Before we get the offical release of 4.09
 

Can we get the API 50's belting corrected for the final 4.09, please?

I have made every attempt to copy the pictures into my web site as not to directly link from the sources. All web sites are accredited. The only thing I have done is gather the information.


Weights and Measures
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/i...g/50_ammo.html

WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER ARMAMENT EFFECTIVENESS
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm


Some pics


http://www.warwingsart.com/history/50Cal/Types_01.jpg

http://www.warwingsart.com/history/50Cal/Types_02.jpg

http://www.warwingsart.com/history/50Cal/Types_03.jpg

Where these pictures came from
http://www.liberatorcrew.com/15_Gunnery/09_ammo.htm


Now my friend 310th_Diablo posts the following (books and ISBN numbers follow)

A book sample:

Wolf, William. American Fighter-Bombers in World War II: USAAF Jabos in the MTO and ETO. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 2003
ISBN 0-7643-1878-0
391 pages

http://stonebooks.com/archives/031123.shtml


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In December 1944 the Ordnance Section of the 12th Air Force. using 57"' Fighter Group fighter-bombers, conducted a study of attacks on a static Italian steam locomotive. Strafing damage was found to stall a locomotive and cause repairs ranging from one to 35 days, and that strafing was much more likely to achieve hits than bombing or rockets. It was suggested that strafing using a .50 belting of four armor piercing incendiary (API) rounds to one tracer was ideal (as opposed to the previous API-lncendiary-APl-Incendiary-Tracer belting). Strafing from 90-degree beam was suggested over an attack from a shallower angle, as these perpendicular strikes were more likely to perforate the locomotive's boiler and less likely to ricochet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, basically there wasn't a problem with killing aircraft with the .50 caliber because the U.S. was able to mass produce specialized Incendiary and Armor Piercing Incendiary .50 cal ammo for use in it's aircraft. Only in the Korean war because of the high altitude nature of the aircraft, and the jet engine and fuel used was the only limiting factor that caused the .50cal to go out of favor. It was more than adequate during WW2 though as can be seen in the examples above.
------------------------------------------------

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

With API ammo the 50's will actually have more power and stopping ability too.

-----------------------------------------------

more

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From http://www.vought.com/heritage/speci...ymilitary.html, recounted by Marine Corps crew chief Bud Yinger:

"Other crews were kept busy belting ammunition. Belting the 50-caliber ammunition had to be arranged so that the rounds were in order-- tracer, armor piercing, incendiary."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From http://www.cannon-lexington.com/Pages/Bob%20Capps.htm, recounted by CV-16 crew chief Lowell R. Capps:

"Our next learning adventure was how to belt 50 cal. ammo. There were four of us that sat around this belting machine that had a tray. One of us would put an armor piercing shell in the tray, another an incendiary and the other a tracer."

------------------------------------------------

more...LOL

AlmightyTallest Posted Sat February 26 2005 12:03 Hide Post
Okay, just found one of my books that gives a standard aircraft belted ratio for the Corsair.

From: "Corsair The F4U in WW2 and Korea"
by: Barrett Tillman

Page 20-21

"most aviation .50cal ammo was belted in the ratio of AP-I-AP-I-Tracer"

So at any rate since the .50cal ammo belt used in PF goes for all .50cal guns, I think if the HE load is incorrect the HE round should be replaced by either an Incendiary, or if you want to cover all bases, an Armor Piercing Incendiary round.



Here is the rest of the thread at the Zoo: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...771003335/p/13


Now for some pictures:

Now here is the picture of Schmatzie 57th FG 64th FS 'Black Scorpions' #53 SN 4420866 (shown 420 866)
Register: http://perso.orange.fr/p-47.database...e/44-xxxxx.htm

http://www.warwingsart.com/history/5...rer_Main11.jpg

The armorer loading a nice belt of 4 API and one tracer that backs up my friend Diablos post.
Now, compare the belting here with the paragraph above and the accompanying pictures.

Notice the light colored tips on those rounds?

Here is Grabesky's aircraft in color (same from above)
http://www.warwingsart.com/history/5...stangAmmo2.jpg

Now here is a report from the 359th FG (Green Nosed) 16 August 1944
http://www.warwingsart.com/history/5...ll-16aug44.jpg
Note J: 776 Rounds API

Now all we have to do is to make sure we all know the true History all we need now is to get it fixed.

As you can see, if we had the historical belting in IL2 we should only press the trigger (provided you aimed correctly) for 1 to 2 seconds and not the current game implementation of using the entire belt to bring down an enemy.


Also, if possible, can the belting be revisited and augment any missing load outs like 20mm as an option for the 109G10/G14 and 1000lbs bombs on the P47 wing hardpoints?

*Bump!*


You forgot one thing Guse, smoke from them .50 cals... ;)

591 views and no replies?

Here we go again... :P

This will not happen Oleg said there will not be any FM changes only slight program bug fixes. I'm for one would like to see this but it won't happen due to the fact the problem that occurred with Northrup-Grumman copyright infringement Which was a bunch of BS.

When they took advantage of him with copy right infringements on NG aircraft which wasn't true due to the fact that those WWII era planes, copyright had expired years ago.

So now Oleg is jaded to US aircraft and we probably wont see any US Aircraft in BOB also.

Perhaps its because everyone knows Guse is right and there is no argument to be had like usual. :-)

I would not classify this as a flight model change. Perhaps Oleg does though. I think the 4.09 patch is going to have more in it then many think. ;-)

That's true. But I doubt he will change that. After all, these changes are made by 3d-party modellers and skinners. I doubt they'll cut any manpower from BoB to change any part of the code in IL2 that is in there for almost 10 years, now.

Bah, changing belting of 0.50 coul'd be.....5 min, including a beer drinking ;)

It is a pretty well done part of the game, regarding his age........ modifications like belting are pretty easy and quick to do due to the good conception of the weapons related programming....

Why is it for people hard to understand that no employee of Maddox Games works on the Il-2 engine anymore? Or why do you think getting 4.09 ready takes so freaking long? :roll:

So basically the beta DLLs that have been released lately were written by themselves?

I had to ask Oleg personally to instruct one of his programmers to reinstall the Il-2 DevTools so the new default skins could be imported. All work on Il-2 happens in "spare time". How much of that is there should be clear to everyone. ;)

Exactly why I bumped Guse's post twice. It is a 5 min job.

Lol :rolleyes: sure, editing datas for 50 belting need an heavy, complex and enormous dev tool....... :-P

The winner is......(drums.... trumpets.....) ......... Notepad...... (copy and paste values of API to AP and HE..... you know... ctrl+c and ctrl+v.....

Then, compile and put in files.sfs..... (so, 5 minutes max)...

Afterthat, it is sure that it is just Oleg's will or not.... no more.

I understand and respect that, but please, stop to say things like no time and so on..... that has no sense for so simple things like new belting for 0.50. :rolleyes:

All I said was not to expect anything precisely because MG doesn't invest more time into 4.09 than necessary for them. And the DevTools are needed to compile the SFS files ... There are a lot of small things that could be done to improve things, but that just won't happen.

yes, we are both ok with that ;) ......

Possible, but no will......

Oleg no more care about IL-2 serie.... be sure.... end for him.... :-P

So, just have to have better time possible before SOW.. (two more..... what you want)... and improving ourself when possible this game.... without hopping something from 1c.... it is now my way.

csThor...I understand your point and respect it. This is something that has been asked for many times over several years. As josse said...it's not a time consuming job to do. Evidence was provided years ago to MG. the "mein" shell was added pretty readily to the German planes, we should have had API belting done as well. For those that want to complain about how API would shirft the balance of power or how it was an FM/DM change I say your wrong. Those same people did not complain when the "mein" shell was added. It sure changed things alot in hitting power to German planes.

Wow, give Oleg a break and let him work on SoW !

Diablo - Please do not think that I do not agree with this request. And I certainly think that Oleg and Maddox Games should learn from the experience Il-2 and make sure that they get their act together in SoW. Because there are issues they have to learn from, most of which has to do with questionable priorities and project management. It was strange to see historically irrelevant aircraft being added for reasons noone really understood while relevant types and important issues were never solved ("No time" - don't ask how often I heard that one from Oleg personally :rolleyes: ). This is - IMO - the most important lesson Maddox Games has yet to learn:

Make sure your priorities are spot on. Few things alienate customers more than illogical development priorities.

csThor...no problem. I agree with you too ...let's hope that Oleg and Co. have learned from this. It was kinda silly to ahve all those weird planes and yet a few minutes could not be spent fixing a few of the well known problems. ~S~ sir.

csThor is it correct to think then that Oleg has accepted to give to third parties the necessary tools and access to the source code to improve it?
Can we then imagine that as it happened with Falcon the source code could be improved by a team of "volounteers" that would do improvements for the community?
Gold

No, it is not. Remember how we were told we'd act as kind-of-betatesters for parts of the SoW flightmodel in some 4.0X patch? That alone tells me that the SoW engine will - in parts - be an evolution of the Il-2 engine. So why would Oleg allow for this potential danger for his new baby?

He may not have taken steps to deal with the hacking issue but that is not because he approves of it but because he has his mind on SoW (which is already a long way behind the original schedule).

I'd love to be able to get an answer from the developer himself.

Thanks.

'Guse, have you tried directly emailing Oleg?

I know it may be a fools errand, but hell, it's worth a try.

Thanks for the initial post sir. Well presented.

See you around!

S!

I would like to see that too.... Truth be told.. although I know I am just dreaming.. I would like to see a few things from some of the mods implemented into the last patch as well.. like the default skin thing... that would be great for mission builders if they could skin the static aircraft.. and the way I see it if some on can hack the code and do it then sure the developer could work that into the code...