Damage Model update?

[fastfreddie]

It's not limited to one side: I cannot count the number of times I have hit the Dora in the engine bay with .50 cal (which should ALSO kill the engine with a single hit to the engine block) only to watch it pull away from me easily at 350-400 mph.

 

Or, for that matter, the amount of times that I have put a sustained (2-4 second) burst into the cockpit area of a Dora, particularly from the side or beneath, that did not kill the pilot.

 

I've lost an engine to the AI P51 with only four rounds in the initial pass so it can be done. The very front portion of the engine cowling does have 5.5 to 6.5 mm of armor to protect the radiator. The oil tanks of the Dora are located at the rear of the engine on the port side so they are well protected from attacks also. The German armored seat design and fuel tanks were designed to protect the pilot from attacks from the rear and underneath. They also used a 50mm windshield so the most vulnerable angles would be from the front left or right at 45 degrees.

 

I'd loved to see the FW190 A-8 or F-8 in the game with a R8 conversion. It would be the German WWII version of the A10 with its upgraded armor kits. It would make ground attacks reasonable for once.

Edited November 8, 2014 by fastfreddie

[kubanloewe]

i´ve got today on Dogs of War server many flak hits in my P51. outside the cockpit i saw absolutely nothing but in outside view i saw many holes in my fuselage. Plane flies like new but than i get a hit and near all my electric systems and gauges were gone. Gunsight,radio,altimeter,kompass,rpm,lights. Speedo, boost and fuel gauges were ok so i flew another 15min before another hit let my plane smoke dark...but i flew 20min home without any engine failure or oil pressure drop and landed. At landing yes the plane behaviour was bad so damage seems there and engine power was also reduced a bit.

 

btw. 190´s looses wings very fast with cal.50´s

[OutOnTheOP]

I've lost an engine to the AI P51 with only four rounds in the initial pass so it can be done. The very front portion of the engine cowling does have 5.5 to 6.5 mm of armor to protect the radiator. The oil tanks of the Dora are located at the rear of the engine on the port side so they are well protected from attacks also. The German armored seat design and fuel tanks were designed to protect the pilot from attacks from the rear and underneath. They also used a 50mm windshield so the most vulnerable angles would be from the front left or right at 45 degrees.

 

I'd loved to see the FW190 A-8 or F-8 in the game with a R8 conversion. It would be the German WWII version of the A10 with its upgraded armor kits. It would make ground attacks reasonable for once.

 

That tiny rondel of armour in the nose only protects from hits from dead forward. Not from hits at 15-50 degrees of deflection off the tail. Also, the Mustang has very similar armour behind the spinner... which, in game, doesn't help protect the governor (which, incidentally, the real Dora ALSO has a prop governor... controlled by a hydraulic system, rather than oil pressure as on the Mustang, as best as I know. Either way, it never seems to fail?) As to the fuel tanks, there are two, located in front and underneath the cockpit... and they have no armour.

 

Speaking of armour, I suspect you have never seen what .50 cal API does to armour plating. Inside of 500 meters (IE, any sane aerial combat range), it will completely perforate 20+ mm of armour. There is NOTHING in either the Dora or Mustang that will stop a .50 API, except the engine block... which would be destroyed in the process (no, not like shattered into little pieces, but the block will likely crack, and the interior of the cylinders will deform; engine therefore sieze).

 

The problem I see is that the damage calculations seem to have been decided based on a comparison of how big a hole a 20mm HE vs. .50 cal API will put in the skin of the aircraft, but NOT how deeply they would penetrate and what systems they would hit on their trajectory through.

 

Also, I would add "major structural members", or at least main wing spars, to the list of key components that need to be discretely tracked by internal location in DCS to adjudicate hits.

Edited November 9, 2014 by OutOnTheOP

[snowsniper]

Hope Edge will improve this. Has anyone see in devs plan something talking about it ?

 

wwii warbirds DM and Graphical issue about DM ?

 

It would be, the best flight sim experience ever to get DCS FM with something like Clod DM

[fastfreddie]

That tiny rondel of armour in the nose only protects from hits from dead forward. Not from hits at 15-50 degrees of deflection off the tail. Also, the Mustang has very similar armour behind the spinner... which, in game, doesn't help protect the governor (which, incidentally, the real Dora ALSO has a prop governor... controlled by a hydraulic system, rather than oil pressure as on the Mustang, as best as I know. Either way, it never seems to fail?) As to the fuel tanks, there are two, located in front and underneath the cockpit... and they have no armour.

 

Speaking of armour, I suspect you have never seen what .50 cal API does to armour plating. Inside of 500 meters (IE, any sane aerial combat range), it will completely perforate 20+ mm of armour. There is NOTHING in either the Dora or Mustang that will stop a .50 API, except the engine block... which would be destroyed in the process (no, not like shattered into little pieces, but the block will likely crack, and the interior of the cylinders will deform; engine therefore sieze).

 

The problem I see is that the damage calculations seem to have been decided based on a comparison of how big a hole a 20mm HE vs. .50 cal API will put in the skin of the aircraft, but NOT how deeply they would penetrate and what systems they would hit on their trajectory through.

 

Also, I would add "major structural members", or at least main wing spars, to the list of key components that need to be discretely tracked by internal location in DCS to adjudicate hits.

 

Yes, the Dora governor can be taken out and I've had it for taken out several times. Fuel tanks act similar to a sand bag in this situation by absorbing the velocity of the round. Being they were self sealing they didn't have the same problems of the Japanese with catching fire. This said the FW190 pilots reported the biggest and most dangerous problem was the fuel lines being hit as it could start cockpit fires. I seriously doubt the unprotected fuel lines are damaged modeled in either plane.

 

I was a .50 gunner in the Army for 4 years so yes I know exactly what the rounds do and what the gun is capable of to being with. To expect a .50 cal round to have exact physics isn't going to happen. Just because a round can go through a piece of steel plate on a range has nothing to do with the changes it would have hitting multiple components in a plane. Watch WWII real life gun footage and the FW190's take quite a bit of damage. The damage model needs work but control surfaces seem to of the biggest concern now.

[Shadylurker]

I think it's mostly ok in the non visual aspect. I haven't seen or been the bullet absorbing sponge some people mention, maybe they are missing? Gunnery is very different then any game I have played, I think its for the better but it seems harder.

 

The visual DM does seem to lack.

[OutOnTheOP]

Yes, the Dora governor can be taken out and I've had it for taken out several times. Fuel tanks act similar to a sand bag in this situation by absorbing the velocity of the round. Being they were self sealing they didn't have the same problems of the Japanese with catching fire. This said the FW190 pilots reported the biggest and most dangerous problem was the fuel lines being hit as it could start cockpit fires. I seriously doubt the unprotected fuel lines are damaged modeled in either plane.

 

I was a .50 gunner in the Army for 4 years so yes I know exactly what the rounds do and what the gun is capable of to being with. To expect a .50 cal round to have exact physics isn't going to happen. Just because a round can go through a piece of steel plate on a range has nothing to do with the changes it would have hitting multiple components in a plane. Watch WWII real life gun footage and the FW190's take quite a bit of damage. The damage model needs work but control surfaces seem to of the biggest concern now.

 

It's kind of hard to tell how many hits they take... or for that matter, exactly when they die, from gun camera footage. After all, you could well put a .50 right through the pilot's forehead, but the plane just keeps flying forward, maybe in a lazy roll. It's not like it's always obvious. Also, the gun camera footage does NOT have sound... so any sound effects that indicate how long the gun is firing were added "for effect" in some documentary program (or propaganda program), and do not indicate the actual length of burst. Many allied aircraft do have a small flag that displays at margin when firing, though.

 

...and just as frequently as "bullet sponge" FWs in real camera footage (which still take a LOT less than the DCS ones seem to), are ones that take a quarter second burst and explode quite spectacularly; either from a hit to the ammo bins, or fuel tanks (generally more a problem with the belly tanks than the internals- though the IM-11 barium nitrate/ magnesium filler in an M8 API burns at some 4000 degrees fahrenheit, as I recall... and tends to ignite on the SECOND surface penetrated, when the surfaces are thin aircraft aluminum, steel drums, or the like... and the barium nitrate is a strong oxidizer, so it doesn't actually require air to enter the self-sealing tanks, because it provides the oxidizer all on it's own).

 

As to the "complex ballistics" of .50, you're right, you can't model every bit of deflection or bullet yaw due to impacting skin, structural members, and all the other bits and pieces... however, if you do some looking online, you will find that studies into the use of perforated steel, steel wire mesh, and other lightweight standoff armours (IE, designed to induce yaw to reduce penetration of the main armour belt) indicated that even against hardened steel armour inclined at 20-30 degrees, a fully-yawed (90 degrees sideways) .50 will perforate a plate up to 10mm at ranges of 200m. That's pretty much worst-case for the .50 penetration, but it will still through-and-through the armour plate.

 

Either way, when I shoot a 3-second burst with sparkly hits all over the plexiglass CANOPY of a Dora, or hit just below the canopy railing, it is inexcusable that the simulation does not give a pilot kill.

Edited November 10, 2014 by OutOnTheOP

[fastfreddie]

We'll see what they address after Edge and hopefully they look into everything. I've rarely killed a P51 pilot either or taken off a wing at that. Almost all my kills end up being engine(my favorite target) or destruction of the body of the P51. The FW190 wings seem to be coming off pretty easy now and I've had several snap after being damaged in moderate G's. I'm sure they will address alot of this because it wasn't the biggest issue when it was just the A-10 or Blackshark.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

funnily i get lots of pilot kills online.but thats what i aim for tbh.engine and cockpit.also wings go off quite easily on the p51 as well.not as easy as on the dora though.

[airdoc]

This is the longest video with gun camera footage I 've been able to find. It contains clips from 8th fighter command operations in 1943 and 1944, so it's mostly .50 cal damage effects (and not 20 mm), which they appear to be quite destructive.

 

It' 3hours 30 mins long.

 

It seems that explosions are pretty common, and wings coming off are rather uncommon. Most of the air-to-air shots are at short distances (<200m).

 

Edited November 10, 2014 by airdoc

[OutOnTheOP]

We'll see what they address after Edge and hopefully they look into everything. I've rarely killed a P51 pilot either or taken off a wing at that. Almost all my kills end up being engine(my favorite target) or destruction of the body of the P51. The FW190 wings seem to be coming off pretty easy now and I've had several snap after being damaged in moderate G's. I'm sure they will address alot of this because it wasn't the biggest issue when it was just the A-10 or Blackshark.

 

A valid point; flying the P-51D, I have had my pilot killed only VERY rarely, and even then, almost always by ZU23s, rather than FW190 fire. That said, everything I have seen indicates that the 20mm HE/ Minengeschoss rounds are less likely to kill (though significantly more likely to wound) a pilot, due to their fuze function and lesser depth of penetration. I recall seeing stats from either the USAAC or Air Ministry that indicated that MOST air kills were due to loss of control, generally from wounding of the pilot... which is just about the RAREST form of kill in DCS now.

 

As to wings breaking... it's strange; the Mustang wings break WAY too easily from G, and do not seem to break easily to gunfire. However, my experience at shooting up P-51D with the FW190 is that I quite frequently shoot the entire tail section off in a 1/4-1/2 second burst, and the engine lights up just as quickly if you have a shooting angle to hit it.

 

Now, that said, on the opposite end of the spectrum is the F-86F, which I have found can be killed by a mere 12 rounds of .50 fairly reliably (from another F-86F), which seems a bit low to me... particularly as jet fuel is much less volatile than aviation gas.

[OutOnTheOP]

funnily i get lots of pilot kills online.but thats what i aim for tbh.engine and cockpit.also wings go off quite easily on the p51 as well.not as easy as on the dora though.

 

Against what? The P-51D, or the FW190D9? I've found the FW pilot quite hard to kill; I regularly, in turn fights, put a sustained burst right on the cockpit for 2-3 seconds without killing the pilot; often from ranges so close that I have to deliberately offset to put one wing's gun impact on the discrete aimpoint (so I can see quite well where I'm hitting!) Either the canopy is made of diamondtanium, or the "impact flash" effect does not accurately reflect where the projectiles are actually striking.

[OutOnTheOP]

It seems that explosions are pretty common, and wings coming off are rather uncommon. Most of the shots are at short distances (<200m).

 

Depends on the aircraft, no? You'll find that wings coming off are not too terribly uncommon, when one samples only the radial-engined FW190. The ammo stowage in the wing roots was somewhat prone to catastrophic detonation. Probably why they moved the bins into the fuselage in the Dora...

 

The next question is, how many of the exploding ones had external tanks on?

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

Against what?

 

both p51&fw190

[arthuro12]

I'd like to see the damage model like this one day (it's a GIF image):

 

 

I know it's Warthunder but I think they pulled it off pretty good (although it's over-exaggerated a tad)