PDA

View Full Version : Something wrong with MG17s?



DR-Aquila
08-02-2004, 11:33 AM
Hi all!

With some chaps as crazy as I am, we've done some tests about the light MGs... And we found that:

Target: Ju-87G A.I.
Planes used for the test: I-16/24 (ShKas); Me 109-F4 (MG17). Coop mission. We shot at a distance < 100m, convergence 100m. We fired until the pilot and gunner bailed out.

This is from the eventlog:
MG17:
Fire Bullets: 302
Hit Bullets: 246
Hit Air Bullets: 246

The crew bails out, the Stuka loosing carb and grey smoke. It goes slowly down, and crashes in the sea. Here is the .ntrk track, very interesting. Click here to download (http://www.warbird-ecole.com/tracks/test-mg17.ntrk)

ShKas:
Fire Bullets: 104
Hit Bullets: 86
Hit Air Bullets: 86

The Stuka takes fire immediately, and the crew bails out. The Ju-87 explodes a few seconds after. Here is the track: Click here to download (http://www.warbird-ecole.com/tracks/test-ShKas.ntrk)

Is there a problem about the MG17s? Or were these weapons less effective than the Allies ones?

P.S. Sorry, my english is quite poor... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DR-Aquila
08-02-2004, 11:33 AM
Hi all!

With some chaps as crazy as I am, we've done some tests about the light MGs... And we found that:

Target: Ju-87G A.I.
Planes used for the test: I-16/24 (ShKas); Me 109-F4 (MG17). Coop mission. We shot at a distance &lt; 100m, convergence 100m. We fired until the pilot and gunner bailed out.

This is from the eventlog:
MG17:
Fire Bullets: 302
Hit Bullets: 246
Hit Air Bullets: 246

The crew bails out, the Stuka loosing carb and grey smoke. It goes slowly down, and crashes in the sea. Here is the .ntrk track, very interesting. Click here to download (http://www.warbird-ecole.com/tracks/test-mg17.ntrk)

ShKas:
Fire Bullets: 104
Hit Bullets: 86
Hit Air Bullets: 86

The Stuka takes fire immediately, and the crew bails out. The Ju-87 explodes a few seconds after. Here is the track: Click here to download (http://www.warbird-ecole.com/tracks/test-ShKas.ntrk)

Is there a problem about the MG17s? Or were these weapons less effective than the Allies ones?

P.S. Sorry, my english is quite poor... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

JG7_Rall
08-02-2004, 11:39 AM
I think the russian MG's had a higher muzzle velocity, I'm not sure tho.

The MG17's are definatly undermodelled. Some 109 pilots flying the Emil would only use the machine guns because they disliked the cannons and they still managed to get kills. You can use nearly all your ammo and not scratch the paint off some planes in this game.

Btw, your english is quite good http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!

DR-Aquila
08-02-2004, 11:44 AM
Thx, Rall!
I have to say that my squad is a red one, but we saw, flying German planes for fun or DACT, that MG 17s seemed to be under modelled, as you say. Or perhaps there is something we don't know about them? Ore are Red Mgs over modelled?

I know, the Spits have 4 Mgs... But with a 90‚? deflexion, you can cut a FW190A wing without using your 20mms... Seems strange. Look at the tracks, it's quite funny...

Luftcaca
08-02-2004, 12:12 PM
if you really wanna go nuts, try MG17 agaisnt de Lagg3 S4
you can unload all the MG's of an Emyl on a Lagg3 and see no damage on the Lagg...
We've been saying this since FB 1.0, but....still good ol concrete Lagg3 with an inline engine tougher than the BMW801...

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

wants flyable:

early 110's
IL-10
Pe-3

Patditlepat
08-02-2004, 12:36 PM
For you example Luftcaca, the other problem is the strange DM of the LaGG-3 series... It's almost impossible to shot down a LaGG-3 with small MG caliber, except with a PK (PK happened very often on the LaGG-3...). Also...the oil radiator is not coded, and the M-105 engine is pretty tough for a V-12 engine...

To show the effectiveness of the 7.92 mm in comparaison of the .303 British I post two littles tracks (800 Ko each, 2.04):

The target with the .303 Brit.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/ja.muller/Conneries/M3.ntrk
And the same target with the 7.92 mm
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/ja.muller/Conneries/7.92.ntrk
No comment....

Like Aquila: sorry for my poor english too. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Luftcaca
08-02-2004, 12:50 PM
The oil radiator of the Lagg3.....the myth
Sometimes, on rare occasions, the Lagg3 with leak oil from a wing, I read somewhere that the Lagg3 has something like 5 radiators disposed everywhere in the plane, and that the engine was VERY easy to shut down...but I dont really remember clearly, can someone shed some light over that?

edit: Heille Pat tu parles francais hein?

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

wants flyable:

early 110's
IL-10
Pe-3

Fillmore
08-02-2004, 01:53 PM
I thik I read someone say before that MG17 did not have incindiary ammo, perhaps that is why less fires from it (I heve set IL-2 engine on fire using just MG17, but it takes a lot of ammo to do it).

WUAF_Co_Hero
08-02-2004, 02:46 PM
This is a good point Fillmore. However, to my understanding there are no LMG incindiary ammunitions modeled in AEP, so this would be constant at least.

Someone mentioned above that light MG's have a hard time taking down Lagg3's, well... Mg17's do yes, but ShVak's have no problem. At any rate, I think that the Mg 17's should at least be looked at before AEP's patch support goes Kaput.

Build a man a fire, keep him warm for a day...

Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Luftcaca
08-02-2004, 03:00 PM
Nonetheless the DM of the Lagg3 is still bogus, its just only more evident with MG17

it still can take enormous amount of 20mm hits without suffering engine damage, or if it does, the engine will be DEAD, theres no "in betweens" like for the DB.

The best way to down a Lagg3 is still BY FAR aiming at the pilots head http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

wants flyable:

early 110's
IL-10
Pe-3

Patditlepat
08-02-2004, 03:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Luftcaca:
edit: Heille Pat tu parles francais hein?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Réponse: oui http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Ton image est hébergée chez ifrance... French too? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Jabo Patatras
Fw 190 lover since avril 2003: cuvée spéciale à fort taux d'octane.

http://www.ifrance.com/JaboLalouxExtrem/bannierecielbleuoff3.JPG?NOM=JaboLalouxExtrem

Willey
08-02-2004, 03:13 PM
The ShKAS was a better MG, especially in rate of fire.

MG 17 - 1200rpm, 775m/s Vo
ShKAS - 1800rpm, 870m/s Vo

But in FB, worlds are between ShKAS, .30(3), the jap thing and the german ones. Yeah, even the A6M light MG is stronger than MG17 in FB! Surely the "Knochens√¬§ge" (bone saw) is undermodelled... All the others in that class fit to each other IMHO. The ShKAS is the best, followes by the US/UK ones and then the japanese one. MG 15 and 17 are way behind them. I'd bet, MG 81, too, but it's hard to tell because it's 2 MGs.

Jippo01
08-02-2004, 03:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Willey:
The ShKAS was a better MG, especially in rate of fire.

MG 17 - 1200rpm, 775m/s Vo
ShKAS - 1800rpm, 870m/s Vo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


There is no big difference between these two in anything else than RPM, MG 17 uses much heavier bullet.


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
www.ju88.de.tf (http://www.ju88.de.tf)

NN_Tym
08-02-2004, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jippo01:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Willey:
The ShKAS was a better MG, especially in rate of fire.
MG 17 - 1200rpm, 775m/s Vo
ShKAS - 1800rpm, 870m/s Vo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is no big difference between these two in anything else than RPM, MG 17 uses much heavier bullet.

-jippo
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>From The WW2 Gun Debate (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-pe.html)

ShKAS projectile weight is 10.9 grams
MG17 projectile weight is 10.8 grams

Either your information is wrong (you did not give numbers by the way), or Mr Gustin is wrong.

Based on the information found on this site, and an applet pointed to us by Butch2k HERE (http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm/ballistics/traj/traj.html)

I compared both guns :

Energy(ft-lbs)

Range
(yards) ShKAS MG17
0 2959,2 2392,1
100 2582 2074,7
200 2245,1 1792,1
300 1944,9 1539,2
400 1677,1 1315,6
500 1438,1 1119,9
600 1227,5 950,1
700 1043,7 804,8
800 884,6 683,2
900 749,6 584,4
1000 637,6 505,7

Drop (inches)

Range
(yards) ShKAS MG17
0 -1,5 -1,5
100 4,1 5,5
200 4,9 6,4
300 0 0
400 -11,4 -14,8
500 -30,3 -39,3
600 -58,1 -75,4
700 -96,1 -125
800 -146,3 -190,7
900 -210,8 -275,2
1000 -292,2 -381,8

In my opinion, the problem with MG17 comes from the incendiary rounds that lack ignition power. With any LMG, other than the MG17, I can set a FW190 on fire fron dead six. With the MG17 I never set it on fire.

Anyway, there is no doubt in my mind that the ShKAS was a much better weapon than the MG17. Simply look at the muzzle velocity.

DR-Aquila
08-02-2004, 04:04 PM
Rate of fire is one thing... But the main problem is that you need more german 7,92 bullets than soviet 7,62s to get significant damages on the same target... This is a bullets efficiency problem, not a ROF one... Am I wrong? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Jippo01
08-02-2004, 04:07 PM
I have seen many sources quote 12.8 grams for AP round (SMK - Spitzgeschoss mit Kern), which has muzzle velocity of 770m/s.

About lack of incendiary ammunition, the mentioned E. Gustin lists as a belt composition against air targets having 40% of incendiary rounds (PMK).

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html


-jippo

LeLv28 - Fighting for independency since 2002
http://www.lelv28.com

Falkster's Ju-88 fan site:
www.ju88.de.tf (http://www.ju88.de.tf)

WWMaxGunz
08-02-2004, 04:19 PM
ROF counts not when hits are given, much more hits for MG-17.

However by Olegs' Table:

MG-17 AP/APT - both 810 m/s - both 10 gm - fires AP-AP-APT
ShKas APIT/API/T - 869/871/869 m/s - all 9.6 gm - fires APIT-API-T-API

The letter I is for incendiary, T is for Tracer and AP is armor piercing.
This is probably why the fires so quick.

That is what he gave about 2 years ago. Anyone argues, it is with him. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif


Neal

jugent
08-03-2004, 03:07 AM
There is much wrong in damage model and weapon effectiveness. The radiators dont leak water if they are hit. The effect of a a HE-projectile is depending of the distance from where you fire it. The german mg:s and guns are undermodelled in general. Maddox have probably dont included that the german got more effective "TNT" and less of the stuff in every granate.

The planes can take more damage in this game than they could in real life.
Most kills occured when a unoticed plane down down and fired a burst and the got a kill.
Some planes got a soft damagemodel like the Mig, it burns easy Me109, burns easy and one hit in front area makes is smear oil and loose power, and the FW, it looses its wings and sight very frequent. The FW limps bad after one hit in the wing.

Other planes havent been worth modelling with like the Lagg3 and I-16, but it has became better, the gladiator and the Yak1 to 9.

The engine of the La7 dont take any disadvantage of flying overheated.

I hit a Yak9D (QMB Smolensk 2000m Oponent; ace default loadout summer 12.00)
three times two in the wing and one in the fuselage with the nosegun of the Me109G6. The Yak braked hard and climbed up behind me and shoot of my wing with tre hits.

I have scored 70 hits in a IL2 1941.(QMB Smolensk 500m Oponent; ace default loadout unlimited ammo, summer 12.00) with a Me109f4. The next burst, 10 hits made him jump.

I think that IL2/FB is made for close combat dogfights and than must the plane take more damage.
This together with the fact that the german planes got weak guns, make this game in favour for planes such as Spitfire, Yak La Lagg and IL2.

NN_Tym
08-03-2004, 03:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
ROF counts not when hits are given, much more hits for MG-17.

However by Olegs' Table:

MG-17 AP/APT - both 810 m/s - both 10 gm - fires AP-AP-APT
ShKas APIT/API/T - 869/871/869 m/s - all 9.6 gm - fires APIT-API-T-API

The letter I is for incendiary, T is for Tracer and AP is armor piercing.
This is probably why the fires so quick.

That is what he gave about 2 years ago. Anyone argues, it is with him. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Neal<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If I read you correctly, the MG17 does not have any incendiary round... It seems there is something to fix here.

DR-Aquila
08-03-2004, 04:14 AM
For MG 17s, some sources give that (in real life):
Any 10 cartridges, you will find:
5 S.m.K.-v (AP)
4 P.m.K.-v (API)
1 B.-Patrone-v (HEI)

Right or wrong?

butch2k
08-03-2004, 06:28 AM
The source for the above belt is the official 1942 document for ammo belt composition http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
08-03-2004, 08:59 AM
I was only giving the data from what Oleg posted long ago during IL2.
There has been no notice of any changes.


Neal

War Trials Judge: What were you doing in 1942?
Answer: I was mowing my lawn.
WTJ: Mowing your lawn?
Ans: It is very big lawn. Taking long time to mow.

IIJG69Kartofe
08-03-2004, 10:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by butch2k:
The source for the above belt is the official 1942 document for ammo belt composition http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And before 1942 ? It was the same or different ?

NorrisMcWhirter
08-03-2004, 10:50 AM
Hi,

An entirely *subjective* opinion (mine) would say that the Mg17s are weaker than their Russian counterparts. So much so, in fact, that they are nigh on useless; I always go home after running out of cannon ammo unless they are stricken and I can put a lot of Mgs into them.

If that is correct, then so be it.

Cheers,
Norris

================================================== ==========

: Chris Morris - Blue Jam :
http://cabinessence.cream.org/

: More irreverence :
http://www.tvgohome.com/

: You've seen them... :
www.chavscum.co.uk (http://www.chavscum.co.uk)

'Bugs? What bugs?'
'AAA steals online kills, crash landing if good landing but out of fuel, muzzle flashes, kill given for planes that have landed OK, AI steals offline kills, gauges not working, Spitfire never overheats, FW190 view, P63 damage model, weird collision modelling...'
'Yeah, but look on the bright side - at least the 0.50s are fixed!'
Moral: $$$ + whining = anything is possible

Brain32
08-03-2004, 02:40 PM
I agree Shkas and .303 were(are) stronger than MG17 but the way the MG17s damage is modelled in FB I would rather open canopy and shoot with my Luger (pistol for those that don't know what it is). I think it woud be quite deadly comparing to MG17. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
08-03-2004, 03:28 PM
Close to medium range, use the tracers to track to the target. Then let him
know you have something real.

kostek
08-03-2004, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jugent:
There is much wrong in damage model and weapon effectiveness. The radiators dont leak water if they are hit. The effect of a a HE-projectile is depending of the distance from where you fire it. The german mg:s and guns are undermodelled in general. Maddox have probably dont included that the german got more effective "TNT" and less of the stuff in every granate.

The planes can take more damage in this game than they could in real life.
Most kills occured when a unoticed plane down down and fired a burst and the got a kill.
Some planes got a soft damagemodel like the Mig, it burns easy Me109, burns easy and one hit in front area makes is smear oil and loose power, and the FW, it looses its wings and sight very frequent. The FW limps bad after one hit in the wing.

Other planes havent been worth modelling with like the Lagg3 and I-16, but it has became better, the gladiator and the Yak1 to 9.

The engine of the La7 dont take any disadvantage of flying overheated.

I hit a Yak9D (QMB Smolensk 2000m Oponent; ace default loadout summer 12.00)
three times two in the wing and one in the fuselage with the nosegun of the Me109G6. The Yak braked hard and climbed up behind me and shoot of my wing with tre hits.

I have scored 70 hits in a IL2 1941.(QMB Smolensk 500m Oponent; ace default loadout unlimited ammo, summer 12.00) with a Me109f4. The next burst, 10 hits made him jump.

I think that IL2/FB is made for close combat dogfights and than must the plane take more damage.
This together with the fact that the german planes got weak guns, make this game in favour for planes such as Spitfire, Yak La Lagg and IL2.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

God dam it, i totally agry with u. This is what i wanted 2 say for over 1 year about IL2, after 5 years of playing Warbirds, which is more EF(b&z) style game.

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
08-04-2004, 07:40 AM
u can't compare RPM, because the guns are syncronized!

http://home.arcor.de/sebastianleitiger/FB/Screens/Fw%20190A-4guns.JPG (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=185103665)

Hoarmurath
08-04-2004, 08:08 AM
Difference in rpm should result in difference of firing time to obtain same result, not in number of hits to obtain the same result.

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg (http://hoarmurath.free.fr/files/internationale-ru.mp3)
56Kers are strongly advised to NOT click on my signature http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

jurinko
08-04-2004, 08:26 AM
present MG17 can easily set P-39 to fire or to smoke Hurricane, Spit or P-38/40. The problem is DM of certain aircrafts (like Soviet types maybe except MiG-3s) and overdone effect of some other guns. Notice for example that UBS in arcade mode does not only a single arrow when hitting the target (like MG131 or Browning), but produces few arrows per each hit, like a cannon round.
Moreover, the glycol coolers on many planes are not coded to be vulnerable to small bullet hits (like those on Bf 109, Yaks, LaGGs etc.) so hits which would in reality cause glycol leak (and sure kill if happened far enough from friendly ground) are not effective.

---------------------
Letka_13/Liptow @ HL

WWMaxGunz
08-04-2004, 11:19 AM
How many radiators were there made in sections and had self-seal valves?
Sure, some fluid lost and cooling area lost but not all.
These things were also built into some or many oil systems.

WWMaxGunz
08-04-2004, 11:22 AM
Top, since RPM is commonly known as Revolutions Per Minute (engines, HD's, etc)
the better and common term for shooting is ROF as Rate Of Fire.

Just FYI. RPM is only momentarily confusing.

Danschnell
08-04-2004, 11:57 AM
People, people.
Stop mistrusting Oleg. Oleg has done a BRILLIANT job modelling MG17s. Doesn't anyone realise that one of the most famous armaments quotes from WW2 is about LMGs, and is 'only good for scratching paintwork?'

Just 2 MG17s should be practically useless, especially as that quote usually refers to 8 .303 Brownings. The MG17s are only there so you at least have something to shoot with in an emergency, not so you can make loads and loads of kills.

Anyone who complains about not being able to make many kills with their MG17s should note that early war fighters like the P-39 and Hurricane ARE quite vulnerable to them in this game anyway, like they should be, whereas later war fighters made them completely obsolete.

If anything, the Russian LMGs are rediculously overdone. LMGs could make 1000s of strikes on bombers and still not bring them down.

People seem to want all weapons to have the same effectiveness when they whine. Personally I love the variety in this game that makes the different types of guns take anything from one single hit to many 100s of hits to bring a plane down. Its realistic and makes the game fun. I have no complaints about damage models these days.

Roy_15JG52
08-04-2004, 12:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jurinko:
present MG17 can easily set P-39 to fire or to smoke Hurricane, Spit or P-38/40<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Jurinko, my 800+ missions in VEF give me rights to doubt that. IF you are lucky maybe can make PK with MG 17, othervise they are totaly usseles and obsolete. Maybe UBS produces just few arrows but they make real damage at OKL planes.

Roy_15JG52
08-04-2004, 02:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Stop mistrusting Oleg. Oleg has done a BRILLIANT job modelling MG17s.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, generally comparing to CFS and other flight sims IL2/FB is brilliant.

[/QUOTE]Just 2 MG17s should be practically useless, especially as that quote usually refers to 8 .303 Brownings. The MG17s are only there so you at least have something to shoot with in an emergency, not so you can make loads and loads of kills.[/QUOTE]

Good point comparing to 8 .303 and 6/8 0.50. Why then similar russian weapon doing much greater damage? RPM? Velocity? Why MG17 have significantly weaker performance than 2x 0.303 at Spitfire Mk IXe which with ease can put fire at Bf 110 engine?

[/QUOTE]Anyone who complains about not being able to make many kills with their MG17s should note that early war fighters like the P-39 and Hurricane ARE quite vulnerable to them in this game anyway[/QUOTE]

In my last 2,5 years i remember three or four cases when i down VVS plane only with MG17. Maybe we dont play same game?

[/QUOTE]People seem to want all weapons to have the same effectiveness when they whine.[/QUOTE]


Well, this is part which pisses me off. Most common argument when somebody ask why german planes or weapons are modeled like they are in IL2/FB game is you are whinner. Is whinning when VVS/allied shell pass directly from your tail to engine and hit oil tank, when somebody ask why gravity have allmost no influence at VVS/allied shells, why Lagg 3 / La5 with or without additional fuel tanks have same speed and manuevrability, why Spitfire no overheat with 100% throttle + WEP, why one third of FW 190s aiming sight is covered (YOU IS WRONG!), why P 47 machineguns can destroy Tiger tanks...wanna more?


If you have any argument except you whinner! pls wrote here. IMHO IL2/FB is great game but constantly biased at VVS/allied side.

WWMaxGunz
08-04-2004, 07:23 PM
All bullet trajectories in the sim arc. All bullets have drag.
Lighter bullets that start out slower drop at closer range but
they ALL drop at the same rate. Somewhere in range though, I
think that bullets disappear but it may be very far out.

Guess which bullets are lighter and start slower?

Other thing: I look at the calibre, mass and muzzle speed of many
different guns. When I see one gun with 10% or more differences
in weight and speed of different rounds, I know the paths will be
different. Up close the difference won't be much, even mid-range
except maybe a wing thickness you hit with one kind and not another.
Lighter + faster will start flatter than heavier + slower. Lighter
shell will lose speed quicker. Somewhere the paths (not shots) will
cross if conditions of weight and speed are near right then the
lighter shot will drop more per meter travelled for being slower
while the heavy one will hold speed longer. But I don't know how
far out. Bullets may follow broken air of the last for stationary
guns but the plane flies forward and the guns do not point exactly
along the path of flight, one shot to the next does not come out
along the broken air.

Find out the cannon shells data. Long shots will have the most
seperation.

US 50 cals fire from the wings, far below the gun sight line. They
cross at convergence then arc over and recross. Historic P-47 data
shows guns average 47 inches below the sight, crossing at 300 yards,
and passing to a high point 9 inches above the sight line at 500 yards
before they begin to come down. NINE INCHES DEVIATION OVER 200 YARDS
AND NO MORE TILL THE BULLET CROSSES BACK NINE INCHES DOWN. Kinda flat
looking? Go out and set it up. Place a 9 inch high object so it's
clear to see top and bottom then stand back 200 yards and see how small
the difference is.

Then go find the same for German guns. The data I have is for FW with
MG-17 and 151/20's. MG-17 starts 20 cm below the sight line (nose gun
is closer to sight line) then arcs up 75 cm at from the diagram, 250 m.
Then it shows the arc downward across zero at 500m which -- hey the
person who drew this probably went from limited data but he has the
bullets travelling farther for the same drop from 250m to 500m! Rocket
bullets with delayed action perhaps? Or just not enough data so make
a parabola and forget about drag? 75 cm is almost 30 inches, 95 cm is
almost another 8 inches. So the bullet travels up 95 cm over the first
250m and drops only 75 cm in the next 250m. Sorry but that is not right.

Still I am willing to believe that the data given below is correct. I
don't read German and can't type the letters right but with the diagram
I can guess with some confidence; Grobte Hohe Uber Viserlinie is the high
point over the sight line = 75 cm. Schnittelinie mit der Erster is where
the bullet first crosses the sight line = 30 m. Visilinie Zweiter is where
the bullets cross back through the sight line on the way down, second crossing
and long range = 500 m.

The shots appear to lob higher because they are not coming from far below the
sight. Same data for 151/20's, the lower gun fires from 120 cm below the sight,
about (bit less than really) 48 inches (real value is 120/2.54001) the the high
point is 82 cm above the sight, 1st crossing at 135 m, second crossing at 550.
The other 151/20 starts, it looks like 116 or 117 cm below but get the difference
in curve; high point at 84 cm above, 1st cross at 125m and final cross at 550 m.
The 151/20 data is for Spr.Gr.Patr shells only, AP path is not the same.

Best data shown is that AS SET UP, MG-17's trajectory crosses 151/20's trajectory
about 275 m out and about 70 cm ABOVE the sight line. At 500m, the MG-17's are
on the sight line and the 151/20's are about 30 cm above if I can believe the
curves, which I cannot really, the difference may actually be less and the crossing
point of the shots may be more close to 300 m out.

Now how thick are wings from dead six? Can you hit with both MG-17's and 151/20's
at long range? Does that hold true for cannon that fire mixed solid shot with HE?
I bet it does, just don't know the degree of difference. Fascinating, huh?

Do you think there may be more to some questions that you thought?


Neal

jugent
08-06-2004, 04:29 PM
When I duell a FW190 against a Lagg3 I find the guns lethally equal but the FW got 4 guns and two MG and the Lagg got fewer.
When I fly the Lagg a can hit at ranges &gt; 500 m.
The most overgunned AC is the I-16 and IL2.

Brotrob
08-12-2004, 08:55 AM
BUMP !


Couse MG 17 are really a Joke, since the first days of IL2.
It was this way and will ever be, couse Oleg will never admit he's wrong.

If anyone doupts that MG17 are nothing else than USELESS WEIGHT on your airplane, I recomendt to fly a german campaign in FB with Emil, Friedrich and G2.

I can line up behind certain aircraft-types ( mentioned LaGG3 and Pe's and so on ) and EMPTY MY 1000 ROUNDS in the enemyplane from 3-5 metres away. Surface weighting more than the whole airplane falls of, and absolutely nothing happens.

I can live with the Modelling of nearly every other gun (Mg 151/20 still to weak, but ok ), but the MG 17 is just a joke. I doubt Oleg has ever fired a light MG, else he wouldn't have modelled such a peashooter.

But I still like scaring people online with my Super-Soccer-MG17, who dont know that they could just fly straight instead of stalling in the Ground http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

tac tac tac tac tac

Greetings,

Brotrob

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v386/brotrob/DD.jpg

Achdung! Kombjuderraum

D√¬§r Raum is vull bis under die Deggn mit die dollsdn und deiersdn elegdrischn und vullelegdronischn Abbarade. Stauna und glodzn derf dou jeder, obber umananderworschdln und an die Gn√¬∂bfler rumdriggn des derfn blou√ü mir, die EGGSBERDEN!

Atzebrueck
08-12-2004, 11:27 AM
http://www.jg51.de/JG51/report/treffen04-2/41.jpg
Real Life MG 17:
AP - APT - API - HEI

FB-AEP:
MG 17
// AP - AP - APT
ShKAS
// APIT - API - T - API

As you can see the MG17 got the worst ammunition to choose from. If we had the incendiary stuff, as the picture shows, it would at least light planes up http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. We would still need hundreds of hits to bring something down, but that'd be better than the currently needed thousand projectiles.


Another source, which states, that the real MG17 ammunition included 50% incendiary projectiles: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html
my skins:

http://vow-hq.com/files/jg51_atze/skin.jpg (http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=JG51_Atze&comefrom=display&ts=1049772896)

[This message was edited by Atzebrueck on Thu August 12 2004 at 10:52 AM.]

Ring-
08-12-2004, 06:33 PM
http://www.axishq.wwiionline.com/~ring/info/ammo/ww2ol-weapons.htm

MG 17 7.92mm S.m.K. 785ms 11.6g 3574.11j

7.92mm S.m.K.L. (tracer) 830ms 10.3g 3547.84j

MG 17/15 7.92mm PmK (API) 790ms 10.15g 3167.31j

7.92mm B-Patrone (HEI) 775ms 10.85g 3258.39j



The recommended use of ammunition in the MG17 was as follows:

- five (5) SmK-v rounds
- four (4) PmK-v rounds
- one (1) B-Patrone-v round

The SmK round was an armor piercing round with a lead sleeve and a hard steel core. The PmK round (also armor piercing) also had a steel core surrounded by phosphorus, which exploded on impact. The B-Patrone round was the tracer round that pilots could verify if they were hitting their target. It was a high explosive charge and incendiary material and exploded on impact.


http://www.axishq.wwiionline.com/~ring/info/ammo/air.jpg

[This message was edited by Ring- on Thu August 12 2004 at 05:42 PM.]

WWMaxGunz
08-14-2004, 12:52 PM
What's the deal with the MG 17/15 as opposed to the MG 17?
Is that just a designation? Should the sim MG 17's be 17/15's?


Neal

OldMan____
08-14-2004, 02:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
All bullet trajectories in the sim arc. All bullets have drag.
Lighter bullets that start out slower drop at closer range but
they ALL drop at the same rate. Somewhere in range though, I
think that bullets disappear but it may be very far out.

Guess which bullets are lighter and start slower?

Other thing: I look at the calibre, mass and muzzle speed of many
different guns. When I see one gun with 10% or more differences
in weight and speed of different rounds, I know the paths will be
different. Up close the difference won't be much, even mid-range
except maybe a wing thickness you hit with one kind and not another.
Lighter + faster will start flatter than heavier + slower. Lighter
shell will lose speed quicker. Somewhere the paths (not shots) will
cross if conditions of weight and speed are near right then the
lighter shot will drop more per meter travelled for being slower
while the heavy one will hold speed longer. But I don't know how
far out. Bullets may follow broken air of the last for stationary
guns but the plane flies forward and the guns do not point exactly
along the path of flight, one shot to the next does not come out
along the broken air.

Find out the cannon shells data. Long shots will have the most
seperation.

US 50 cals fire from the wings, far below the gun sight line. They
cross at convergence then arc over and recross. Historic P-47 data
shows guns average 47 inches below the sight, crossing at 300 yards,
and passing to a high point 9 inches above the sight line at 500 yards
before they begin to come down. NINE INCHES DEVIATION OVER 200 YARDS
AND NO MORE TILL THE BULLET CROSSES BACK NINE INCHES DOWN. Kinda flat
looking? Go out and set it up. Place a 9 inch high object so it's
clear to see top and bottom then stand back 200 yards and see how small
the difference is.

Then go find the same for German guns. The data I have is for FW with
MG-17 and 151/20's. MG-17 starts 20 cm below the sight line (nose gun
is closer to sight line) then arcs up 75 cm at from the diagram, 250 m.
Then it shows the arc downward across zero at 500m which -- hey the
person who drew this probably went from limited data but he has the
bullets travelling farther for the same drop from 250m to 500m! Rocket
bullets with delayed action perhaps? Or just not enough data so make
a parabola and forget about drag? 75 cm is almost 30 inches, 95 cm is
almost another 8 inches. So the bullet travels up 95 cm over the first
250m and drops only 75 cm in the next 250m. Sorry but that is not right.

Still I am willing to believe that the data given below is correct. I
don't read German and can't type the letters right but with the diagram
I can guess with some confidence; Grobte Hohe Uber Viserlinie is the high
point over the sight line = 75 cm. Schnittelinie mit der Erster is where
the bullet first crosses the sight line = 30 m. Visilinie Zweiter is where
the bullets cross back through the sight line on the way down, second crossing
and long range = 500 m.

The shots appear to lob higher because they are not coming from far below the
sight. Same data for 151/20's, the lower gun fires from 120 cm below the sight,
about (bit less than really) 48 inches (real value is 120/2.54001) the the high
point is 82 cm above the sight, 1st crossing at 135 m, second crossing at 550.
The other 151/20 starts, it looks like 116 or 117 cm below but get the difference
in curve; high point at 84 cm above, 1st cross at 125m and final cross at 550 m.
The 151/20 data is for Spr.Gr.Patr shells only, AP path is not the same.

Best data shown is that AS SET UP, MG-17's trajectory crosses 151/20's trajectory
about 275 m out and about 70 cm ABOVE the sight line. At 500m, the MG-17's are
on the sight line and the 151/20's are about 30 cm above if I can believe the
curves, which I cannot really, the difference may actually be less and the crossing
point of the shots may be more close to 300 m out.

Now how thick are wings from dead six? Can you hit with both MG-17's and 151/20's
at long range? Does that hold true for cannon that fire mixed solid shot with HE?
I bet it does, just don't know the degree of difference. Fascinating, huh?

Do you think there may be more to some questions that you thought?


Neal<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

your german is not as bad as you think.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

WWMaxGunz
08-15-2004, 05:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:

your german is not as bad as you think.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well.... the diagrams REALLY helped!

My year in school, we got French....
I still haven't fully forgiven them of that, German or Russian, even Chinese,
would have been FAR more useful!


Neal