Jump to content

P51- insufficient shot damage


INTRUSO_BR

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team
4 hours ago, Silent Film said:

 

So, you know for this bug and that it is corrected in beta, but you still say I am making things up, that makes you a troll.

 

From my experience, recorded tracks are usually inaccurate, and I would never accept a recorded track as a proof.

 

Anyways, I have managed to record a video of what I was talking about, and why I thought Mustang .50 cal guns were underpowered, while in reality they wre ok, just the AI was stuck in a way, and continued flying despite being shot down.

 

What is wrong for your mind? The Anton was a history exactly after its engine is down. Is it something extraordinary that the plane with dead engine is going to try emergency landing? Do you expect to see instant big boom like in Hollywood movies? Yes, in reality you can expect this effect but the plane name must be not FW but Zero - with unprotected not self-sealed tanks,  fragile airframe.
Speaking about .50 cal "devastating effect" is not very correct - of course they are quite effective, but only USAF was stuck to this caliber. RAF, Luftwaffe, VVS prefered 20-30 mm cannons instead. MiG-15 37 and 23 mm battery was way more effective either against well armored areas and systems or soft targets.
As I said, .50 cal was very effective against not self-sealed tanks, in  not armored planes like Japaneeze aircraft but 190 is very different aircraft.

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2021 at 10:15 AM, iFoxRomeo said:


And now you're confusing things. My comment on you making stuff up is about the invincible AI during landing/on the ground, because you claimed to know it. Not about the bug that aircraft continue to fly after being shot down. Read again.

 

And also, it doesn't matter what YOU think about tracks. ED needs them for their bug fixing. Is that so hard to comprehend?

 

I'm glad I'm not an official here. That gives me the luxury for now to handle your comments the way your name suggests.

 

 

Fox

 

 

 

I didn't claim "I know it", I was just calling it "invincible", because it was virtually impossible for me to kill an AI aircraft after he lands, and I really thought it was something done by design. You are just being hostile for no reason and trolling me.

 

It does matter what I think as a customer, because saved tracks are usually inaccurate, up to the point that they will show that AI shot down me when in reality I shot down him. Using saved track as a proof is SCARY.

 

Thank God you are not an official.

 

On 5/14/2021 at 11:06 AM, Yo-Yo said:

What is wrong for your mind? The Anton was a history exactly after its engine is down. Is it something extraordinary that the plane with dead engine is going to try emergency landing? Do you expect to see instant big boom like in Hollywood movies? Yes, in reality you can expect this effect but the plane name must be not FW but Zero - with unprotected not self-sealed tanks,  fragile airframe.

 

Man, can you see that the AI pilot opened his canopy to bail out after his engine died, but he got stuck flying in a straight path? And my bullets became completely ineffective after that moment? There was no emergency landing, AI just got stuck, and also became invincible to my bullets, until he crashed.


Edited by Silent Film
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Yo-Yo

 

Sorry, you were actually right about the emergency landing, I have mixed this with Microsoft CFS3, where you needed to open the canopy to bail out, while here you have emergency release for the canopy. So, he opened the canopy for what, to jump off the plane after the emergency landing? 🙂 OK, but that was funny. But no way a Fw 190 A-8 could glide for 5 minutes with his engine dead and canopy open in an almost horizontal path, and not only that, but to accelerate from 110 kts to 140 kts. I have tried to shut down the engine and glide with my Mustang, and I retained the speed at around 100-110 kts, but I didn't accelerate to 140 kts, and Mustang is more aerodinamically sound than Anton. And I had 50% of fuel, while he had 100% of fuel. Something doesn't look right there.

 

But the important part regarding this topic is why my hits were ineffective? Should it be like that normally, or AI became invincible once he begun the emergency landing? If it was made like that, then this topic is right, and Mustang .50 cal guns provide insufficient shot damage.

 

If you compare NineLine's video with mine, in his video Fw 190 A-8 went straight down after just one burst from behind.

 

 

While in mine video Fw 190 A-8 suffered no damage after several bursts from behind.

 

 

But he was using the beta version, and I am using the stable version, so maybe there is some difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2021 at 5:59 PM, Silent Film said:

I know that I can't destroy AI while he is on the ground, and I suppose it was done on purpose, can't understand why though...

Your words.

2 hours ago, Silent Film said:

I didn't claim "I know it",...

Also your words.

 

 

 

Quote

 

It does matter what I think as a customer, because saved tracks are usually inaccurate, up to the point that they will show that AI shot down me when in reality I shot down him. Using saved track as a proof is SCARY.

The track is not necessary as a proof. It is necessary to reproduce and understand the problem. And yes sometimes they don't work properly, but often enough they do and it is still a requirement from ED.

 

Quote

Thank God you are not an official.

I don't think god cares about this here.

 

 

  • Like 1
Spoiler

PC Specs: Ryzen 9 5900X, 3080ti, 64GB RAM, Oculus Quest 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Your words.

Also your words.

 

The track is not necessary as a proof. It is necessary to reproduce and understand the problem. And yes sometimes they don't work properly, but often enough they do and it is still a requirement from ED.

 

I don't think god cares about this here.

 

"I know" can have different meanings. As a customer, if I say "I know", that obviously means "I guess from my experience", since only the developers can literally know.

 

On 5/6/2021 at 6:56 PM, NineLine said:

tracks Tracks Tracks.... people saying they tried today, and I see no tracks. Tracks Please.

 

Ok, I have gathered some courage, and saved a track. It is another Dora flying backwards after being fatally hit. If you see something else, please forget what you saw, and burn the track. 🙂

open_at_your_own_risk.trk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Silent Film said:

"I know" can have different meanings. As a customer, if I say "I know", that obviously means "I guess from my experience", since only the developers can literally know.

That doesn't make any sense. You want people to assume what your words might mean. Why not say what you mean without the need of assumptions to prevent misunderstandings. Helps a lot. 

Quote

Ok, I have gathered some courage, and saved a track. It is another Dora flying backwards after being fatally hit. If you see something else, please forget what you saw, and burn the track. 🙂

open_at_your_own_risk.trk 393.42 kB · 0 downloads

The ai behaviour of continuing to fly after being fatally hit is known as previously mentioned and corrected in DCS 2.7.

 

Your initial problem was the ineffectiveness of the .50cal bullets, wasn't it?

 

Do you have a track to show the ineffectiveness of the .50cal bullets?

 

Fox

  • Like 1
Spoiler

PC Specs: Ryzen 9 5900X, 3080ti, 64GB RAM, Oculus Quest 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, iFoxRomeo said:

That doesn't make any sense. You want people to assume what your words might mean. Why not say what you mean without the need of assumptions to prevent misunderstandings. Helps a lot. 

The ai behaviour of continuing to fly after being fatally hit is known as previously mentioned and corrected in DCS 2.7.

 

Your initial problem was the ineffectiveness of the .50cal bullets, wasn't it?

 

Do you have a track to show the ineffectiveness of the .50cal bullets?

 

Fox

 

I was using casual speech, didn't know you were that sensitive. 🙂 🙂 🙂

 

NineLine asked me about the track with flying backwards, I just used a wrong quote.

 

I don't know about the .50 cal, I feel it is underpowered, it feels more like .303, but if they say it should be like it is, then I have no experience with the real Mustang and .50 guns to know what it's like in the real life. I have figured out I just need a longer burst to be more effective, but I don't know why one long burst would be more effective than 4-5 short bursts.

 

In CFS3, I used mostly Fw 190 A-8, because of its mighty four 20mm cannons and stability for ground attack, but there Fw 190 A-8 was one of the fastest aircraft, while here it is one of the slowest, which means probably a no for me. But it's got awesome textures, and looks adorable. The other problem is that swastikas are not shown, which makes it repulsive. In CFS3, I was using a custom fix which brought swastikas to all German aircraft. Also, a draw back is that default Fw 190 A-8 has that texture with the devil logo, which I don't want to use because I am Christian. But still, I kind of look at Fw 190 A-8 with nostalgia.

 

The difference in gun effectivenes is HUGE. Just few hits with 20mm at my Mustang, and I'm almost done.

 

 

But, why are you acting as an official, when you are not? 😀 😀 😀

 

On 5/7/2021 at 6:37 AM, NineLine said:

Are you running Open Beta or Stable? Also, do you have the track for that? I have never seen the flying backwards, but heard about it a few times.

 

This time the actual quote. 🙂 Stable version. The first Anton flying backwards. It is a pandemic of flying backwards after I have recently changed disc and re-installed everything, maybe it could be because of new antivirus. 😀

 

But I sincerely got no clue what is on that track. 😐 Hope it works.

first_anton_backwards.trk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
5 minutes ago, Silent Film said:

 

 

This time the actual quote. 🙂 Stable version. The first Anton flying backwards. It is a pandemic of flying backwards after I have recently changed disc and re-installed everything, maybe it could be because of new antivirus. 😀

 

But I sincerely got no clue what is on that track. 😐 Hope it works.

first_anton_backwards.trk 200.49 kB · 0 downloads

Ok, Stable, do you mind if you check again after stable gets the latest version of DCS? I believe its fixed in there, but fully willing to look again if you still see it. I will even try your track in the new version to see what happens. Thanks!

On 5/13/2021 at 4:24 PM, Nealius said:

 

The difference here is that in DCS the AI have no fear or systems-management needs, and thus will sometimes continue to doggedly fight you instead of managing his damaged systems and bugging out like a real human would. Until a more human-like response to the damage is programmed, the realistic survivability is more akin to cheating. Especially when a smoking Anton goes vertical, stalls out, and 360 no-scopes your canopy as his nose falls through the horizon like something out of Star Wars--I thought those Tacview examples were one-offs until it happened to me too just a couple days ago.

 

With only three hits to my Jug, one somewhere near the engine, I've lost oil, lost hyds, and have a damaged cylinder, and can't fight at all. Meanwhile an AI that took orders of magnitude more hits with black or gray smoke pouring out, can still maneuver and fight. Maneuver and fight is the part that's sus. Make it back to base and belly land? Sure. Continue to fight? Doubt it. That part seems imbalanced on the player vs. AI side.

 

This isn't 100% true, I mean yes, AI fear nothing, but we have taken the steps to make them hit the chute or RTB when a player might. Its never going to be 100% infallible of course, but we have taken steps to improve this already, my video above shows this as well.

On 5/14/2021 at 1:46 AM, grafspee said:

Maybe out of topic but this P-47 apparently flew through forest 🙂

p-47_tree_damage-jpg.359825

I believe P-47s were used for clear cutting and Christmas tree harvesting 🙂

  • Like 2

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
17 hours ago, Silent Film said:

 

 

 

 

Man, can you see that the AI pilot opened his canopy to bail out after his engine died, but he got stuck flying in a straight path? And my bullets became completely ineffective after that moment? There was no emergency landing, AI just got stuck, and also became invincible to my bullets, until he crashed.

 

Please excuse Yo-Yo, this issue was fixed a while back for us internally, he may not realize the issue still lingers in stable. I am positive that when Stable gets 2.7 you wont see this anymore... fingers crossed 🙂

  • Like 2

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Ok, Stable, do you mind if you check again after stable gets the latest version of DCS? I believe its fixed in there, but fully willing to look again if you still see it. I will even try your track in the new version to see what happens. Thanks!

 

Well, if I encounter with this when 2.7 arrives to stable version, I will surely post about it. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Please excuse Yo-Yo, this issue was fixed a while back for us internally, he may not realize the issue still lingers in stable. I am positive that when Stable gets 2.7 you wont see this anymore... fingers crossed 🙂

 

It looks odd that AI pilot just opens his canopy and flies in a straight path for emergency landing like he's on picnic, while the enemy aircraft is on his back shooting at him. It would look more realistic if he would fly down in a spiral pretending like he's going down, but then perform an emergency landing. I don't know what was fixed in beta, hope it will be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAF 20mm contained 6g of RDX per round, it’s like a small frag grenade exploding against the target, also the Hispano has a fast fire rate for a 20mm cannon. Compared to 20mm HE AP just makes small holes. The US Browning 2 had quite a slow rate of fire also so less rounds on target.

 

Attacking from directly behind means your maximising the effect of any armour the aircraft has as its placed to defend against just that attack. In the FW there’s an armour bulkhead behind the pilot, the rear section behind the bulkhead is mostly empty, as are the wings (OK maybe the ammo in the wings should be an explosion risk) shooting small holes in those areas would do very little. Really you need a deflection shot into the cockpit or the engine, Galland talked about bringing aircraft down with a single well placed 20mm round to the engine, always deflection shots from the top or side. 
 

Im not sure how DCS models pilot injury.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • ED Team

Ok if they are so bad you can just redo a short one showing the issue, I just did 6 flights P-51D vs Fw 190A and I had no issue killing it with the .50 cals.

 

Also most everyone has access to some file sharing now a days, google drive, wetransfer, etc. 

  • Like 1

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the issue as well is that exploding fuel or ammo is not modelled yet, this was a big deal, well ammo (in the case of the 190A) was as far as removing wings. But in general, if you hit it, the 190 will go down. 

(Yes we need the API rounds and the exploding fuel/ammo). However the rest of your statement is simply not true in the multiplayer environment. The. D9 can take punishment but difficult to bring down. The A8 is damn near impossible! It’s to a point that my squad and I pretty much let the Anton go because it will require every bullet the P51 has and then some from your wingman to bring it down. A few months back you could remove a wing, not so anymore. I fly both sides and agree with the original statement. The P51 50’s are severally inferior to any other plane in DCS. The running joke is to land and reload after every K4 engagement, if it’s an Anton engagement the whole squad has to land and reload. We are very skilled group with very good marksmanship. I can only imagine how much more difficult it is for the average Flyer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Campbell said:


(Yes we need the API rounds and the exploding fuel/ammo). However the rest of your statement is simply not true in the multiplayer environment. The. D9 can take punishment but difficult to bring down. The A8 is damn near impossible! It’s to a point that my squad and I pretty much let the Anton go because it will require every bullet the P51 has and then some from your wingman to bring it down. A few months back you could remove a wing, not so anymore. I fly both sides and agree with the original statement. The P51 50’s are severally inferior to any other plane in DCS. The running joke is to land and reload after every K4 engagement, if it’s an Anton engagement the whole squad has to land and reload. We are very skilled group with very good marksmanship. I can only imagine how much more difficult it is for the average Flyer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Here (please see link below) are some real life tracks involving a number of FW 190 incidents that show some of the real life effects I think we are looking for:

 

Incredible WWII Gun Cam Action | Military.com

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

  • Like 1

Bell_UH-1 side.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I need tracks, if its MP, then get a buddy and do a quick test of it, I have not see this.

Tracks - We’ve tried the tracks route before and it fell on deaf ears. If I have your ear and you are willing to actually follow through, then I can get you plenty of tracks. Take a day or two and spend a little time flying on the (storm of war) server and you will experience all these things that fill up the forum on a regular basis. These are not one off’s or random events, they happen daily. Fly the P51, experience the random engine failures while everything is in the green (frustrating!) Shoot a couple K4 and A8’s and see how ineffective the 50’s are. Watch the K4 and the A8 crash land at 350+ MPH, tumble, go through the trees and remain completely intact while the P51 can (now thankfully crash land but land on a runway softly with no tail wheel and explode into a fire ball). Fight a K4, have him fly through your fuselage cutting you in half and watch him fly away as you fall from the sky. Try to pull vertical in a fight and watch your engine flash heat in about a second. Watch the D9, A8 and K4 all dive at 450-500 mph and pull G’s while P51’s rips wings off with any g load at those speeds. I personally have never seen a german plane lose a wing in the dive while pulling G’s. Watch the P51 engulf in flames from one German canon in proximity, watch Spitfire’s instantly lose their empanage from a single round. (That maybe accurate for cannons) however, it’s frustrating when you put 10,000 rounds in a German plane and can’t do a quarter of that amount of damage. Getting a buddy to fly to recreate these things don’t work! You have to experience them on a server in action. I hope you understand this is me airing my frustrations. I’m not trying to come across as an ass! I have the same desire as everyone to make DCS WW2 all it can be. I also do not wish to plug up the forum, I would be more then happy to move this conversation to PM and provide you with any info you request/tracks you request. Thank you for your efforts !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/27/2021 at 8:23 PM, Talisman_VR said:

 

Here (please see link below) are some real life tracks involving a number of FW 190 incidents that show some of the real life effects I think we are looking for:

 

Incredible WWII Gun Cam Action | Military.com

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

Mustang .50 cal in DCS can't damage Anton's structure, it's like Antons are made of steel, .50 cal just bounces off. You need to hit it with all your ammo at one point in order to make some structural damage to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

I need to see a track, I do not experience this. If you are talking about blowing wings off, that is not because of lack of structural damage from the .50 cal, but rather ammo and fuel explosions are still WIP. And most if not all the famous Anton's and exploding wings are due to this. Otherwise, yes it would take some ammo to saw through a main spar, accounting for aim and ammo type.

 

 

This example is almost certain an explosion from ammo exploding or some such event, its not about sawing a wing off, which would be incredible hard to do on a moving target from a moving target.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that people who claim it doesn't work aren't actually hitting the Anton. Shooting from beyond convergence range will do that. Any plane with wing guns is somewhat tricky to consistently hit the target with, and even if you do, depending on a plane you won't do much if you just make 12.7mm sized holes in wings. You usually need to make those holes in the engine or the pilot to bring the plane down, unless you can manage to set off the fuel and/or ammo, which is not currently modeled. The new DM means that you actually have to land hits where it counts.

 

Adjusting convergence distance is the answer. For me, for example, it's definitely too long, I like to get a lot closer than it's currently set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
10 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I suspect that people who claim it doesn't work aren't actually hitting the Anton. Shooting from beyond convergence range will do that. Any plane with wing guns is somewhat tricky to consistently hit the target with, and even if you do, depending on a plane you won't do much if you just make 12.7mm sized holes in wings. You usually need to make those holes in the engine or the pilot to bring the plane down, unless you can manage to set off the fuel and/or ammo, which is not currently modeled. The new DM means that you actually have to land hits where it counts.

 

Adjusting convergence distance is the answer. For me, for example, it's definitely too long, I like to get a lot closer than it's currently set.

Yes, convergence is on my list of requests, I believe even Nick agrees if done right it would be a nice option to have. 

 

And this DM is going to poke holes in peoples normal tactics, its not like we have experienced before, there isn't a magic wing cut off point, but if you weaken a wing enough, it can break off if your opponent pulls too many Gs, or when we get fuel and ammo explosions in, you will have a chance to see those explosive events that take a wing off. 

  • Like 2

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, we've been spoiled by the old hitpoint system for too long. 🙂 Now we'll actually have to aim at something more specific than "the other plane" to cause crippling damage. 🙂 I'm really looking forward to it coming to modern jets, too. US ones generally output such a hail of 20mm shells that precise aiming is less important, we'd likely see damage from slower-firing cannons make more sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi i fly a lot in WW2 with BF109 ; Spitfire and P51 i like very much the new damage model.

 Whith the 50cal, when you shoot the engine , radiator , tanks... they do a great job , the problem is not here, when you aim good it s easly  shot down a plane. 

the problem is when you shoot the wings, you never can cut a wing of a BF109

i tried to shoot the wing of the FW190A8 and i cutted is wing on the first try ( its hard but its possible). 

when you shoot the fuselage whith 50cal i realised they dont do a lot of damage on the fuselage of the BF109

i know they are not explosive munition but when there is a lot of impacts they should  cut the wing and its not the case

if you put a good long shot it had to cut it, no ? what do you think? I think there is really a problem on this.

 

 

I tried something and i dont understand the result (if you can explane it to me thanks)

That was turn on dcs open beta 2.7.6.12852

 

why can  i cut the outside part of the  wing with 10bullets and the interior with 30 ?

 

and now; Why can I  cut whith one 50cal but not whit 6

i know i missed a lot of shots but i put more bullets whit the P51, no ? 

It s 6x 50cal i feel i shoot potatoes, at the end of the video you will see i put a litle burst in the tanks and it s works very well but not in the fuselage is that normal ?

I know they do less damage than a 20mm but here i don t understand.

 

I watch a lot of  footages of 50cal cutting other planes and i feel it s impossilble to cut the tail or wing of a 109 or D9, i m probably wrong.

 

Yeh i know IL2 is old but go at 3.10 and 18.40, is that possible in real life and if yes is that possible in DCS ?

PS thanks you for DCS i like it very much, i just want to help you to make it more realistic and be helpfull ! thanks in advance for the time you will spend on it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

In order to remove parts, you have to have some pretty catastrophic hits, even those famous cannon tests out there, while the damage is pretty bad on the wings, the spars are generally very strong, and can take more punishment. 

 

For the shots from the ground, I would need to check the belt on those, but quite possible that is the difference, as well it looks like you are getting good hits on the spar from that angle, I would need the tracks to be sure.

 

With the aircraft you have different rounds, and those rounds need to make it through to the spar, so say you fire a burst on a 109, but all your AP rounds miss, and only your HE hit, the HE are gonna burst on the surface and never get through to the spar. Even if you hit with AP, it is going to take a good concentration of fire in the same spot, which is nearly impossible, nearly.

 

More likely you will weaken a wing, and later on if the plane is further abused the wing could pop off.

 

Full disclaimer, I am not trashing IL2, I am not saying anything bad about them or their DM, fact is, I don't know what is going on under the hood. That said, I hate the clean tail cut off, I personally have fought against it, I would rather see the tail horrified, elevators, stabs, rudder keel all gone or torn up. But for the tail to just pop off from .50 cal, I don't think so. Maybe if you landed ever round in the same area, I mean an entire ammo load, perfectly with all guns hitting right. This is why I dont like using other games as an example, their way is their way, we are not them, and I am not saying we know more or whatever, it just puts is in a bad place, so future reference, only use real world examples.

 

Now a 1 -2 or more cannon arounds I could see knocking a tail off.. but .50 cal or the like, I really cant see it.

 

Back to wings, you can see gun footage where a 190A wing pops off, but if you look, you will see a larger explosion than just an HE hit, generally this is something on the plane failing, so if you have ammo or fuel in the right spot, and you hit it right so that it explodes, then sure, a wing can come off (disclaimer our fuel/ammo explosions still are not in). Also many photos of aircraft missing chunks of wing many times are collisions rather than gun damage.

  • Like 1

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...