PDA

View Full Version : Check this video out....



GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 05:58 AM
Ok this is NOT flaming! More a question out of interest!
In tjis video I have chosen to check the difference between the US 0.50 cal(12,7mm) and the russian 12,7mm.
Can anyone give me info why the russian 12,7mm Is so much more deadly than the US 12,7mm round?
I think its faster is that why?

In this test I use ONLY two 12,7MGs! First half of the video is the Mig-3 with 12,7mm MG gunpods.
Second half of the video is a Spitfire with 2 0.50 cals.
The first thing that strikes me is the amount of flashes I see when using the russian 12,7 is more than double!! did they use more "spark rounds" than the western 12,7mm??

I posted this video in the "50 cal status" thread but it went by unnoticed. Anyone out there with info???
Press the link below and download from Mediafire server (no stupid pop ups there)

http://www.lobortis.com/file/1232435708

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 05:58 AM
Ok this is NOT flaming! More a question out of interest!
In tjis video I have chosen to check the difference between the US 0.50 cal(12,7mm) and the russian 12,7mm.
Can anyone give me info why the russian 12,7mm Is so much more deadly than the US 12,7mm round?
I think its faster is that why?

In this test I use ONLY two 12,7MGs! First half of the video is the Mig-3 with 12,7mm MG gunpods.
Second half of the video is a Spitfire with 2 0.50 cals.
The first thing that strikes me is the amount of flashes I see when using the russian 12,7 is more than double!! did they use more "spark rounds" than the western 12,7mm??

I posted this video in the "50 cal status" thread but it went by unnoticed. Anyone out there with info???
Press the link below and download from Mediafire server (no stupid pop ups there)

http://www.lobortis.com/file/1232435708

K_Freddie
01-02-2008, 06:47 AM
Hmmm.
In the mig, your aim was much better.
Another thing to consider is that IL2 favours nose guns over wing guns, with regard to hitting power.

Wing guns are only really effective when the target is close to convergence, whereas with nose guns the target can be 2x convergence and you'll still get a good concentration spread.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 06:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
Hmmm.
In the mig, your aim was much better.
Another thing to consider is that IL2 favours nose guns over wing guns, with regard to hitting power.

Wing guns are only really effective when the target is close to convergence, whereas with nose guns the target can be 2x convergence and you'll still get a good concentration spread.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hehe Im sure my aiming was pretty much the same in both planes!
Anyway, the Mig has the 12,7mm gunpods on the wings pretty much at the same place as the Spit!
And I was only using them not the nose mounted MGs! The convergence was the same for both planes, 150m. So the convergence vs nosemounted guns is not the issue here!

K_Freddie
01-02-2008, 07:51 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif OK it's your aiming then.

It looked like you were firing slightly to far forward in the spit as I saw fewer hit's on the bombers. Maybe you can check this in the track and tell us.

Another story to come from the eastern front was that the Russian MGs and cannons were supposed to have higher muzzle velocity/hitting power than the germans ones. The Germans said the opposite. ???

Maybe the spit guns had higher velocities and you might have put in too much deflection.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Matz0r
01-02-2008, 07:57 AM
First of all the wing mounted and nose UB guns are different. The UBK has a higher rate of fire 1050 rpm IIRC and the UBS some 800 rpm, while M2 ROF is 750 rpm. UB also fires a heavier round - 12.7/108 vs 12.7/99 for M2. Perhaps it'd make sense to compare both synchronized version also (P39-Q10). Don't think it matters though, all Russian guns are very powerful in this game.

LEBillfish
01-02-2008, 08:09 AM
Sorry, yet I'm not even going to download the video "simply" because there are way way way too many variables with in sim generated movies.

Meaning, if your range is off by 4' it would make a difference, if you hit 3" off from the other it would make a difference, might of hit turbulance, your hand might of shook, your stick could be fluttering, on and on.

If you are really serious about testing rounds, first off get some r/l stats (here's a good place to START not the final word http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm )....Then, set up a static (unmoving) and consistant firing range (place a plane or object at a point, then test various planes aimed at it FROM THE SAME POINT (swap out planes) naturally having to elevate the object)...and so on. (must also consider eqal rounds fired, etc.).

Even then you'll have difficulty. However frankly, I have NO problems doing massive damage with the U.S. .50 cal. guns....Without question I'd take them over Mk108's or any other similar sized round.

In any case however, you will never be able to determine effectiveness accurately by firing guns in the sim as EXACT results and what is actually happeneing to the target object can only be guessed at (damage shown simply picture representations once X% has been reached).

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Sorry, yet I'm not even going to download the video "simply" because there are way way way too many variables with in sim generated movies.

Meaning, if your range is off by 4' it would make a difference, if you hit 3" off from the other it would make a difference, might of hit turbulance, your hand might of shook, your stick could be fluttering, on and on.

If you are really serious about testing rounds, first off get some r/l stats (here's a good place to START not the final word http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm )....Then, set up a static (unmoving) and consistant firing range (place a plane or object at a point, then test various planes aimed at it FROM THE SAME POINT (swap out planes) naturally having to elevate the object)...and so on. (must also consider eqal rounds fired, etc.).

Even then you'll have difficulty. However frankly, I have NO problems doing massive damage with the U.S. .50 cal. guns....Without question I'd take them over Mk108's or any other similar sized round.

In any case however, you will never be able to determine effectiveness accurately by firing guns in the sim as EXACT results and what is actually happeneing to the target object can only be guessed at (damage shown simply picture representations once X% has been reached). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


If ur not watching the video then u cant comment so dont answer! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 08:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif OK it's your aiming then.

It looked like you were firing slightly to far forward in the spit as I saw fewer hit's on the bombers. Maybe you can check this in the track and tell us.

Another story to come from the eastern front was that the Russian MGs and cannons were supposed to have higher muzzle velocity/hitting power than the germans ones. The Germans said the opposite. ???

Maybe the spit guns had higher velocities and you might have put in too much deflection.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats my point! U cant see when hitting with the US 0.50s as well as u can with the Russian 12,7mm. The Us 0.50s seem to produce less flash effect" when hitting! Im pretty sure my hit % is the same!
Im not saying its wrong im just seeking an explanation why 2 russian 12,7mm creates 3 times more flashes on target than 2 US 12,7mm

LEBillfish
01-02-2008, 09:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
If ur not watching the video then u cant comment so dont answer! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually yes I can, as it just takes a tiny amount of common sense to realize how much results could vairy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 09:42 AM
Ok LEBillfish do me this favour. make the mission urself and ull see for urself that although results may vary ull see what I mean. Take a Mig3 with 12,7 gunpods and use only the 2 gunpods and fire at a couple of bombers. Remeber what u see. Then take a spitfire and use only the 0.50s and do the same. U will see what I see!

If I were to compare the Mk108 round vs a 0.303 round would u still say that the difference would be because only the results vary?

HuninMunin
01-02-2008, 10:15 AM
Rate of fire damnit.

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 10:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:
Rate of fire damnit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats what im looking for HuninMunin if u read my first post! But with how much???? is it really twice as fast or 3 times as fast as the amount of flashes would suggest?
Since its pretty clear that people post here before they read the posts im reminding that Im not flaming, Im asking because I dont know! I will repeat that for the 1diots that reply without reading, IM ASKING!

Still noones seems to know why the russian 12,7 produce more flashes o target than other 12,7 rounds! Anyone??

GH_Klingstroem
01-02-2008, 10:37 AM
Oh btw how do I check hit % when flying offline?

HuninMunin
01-03-2008, 05:22 AM
5th post.

And no, you didn't say anything about RoF in your initial post.
Nevermind though.

PS
Answer to your question is simple ( and you could have gotten it yourself if you had read all the posts and the link Billfish provided you ).

1. The RoF of the russian guns is higher.
2. They have a different belting ( more flashes)

Jaws2002
01-03-2008, 09:34 AM
From the link Bilfish posted (Best internet resource for ww2 aircraft armament info):

"The American Browning .50 M2 is an undistinguished performer, particularly when compared with its closest competitor, the 12.7 mm Berezin. The relatively small incendiary content in the .50 API (0.9 g instead of 2 g) gives the Soviet round a flying start, which it adds to by its usefully higher rate of fire, then finishes off in style by being lighter as well, and thereby almost twice as efficient overall. "

LEBillfish
01-03-2008, 09:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
Ok LEBillfish do me this favour. make the mission urself and ull see for urself that although results may vary ull see what I mean. Take a Mig3 with 12,7 gunpods and use only the 2 gunpods and fire at a couple of bombers. Remeber what u see. Then take a spitfire and use only the 0.50s and do the same. U will see what I see!

If I were to compare the Mk108 round vs a 0.303 round would u still say that the difference would be because only the results vary? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hon you're not understanding my point....and none of it was a slam or insult toward you.

Flying in the sim it is really impossible to make accurate comparisons my point....The reasons being many, yet a few would be....The angle of attack will be different, range will be different, convergence will be different (as some planes "can't" get to as low a horizontal convergence), rate of fire, rounds hitting the exact same place and so on.

So it's not an insult, no one can by "flying" in the sim make accurate checks....That's why even real life guns were checked by a stationary plane at a stationary target. That is how you'll get your most accurate results. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Choctaw111
01-03-2008, 10:58 AM
I do believe that you were scoring MANY more hits with the MiG3 than with the Spit. It just seems that your gunnery in the Spit is not as good as in the MiG3. In the MiG you were doing just fine and were really shredding them with the BnZ tactics. I think that many people suffer from poor 50 cal gunnery. The Russian 12.7mm tracers are much easier to see than the 50 cal ones. That in and of itself seems to help gunnery out quite a bit for a lot of people. My hitting percentage with the 50 cal/30cal are not nearly as good as with other weapons. Is it because the tracers are hard to see? Who knows.

SeaFireLIV
01-03-2008, 11:20 AM
I gotta back LEBillfish up. You don`t have to see the film to understand that there are too many variables to base it all off just that test.

Billfish and other old timers have been on this long enough and seen enough to know without seeing your little film. Sounds pompous but it`s true. I looked anyway, and my point still stands.

Dustysquareback
01-03-2008, 12:53 PM
Keep in mind the round themselves are VERY different. In the UB, 1 of every 4 bullets has high-explosive. The American .50 cal, has no such thing.

buzzsaw1939
01-03-2008, 01:51 PM
Kling... I'm feeling your frustration!...

It was a simple question, with a vid for an example of what your talking about, it was very clear to me.

Apparently it was an invitaion for some with inflated ego's to jump in and try to impress you, by talking down to you, like this sim represents the real world, It always amazes me!

I belive your question has been answered, it's just a shame people can't do it without that superior attitude, it never impresses me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Jaws2002
01-03-2008, 03:01 PM
The UB 12.7 guns have the best balistics in the game. It was better then all other .50cals but in this game this gun is the motehr of all fifty cals.
The reason you can hit better with it is that you need a lot less lead with the UB guns. It was beter then the others but i'm not sure was this good.

GH_Klingstroem
01-03-2008, 04:18 PM
What is the order of the rounds for the .50s we have in game?? every 5 round is a tracers thats all I know.. what else do we have?
Some peope say we should have API and apperently we dont. What about the HE round? Which round is the one giving a flash when its hitting its target?

Y0RGO
01-03-2008, 04:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:

The reason you can hit better with it is that you need a lot less lead with the UB guns. It was beter then the others but i'm not sure was this good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or other hands; is amerikan 50 is not as this poor?

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

Ratsack
01-03-2008, 07:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
...

Billfish and other old timers have been on this long enough and seen enough to know without seeing your little film. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Been around long enough to be patronising by reflex, you mean. She didn't address the question he raised, but gave him a lecture on test set ups. He wasn't professing to have a test, but an film to illustrate. Different concepts.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Sounds pompous... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because it is.

Ratsack

buzzsaw1939
01-03-2008, 08:02 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
01-03-2008, 08:57 PM
..........as we await buzzsaw and ratsack to have an answer for Klingstroem.......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

buzzsaw1939
01-03-2008, 11:54 PM
I think I made it clear that he got his answer!.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I don't think a profesional pilot needs or appreciates a lecture from a simmer!

Like I said, it dosen't impress me at all!

A simple question only needs a simple reply, and that was done by some.

LEBillfish
01-03-2008, 11:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
I think I made it clear that he got his answer!.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I don't think a profesional pilot needs or appreciates a lecture from a simmer!

Like I said, it dosen't impress me at all!

A simple question only needs a simple reply, and that was done by some. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

so you have no answer....Well that is an answer too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

buzzsaw1939
01-04-2008, 12:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:
From the link Bilfish posted (Best internet resource for ww2 aircraft armament info):

"The American Browning .50 M2 is an undistinguished performer, particularly when compared with its closest competitor, the 12.7 mm Berezin. The relatively small incendiary content in the .50 API (0.9 g instead of 2 g) gives the Soviet round a flying start, which it adds to by its usefully higher rate of fire, then finishes off in style by being lighter as well, and thereby almost twice as efficient overall. " </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I think this covers it pretty well!

By the way, your wasteing your time talking down to me also, if you need the last word, you got it! Buzzsaw out! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

KIMURA
01-04-2008, 02:42 AM
What we actually have here is a discussion about who is right and who is wrong or who did wrong testing. We got no specs til yet. How's about the M2 0.50" belting compared to the UB 12.7 belting. Next question: does API really have that effect on soft targets like a Betty is(soft - non-armored target)? Does HE or HE/I a better job on that?

GH_Klingstroem
01-04-2008, 03:18 AM
Well its not like its forbidden for people to do the test themselves... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

KIMURA
01-04-2008, 03:36 AM
Klingstrom, your testing or aiming is not the point. So far everybody can see there's nothing we can really talk about, because there are too many variables in that equation - as Billfish mentioned.

To have something to talk about we have to kwno the belting of both weapons and the effect on a non-moving object or a fired rounds / hit counter tool. (there are some available)

GH_Klingstroem
01-04-2008, 04:09 AM
Exactly Kimora! Thats exactly what I need to know or want to know!! So far noone here seems to have the belting information about these two weapons! Everyone keeps saying the same thing. The russian 12,7mm is stronger etc etc... But what does it have in its belting that the 0.50 M2 doesnt?

R_Target
01-04-2008, 04:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
But what does it have in its belting that the 0.50 M2 doesnt? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg's iron will.

Oh wait....maybe it's Delta Wood. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

GH_Klingstroem
01-04-2008, 04:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by R_Target:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
But what does it have in its belting that the 0.50 M2 doesnt? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg's iron will.

Oh wait....maybe it's Delta Wood. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
No but seriously, what does it have in its belting that creates that high amount of flashes on impact? Is that the HE that explodes on impact?

Wepps
01-04-2008, 05:22 AM
One of the things I always loved (hated) about IL-2, is the fact that it is such a great simulator, that most people flying expect more perfection from Oleg.

I'm one of these http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

You get drawn in to pointless discussions about modeling of everything from air to bullets. It's expected in certain things, but also has to be balanced with game play for it to be a great game. Or does it?

If I were Oleg, I'd have added maps like crazy until Europe all the way to the Urals was represented, then go for perfection in EVERYTHING. This is what the game became shortly after release, a great (but not perfect) representation of what a flight simulator should be!

What I never understood is why after all these years nobody has stood up and challenged Oleg on this platform. IL-2 is still the best around, and it's looking like it always will be the best game.

From my own personal perspective, it should have stayed in Russia though, with different and new products bringing the Pacific and European Theatres to us. I would have loved to have seen Russia finished. That's the draw for me.

But that's just me.

At any rate (of fire), it's still a great (but not perfect) simulator.

KIMURA
01-04-2008, 06:29 AM
These info are taken from a similar thread posted by Frankyboy.

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

and from another thread
UB:

UBS / UBT 12.7
// APIT - AP - HEI

APIT
mass = 0.0448
speed = 850.0
power = 0.001

AP
mass = 0.051
speed = 850.0
power = 0

HEI
mass = 0.0428
speed = 850.0
power = (0.00114+0.00128)

KIMURA
01-04-2008, 06:45 AM
Exactly what I expected if these figures are true. From my understanding of gunnery it makes less sense to fire AP or API to an non-armored target. The AP does low effect on the target and simpy stamps holes into the construction. API's effect is also low because of low chemical power. To get good results with API you have to clearly hit fuel tanks or something like that. The best effect on a non-armored nacelle 95% of the whole construction will always have HE/(I) rounds.

LEBillfish
01-04-2008, 08:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:
From the link Bilfish posted (Best internet resource for ww2 aircraft armament info):..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this covers it pretty well!

By the way, your wasteing your time talking down to me also, if you need the last word, you got it! Buzzsaw out! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great, Thank you! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BSS_Sniper
01-04-2008, 09:07 AM
Someone please tell me where people are getting that there is a .50 HE round for the M2.

Capt.LoneRanger
01-04-2008, 09:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_Sniper:
Someone please tell me where people are getting that there is a .50 HE round for the M2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly what I was wondering about.

AFAIK in WW2 the following types of ammo for cal.50s were available:
Ball (standard), AP, Tracer, Incendiary and API?

BSS_Sniper
01-04-2008, 09:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_Sniper:
Someone please tell me where people are getting that there is a .50 HE round for the M2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly what I was wondering about.

AFAIK in WW2 the following types of ammo for cal.50s were available:
Ball (standard), AP, Tracer, Incendiary and API? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

APIT and thats all I know of for ww2, at least that was common in inventory.

buzzsaw1939
01-04-2008, 02:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:
From the link Bilfish posted (Best internet resource for ww2 aircraft armament info):..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this covers it pretty well!

By the way, your wasteing your time talking down to me also, if you need the last word, you got it! Buzzsaw out! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great, Thank you! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif........ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Badsight-
01-04-2008, 04:26 PM
how did this incredibly non-accurate test ever make 3 pages ?!?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Apparently it was an invitaion for some with inflated ego's to jump in and try to impress you, by talking down to you, like this sim represents the real world, It always amazes me!

I belive your question has been answered, it's just a shame people can't do it without that superior attitude, it never impresses me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
you find people who know , explaining why hes wrong as flaming ? you must get along great in life like that

BfHeFwMe
01-04-2008, 05:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jaws2002:
From the link Bilfish posted (Best internet resource for ww2 aircraft armament info):

"The American Browning .50 M2 is an undistinguished performer, particularly when compared with its closest competitor, the 12.7 mm Berezin. The relatively small incendiary content in the .50 API (0.9 g instead of 2 g) gives the Soviet round a flying start, which it adds to by its usefully higher rate of fire, then finishes off in style by being lighter as well, and thereby almost twice as efficient overall. " </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but Russia also created a throw away gun that was unsuited for a world wide deployed military with a vast logistics chain. You know to obtain those high firing rates they dropped heat treating on critical components. These were throw aways, one shot wonders. Amazing why no one else ever came up with the same solutions, LoL. Now you know why. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Choctaw111
01-04-2008, 06:56 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Badsight-:
how did this incredibly non-accurate test ever make 3 pages ?!?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Because it has to do with the 50, that's why. Wait till it hits 5 pages or more. It will get there I'm sure.

buzzsaw1939
01-04-2008, 09:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight-:
how did this incredibly non-accurate test ever make 3 pages ?!?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Apparently it was an invitaion for some with inflated ego's to jump in and try to impress you, by talking down to you, like this sim represents the real world, It always amazes me!

I belive your question has been answered, it's just a shame people can't do it without that superior attitude, it never impresses me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
you find people who know , explaining why hes wrong as flaming ? you must get along great in life like that </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I get along great in life, maybe it's because I read a question carefully before I post! he made it very clear he was not flameing!! it was a simple question, (got it?)

Ratsack
01-04-2008, 11:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
..........as we await buzzsaw and ratsack to have an answer for Klingstroem.......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't tell him I had an answer.

I didn't just tell him to naff off and learn how to set up a test, either.

It's just manners, ya know? Remember them?

Ratsack