reported Allied QF 3.7 in guns too accurate & deadly against fighters - Recent changes (18-11-2021) not applied to QF 3.7 guns

[Night Owl]

Side-by-side comparison reveals substantial differences in the accuracy and damage caused by German 88 mm flak guns and their Allied counterpart, the QF 3.7 in guns. These differences are: 

- much higher accuracy for QF 3.7 in guns vs. 88 mm flak guns

- shorter time to become accurate for QF 3.7 in guns vs. 88 mm flak guns

- higher splash damage for QF 3.7 in guns vs 88 mm flak guns

In November last year, changes were made to the heavy AAA guns accuracy and damage caused to reduce their effectiveness against fast flying fighters (DCS 2.7.8.16140 Changelog 18-11-2021). These changes had the desired effect to make heavy AAA moire realistic against fighters. However, it seems like at least some of these changes were only applied to the German 88 mm flak guns and not to their Allied counterpart. 

See the attached track file for a comparative testing. The first planes to fly through flak are set to immortal to look at the spread of the brusts, the next two planes are not immortal and show the damage caused. 

flak_comparison_allied_vs_axis_.trk

Edited July 23, 2022 by Night Owl

[Mr_sukebe]

Have to say that I think that ALL AAA is still ridiculously accurate.  I know that you can jink around, but the reality is that as is, the AAA can happily perfectly predict range and lead for aircraft, which is just not how it was.

 

For that matter, I got the impression that the big AAA (88s and similar) would:

 - Be warmed up by advance notice from radars and spotters.  By mid war, apparently the Luftwaffe was running a VERY complex and highly effective interlinked radar system

 - Have a spotter attempt to confirm speed, altitude and bearing

 - Have someone else predict the rough expected flight path

 - Have the loaders set the correct time delay for the rounds.  The Luftwaffe never had proximity rounds.  The Allies did

 - Have the gunners then lay in the actual aim for the weapon

Put the above together, and you're probably looking at 10-20 seconds to calculate and change the firing point.  So whilst the 88s had a great rate for fire, it was still dependant upon a lot of different estimates and calculations.  

I got the impression that a typical tactic of the bigger AAA was to fire at a predetermined point in space to put forward a "wall" that bombers would end up flying through.

 

Consider the above, and I'd be surprised if the bigger AAA was actually used against lone fighters of even groups of fighters.  Big groups of bombers, sure, but not the kind of numbers that we tend to fly with in DCS most of the time.

For DCS, I tend to have the bigger AAA disabled unless there's a big bomber group going over, in which case I'll have then "AI enabled", and then disabled again when out of range.

[Night Owl]

@Mr_sukebe
Absolutely agreed, I don't think heavy AAA would have been used at all for lone fighters. Barrage firing was a tactic, but they definitely also fired on target though, at least the Germans. But then clearly at large formations and not single aircraft. 

However, I find the changes made in November last year for the German 88 guns make it okay, they will fire at you, which gives a nice effect, but are very easy to avoid if you do ever so slight manoeuvres. We have plenty of 88 battteries on the server and normally never get hit because they take time to walk their shots in, and when you then start doing slight turns their aim gets thrown off.

My main issue at the moment is that these changes were not applied in a similar way to the Allied counterpart. Those will hit you with the first salvo, and even if you do slight turns they will still continue to hit you. If the same changes as for the 88s were applied there too, I believe they would be okay to deal with.

[barry_c]

On 7/23/2022 at 3:10 PM, Mr_sukebe said:

Have to say that I think that ALL AAA is still ridiculously accurate.  I know that you can jink around, but the reality is that as is, the AAA can happily perfectly predict range and lead for aircraft, which is just not how it was.

 

For that matter, I got the impression that the big AAA (88s and similar) would:

 - Be warmed up by advance notice from radars and spotters.  By mid war, apparently the Luftwaffe was running a VERY complex and highly effective interlinked radar system

 - Have a spotter attempt to confirm speed, altitude and bearing

 - Have someone else predict the rough expected flight path

 - Have the loaders set the correct time delay for the rounds.  The Luftwaffe never had proximity rounds.  The Allies did

 - Have the gunners then lay in the actual aim for the weapon

Put the above together, and you're probably looking at 10-20 seconds to calculate and change the firing point.  So whilst the 88s had a great rate for fire, it was still dependant upon a lot of different estimates and calculations.  

I got the impression that a typical tactic of the bigger AAA was to fire at a predetermined point in space to put forward a "wall" that bombers would end up flying through.

 

Consider the above, and I'd be surprised if the bigger AAA was actually used against lone fighters of even groups of fighters.  Big groups of bombers, sure, but not the kind of numbers that we tend to fly with in DCS most of the time.

For DCS, I tend to have the bigger AAA disabled unless there's a big bomber group going over, in which case I'll have then "AI enabled", and then disabled again when out of range.

There are literally hundreds of reports of heavy flak being absolutely deadly to fighters, read Pierre Closterman himself spoke about how many aircraft they'd lose to flak. If anything flak isn't accurate enough and the Regular 20/40mm AAA guns are too accurate, just as any machine guns style aa is due the DCS targeting system where it auto aims on the pilot head.

[Night Owl]

Am 25.7.2022 um 17:10 schrieb barry_c:

There are literally hundreds of reports of heavy flak being absolutely deadly to fighters, read Pierre Closterman himself spoke about how many aircraft they'd lose to flak. If anything flak isn't accurate enough and the Regular 20/40mm AAA guns are too accurate, just as any machine guns style aa is due the DCS targeting system where it auto aims on the pilot head.

Even if that's true, it does not really affect the point of the bug report. The Allied QF 3.7 in guns at the moment will hit with their first salvo a single fighter target almost always. This is just not realistic at all, the time-fuses should have some degree of variability, as does the initial range calculation before the first salvo. The recently altered behaviour of the 88mm guns is much more realistic, as they take 2-3 salvos to get accurate. 

As for Clostermann's reports, even if they are true (some of his claims are questionable), those would have occured in squadron- or even wing-sized flights. The effectiveness of heavy AAA on such formations should be way higher than against single planes. 

[Nealius]

On 7/23/2022 at 11:10 PM, Mr_sukebe said:

For that matter, I got the impression that the big AAA (88s and similar) would:

 - Be warmed up by advance notice from radars and spotters.  By mid war, apparently the Luftwaffe was running a VERY complex and highly effective interlinked radar system

 - Have a spotter attempt to confirm speed, altitude and bearing

 - Have someone else predict the rough expected flight path

 - Have the loaders set the correct time delay for the rounds.  The Luftwaffe never had proximity rounds.  The Allies did

 - Have the gunners then lay in the actual aim for the weapon

Put the above together, and you're probably looking at 10-20 seconds to calculate and change the firing point.  So whilst the 88s had a great rate for fire, it was still dependant upon a lot of different estimates and calculations.  

30 seconds, per period training films presented to bomber pilots on the subject of avoiding flak. This is why they would change course every 30 seconds. By the time the 88s calculated and set everything, the bombers were starting on a new path. 

[NineLine]

On 7/23/2022 at 6:43 AM, Night Owl said:

Side-by-side comparison reveals substantial differences in the accuracy and damage caused by German 88 mm flak guns and their Allied counterpart, the QF 3.7 in guns. These differences are: 

- much higher accuracy for QF 3.7 in guns vs. 88 mm flak guns

- shorter time to become accurate for QF 3.7 in guns vs. 88 mm flak guns

- higher splash damage for QF 3.7 in guns vs 88 mm flak guns

In November last year, changes were made to the heavy AAA guns accuracy and damage caused to reduce their effectiveness against fast flying fighters (DCS 2.7.8.16140 Changelog 18-11-2021). These changes had the desired effect to make heavy AAA moire realistic against fighters. However, it seems like at least some of these changes were only applied to the German 88 mm flak guns and not to their Allied counterpart. 

See the attached track file for a comparative testing. The first planes to fly through flak are set to immortal to look at the spread of the brusts, the next two planes are not immortal and show the damage caused. 

flak_comparison_allied_vs_axis_.trk 1009.06 kB · 2 downloads

 

I'll ask if all changes were made to Allied Flak as well, but flying straight and level is generally a bad practice.

All the other concerns in this thread need tracks and their own reports please. 

[Night Owl]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb NineLine:

I'll ask if all changes were made to Allied Flak as well, but flying straight and level is generally a bad practice.

All the other concerns in this thread need tracks and their own reports please. 

@NineLine

Thank you very much Sir! 

Yes that's very true, but this setup with AI flying straight was the best to test the difference between Allied and Axis heavy AAA in a somewhat standardised manner. 

Since the change in November I find the 88s perfect, their first burst will normally not hit and then you can start to evade. Qf 3.7's will hit first burst though. 

 

[[AUSSIE]t0min8t0r]

the 88s tend to walk in their shots also over a period of time, the 3.7s a dead accurate first shot 

[NineLine]

10 hours ago, Night Owl said:

@NineLine

Thank you very much Sir! 

Yes that's very true, but this setup with AI flying straight was the best to test the difference between Allied and Axis heavy AAA in a somewhat standardised manner. 

Since the change in November I find the 88s perfect, their first burst will normally not hit and then you can start to evade. Qf 3.7's will hit first burst though. 

 

Thanks I have reported to have it reviewed!