Long bursts more effective than multiple short ones?

[greybeard1]

Originally Posted by Woke Up Dead

... Seems that two bullets on the spot ten seconds apart should do the same damage as two bullets on the same spot milliseconds apart.

I don't remember ever having read anywhere the principle on which it is based the damage model of IL-2, and, when they lack the basic information, you can imagine anything.

I mean, it matters of "bubbles" like in EAW or damage boxes, and how are they dimensioned?

Then, each of them how many states of damage does have? And transition from a state of damage to next is a matter of "points" given by incoming bullets?

I think that without these info (and more) we can't answer to your question. In principle, two bullets on same spot should give the very same effect, independently from their separation in time.

BTW, about hypothesized effect of bullets on a stressed structure, there's no official evidence. From 4.10 Guide: "Once damaged then its structural integrity is reduced so the ultimate load reduces as well." That's to say bullet hits reduce available G-load, but this latter admittedly does not affect resistance to bullet.

[MaxGunz]

The damage model uses 100's of 3D parts, all with hit points as one value to express both strength and ability to take damage.

We know this because throughout we have been shown this as well as explained about with some questions answered. When FB came out we were shown engines with 20 different parts that could be hit and destroyed, that was just the engine of one plane modeled on the real engine of the real plane. The airframe, instruments and pilot/crews are all modeled down to pieces and with every major step the new planes modeled to higher detail and occasionally planes from older versions got upgraded models thus some planes became unbalanced as to vulnerability.

We know the structural strengths are and were tied to hit points, the base of the Gigant can take massive hit damage because it had to be beefed up to not collapse when the model landed.

I guess you had to be there and actually thinking at the time.

If you want to know about EAW hit bubbles I can probably dig up the source code I wrote for the EAW Tweaker I wrote in 1999 that allows a one-pass even adjustment to all the hit bubbles both hit points and size. That was out before the hand-adjustments by committee ECA that Charles Gunst did manage to keep good control of.
The Tweaker uses a C++ class object to handle both EAW cabinet and mod files, it even takes care of opening, checking and creating needed mod files as part of the object instantiation. It's practically a library.

EAW hit bubbles are nothing like as detailed as even the original IL-2. EAW hit bubbles only know 'hit' and 'how hard'. IL-2 DM knows the part hit, the angle of the hit and the hit energy down to relative velocity and explosive power attributed to the projectile.
But then a computer capable of running masses of planes in EAW might start to slow down with 4-8 planes in the original IL-2.

Ask around if you didn't see. There's still probably sites showing those IL-2 model details and you may have such pictures as part of one or more IL-2 discs or patches.

[greybeard1]

Thank you Max!

I mentioned EAW just as an example.

I was wondering how IL-2 damage model isn't object of mods, like I often saw for other sims. Also, I would be curious to know where it is; I found inside flight model ("buttons") a section like that which follows:

[Toughness]
  AroneL 50
  AroneR 50
  CF 400
  Engine1 70
  Engine2 70
  Engine3 70
  Engine4 70
  GearL2 200
  GearR2 200
  Keel1 70
  Keel2 70
  Nose 100
  Oil 70
  Rudder1 70
  Rudder2 70
  StabL 100
  StabR 100
  Tail1 120
  Tail2 120
  Turret1B 100
  Turret2B 100
  Turret3B 100
  Turret4B 100
  Turret5B 100
  Turret6B 100
  VatorL 100
  VatorR 100
  WingLIn 120
  WingLMid 100
  WingLOut 100
  WingRIn 120
  WingRMid 100
  WingROut 100
  Flap01 100
  Flap02 100
  Flap03 100
  Flap04 100

is this related to the damage model?

Returning to the original question, I think two bullets on same spot gives same effects (given they've same energy and angle of impact) no matter the time interval. Probably, effectiveness of long bursts is a matter of hit probability, higher according to number of bullets fired. So it is more probable, for a long burst, that two or more projectiles land on same spot, making more damage.

Do you agree?

[MaxGunz]

Originally Posted by greybeard1

Thank you Max!

is this related to the damage model?

Question is also how related. You can poke values and try to attribute changes to those and still miss effects down the road. You can also go into the woods and randomly eat leaves, flowers and berries not seeing mold spores on some.

Returning to the original question, I think two bullets on same spot gives same effects (given they've same energy and angle of impact) no matter the time interval. Probably, effectiveness of long bursts is a matter of hit probability, higher according to number of bullets fired. So it is more probable, for a long burst, that two or more projectiles land on same spot, making more damage.

Do you agree?

Not completely. For one, hits that may be a hand span or less away from each other may hit different parts. For another between moving shooter, bullets and target the fire may walk while at other times it holds to an area for the next dozen or thirty hits but even those come from 6 or 8 different guns.
Yeah the chances go up then. The chances of bullets from different guns to hit the same part go up to.

Concentrated fire can work to hammer through both armor and thicker parts but the best results is when weaker critical parts get hit just once.

The pilot for instance. Also control cables which is rare but IL-2 models the effects of such damage. Or a fuel or oil line.

Those are all quicker kills than busting a spar let alone the structure of a tail wheel and the seat armor behind it. So I spend more shots fishing for a critical hit at angles to places where I know the weaker critical's live, hence deflection directly into the engine, wing root, cockpit.

[greybeard1]

I see. A WWI british ace said there was only one "paying" target on the whole plane and it was pilot's head. Likewise, a WWII US Navy report demonstrated how hits on engine and its fuel and oil circuits were main cause of aircraft loss.

Personally, I think aim is the core point: you can fire short or long bursts, but what really matters is how thy are aimed.

[MaxGunz]

They should be less than 1 second (pref 1/4 -1/2 sec) bursts aimed with lead deflection shots that the target flies through. 20 hits to the wrong spot is worth less than a single critical hit.

[Woke Up Dead]

I was flying a P40 vs 109G6s and I was getting kills by smoking their engines, putting holes in their wings, making them lose controls etc. The 109 pilots were doing their best to avoid my shots so I couldn't get more than a quarter-secon burst in at a time. Many of them took a lot of hits and still kept flying, I was content with letting them go to let them slowly "bleed to death" on their way back to base.

Near the end of the map I caught one pilot unaware, and got a long (one whole second) burst in from a nice angle right at convergence, and he blew up the way that Zeros or 30mm cannon victims sometimes blow up, not a typical 50cal kill vs a decently armored plane like the 109G6. This is what first made me think that perhaps long bursts may be more effective than short ones, even if the short bursts end up getting more hits overall.

Occasionally I get similar results in the lightly armed Yak-9: I can expend all my ammo on a 109, get lots of hits and cripple him by pecking away with short bursts, but a single long burst will make him go pop sometimes.