PDA

View Full Version : 50cals vs 109 and 190s?



GR142_Astro
08-12-2005, 01:42 AM
Man, this is amazing:

50cal damage (http://www.redspar.com/downloads/50cals.avi)

http://www.mustangsmustangs.net/p-51/survivors/pages/picfiles/44-74536/44-74536_31_jd3.jpg

GR142_Astro
08-12-2005, 01:42 AM
Man, this is amazing:

50cal damage (http://www.redspar.com/downloads/50cals.avi)

http://www.mustangsmustangs.net/p-51/survivors/pages/picfiles/44-74536/44-74536_31_jd3.jpg

LeadSpitter_
08-12-2005, 01:54 AM
OLEG SAY PURE PROPAGANDA BROWNING M2 EQUIVELENT TO NERF GUN! YOU IS WRONG

Hydra444
08-12-2005, 01:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
OLEG SAY PURE PROPAGANDA BROWNING M2 EQUIVELENT TO NERF GUN! YOU IS WRONG </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

nerf gun ROFL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Xiolablu3
08-12-2005, 01:58 AM
Good movie, I have to question the p47 of the day being faster than a Dora tho??

Plus, as he said that is the result of a lucky shot right in the fuel tank.

Nice clip tho.

Hetzer_II
08-12-2005, 02:17 AM
Nice clipp...
Besides i agree with the feeling that the 0.50 is to weak i bet they realy had to search quiet long to find this video... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Plus: Isn´t that a ta not a d9 on the picture? I mean to remember that the wings are to long for a long nose...

LeadSpitter_
08-12-2005, 02:23 AM
besides joking around It appears the .50 cals struck to 20mm ammo bay, this is the result in the many clips of both the 190a and d's wings exploding off.

In most interviews I seen all the us pilots say its from hitting the fuel tanks.

I have seen a bunch of clips of p47s being hit by mg151 in the wing roots and they get a short flame which goes immediatly out.

Out of all my footage i have never seen a p47 explode or loose entire wings or have fuselage break in half from mg151 and i have a ton of german guncam, mostly p47s credited seem to have major fires or just to damaged to stay flying being hit so many times. I have seen alot of footage of 47s getting hit by multiple strikes of mg151 and still rtb, and some of the very rare clips of direct 88mm strikes to engine or 4 foot+ hole to the wing from a 88 round passing thru

The longest clips .50 cal clips I seen are 190s and 109s take 18 flashes in about 3 seconds of fire total 100-600m range

But then again the guncams are slowed down 1/4th or 2/4th speed stikes before the plane is torn up badly and always severe flames and pilot bails, in many of the clips i have the plane stays mostly 90% intact with primary and secondary explosions which are what causes the structural damage.

Thanks for uploading the short clip, its pretty useless to discuss this topic here as m2s are still considers "lazers" to the blue only pilots.

Heres a flugzwerk dora wing blueprint i scanned for you quickly as you see the explosion appears after a gunbay strike

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/wingz.jpg

Hristo_
08-12-2005, 02:31 AM
Cannon envy. Fly a Spit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.



I don't know about .50 cals, I have yet to be fired upon in this WarClouds tour.

LeadSpitter_
08-12-2005, 02:35 AM
bah 2 or 4 hispanos of the spitV and v4 dont even equal 1 mg151 anymore, either do 3 B-20 20mm cannons of the la7s.

why do you think everyone currently asking for 20mm on the g10 g14 k4?

Abbuzze
08-12-2005, 03:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
bah 2 or 4 hispanos of the spitV and v4 dont even equal 1 mg151 anymore, either do 3 B-20 20mm cannons of the la7s.

why do you think everyone currently asking for 20mm on the g10 g14 k4? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You realy ask for an answer??
So, cause it´s more fun to aim well with the 20mm at "longer" distances for 200m, cause the 30mm is a short range cannon ( I know I know Leadspitter, you score hits with the MK108 at 800m but it seems no LW flyer use it at this distance except you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

I simply like to hang 250m behind a big Jug at the top of a hammerhead and make some well aim hits into a wingroot.
I´m not interested to do this with a 30mm.

EDIT: Beside, did you ever wonder while RL LW pilots preferd the 20mm over the 30mm if they fly vs other fighters???

FritzGryphon
08-12-2005, 03:25 AM
Nice video. It nicely shows the power of the MG151 shells http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hristo_
08-12-2005, 03:54 AM
I prefer MK 108, though there are times I'd like to have MG151/20 instead. Simply because of greater range and ballistical characteristics closer to MG131s.

With MK108 + 2xMG131s, you hit with one and miss with the other. With MG151/20 + 2xMG131 chances are you will hit with all three.

P.S.
I agree, Fritz, MG151/20 shells were very powerful, even if only the propellant detonated.

tigertalon
08-12-2005, 04:21 AM
The clip shows max speed for P47D 428MpH, and for Dora Nine 408MpH ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Vike
08-12-2005, 06:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
With MK108 + 2xMG131s, you hit with one and miss with the other. With MG151/20 + 2xMG131 chances are you will hit with all three. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you are patient enough,you can use the more powerfull 109's engine to be closer,and hit with the three canons,including MK108,including saving up some rounds,including the kill...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon :The clip shows max speed for P47D 428MpH, and for Dora Nine 408MpH ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Clear http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif and i wonder also if that clip isn't a big fake http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Ps:Hello Tiger http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

@+

Grue_
08-12-2005, 06:15 AM
Thanks for linking the clip.

I thought that it was already accepted that the v4.01 damage models were screwy (esp the 190).

The MG's don't cause enough damage except when you hit the engine. This is for any MG, the American planes are most affected because they don't have cannon (obviously).

Not looking forward to going back to the 190 losing a lot of speed because of a couple of .50 cal hits in the wingtip though.

F19_Ob
08-12-2005, 06:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
besides joking around It appears the .50 cals struck to 20mm ammo bay, this is the result in the many clips of both the 190a and d's wings exploding off.

In most interviews I seen all the us pilots say its from hitting the fuel tanks.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for posting the clip Astro, and I think U are right leaddie.
Many guncameras that show wings exploding off german planes , mostly fw190 very likely hit the ammoboxes.
Thats why later fw190's destined for attacking bombers had armorplates at the position of ammoboxes to avoid exploding since they were exposed to returnfire very often.

carguy_
08-12-2005, 07:02 AM
LOL the clip shows the guy fired from 120-70m range!I do worse damage with 50cal in 4.01 from those distances!

Kocur_
08-12-2005, 07:25 AM
Very interesting clip. Watch it but dont listen http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Guy who included Dora picture and description has no idea on Fw-190 versions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif The plane destroyed is Fw-190Anton, not Dora http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif!

I wont mention silhouette of Anton clearly in my view, as this might be questioned.
Undoubtly the plane was destroyed by ammo explosion caused by API hit. Problem is Dora did not have anything to explode in that part of wing: no cannons, no fuel.
Anton did have gunbay there and ammo of course: 20mm or 30mm.

LeadSpitter_ posted
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Heres a flugzwerk dora wing blueprint i scanned for you quickly as you see the explosion appears after a gunbay strike </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the effort, but you posted blueprints of two proposed experimental weapon systms: set of MK108 barrels or weapon similar to Panzerfaust, both mounted vertically in the wing.
Those are nor in Dora 9 blueprints http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif Those are drawnings of Ta-152 as anyone can read, or discover by noticing fuel tanks outlines. Ta-152 had fuel (and MW-50/GM-1) tanks in wing, Fw-190 Anton or Dora did not have any fuel in wings.
Anton outer cannonbay would be just outside of rib 7 on those drawnings.

GR142_Astro
08-12-2005, 08:26 AM
Just for the record, my attitude is not cavalier about the poor chap inside that 190 that was vaporized. Still, a lot of young men died like this.

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

At any rate, I don't think there is anywhere on either the 190 or 109 that you can explode them with .50s, but maybe someone like AFJ Mantis can? It will be interesting to see if they ever include ammo explosions in ForgottenBattles, since I agree with Lead there are many clips of 190 wings blowing off due to a hit in the gun bay.



&lt;Salute All&gt;

http://www.airrace.de/reno1998/vrrklein.jpg

JG53Frankyboy
08-12-2005, 08:38 AM
my opinion about this is that the games DM engine does not work very good with AP ammunition.
and so , espacially the heavy MGs have "proplems". HE shells work much better.
a solution for the Brownings would propably bee to give it more API instead of AP in its ammo belt.
thats the last info we have - unfortunatly rather old
Browning .50
// APIT - AP - HE - AP

APIT
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.002

AP
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0

HE
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.00148

lets hope for BoB.

JG53Frankyboy
08-12-2005, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
bah 2 or 4 hispanos of the spitV and v4 dont even equal 1 mg151 anymore, either do 3 B-20 20mm cannons of the la7s.

why do you think everyone currently asking for 20mm on the g10 g14 k4? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

not to forget this:
"Right, MK 108-gunpods were only in some prototypes, no series-production was done.

Engine-mounted MK 108:
We discussed this topic some weeks ago in Butch2k's forum. The result of the thread:

1943: Only 181 G-6 were equipped with MK 108

First half of 1944: Ca. 5% of the G-6 had MK 108.

July-September 1944: Figure goes up to ca. 25% (incl. G-6 & G-14).

September-December 1944: Ca. 50% of the G-models,

1945: approx. 100%

K-4 generally had a MK 108.

Moreover, only in October 1944 the first MK 108-equipped 109's show up in the statistics of the Eastern-Front-JG's."

faustnik
08-12-2005, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
bah 2 or 4 hispanos of the spitV and v4 dont even equal 1 mg151 anymore, either do 3 B-20 20mm cannons of the la7s.

why do you think everyone currently asking for 20mm on the g10 g14 k4? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Typical Leadspitter insane exaggeration http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif but, there is definately something up. Mg151 and Hispano have equal effect on Bf109s but, Mg151 has much more effect on P-47s than the Hispano. Somethings is up with the DMs. I think the American DMs were adjusted down previously because of the weak Mg151 in 3.04. Now, the American a/c DMs need adjusting again (stronger) with the corrected Mg151.

faustnik
08-12-2005, 12:55 PM
Here is the Fw190 ammo location:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/Fw190firearminstallation.jpg

The wing will pop off in PF if hit there but, there is no explosion. A nice explosion effect when a 190 is hit there would be great.

fordfan25
08-12-2005, 02:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
OLEG SAY PURE PROPAGANDA BROWNING M2 EQUIVELENT TO NERF GUN! YOU IS WRONG </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

be sure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif LMAO.

Vike
08-12-2005, 04:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:

not to forget this:
"Right, MK 108-gunpods were only in some prototypes, no series-production was done.

Engine-mounted MK 108:
We discussed this topic some weeks ago in Butch2k's forum. The result of the thread:

1943: Only 181 G-6 were equipped with MK 108

First half of 1944: Ca. 5% of the G-6 had MK 108.

July-September 1944: Figure goes up to ca. 25% (incl. G-6 & G-14).

September-December 1944: Ca. 50% of the G-models,

1945: approx. 100%

K-4 generally had a MK 108.

Moreover, only in October 1944 the first MK 108-equipped 109's show up in the statistics of the Eastern-Front-JG's." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

"Although it was first designed by Rheinmetall-Borsig in 1940 as a private venture, the design was finalized in 1942

Ease of manufacture, compact size and weight and destructive power. The MK 108 30mm cannon earned a fearsome reputation among Allied bomber crews, who named it the "pneumatic hammer" due to its distinctive firing sound."

Here (http://www.luft46.com/armament/mk108.html)

I really don't think that Luftwaffe could afford to use MK108 so lately in WWII,for a such easy-making gun which has been designed in 1942...

@+

DangerForward
08-12-2005, 04:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hetzer_II:
Nice clipp...
Besides i agree with the feeling that the 0.50 is to weak i bet they realy had to search quiet long to find this video... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Plus: Isn´t that a ta not a d9 on the picture? I mean to remember that the wings are to long for a long nose... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Consider that they have a better view of the film than we do. I think the more narrow body of the D9 makes the wings look longer than the Anton here, although they are the same length I think.

DangerForward
08-12-2005, 04:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vike:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:

not to forget this:
"Right, MK 108-gunpods were only in some prototypes, no series-production was done.

Engine-mounted MK 108:
We discussed this topic some weeks ago in Butch2k's forum. The result of the thread:

1943: Only 181 G-6 were equipped with MK 108

First half of 1944: Ca. 5% of the G-6 had MK 108.

July-September 1944: Figure goes up to ca. 25% (incl. G-6 & G-14).

September-December 1944: Ca. 50% of the G-models,

1945: approx. 100%

K-4 generally had a MK 108.

Moreover, only in October 1944 the first MK 108-equipped 109's show up in the statistics of the Eastern-Front-JG's." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

"Although it was first designed by Rheinmetall-Borsig in 1940 as a private venture, the design was finalized in 1942

Ease of manufacture, compact size and weight and destructive power. The MK 108 30mm cannon earned a fearsome reputation among Allied bomber crews, who named it the "pneumatic hammer" due to its distinctive firing sound."

Here (http://www.luft46.com/armament/mk108.html)

I really don't think that Luftwaffe could afford to use MK108 so lately in WWII,for a such easy-making gun which has been designed in 1942...

@+ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I read in a book on the ME110/410 that part of the problem with getting the MK108 on more planes was that at some point the factory that built it got damaged by allied bombing. This slowed down the production for a while.

mynameisroland
08-12-2005, 04:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
bah 2 or 4 hispanos of the spitV and v4 dont even equal 1 mg151 anymore, either do 3 B-20 20mm cannons of the la7s.

why do you think everyone currently asking for 20mm on the g10 g14 k4? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Typical Leadspitter insane exaggeration http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif but, there is definately something up. Mg151 and Hispano have equal effect on Bf109s but, Mg151 has much more effect on P-47s than the Hispano. Somethings is up with the DMs. I think the American DMs were adjusted down previously because of the weak Mg151 in 3.04. Now, the American a/c DMs need adjusting again (stronger) with the corrected Mg151. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe thats because of the proportion of HE in each of the 20mm shells. The P47 would suffer more from Mg 151 due to its high explosive content rather than the Hispanno higher velocity shells.

Mg 151 should only need 5 or 6 hits to destroy a fighter. What US fighter succumbs to under 5 rounds? Why make it stronger when its the DM of the Fw that supposedly needs attention. Whats the point of campaigning to introduce the MG shells to the Mg 151 belt only to increase the relative DM of enemy AC?

p1ngu666
08-12-2005, 05:17 PM
i had iron 190 the last time i shot at one, bunch of 50cal and some 20mm hispano, didnt think id done anything, it split S'ed and dived into the ground 30secs later (we was high).

but yeah ive seen footage where the wing falls off.
spit and tempest had armoured ammo boxes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

faustnik
08-12-2005, 05:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:

Maybe thats because of the proportion of HE in each of the 20mm shells. The P47 would suffer more from Mg 151 due to its high explosive content rather than the Hispanno higher velocity shells.

Mg 151 should only need 5 or 6 hits to destroy a fighter. What US fighter succumbs to under 5 rounds? Why make it stronger when its the DM of the Fw that supposedly needs attention. Whats the point of campaigning to introduce the MG shells to the Mg 151 belt only to increase the relative DM of enemy AC? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right, I was being to general there. I was referring to issues with the P-47 specifically. The P-47's DM has some wierd interaction with the minengeschoss rounds that make the tail section overly vulnerable.

The comparison of the Hispano and Mg151 was only in relation to the Bf109 and P-47. Please see the P-47 damage thread in ORR for the full story. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

J_Weaver
08-12-2005, 05:36 PM
Cool video!

But where do they find the people who narrate these clips. A two minute google search will show that the FW 190 didn't have wing tanks. The Jug pilot just got a lucky hit on the 190's ammo.


Also it looks like maybe 2 190A's. I know the second plane is obviously a 190A. Kinda hard to tell about the one that gets flamed though.

Ankanor
08-12-2005, 06:06 PM
This was a perfect shot, a certain kill - right MG151 ammo boxes, fuel tanks and cockpit got in the burst covered area. You can see some tracers behind the tail just as the Dora blows up. It is difficult to say where did the explosion start from but I'm almost sure it was a combined hit of the ammo boxes of the right MG151 which are located in front of the first fuel tank + the two fuel tanks themselves.

VW-IceFire
08-12-2005, 06:54 PM
Observations.

1) As far as I can tell...both aircraft in that gun camera footage were FW190A's and no FW190D's were there at all.

2) The FW190D-9 that they show a picture of is a Ta-152H yet they quote the speed of a FW190A at 408mph. They also show an early P-47D and quote the speed of a later model http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Dorks! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

3) As far as I know, the FW190 carries all fuel in the fuselage so the hit (as mentioned by the people here) is in the ammo bay/cannon on the outboard cannon. Makes most sense for a FW190A as well.

So...we've got some innacurate information. Not surprising as most of these programs are seemingly produced hastily with most of the people involved not knowing anything about what the heck they are talking about. What they do know is howto make good TV and that was pretty good TV so we'll give them that credit. But it doesn't hold water with people like ourselves.

Finally...this looks like real guncamera footage to me. While everything else that is surrounding this clip is fairly bogus or innacurate...the clip itself is interesting to behold and a prime example of the dangers of aerial warfare.

But it seems very real and true to history. We can look at this and very accurately understand what happened. Its not propoganda...this plane was chewed up by .50cals and it blew up. I've also seen FW190s hammered by .50cals and not blow up. Either way...something, as most acknowledge, is wrong with the 4.01 DM model for the FW190 as I've hammered several without much effect. They don't have to blow up...I just shouldn't feel like my armorer loaded rubber bullets.

This is a DM issue...Japanese planes light up fine. Shoot a Yak for some reason and you eat their wings to bits with a short burst.

The .50cal rarely should produce a spectacular explosion (like this clip) from what I've seen, read, and heard but it should do its share and I think we've got some DM's to tweak if we want greater accuracy.

J_Weaver
08-12-2005, 07:40 PM
Well said IceFire! Agreed on all points! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I wonder though if that 190 totally disintegrated or just lost a wing. Not that it really matters, the end result was the same.

Obi_Kwiet
08-12-2005, 09:32 PM
I don't play PF a whole lot, but I was flying the other day, vs. two 109's in a P-40 M. The guns seemed really powerful. Even at 2x the convergence range (150m) he caught on fire real quick. Then I got in a P51 in the same situation and I couldn't even hit them. I dunno what the issue was there.

USAF_pilot
08-13-2005, 12:48 AM
Leadwhiner you need to get your skull examined if you are thinking that MG151 is worth more than 2 Hispanos or the 3 B20 on the La7.I seriously dont understand this latest campaign by Kwiatek , Leadwhiner , Pipper to blackmail Oleg - if you dont want German planes in your game - fly US vs US.Better for all of us

Gibbage1
08-13-2005, 02:47 AM
The Jug pilot did not get lucky on the ammo, but got lucky on the fuel tank. The explosion came from the body of the aircraft, not the wing. When the ammo bay goes, there is NO fireball. Fireball needs fuel. No fuel in the wings, no fireball.

Remember that the P-47 has wing mounted guns. An aircraft that close is inside his conversion. That means he has TWO sets of guns, not just one. You may be seeing some sparking from API's hitting the FW-190's wings from the left guns, but you DONT see is the API's going into the fueltank from the RIGHT side guns.

Again, TNT or explosives do NOT cause FIREBALLS without FUEL!!!!!! Thats all Hollywood! Those are called "fuel bombs" for a reason in movies. If you watch guncam movies and see what an ammo bay explosion looks like, all you see is a flash, and the wing is missing. Then you have a spiraling FW-190. Then compair to video footage from a Zero that has many fireballs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

My conclusion is that the P-47 pilot got an API into the fuel tank wile you guys were distracted by the sparks on the right wing.

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 05:12 AM
I made sequence of frames of the Fw-190A destruction.Im affraid P-47 didnt hit fuel tank, yet fuel did explode later.
In previous frames one can see some hits on right wing closer to tip, but no hits on the left wing or fuselage.


Hit or right external cannon ammo box:
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/6509/fw190aboom168yq.png (http://imageshack.us)



The explosion clearly is more to right. The ball of burning gases would be even more to right but is blown to left because the plane is turning right. Whether initial explosion came from hit on projectile or case in that ammo box, eventually both explosives in projectiles and propellant in cases came off. And propellant does make large balls of fire. Its because explosions of explosives are supposed to be as fast as possible, and gun propellant explodes, or rather "fast-burns", slower.
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/7539/fw190aboom171jp.png (http://imageshack.us)



9 frames later we see how large are parts of plane blown away. Still centre of fireball is more to right.
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5551/fw190aboom266zy.png (http://imageshack.us)



Seems that now, 14 frames later fuel explodes too.
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/6613/fw190aboom407xa.png (http://imageshack.us)



And fuel continues to burn still here, 23 frames later, and will burn until the end of guncam clip.
http://img78.imageshack.us/img78/6299/fw190aboom635mx.png (http://imageshack.us)

Ankanor
08-13-2005, 05:27 AM
Looks to me the center of the explosion is in the right wingroot, you can see the small flash from the previous frame being about 3-5 ft right of the center, the center in this case being the inner cannon and its ammo box. But there is more reason to believe the explosion came from the wingroot/forward fuselage. it's not only the right wingroot cannon ammo box, in this area are situated the ammo for the machineguns and the left MG151 AND the fuel line to the engine. there is just more stuff to be blown there. Unless of course, the FW190 had MK108 as outer cannons. But even so, the aircraft is torn apart from the inside, which won't be possible if the explosion center is located about 3m outside the body. I see two tracers just aft of the FW190 tail, in the frame just before the explosion. Can anyone confirm?

And a word for the German pilot. I hope he died instantly, even before he knew what was going on. Better than losing a wing and being trapped inside, if you ask me.

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 05:55 AM
If you mean two bright dots behind left horizontal stabilizer, they do look like two tracers but arent them, because can be seen for 3 frames in the same place, i.e. those are some film rubbish.
NO HITS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF Fw-190A can be seen in the entire guncam clip. On the other hand there are some hits on the RIGHT wing tip exactly. So right battery of M2's hit right tip and missed later, and left battery missed initially and later achieved hits on ammo box. We are talking here about events that took friction of a second.

In Fw-190 fuel is in the fuselage only, below cocpit. No explosion initailly there, but at right outer cannon ammobox only. Fuel exploded a while LATER after ammo explosion and fuel explosion was triggered by ammo explosion.

Ockham, Ockham!

Blackdog5555
08-13-2005, 07:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
If you mean two bright dots behind left horizontal stabilizer, they do look like two tracers but arent them, because can be seen for 3 frames in the same place, i.e. those are some film rubbish.
NO HITS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF Fw-190A can be seen in the entire guncam clip. On the other hand there are some hits on the RIGHT wing tip exactly. So right battery of M2's hit right tip and missed later, and left battery missed initially and later achieved hits on ammo box. We are talking here about events that took friction of a second.

In Fw-190 fuel is in the fuselage only, below cocpit. No explosion initailly there, but at right outer cannon ammobox only. Fuel exploded a while LATER after ammo explosion and fuel explosion was triggered by ammo explosion.

Ockham, Ockham! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that whhat it looks like. the fire comes from the rights wing root as if hit by burning shrappnel from the ammo box. API would have caused flashes on thed wing root and behind cockpit for API hits on the tank

SkyChimp
08-13-2005, 09:08 AM
Who needs to hit a fuel tank when hitting an ammo box can do that. Hitting a fuel tank probably wouldn't have caused anything that dramatic.

Atomic_Marten
08-13-2005, 09:29 AM
ROTFL

F0_Dark_P
08-13-2005, 09:49 AM
cool cam!, but how they got that FW to a D-9 i dont know http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

it really looks like he hits the ammo so it triggered the fuel to explode, but i dont know, it lags a bit, couse it stands still when the exploation comes, so it could be a direct hit on the fueltank to i think, but i dunno

Gibbage1
08-13-2005, 02:23 PM
After a second look, I think the inner ammo box was hit, exploded, and ruptured the fuel tank causing the fireball. Again, without fuel, there is no fireball. So the fuel tank MUST be involved. The people think it was just the ammo box going up is watching way too many hollywood movies! Be sure!

Gibbage1
08-13-2005, 02:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SkyChimp:
Who needs to hit a fuel tank when hitting an ammo box can do that. Hitting a fuel tank probably wouldn't have caused anything that dramatic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree. If the fuel tank was 1/3 or 1/4 full, there would be a rather large cavity full of fuel vaper. API going through that cavity of fuel vaper WOULD explode. In recent history a 747 crashed due to this. FAA concluded that a wire inside an empty fuel tank lit fuel vapers inside the tank. The resulting explosion bloew off the forward porton of the jumbo jet!!!!!!!! All passangers lost. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

RedDeth
08-13-2005, 02:44 PM
gibbage you are making pure guesses.

you dont have any knowledge of explosions. neither do I. but if i were to guess id say hitting about a hundred explosive cannon shells just might cause a gigantic explosion causing a secondary explosion in the fuel tank making an even bigger explosion.

but to make a hypothesis that explosive rounds dont explode or cause a fireball is ridiculous.

what is your degree in?

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 02:44 PM
Explosion of propellant in all those cases gave a fireball. Propellant does give fire, doesnt ithttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If API hit fuel tank below fuel level nothing drastic would happen, but if hit above, it would pass thgrough area of vapour+air, i.e bomb ready to go off if ignited...

Here fuel tank was torn by fragments/blast from outer cannon ammo box explosion, fuel was dispersed and lighted.

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 02:55 PM
No, no! Gibbage1 is right: explosives like TNT, hexogen, petryl, etc. are supposed and indeed expolode very fast! To get a visible fire ball you need materiel that burns relatively slowly. In this case materiel to give the fire ball was not explosives in projectiles but propellant in cartridge cases. Propellats burn relatively slow and its "fire ball" effect is seen at muzzle moments after projectile leaves a barrel.

Atomic_Marten
08-13-2005, 03:09 PM
Guys... don't wanna spoil the party but tell me why do you think that ammo box on FW-190 has exploded (and maybe ignited fuel)? Please don't tell me it was because that little round flash just before big boom. 'Cos there are larger flashes and flashes all around the right wing before that... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 03:18 PM
Because there is nothing else in Fw-190A wing to explodehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And THE flash is exactly where external cannon ammo box is located.

Atomic_Marten
08-13-2005, 03:47 PM
Problem is that we can not tell if that "ignited ammo box" can produce such explosion.(if it was ignited in the first place, that is)

The main question is what caused the big flash?

Piece of hot metal in the fuel tank seems like the most logical answer for me.

Now on what way it ended up in the fuel tank, that is what we can discuss.
Is it M2 round or piece of exploded MG151 shell?

That is almost impossible to tell...

Xiolablu3
08-13-2005, 04:09 PM
From my Battle Of Briain (factual day by day book)

'....completely destroying 4 of the Me110's, whose empty, vapour filled external fuel tanks exploded like bombs'

Sounds very much like what we see here. (but with internal fuel tank of course)

Kocur_
08-13-2005, 04:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Problem is that we can not tell if that "ignited ammo box" can produce such explosion.( </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

INDEED it can! You must have seen pics of tanks with turrets blown away. Explosion of ammo inside the tank causes that. And it takes SOME explosion to make 10t turret fly away...

API(gnition) projectile when passed through cases of that ammo did exactly what primer usually does, but on massive scale...The same if penetrated a shell, that is less probable though because walls of HE projectiles are simply thicker than cases' and are simply smaller. On the other hand whether it was MG151/20 or MK108 there were Minengeschoss rounds there too, and those are thin walled and have 20g/82g of explosive inside. And if initial explosion was a shell, propellant in cases would explode a tiny moment later.

pourshot
08-13-2005, 05:36 PM
My best guess is that the .50 cal round(s) hit one or more of the cannon shells in the outer gun bay setting off a chain reaction. You should see small flashes of light from a normal cannon hit but in this case I would suggest that most of the flame is coming from the propellant.

Soon after the explosion starts you can clearly see shrapnel flying out in all directions this would likely include into the fuel tank and this is what I suggest set off the large fireball towards the end of the film.

If this film had been made with high speed cameras instead of a gun camera exposed at around speed the full story would be much clearer.

As a side note I think it would be good to have cannon ammo explosions modeled in the game, if not for il2 then perhaps in the BOB.

LeadSpitter_
08-13-2005, 05:56 PM
typical blue responses by roland and others in the blue only mafia club.

http://www.historicaviation.com key word guncam

http://www.rareaviation.com

go prove each and everyone of those real clips wrong now since blue knows more then the real thing.

pourshot
08-13-2005, 06:15 PM
One more thing did anyone else spot the stores hanging on the center line, fuel tank/bomb?

Blackdog5555
08-14-2005, 12:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by pourshot:
My best guess is that the .50 cal round(s) hit one or more of the cannon shells in the outer gun bay setting off a chain reaction. You should see small flashes of light from a normal cannon hit but in this case I would suggest that most of the flame is coming from the propellant.

Soon after the explosion starts you can clearly see shrapnel flying out in all directions this would likely include into the fuel tank and this is what I suggest set off the large fireball towards the end of the film.

If this film had been made with high speed cameras instead of a gun camera exposed at around speed the full story would be much clearer.

As a side note I think it would be good to have cannon ammo explosions modeled in the game, if not for il2 then perhaps in the BOB. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Ive seen a lot of FW ammo boxes go off in gun cam shots. The cannons exposive charge flash like a small genade and the wing tip flies off sending the 190 in a tumble. No fire or fireball. The Cam shot was a fireball caused by exploding gas. obvious. Not a bomb. You dont need to be an expert to know the difference from a fireball from a bomb exploding. Cant be a moron though, but dont need a degree in pyrotechnics to know the difference. Its possible that the tank was ruptured by AP ronds too then ignited by an API round...but definately gas exploding.