Quote:
Originally Posted by Grach
No problem.
At the risk of hijacking this into a .50 cal thread, I will post the original Il-2 Sturmovik game ammo data for the .50 BMG.
Mass is in kg
Speed is m/s (v0)
Power appears to be mass of explosive/incendiary material in kg. (I have no idea if this is 'standardised' or not. e.g. IM was 2x as effective gram for gram as plain phosphorous and different explosives vary in their energy yield per gram.)My notes/whinges are in italics. 
Browning .50
// APIT - AP - HE - AP
(Belt composition is unlike anything I've seen in US manuals and documents, presumably a Soviet belting?)
APIT
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.002
(Presumably this is meant to be M20 APIT. Mass should be 0.03966, speed should be 888, power should be 0.0018 - that is 0.0009 of IM @ x2 efficiency, they may have added 0.0002 for the trace material as well, then the power actually looks okay. Overall, not bad for an M20 representation.)
AP
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0
(M2 AP would be mass = 0.04588, speed = 885 power = 0. So not too far off the mark either.)
HE
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.00148
(Okay, this is the WTF? moment!  There was no US HE round for .50 BMG in or before WW2. The only thing I can think of is that this is a Soviet 12.7mm MDZ-3 HE bullet loaded into a BMG case. Apparently this did happen as L-L ammunition was also supplied as components. So, no US equivalent for this!)
************************************************** *******
I'm wondering if these data are all for Soviet 12.7mm ammunition types actually, as the weights are heavier and the velocities are a little lower than is usual for .50 BMG. Which is about right for 12.7x108mm...
Hmm.
Hopefully TD can use some of this data if they care to as it would be nice to have the correct ammo types.
Maybe we should start a .50 ammo thread... I can see it now. Out of the woodwork they will come, the lovers and the haters... 
Perhaps not then. |
Grach, I'd love to see a thread not just devoted to the .50cal but all manners of armaments in the game. Back in they day there was a giant (albeit heated) discussion regarding the effectiveness of the German MG151/20 cannons. Turned out as was later discovered was that the belting was a rare type specific to the Eastern front and one that was designed to up against IL-2s rather than more general use. Rebelted the MG151/20 gained the Mine shell and suddenly the weapon was performing at more historical levels.
We have a bunch of weapons and aircraft that could use some good looking at. Did you know that all Zeros are currently fitted with MG-FF/M instead of Type 99 1 or 99 2 or that the Ki-43-II and II Kai currently have the Browning .50cal installed but with yellow tracers rather than the Ho-103 machine gun? There was even a good discussion about the Ho-103 machine gun possibly being belted with HE rounds that had a pretty good punch to make up for the machine guns otherwise average performance. Even my favourite aircraft, the Tempest V, is missing the historically used 500lb bomb option. Instead it has the never fitted 80lb rockets with rails (Tempests were only tested and approved for zero length but not operationally) and US 1000lb bombs.
If we could (and I know this is impossible) keep the nationalistic crap out of the way, I'd love to see a discussion around identifying some inconsistencies and doing the research to gather the sources necessary to model this stuff. Tying it back to the current discussion... the P-47's armament options are yet another example of that sort of thing that could be discussed and well researched and presented to Team Daidalos for addition to future patches. With some serious help I've already managed to help correct the Yak-9UT armament which was entirely wrong from day 1.