away.
I wasn't there but saw it in the paper. I know that town and surroundings very, very well.
A long walk if you were in a hurry. I wouldn't just for kicks stand out to get shot at by
most any firearm even at 500 meters. Well, maybe 22 short from short barrel pistol won't
go so far. And any shotgun... some others I am sure but best not to FA.

Seasoned State Cops are said to park under highway bridges right about midnight on New Years
just because of idiots firing rifles and pistols in the air.

Jetbuff
04-16-2005, 02:34 AM
Well, like I said, the bouncing off human skin part at 500m kinda threw me off - did seem unlikely. Otherwise, what's the point of snipers? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

However, even small calibre rounds like the browning .303's in the sim are still effective up to 1000m away. Given that the target is usually flying at 400kph itself, it seems to be a bit of a tall order for a bullet travelling that sort of distance to even dent an aluminium frame, let alone cause catastrophic damage.

Basicly, apart from the effects of increased dispersion I can't seem to discern any significant reduction in the kinetic energy of any round in FB. Should the reduction in effectiveness be more pronounced or am I expecting too much in terms of KE decay?

WWMaxGunz
04-16-2005, 03:10 AM
CIL Ballistics and Range Table:

.303 British
180 grain Sabretip bullet (hunting round closest I have to military round at a guess)
Muzzle 2540 fps, 500 yards 1580 fps
Muzzle 2580 ft/lbs, 500 yards 1000 ft/lbs -- on a pointed bullet about the diameter of a pen.

That bullet travels 500 yards in the time it takes to rise 5 inches and fall 76 inches, that
is the high point being 5 inches over the sight line at 125 yards and at 500 yards it is 71
inches below the sightline when sighted in at 250 yards. 6 feet 4 inches of drop when in 1
second the bullet will fall 16 feet but in 1/2 second it will fall 4 feet... try to imagine
a slug going so fast that it travels 500 yards in just over 1/2 second and is still going
over mach 1 at sealevel... that's not going to punch a hole in what? And that isn't even
the military round, just close.

IMO, people don't respect firearms properly on average.

Jetbuff
04-16-2005, 09:32 PM
You're right Neal, I'm no munitions expert. However, I'd like to know the power/speed of the bullet at 1000 meters. (~1100 yards)

WWMaxGunz
04-16-2005, 10:31 PM
The chart goes to 500 yards. By there the drop is 6 feet for that round, more or less for
others. It is made for civilian shooters taking aimed shots at smaller things than planes
or cars.

Snipers with scopes and 30 cal military rifles sighted in at 1000 yards have made head shots
that didn't leave enough for any doubt. That .22 LR bullet weighed about 50 to 60 grains,
1/3rd your average 30 cal and started out at about 1200 fps yet when fired up at a slight
arc and hit that college dude in the thin bone side of his head it had the power to break
through and do instantly critical damage. He was dead before he hit the ground from a jump
even if it was an incredibly off chance accident.
At 500 yards the .303 is going over 1500 fps and weighs 3x more for just over 2x the frontal
area. Once it gets below mach 1 the drag on it reduces considerably, btw, even if the bullet
is not boat tailed. But what that will do to internal hardened aluminum structures some of
which are over 1/16th inch thick I cannot say. The skin could be enough to stop it if there
was a bracing element right beneath and the angle really tight... I doubt such detail down
to about 5 cm granularity is modelled or could be though -- but surface strength and angle
of impact are modelled at least on average since yes, IL2 has ricochets possible. Where
you are hitting and how many times the same DM piece matters. And don't go by graphics and
sound to say hit once or twice, these are not physical events but models that have to run
in real time.

Time to get Fehler to run some experiments if he will.

I remember back in the early 70's out with my brother in law (sister is 12 years older than
me) and breaking rocks at 200 yards using a 30-06 with cartridges loaded with 1/2 the usual
powder and the rest filled with cream of wheat (so no air space to compress). It had a
scope and we had a spotter scope, part of our time we spent making gravel out of rocks
with half power and considerably slower bullets.

Jetbuff
04-17-2005, 02:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
But what that will do to internal hardened aluminum structures some of
which are over 1/16th inch thick I cannot say. The skin could be enough to stop it if there
was a bracing element right beneath and the angle really tight... I doubt such detail down
to about 5 cm granularity is modelled or could be though -- but surface strength and angle
of impact are modelled at least on average since yes, IL2 has ricochets possible. Where
you are hitting and how many times the same DM piece matters. And don't go by graphics and
sound to say hit once or twice, these are not physical events but models that have to run
in real time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh I don't go by graphics representations, I was just wondering about how one can lose control surfaces rods or lines from an MG ping at 1000m. As quiet_man noted in the now locked Lixma troll attempt, it seems that high initial KE is the pre-eminent factor in determining how much damage is done. i.e., just like drag on most aircraft appears to be generous, it seems drag on most bullets is similarly weak.

The other night I got a Tony (?pointy Japanese plane) smoking, leaking fuel and apparently without elevator with a rear-quarter spray from at least 600m away. I only pinged him a couple of times, since only two of my Hellcat's guns were operating and my plane violently jerked to one side every time I fired. Granted, the Japanese planes are flimsy, but the same can be repeated against the 109 and the 190. At 1000m, I find it hard to believe that a .303 (or even a .50) would do enough damage to a wing to significantly alter the flying characteristics of a plane as sturdy as the 190.

By far the most devastating round at range is the green laser of death. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

I know it has a high muzzle velocity, but the number of times I have suffered/inflicted catastrophic damage with this baby at incredible distances is rather alarming. Heck, I've actually severed the wing of a zooming 190 with an IL-2's MG's from at least 800m a couple of times.

Of course, it could all come down to a simplified DM (to prevent a slideshow) as you said. I truly hope so because otherwise it means that there is a flaw in how decelleration is modeled in PF.

LLv34_Stafroty
04-17-2005, 02:06 PM
Seems like ppl didnt understand my first post or issue in it.

thats much likely my great English skill.

well, to put it simple:

my plane was flying some 900kmh IAS about, enemy behind some one km or more, was shooting at me, so, when his rounds reached my position, rounds flew so slowly past me that pilot really could grab one in had, i still had much speed and bullet speed was drop quite down, aint 900kmh some 300m per sec or such, anyway, i was at the point where those rounds vanished. and they really were sloooow that it really looked stupid, when one hit me and punchtured my fuel tank, which sfor sure would have been impossible. so, there was some KE in rounds still, IF target would have been stationary, but, i was flying really fast, and rounds barely flew past me. understood now?

so what i think, is that speed difference of rounds and airplanes aint calculated when dealin with KE damage, that i think game engine only uses Ke table for rounds,or in even more simplier way, it just uses same amount of damage no matter what range is. dunno how it is, but now in my opinion, i think rounds have always same amount of damage no matter what the distance, speed etc to the target is.

it doesnt count up the speed differencies of round and plane, that what im sure of. get i now?

WWMaxGunz
04-17-2005, 02:24 PM
Well, a 30 cal MMG will chew up a car at 1000 yards and you wouldn't want to be inside.
Also consider the number of guns firing 10 shots per second, if the target is anything
steady you will land at least a few hits in a general area that the DM may think is one
place -or- you will increase the chances of a critical hit like the control line which
is weak.

As for drag on bullets, that decreases with altitude IRL and ranges should increase as
you go up. It is checkable in a rough way but the mission setup and tests would be a
lot of work. You could time shot to hit at ranges and altitudes on playbacks if you
want to try assessing game ballistics. Might even work out rises and drops to see if
they correspond with travel times but have to be careful to get it right before making
claims. Air is roughly 1.5% less dense for every 1000 feet IIRC so that may be wrong.

When people say lasers, I usually stop taking them at all serious by the second time.
if nothing else, it's an insult to 1C for the work they've done. Run an older sim and
compare the bullet trajectories.

LLv34_Stafroty
04-17-2005, 04:33 PM
well, in that one sortie those rounds which barely flew past me, would not penetrate a cardboard if one would be stucked on my plane, they weer THAT slow, it would have demanded hundreds of rounds in same place to make hole in AC skin.

what i talk, is that rounds were flying almost at same speed as my plane was. got it? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jetbuff
04-17-2005, 05:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Well, a 30 cal MMG will chew up a car at 1000 yards and you wouldn't want to be inside. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Static car, or car moving at 600kph? Even the range would be different (more than 1000m) if the target was moving.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is checkable in a rough way but the mission setup and tests would be a
lot of work. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You're right, it would be a lot of work and I don't have that kind of fanaticism.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>When people say lasers, I usually stop taking them at all serious by the second time.
if nothing else, it's an insult to 1C for the work they've done. Run an older sim and
compare the bullet trajectories. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
LASERS! LASERS! LASERS! LASERS! LASERS! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Spare me the guilt trip. We were simply discussing whether it was accurate or not. No one insulted anyone. Oleg doing a wonderful job does not perclude possible errors and oversights - witness the recent bug uncovered by WW_Bard wrt tracers eating up memory, this has survived how many iterations of IL-2 un-noticed? What about the MG151/20 loadout? Oleg wasn't even aware that the nose-mounted and wing-mounted versions had different belt compositions. With an undertaking this large such oversights are not only understandable but inevitable.

I never said the KE modelling of IL-2 was wrong, I only wondered if it was. Or are we not allowed to do that?

WWMaxGunz
04-17-2005, 06:54 PM
Laser beam travels in a straight line at speed of light. 1C does not have a perfect gunnery
and DM but from the start they have bullets with drag and drop that rise to and above the
sight line then fall back to and below it. All with convergence range affecting either the
guns angle or the sight angle... I would guess the latter but it may depend on the plane and
with different countries making the planes I wouldn't bet on any one way holding except for
prop hub guns you'd have to adjust the sight angle and range adjustable sights likewise.
How far below the sight line the gun is will be critical about the way the shots appear to
follow the sight line and especially how the drop looks after convergence. Nose guns will
look like they drop more. People complain one to the next without thinking why things look
the way they do and they call their conclusions facts then throw insults in and won't bother
to understand explanations since the "see clearly" without being conscious of how they think
about what they see. After so much b!tching for years it is hard to get 1C to check things
and hey, Oleg can't do or even micro-manage everything.

It does seem like someone there has it in for the FW's though, but that's not saying they do.

BBB_Hyperion
04-18-2005, 01:39 AM
May it be the the graphical representation is lagging behind the calculation ?

Tipo_Man
04-18-2005, 02:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
well, in that one sortie those rounds which barely flew past me, would not penetrate a cardboard if one would be stucked on my plane, they weer THAT slow, it would have demanded hundreds of rounds in same place to make hole in AC skin.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How can you be so sure?! You some kind of a prodigy, right?... The same kind which does not know nothing about phisics, ballistics and basic math but can "feel" the things.
Well, since you are so stubborn in your ignorance, I'll give you an example
I told you that:
"AFAIK all shells in the sim are modelled till they loose some percentage of their speed. Generally all 12,7mm bullets disappear after 2-3 kilometers. At that range they fly with at least 400-500m/s
"
Now let's suppose they fly with only half that speed - 200m/s (that's one fifth of it's initial velocity).
A 12,7mm bullet flying with that speed has the same kinetik energy, as a 5 kilogram dumb-bell flying with 72km/h... Now you can do a test, drop a 5kg dumb-bell from the eighth floor and watch the damege it can do to a car for example...
And if you are so confident in you statements , simply stay below it
You will feel the power in a much more reallistic way .. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

LLv34_Stafroty
04-18-2005, 07:11 AM
Tipoman, how can u be so stoopid. when 12,7mm bullets disappear,at some 2-3km range, they have speed still some 400m/sec, if my Jet is flyin some
900kmh IAS which would mean depends the altitude, it could mean some 400m/sec, so whats the case? so hard to get it?

some 200m/sec aint so big speed isnt it some hmm, some 660kmh TAS. so, why it is sooooo hard for U to get it. test it with ur mate, let him take Jet also, take him behind u, take alt at some 8km, start shallow dive, extend from him while he shoots at you with infinite ammo, u find the spot where u might be even faster than .50cal bullets, i did that only once and my plane didnt even shake due the overspeed, so i got some more room left to accelerate my speed.

get it now, stubborn??

Tipo_Man
04-18-2005, 07:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
Tipoman, how can u be so stoopid. when 12,7mm bullets disappear,at some 2-3km range, they have speed still some 400m/sec, if my Jet is flyin some
900kmh IAS which would mean depends the altitude, it could mean some 400m/sec, so whats the case? so hard to get it?

some 200m/sec aint so big speed isnt it some hmm, some 660kmh TAS. so, why it is sooooo hard for U to get it. test it with ur mate, let him take Jet also, take him behind u, take alt at some 8km, start shallow dive, extend from him while he shoots at you with infinite ammo, u find the spot where u might be even faster than .50cal bullets, i did that only once and my plane didnt even shake due the overspeed, so i got some more room left to accelerate my speed.

get it now, stubborn?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I'm stupid:
1. I do not know that 900km/h is 400m/s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
2. 200m/s is not 660km/h - It is 720km/h ...
3. You tell me you were able to fly faster than 400m/s !? wow that's about mach 1,2 !!! I think Chuck Yeager must be ashamed... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
4. I spoke about bullets being fired from static guns. If your wingman is firing behind you he is probably flying with same speed as you... So you'll have to add his(i.e your) speed to the initial speed of the bullet.
5.You are really amusing me... Go on , I'm waiting for your next well sustained proof

BBB_Hyperion
04-18-2005, 08:16 AM
IAS is not TAS Tipo .)

And speed of sound is temperature depending.

Its about c0 = sqrt((101325/1.2935)*1.402) = 331.4 m/s value can vary between 330 and 340 depends on which constants assumed.

depending on temperature c = c0 * sqrt(1+1/273.15* Temp in Celsius)

Temperature on 8km would be about -6.5*10^-3 /m => 6.5 K/km * km

With T0 = 288.15 K - 8 * 6.5 K => 236.15 K => -37 Degrees Celsius.

Speed of sound at 8k => 331.4 m/s* sqrt(1+1/273.15* -37) = 308 m/s

But just a sitenote ,)

Maybe we can get a track of this event.

Ugly_Kid
04-18-2005, 10:54 AM
Maybe it is worth mentioning that the speed drop is faster in the beginning. Just an example (figures are pure imagination) - You shoot a static gun - let's say 800 m/s after 1000 m you have maybe 400 m/s left (that is after 1.67 s). Now if you pack some 250 m/s aircraft velocity on it - it's not said that you have after 1.67s that 650 m/s (400 m/s+250 m/s)left but instead it's notably slower...

quiet_man
04-18-2005, 11:17 AM
Uuuh, so many people here who know the truth
maybe they can answer me this questions:

when firing from P80 flying 500kph at 8k high
1. How far does .50cal bullets fly in IL2?
2. What is the final speed of .50cal in IL2 at range limit?
3. How does final bullet speed change in IL2 when firing 10, 20 or 30degrees upward?

I don't know if LLv34_Stafroty is right or wrong, but if you can't answer above questions, I asume you also don't know.

and finaly:
4. With single AP round from MK108 I'm able to take out the Tail of an A20 at 800m distance. With the cannon from Yak9K it works at 2400m. I can't tell you IL2 speed, as this are non-tracer rounds.
Does someone know the real life speed/energy those rouds should have at this distances?

quiet_man

LLv34_Stafroty
04-18-2005, 11:19 AM
Tipo, im talking about what i experienced in sim, is it soooo hard to understand. i was almost flying at the speed of bullets just before they disappeared, and u know, .50cal rounds fly LOOONG time in this sim bofore magic happens.

WWMaxGunz
04-18-2005, 11:30 AM
Hits from .50 on ground level combat are effective at 2km. Aim is by watch hits and adjust
but when they hit unarmored targets, they count more than cutting cardboard.

That is sea level where the air is just a bit thicker than 8km by over 20%.
There is much less drag up where it is hard to breathe unassisted.

If you are flying along and think the bullets are slow going by you, check the rate of drop.
You could be looking at a graphic being painted slower just because so much else is shown.

Ugly Kid is very right about the speed would be less than just add but don't add how fast
the bullet would be at 1 km at sea level. And subsonic drag is much less than supersonic,
drag drops off then by practical inverse square (Hyperion knows more detail) as drag is
by the square of decreasing velocity. Biggest problem in long range shots is drop and
accuracy.

.45 cal ACP, a devastating pistol round weighs less than 50 cal bullet, muzzle velocity is
800 FEET per second. Translate that to meters. Roughly 240 per second.

LLv34_Stafroty
04-18-2005, 04:06 PM
anyway, rounds flew past me REEAAAALLY SLOW, so slow pilot really could take one of em in hand with no danger. still, made hole in wing and in fuel tank... there was no enought Ke for sure to allow it go thru tank and wing skin.

crazyivan1970
04-18-2005, 04:25 PM
Keep one thing in mind when you want such changes...additional calculations will eventually put your system on its knees. Many things in this simulation are simplified for a reason.

Cheers!

WWMaxGunz
04-18-2005, 09:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
anyway, rounds flew past me REEAAAALLY SLOW, so slow pilot really could take one of em in hand with no danger. still, made hole in wing and in fuel tank... there was no enought Ke for sure to allow it go thru tank and wing skin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I try again. Maybe you confuse graphic with how real things are.

PF may not be able to draw the tracer (because you only see tracer) with like full speed.
It is an effect, not how fast the shot is. That is why a trail of light is drawn instead
of a true point of bright light your eye sees as a trail. PC is too slow for that.

You want to guess the speed, it is modelled and the arc or the trail is your clue. Is the
path of the bullet falling? Oh, you are in a dive so figure your fall is relative as well.
But if you are at a set angle not increasing steep and the shots are the same then they
are not going by slow no matter how slow drawn on the screen.

Real bullets fall in time at the same speed whether fired or just dropped. The path
makes a curve. The gun often points up from level flight, they rise and then fall.
You won't see great arc in the game, the bullets disappear long before the fall compared
to the distance fired is anything much. Fall is meters, range is 100's of meters.

Jetbuff
04-18-2005, 09:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Many things in this simulation are simplified for a reason. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So it is simplified? KE calculations that is...?

I don't mind if that is the case, just wanted to know for sure...

LEBillfish
04-18-2005, 10:23 PM
I have a fair understanding of ballistics however one thing here concerns me. Not one person has utilized the basic and world standard to compare ballistic energy and velocity between rounds fired from moving platforms such as aircraft.

That standard naturally being European Swallows not African Swallows transporting 1 not 2 coconuts as target drones. Fall plumage of course.

Am I the only one here who hasn't missed this?

BBB_Hyperion
04-18-2005, 11:12 PM
Anyone has the Cw or drag coefficent for 50s round ?

quiet_man
04-19-2005, 05:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Anyone has the Cw or drag coefficent for 50s round ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think this would give much as we speek about very late point in flight path and if I remember right there are singificant differences to calculated values:
1. real bullet drops less (rotation creates lift?)
2. real bullet losses speed faster (tumbling?)

difficult to calculate this stuff

also the talk is about in game values

quiet_man

LLv34_Stafroty
04-19-2005, 07:26 AM
Gunz, i bet that tracers as well rounds w/o tracers have exact ballistics and flying arc in this sim.
Like C.Ivan said that it would demand too much from the system if every gun has different ballistics for each type of rounds cos of weight, M.V. and shape differencies. u can test it fast with quick mission over water, shoot at long range at water, and u notice that all ur rounds go at same spot, no differencies with tracer ammo and with ball ammo. and i know that in real life it was different, but talkin now about this sim, that it has some bug or odd things, which aint right. about the range thing, no one would in real shoot at that long ranges, but now, it would be really usefull, cos still one round at extreme long range can still pop thru ur armor and engine what ever, one lucky hit.
Ivan, isnt it so that every weapon has its own amount of damage, no matter about the range, it always do "that much hit points of damage" , am i right on this?

WWMaxGunz
04-19-2005, 09:03 AM
Oleg explained years ago what all is involved in the gunnery and damage, which has only had
detail added. Drag and weight of bullets/shells, relative speed of bullet to target on impact,
angle of impact....

We even had someone claim that Russian bullets were treated differently and posted "proof" that
was shown to be a lie, the screenshot of the German plane was taken from much farther away than
the one of the Russian plane so the scale of view had longer flight of German shots than Russian.
The disproof was in background objects compared to the planes... and then the person posting
shut up and went away. That was when it was Russian guns called lasers.

With all the data on US equipment floating around I don't see how no one has WWII .50 ballistics
table or range data. All I have seen here is on modern .50's which are improved over WWII.

Jetbuff
04-19-2005, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
Ivan, isnt it so that every weapon has its own amount of damage, no matter about the range, it always do "that much hit points of damage" , am i right on this? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't think it's THAT simple. Maybe divided into close, medium, far and too far damage distances or something like that. i.e. maybe there is a reduction in KE, but it's just not calculated 100% accurately in the proper logarithmic manner?

Keep in mind, this is just my opinion, I have no knowledge of the real code behind this. If I'm right though, perhaps the simplification can be looked at once more? The high velocity guns appear to be effective at MUCH greater ranges as it stands now than lower velocity counterparts. I would expect the difference to not be as pronounced.

quiet_man
04-19-2005, 09:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Keep one thing in mind when you want such changes...additional calculations will eventually put your system on its knees. Many things in this simulation are simplified for a reason.

Cheers! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

if it is simplified, why has it so high impact on calculating damage?

the combination makes some guns do critical damage at any range, while other guns do seldom critical damage even at close range

if kinetik energy is realy a fixed number, Oleg should give all guns a base chance of critical damage and make fix KE number a variation to the base effect

quiet_man

BBB_Hyperion
04-19-2005, 09:39 AM
There is something different you may as well check.

Lokal World representation is not sync at all times with other players.

For the gfx representation of the bullets its logical that it lags behind.

Your local world data is used to calculate target hits that can be seen with simulated lag events. You shoot at a plane it lags and then when its back into sync it explodes at another position.

It maybe the case that even when you saw something different like the bullets missed but the bullets did actualy hit on the other pcs system . Thats why a track of such event is usefull from both sides.

The gfx representation of bullets is blended out at about 3 km iirc.
With the same gun different round types are most likely joined and middle value taken out of mv to shorten network load and calculation work.
But wouldnt explain the event discribed.

When we reconsider the described event what range would that be when bullets fallback from f(planespeedshooter + 3200 km/h -targetspeed)(range) = targetspeed.

It maybe a serious bug when the bullets already dropped that much speed or a gfx mispresentation.

So we need still a track to check the little possible options.

quiet_man
04-19-2005, 09:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jetbuff:
... The high velocity guns appear to be effective at MUCH greater ranges as it stands now than lower velocity counterparts. I would expect the difference to not be as pronounced. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

what irritates me are the relative ineffecitve MGs at planes like P11 and Gladiator, they seam not to do as much critical damage at point blank like russian MGs at high range

only because of the higher rof?

quiet_man

Jetbuff
04-19-2005, 11:20 AM
Hyperion, I hear you on lag... I've been victim of the thousand meter ping that blew up my plane too. However, this does not appear to always be the case, specifically I'm talking about offline scenarios and/or when I am the one doing the shooting. In both cases what I see is what is going on, no lag involved. It really felt cheap to get kills at such incredible ranges after getting used to the MG131 where anything farther than 100m will get you nada.

quiet_man, actually you raise a valid point, ROF. I forgot about that. So, is ROF perhaps over-represented in the current damage model?

Do high ROF guns have a much higher propensity for causing catastrophic damage that is incommensurate with their ROF advantage? Of course, this still does not talk to how well KE decay is modelled, but might explain how any simplification in the latter calculations might be magnified when you consider that Russian guns not only have higher muzzle velocities, but also higher ROF.

In other words, might the DM/KE simplifications be unbalancing the game in favour of higher muzzle velocity/ROF guns? Inadvertently of course - before some idiot cries bias or accuses me of saying it.

BBB_Hyperion
04-19-2005, 11:32 AM
Bullets get out in packets so higher ROF more packets and less time spaces between them => more chances of hits => higher hit frequency that doesnt explain the situation described at the top of this thread which was not about rof and is a complete other topic.

Slechtvalk
04-19-2005, 01:07 PM
I'm no expert, but for me it feels that the flight models where being simplified with one of the latest patches from il-2 and with that shooting also became much easier. (it should be very very hard to hit a plane with a 37mm cannon from the p39 for example and it was hard back then.

Also firing on long range in the beginning from il-2 was much much harder and less damage where taken. But hey maybe I am dreaming but I almost know this for 99% sure. Still got a feeling flight models and shooting where simplified because it may sell better then.

But I hope 4.0 changes everything back to normal or even better.

I am not saying harder is more realistic but it sure felt more realistic to me.

Slechtvalk
04-19-2005, 01:59 PM
Ok I just downloaded an old il-2 demo just to see how it was. Get it here:
http://de.download.games.yahoo.net/fiche.php?intIdGame=703&download=1&multidownload=0&strUrl=http://de.download.games.yahoo.com/il2sturmovik.exe&activeX=1&blnIsIE5=0&boontyBox=0

And it's like 5 times harder to shoot anything down and hitting a plane with a 37 just luck instead of good aiming. And long distance hitting doesn't do much if you can hit..

I was really hard working again to get a kill and you bleed much more speed when manoeuvring behind planes which seems to me more realistic. I am not saying everything is better but the FM (for the most part) and gunnery sure feels more realistic ohh and the engine sounds are nicer as well. That whistling sound the me109 makes! so nice and the famous p39 flat spins and such all gone http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-19-2005, 09:53 PM
I agree with Hyperion that some guns must be firing bullets in groups. Once the planes with
6+ high Rate Of Fire guns (Hurri with 12 .303's I think is worst case) got added, well how
can they model each and every bullet without heavy slowdown? So you get bullets in groups
and one hit becomes many. And since each gun is always by the same code, every gun that is
used in large groups is still by packets even if there only two on another plane, they seem
to be hitting harder for one shot because when there is a hit, it is not just one hitting.

Downside is that where real would have an even stream of bullets there are now gaps that a
target can fly through. If he is hit, it is hard but there is less chance for a hit and who
will come up and post about being missed? If they even notice?

In the war, planes that flew in straight lines with enemy so far away were in danger of being
hit if the enemy fired on so steady a target. But in reality the pilot does not waste the
shots where in a game the player does.

Maybe one problem is that critical hits are on modelled 3D volumes may be much thicker/bigger
than scale. Also DM volumes... you don't put holes in wing skin and ribs with placement for
each so is it that the volume is hit and points are subtracted depending on how hard hit?

quiet_man
04-20-2005, 12:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I agree with Hyperion that some guns must be firing bullets in groups. Once the planes with
6+ high Rate Of Fire guns (Hurri with 12 .303's I think is worst case) got added, well how
can they model each and every bullet without heavy slowdown? .... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg said no more packaging, each bullet calculated (but not all tracers)

setup a mission with the Hurries, with more than two Hurries firing same time my FPS drops to zero

we came to the effect of ROF by the impressive damage ShKAS do, compared to any other MG in the game. Even under conditions where they should have less kinetik energy.

And the modelling of kinetik energy was the questions.

quiet_man

Jetbuff
04-20-2005, 03:57 PM
Exactly as quiet_man said. The ShKAS' punch superiority over other MG's appears to be disproportionate and hard to explain by simple ROF/muzzle-velocity advantages.

e.g. in 3+ years of flying I have only managed to sever a wing with the MG131 once - never with the MG17. It was at 50-100m, at the top of a loop with a long deliberate hose-down. Meanwhile, I have achieved it many times with the ShKAS and from significantly larger ranges. The discrepancy is such that one might conclude that the ShKAS' muzzle velocity advantages were several orders of magnitude higher than those of the MG17/MG131.

The truth though is the difference is slim:
MG17: MV=790m/s, ROF=1100rpm
MG131: MV=730m/s, ROF=900rpm
ShKAS: MV=825m/s, ROF=1800rpm

Now, granted the ROF fire of the ShKAS is double that of the MG131 and 1.64 times that of the MG17. However, the MG131 is a larger round (13mm as opposed to 7.62) and still doesn't even come close to competing with the ShKAS in FB.

What strikes me the most though is that when it comes to muzzle velocity the ShKAS is not all that superior to either MG, yet in FB it can "reach out and touch someone" at much greater ranges. Maybe someone who's better at Maths can calculate the likely effective ranges for each but I suspect they will end up with surprisingly low numbers esp. when considered against moving targets with angled surfaces that are likely to deflect most sub-lethal bullets.

BBB_Hyperion
04-20-2005, 05:06 PM
But you guys know that data is transfered in packets over the internet ?

So according to your interpretation we would get excatly 200 packets for 200 rounds. Well wonder how that would be possible thinking about the ammount of data transfered and the 56k modem settings.

The Graphical representation of the Bullets shows all now what is not the same as the data transfer itself.

Jetbuff
04-20-2005, 09:51 PM
Hyperion, please explain to me how packets enter into the equation... offline! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Yes, these discrepancies in MG effectiveness are also visible offline.

BBB_Hyperion
04-21-2005, 05:21 AM
Check 1 post.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I had German Jet, flew over 900kmh IAN and had mate with US Jet firing at me at long range, his rounds flew just bit faster than my jet, some 20kmh faster only, like that pilot would actually catch one with hand, easily. well, one of those slow moving rounds touched my plane, i got instant fuel leak rightaway, it was bit odd.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is the topic explain how you can let a m8 fly another plane on a offline pc.

Jetbuff
04-21-2005, 10:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Check 1 post.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I had German Jet, flew over 900kmh IAN and had mate with US Jet firing at me at long range, his rounds flew just bit faster than my jet, some 20kmh faster only, like that pilot would actually catch one with hand, easily. well, one of those slow moving rounds touched my plane, i got instant fuel leak rightaway, it was bit odd.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is the topic explain how you can let a m8 fly another plane on a offline pc. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's Stafroty's, not my opinion/story. Check my own posts on this thread and you will see that I only raised my own observations on this topic. While they may not be as spectacular as Stafroty's claims, I have experienced this (perceived) phenomenon both on and offline.

BBB_Hyperion
04-21-2005, 11:06 AM
Did read it but we dont have any testing method which allows us to judge any kind of this damage types in detail. We only can guess here or believe .

GFX representation is not the damagestate its only eyecandy. There would be pages to write down what looks inconsisting but we cant analyse the track data that way that we have a 100 % "be sure" counter.

MG17 wasnt that great called "Anklopger√¬§t" Knocking Device tells pretty much about its reputation.

For the Mg131 its possible to down planes with it but only fueltank, pilotkill , control surfaces can be effectively taken out.

The Effective range is indeed something to consider but that will not hold for long http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Question is not if kinetic damaga is right but if a triggerzone was hit what is one of the main problems in this sim.

Blackdog5555
04-21-2005, 02:45 PM
Quote:
That standard naturally being European Swallows not African Swallows transporting 1 not 2 coconuts as target drones. Fall plumage of course...end Quote

Arent Coconuts tropical?

..so how would European Swallows....????

Anyway...So before you pass you must answer these questions three

What is your name: Blackdog

your favorite color: red, no blue, no ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


Ok,, dont forget windage and atmosphereic drag in your calculations. I think everyone could agree that the DM needs tweaking. Bottoms up

bolillo_loco
04-21-2005, 03:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
The chart goes to 500 yards. By there the drop is 6 feet for that round, more or less for
others. It is made for civilian shooters taking aimed shots at smaller things than planes
or cars.

Snipers with scopes and 30 cal military rifles sighted in at 1000 yards have made head shots
that didn't leave enough for any doubt. That .22 LR bullet weighed about 50 to 60 grains,
1/3rd your average 30 cal and started out at about 1200 fps yet when fired up at a slight
arc and hit that college dude in the thin bone side of his head it had the power to break
through and do instantly critical damage. He was dead before he hit the ground from a jump
even if it was an incredibly off chance accident.
At 500 yards the .303 is going over 1500 fps and weighs 3x more for just over 2x the frontal
area. Once it gets below mach 1 the drag on it reduces considerably, btw, even if the bullet
is not boat tailed. But what that will do to internal hardened aluminum structures some of
which are over 1/16th inch thick I cannot say. The skin could be enough to stop it if there
was a bracing element right beneath and the angle really tight... I doubt such detail down
to about 5 cm granularity is modelled or could be though -- but surface strength and angle
of impact are modelled at least on average since yes, IL2 has ricochets possible. Where
you are hitting and how many times the same DM piece matters. And don't go by graphics and
sound to say hit once or twice, these are not physical events but models that have to run
in real time.

Time to get Fehler to run some experiments if he will.

I remember back in the early 70's out with my brother in law (sister is 12 years older than
me) and breaking rocks at 200 yards using a 30-06 with cartridges loaded with 1/2 the usual
powder and the rest filled with cream of wheat (so no air space to compress). It had a
scope and we had a spotter scope, part of our time we spent making gravel out of rocks
with half power and considerably slower bullets. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have a lot of fire arms experience as well. from .22LR up to 203mm howizters and nearly everything in between. I felt the need to clarify that because of what you posted. shooting stationary objects from stationary guns at 90 degree angles on the ground is a lot different than shooting at targets moving twards you or away from you while at the same time you are also moving in 3 dimentions and most of your shots are not 90 degree zero deflection shots.

shooting at an aircraft 300 meters away is a lot different than shooting at a stationary ground target 300 meters away with a rifle. reason.... the bullet from the aircraft has to travel more than 300 meters and while the bullet it slowing down its target using isnt.

I see no point in explaining because I am too lazy, usually people who post things like this are stuck in their ways, its a waste of time. even if I provided the proper documentation some clown would come along and post b/s... im done see you guys in a couple months.

Jetbuff
04-21-2005, 04:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
shooting at an aircraft 300 meters away is a lot different than shooting at a stationary ground target 300 meters away with a rifle. reason.... the bullet from the aircraft has to travel more than 300 meters and while the bullet it slowing down its target using isnt. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
bolillo_loco, you're not that loco afterall. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BBB_Hyperion
04-21-2005, 04:45 PM
@Blackdog5555

Thx for providing us with a correct and 100 % proofable testing method that allows us to claim such things.

"I feel it is wrong" is not considered a suitable answer. Ask Oleg how much feel something is wrong.

Its not only to claim something is wrong but to show what is right.

WWMaxGunz
04-21-2005, 05:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bolillo_loco:

shooting at an aircraft 300 meters away is a lot different than shooting at a stationary ground target 300 meters away with a rifle. reason.... the bullet from the aircraft has to travel more than 300 meters and while the bullet it slowing down its target using isnt. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No! Really! DUH!
You forget to add;
1) speed of the firing platform is added to the muzzle velocity
2) that makes extra initial drag but is still overall plus
3) at 300m, the target isn't going to be moving too **** far before the bullet catches up

600 kph = 167 m/s rounded up and we have shots travelling 400 meters on the oder of 1/2 second.

Sorry if you feel so much is missing you can't be bothered to explain. Major problem is aim
and knowing what delta-V will do to effective range to get the drop right IF the target doesn't
jink. Oh, you don't mention delta-V. So difficult?

[/QUOTE]I see no point in explaining because I am too lazy, usually people who post things like this are stuck in their ways, its a waste of time. even if I provided the proper documentation some clown would come along and post b/s... im done see you guys in a couple months.[/QUOTE]

Please. Post some data. Something real that's not trivial at the same time.
I'm fully open to REASONED argument. Can You bother with actual reasons or are You set in your
ways? I find that people who are just want to lay it down and won't work things out. And I
don't see what hitting opwer at absolute ranges has to do with "the range will be farther"
either. So TF what? What I wrote and You quoted is about those bullets, they have more
impact than a lot of people less experienced than yourself tend to believe. If it's okay with
you, huh? You Have made holes in metal at long distance with sub-caliber munitions? And you
know it's about range, relative velocity of projectile and target, and actually making the
hit? And the answer was about IF it hits, can it do damage? Well? So Please, bring data
and not just "well, hrrumph, hrrumph, hrrump, sound like like b/s but I'm not sayin why, just
I know and you don't". Shize, I'll take reason but that stuff is worthless. At least the
first part had some meat to it.

C-Ya.

LLv34_Stafroty
04-22-2005, 07:24 AM
how much speed does .50cal round have after it trevelled some 3km distance? how much faster it is when plane at that distance which fly some 900IAS speed at 4000m? how much KE it has against the moving plane when shooting comes from 6?
or how long path those rounds in sim travel before disappear magic happens.


at least in SIM Ke damage is wrong. i can come to show it if anyone is intrested to test it and track it up with me. so we got that evidence u guys want to show that KE DM has some issues which needs to be fixed, so has explosive DM as well.

WWMaxGunz
04-22-2005, 05:42 PM
3 km? In this sim? You know you were hit after range at fire time + travel = 3 km?
Even with net lag, this is just a bit funny. Or is the range like fish story that
gets bigger every time?

You get something on track, please send it to Oleg!

LLv34_Stafroty
04-23-2005, 12:32 PM
nothing like fish story, just looks like its **** hard for you to understand simple thing. take a friend with you and test it urself, no one wanted to make a track with me about the case. over and out, and maybe banned, so bye bye.

BBB_Hyperion
04-23-2005, 12:44 PM
Qualis autem homo ipse esset, talem esse eius orationem.

quiet_man
04-23-2005, 03:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
nothing like fish story, just looks like its **** hard for you to understand simple thing. take a friend with you and test it urself, no one wanted to make a track with me about the case. over and out, and maybe banned, so bye bye. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

for the case you are still watching

with FMB I created a mission with two P-80 flying 900kph at 8000m at 1500m distance, I jumped into the aft, fired a burst, made a track and watched from outside

The speed of the .50cal dropped BELOW 900kph (falling back) before they reached the target

nothing about kinetik energy, but LLv34_Stafroty YOUR STORY IS RIGHT

and people DON'T ask me for a track for so simple test

quiet_man

LLv34_Stafroty
04-23-2005, 05:59 PM
thx Quiet man. nothing else to say. well, want to say that NOW im really drunk http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LLv34_Stafroty
04-23-2005, 06:03 PM
oh one thing. now imagine Q.Man, that those slow rounds hits ur wing, which nearly reach you and cause fuel leak http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-23-2005, 06:22 PM
I must have this wrong:

Before the bullets reached the target, they slowed down and fell back relative to the target?

The bullets were going slower than the target. And then they hit the target?

Wu-wu-wu-wu-whut was that again? I MUST have that wrong.

LLv34_Stafroty
04-24-2005, 11:43 AM
gunz, something like that. in my case rounds just barely flew past me, and one hit me causing fuel leak, quiet man‚¬īs case he was faster than bullets but no hits from enemy guns happened to him.

quiet_man
04-27-2005, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I must have this wrong:

Before the bullets reached the target, they slowed down and fell back relative to the target?

The bullets were going slower than the target. And then they hit the target?

Wu-wu-wu-wu-whut was that again? I MUST have that wrong.

yes you got it wrong, I was talking only about the "slow motion" part of the story. Many people here questioned the story throwing whatever numbers around.

I just wanted to show if it is possible to "outrun" the bullets at 900kph or not in the sim. And it is pretty clear possible

I tried hitting, but at the moment I fly only offline and the AI is not very "cooperative" on this http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

at least I can tell you that the AI starts evading when only "touched" by bullets

quiet_man

LLv34_Stafroty
04-28-2005, 05:57 AM
quiet man, want to do online tests about this issue?

WWMaxGunz
04-28-2005, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
how much speed does .50cal round have after it trevelled some 3km distance? how much faster it is when plane at that distance which fly some 900IAS speed at 4000m?

Yes, let us know how hard the bullets hit at 3 km when 1500 meters they are slower than target.
Must be the netcode. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LLv34_Stafroty
04-28-2005, 02:11 PM
Gunz, 900kmh IAS is quite high speed, dont forget that.

Blackdog5555
04-28-2005, 04:07 PM
yes,, 900 kph is 820 feet a second. so the 50 cal BMG has lost @ 66% of its muzzle velocity. still fast enough to penetrate thin aluminum. But I wouldnt argue that the DM of the planes is primitive and KE of the rounds needs tweaking. The algorithm is probably based on the fact of the speed of the round without discounting the speed of the plane. My guess ....

WWMaxGunz
04-28-2005, 04:40 PM
900 kph IAS at 4 km alt is 1140 kph TAS which is 316 m/s
M2 bullet muzzle velocity used is 870 m/s, but that is *muzzle* velocity

Quiet Man set up two planes at that speed 1500 meters apart and fired from
the rear one at the front one. The bullets slowed down enough they never hit.
Just how much time that took I don't know, the bullets had start speed 870 plus
316 m/s and 1500 plus how ever many meters the target travelled for them to get
to it, but they never did.

Interesting data would be how long to when bullet speed matched target plane,
bled down from 1186 m/s to 250 m/s. EDIT: oops, my error, 250 should be 316.

Mach 1 at 4 km alt is 1168.1 kph TAS, BTW. Modern corporate jets fly to .78
mach (Gulfstream III, Lear 35, Cessna Citation, late 80's models twins) due to
compression, not by power limits and yet P-80 runs to .96 mach? Maybe the game
does have airspeed guages reading high from compression after all.

LLv34_Stafroty
05-01-2005, 02:42 PM
The algorithm is probably based on the fact of the speed of the round without discounting the speed of the plane. My guess ....

Blackdog, i think taht too.

WWMaxGunz
05-01-2005, 08:22 PM
Then that would be a bug as from the start Oleg stated the relative speed of projectile
and target as well as angle of impact, mass of projectile and location of hit are modelled.
But you make a little change in code, it may change something else missed.

Again, 45 cal pistol bullet at muzzle velocity is right about 250 m/s. Even slowed down
with reasonable range, that bullet does real damage. Good tests would have to narrow
down impact speed or show impacts at all relative speeds for any range as equal. Yeah,
good luck with the DM graphics showing little and no real knowing what or how damage is
made besides speculation, so much made in moments of self-frustration and then way to
'prove' that idea being a goal. Have fun. Do 50's even go as far as 3 km before vanish
anyway? If not then why ask how hard they hit at 3 km? Try IL2 as longrange target, it
has stronger skin.