PDA

View Full Version : Why do 7.62 even exist?!?!



Istreliteli
01-29-2004, 01:15 PM
Hello, this is my first post...i play both FB and the original, and im really frustrated as to how to use the early Yak or early MiG planes, due to their weak armaments. IN other respects theyre pretty good, but spending a half hour trying to make an '87 smoke is annoying. Anyone have tips on how to take out stukas? Or any plane using weak armament?

Istreliteli
01-29-2004, 01:15 PM
Hello, this is my first post...i play both FB and the original, and im really frustrated as to how to use the early Yak or early MiG planes, due to their weak armaments. IN other respects theyre pretty good, but spending a half hour trying to make an '87 smoke is annoying. Anyone have tips on how to take out stukas? Or any plane using weak armament?

adlabs6
01-29-2004, 01:29 PM
Try coming from above, and raking a few shells through the cockpit.

http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigUBI.GIF
My FB/FS2004 Pages (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com) | OMEGASQUADRON (http://777avg.com/omegasquad/)

carguy_
01-29-2004, 01:39 PM
Try using German machineguns...

http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

LilHorse
01-29-2004, 01:44 PM
Well, I'll take a bash at it. I think there are a couple of things to be concidered. First, I think the overall effectiveness of the .30cal that we experiance is different from what took place in RL. When you fire a bunch of .30cal into an a/c it's messin' up that plane. Are you gonna shear it apart or blow it up a la .50cal or cannons? No. But damage it you will. And get good solid bursts on it and you can shoot it down.

The thing in FB is that we often aren't sticking around long enough to see the end result of the damage. That and the fact that both AI (offline) and humans (online) will stay in the fray once they've been shot up some. In RL anybody who felt or heard the "plink-plink" of rounds hitting their a/c would have done their best to get the hell outta Dodge. And quite often damaging an enemy a/c was enough to achieve mission objectives.

If you're in a long enough mission and you're off, say, trying to RTB after the fight you might see the "Enemy Aircraft Destroyed" from that guy you shot up but only got smoking.

In short, it is possible to shoot 'em down with .30cal. Sometimes even right in front of your eyes. But it just isn't going to happen as readily as with heavy MG or cannon.

horseback
01-29-2004, 01:53 PM
I get the impression that the lighter MGs were used to determine if you were actually going to hit the target with your limited number of heavy rounds. One you see your target start shedding broken oreos, apply cannon rounds with some assurance of hitting him.

Works for me.

Cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

DuxCorvan
01-29-2004, 03:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That and the fact that both AI (offline) and humans (online) will stay in the fray once they've been shot up some. In RL anybody who felt or heard the "plink-plink" of rounds hitting their a/c would have done their best to get the hell outta Dodge. And quite often damaging an enemy a/c was enough to achieve mission objectives.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Finally someone who understands me. That's the point that gives me less immersion. I'd like to be in an active 'missions-vs-patrols' scenarios where chance ten-second engagements would be possible. You know: you're in a slower fighter squad, but you see a faster enemy flight there below. Using energy advantage you all dive on them, try to hit something in the pass and continue diving to disengage and go home taking profit of speed while they're still trying to control the situation. Maybe you've shot down or damage something, maybe not. If you're in a fast aircraft you can climb and go for a second pass, using BnZ tactics, but generally you don't risk your men's lives now that the things are getting matched. I'm sure this is the way it was 70% of the times.

And that's how it isn't in this game, both against AI or online lads. They're simply suicidal hot heads, fighting to death, painless wounded, knowing they are immortal. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I want an AI with SURVIVAL INSTINCT. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Please. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

- Dux Corvan -
http://www.uploadit.org/DuxCorvan/Altamira2.jpg
Ten thousand years of Cantabrian skinning.

F19_Orheim
01-29-2004, 03:13 PM
Aim for the engines...

http://216.12.202.106/~f19vs/F19bannerA.jpg http://216.12.202.106/~f19vs/F19banner.jpg

noshens
01-29-2004, 03:32 PM
How about hurricanes? Has anyone ever tried to shot down stuka flying Hurricane Mk 1?
I set up a game with empty stuka, conv 200 and came to stukas at 6 200m distance unloaded all my ammo and got stuka smoking and killed the tail gunner, that's it! The fuel tank even wasn't leaking and the stuka got safely to base.

I wasn't missing much I used wonder woman view, only very few bullets missed. What did RAF do to make Stukas feel outdated at BOB?

Platypus_1.JaVA
01-29-2004, 04:27 PM
First of all, the 7.62 guns are indeed a bit weak. The effectiveness of ammo, decreases with the distance you are shooting at so, coming in close is more effective.

I think 200meters is still too far off. I set my convergence at 150m The ammo is more effective at that distance and you are able to aim better. When attacking aircraft, try aiming at the wings or the engine(s).

The Ju-87 is indeed quite hard to shoot down. It is well armored and together with the inabbility of 7.62 to inflict serious damage, it is hard to bring down an stuka. WIth me, the He-111 and the 109's are less of an problem. My tactics against Ju-87's is to shoot at the oil radiator, under their noses until they release a small black streak of smoke. The move on to the next Stuka and do the same. The oil now leaks out of the planes and sooner or later their engine is going to seize and they will be out of action. It won't get you kills but, it cripples them. Once you are done with all of the radiators, you can try shooting a wing off, if you have some ammo left.

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php

KcDohl
01-29-2004, 05:14 PM
I've always thought the Stuka was easy to shoot down. In fact, I recently played the same scenario - Hurri Mk.1 against a few Stukas - and shot down three of the planes before running out of ammo. Coming in from directly overhead and aiming for the wing root or engine does the trick, which is actually what I do for all planes...

I actually left two of the planes smoking. One later crash-landed, and the other eventually started burning and lost a wing. The third one started burning and fell immediately after my first pass.

The same tends to apply when flying against fighters, especially German ones. Their tails love to fall off mid-fight. Otherwise, it's the wings and engine.

&gt;&gt;K

Davea011
01-29-2004, 10:26 PM
Good comments all around here. I find myself agreeing with most of them.

The 7.62mm-ish weapons seem underpowered in FB. They were evidently a bit underpowered in real life as well and seem to have been, in most cases, holdovers from pre-war thinking. (Before WWII, after all, a few rifle caliber MG's were more than adequate; after 1942, forget about it.)

They seem to have been used a lot for aiming. At least, that was the theory. Honestly, I'm a bit suspicious of this. It seems to me that aircraft designers (who aren't always fighter pilots, mind you) included RCMG's in later designs simply because it had always been done that way, not because they were necessarily required. Anyone who thinks that there isn't a substantial difference in trajectory between a rifle caliber projectile and something 20mm and up is mistaken in most cases, and while I can only vouch for FB and not for actual WWII dogfights, I don't find streams of 7.62mm fire to assist my aiming much.

What to use it for? Simple -- anything that's not worth wasting cannon fire on. I do a lot of flying with Sturmoviks. When the mission's done, I range about and look for trouble; after all, I'm not getting paid to bring that ammo back to base. Many convoys include motorcycles. 20mm (or larger) fire is pretty much wasted on these. I light 'em up with the 7.62mm. It does the job just fine on them. It also works well for collapsing parachutes. Not that I'd necessarily advocate doing that online, but in singleplayer, why not? Each 'chute you collapse (or pilot you shoot) is a ground kill. I also tend to use 7.62mm fire in dogfights; I'll send very short bursts out occasionally when the range is too long or the angle is bad. I'm not expecting kills, but I'll generate occasional hits like this and while it's not going to blow wings off or knock out engines, one can (and does) get lucky. Most planes carry a lot of ammo for their RCMG's...it makes sense to use it frequently. I also use it at close range simultaneously with the cannon fire. Weight of fire (combined with accuracy) is what generates kills, and if someone is in my sights at a range of 200 or less, why not hit them with EVERYTHING I've got? I don't know how much it helps, but logic says that it should help.

While the .30 caliber fire is not very effective (some would say undermodelled -- I have no comment one way or the other), it can kill. A few weeks ago a similar thread was going on concerning the Hurricane's armament and how ineffective it was. I decided to test it against a variety of targe...err, opponents, in the QMB.

To be brief: I nailed a 111, a 109, a Stuka, some of the Russian fighters, and a first series Sturmovik, using nothing other than concentrated .303 fire. Note that while the AI can be fairly stupid at times, I don't fly fighters often and had never flown the Hurri before this. I had done some time on the P-39 and saw some similarities there, namely that while individual shots didn't do much damage, the sheer amount of lead that filled the air pretty much guaranteed hits out to ranges I'd never even consider attempting with a cannon, and pilot kills in enemy AC were uncommon, but not rare. When the enemy AC is in your chosen range band, within 50m or so of your convergence and not maneuvering too much, and the guns are directed at a vulnerable spot (cockpit, engine, wing root, oil cooler, etc.), the results can be astonishing. The He-111, in particular, went down much easier than I'd thought it would. The 109 was also essentially finished after a short burst -- I'd gone head to head with him and scored a couple of engine hits on the merge, leaving him smoking. (I circled around and finished him for informational purposes, but he was dead on the merge.) The only AC I couldn't drop fairly quickly on the first attempt was that Sturmovik. I noticed numerous white streaks arcing away from him, despite my concentrated fire on his tail. I believe these were ricochets, and I've seen these (less commonly) with 20mm fire. Seeing as how I was shooting at the cockpit through the tail, and bearing in mind the cockpit's phenominal armor, this would make sense. I worked a wing on the second attempt and had better results: he went down, but it took a lot of shooting.

The post regarding fast kills vs. slow kills is spot on. Hell, it's about the only reason I don't use instant success in singleplayer missions anymore -- it was costing me kills. (That, and my atrocious landing skills need constant improvement.) If I shoot up a plane and he disengages while smoking -- and a friendly airport isn't within sight -- he's going to die one way or the other. I don't sweat it. The AI will probably steal the kill, but he won't be going home. It doesn't take much shooting to accomplish this. It takes a good amount to actually generate some visible flames or take a wing off. One thing I noticed with that Hurricane was that the first burst I placed on an opponent (assuming my gunnery wasn't crap) usually generated 3-4 fuel leaks in a variety of locations and tanks; having been on the receiving end of such treatment, I can say that one's fuel can run out surprisingly quickly if the leaks are bad enough.

Now, if we're talking about AC that have only a single rifle caliber MG...well, it must've made sense to somebody at the time. If nothing else, it's good for getting friendly attention when you're in trouble and is more authentic than toggling smoke.

One really nice thing I can say about these weapons, specifically in reference to the Stuka, is that they do wonders to improve your air-to-ground gunnery. If you can savage a convoy with 7.92mm MG fire, you wipe out an entire fleet of vehicles with some cannon fire.

hobnail
01-30-2004, 12:16 AM
Wartime German pilots referred to their MG calibre armaments as "door knockers" in recognition of their lack of lethality.

Best to also read the WWII Fighter gun debate (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html) by Emmanuel Gustin.

http://users.on.net/apoulos/webbanner.jpg (http://www.jg11.com)