4.12.2 de-bugging

[Pursuivant]

Swapping over to the Soviet fighters. Here's an example of the level of toughness I think that an inline engine fighter should have against long-range rifle caliber bullet hits.

The target is a Yak-1, the gunners are more of those crazy accurate Wellington III Ace tail turret guys, this time doing their thing at ranges of anywhere from 700(!!) to 300 m against a slowly maneuvering target.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403464421

What you will notice is absence of smoke and flames, and an engine which still runs pretty well.

This picture actually represents the second and third bursts of long-range gunfire into the engine. The first burst had about 3 scattered hits into the engine block, all hits which would have had a Bf-109 or P-40 engine shut down cold or spewing clouds of black smoke.

A fourth burst of gunfire actually shut down the engine, but I was able to start it back up and continue the fight. A fifth burst of 3-4 shots eventually made the engine lose enough power that I couldn't keep up with the bombers, but I was still able to fly back home.

Further testing basically proves the same thing - the Yak-1 DM makes its engine a lot tougher than other contemporary inline engined planes. So, there is at least one inline fighter in the game which doesn't die instantly when it gets hit in the nose. I will leave it to TD to determine if this is intentional or not.

[Nephris]

a)We noticed an issue with carrier starts since the latest version in coop online play. The planes start airborne but not from the assigned carrier anymore.
The relates to AI and player squadrons.

We discussed about that issue already in the DCG Forum of Lowengrin.com as we expected DCG to be the bugger but none.

Of course this relates to stock 4.12.2 (mod versions also).


b)Is there any chance to receive a trigger to enable and disable bomb ballistics of 4.09 in an upcoming patch?

[Aviar]

Originally Posted by Nephris

a)We noticed an issue with carrier starts since the latest version in coop online play. The planes start airborne but not from the assigned carrier anymore.
The relates to AI and player squadrons.

We discussed about that issue already in the DCG Forum of Lowengrin.com as we expected DCG to be the bugger but none.

Of course this relates to stock 4.12.2 (mod versions also).


b)Is there any chance to receive a trigger to enable and disable bomb ballistics of 4.09 in an upcoming patch?

Can you post a mission so we can test it please. Thank you.

Aviar

[Notorious M.i.G.]

Originally Posted by Baddington_VA

There is a thread on this P39 problem.
Lots of fire and smoke with no real damage at all.
The P39 has been frowned upon and even banned from missions on some online servers because of this.

I seem to abruptly explode within seconds of engine damage in the P-39. Honestly, I feel much safer in a Ki-43 at this point, given how easily the Cobra becomes a fireball.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Notorious M.i.G.

I seem to abruptly explode within seconds of engine damage in the P-39. Honestly, I feel much safer in a Ki-43 at this point, given how easily the Cobra becomes a fireball.

That doesn't match with my experience. Typically, the P-39/P-400 series is damned near invulnerable to engine damage.

OTOH, I guess that once the engine catches on fire, it explodes fast. Realistically, that seems unlikely given that the fuel tanks and engine on the P-39 were separated (engine in the body, tanks in the wings), but at this point, nothing would surprise me about how crappy the P-39 DM is.

Playing with the P-39D-1, I regularly get unstoppable fuel leaks following just one rifle-caliber bullet hit (i.e., EXACTLY the sort of damage self-sealing fuel tanks were designed to cope with), fuel tank fires following just a couple of rifle-caliber bullet hits from different burst (again, EXACTLY the sort of damage self-sealing fuel tanks are designed to cope with), but near invulnerability to engine damage (despite coolant leaks and smoke) and gun damage.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403848095

Note two shots right down the barrel of the 20mm cannon, yet the gun keeps on working!

I also get fuel tank leaks even from bullets no place near the tank:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403847783

Notice leak in starboard side wing fuel tank despite complete absence of nearby bullet hits!

Also, coolant leaks from hits to the engine which are no place near any coolant lines:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403847783

Kind of a crummy screenshot, but you'll notice that none of the shots is anyplace near the P-39's coolant systems, and the bullet that allegedly holed the engine is at such high deflection that it probably would have missed or ricocheted off of the P-39-D1's engine block.

Not that those coolant leaks do anything, mind you, but if they don't do anything at least TD could make them go away.

Of course, those amazing sniper AI gunners don't make things any easier:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403847783

"Wonder Woman" view of the opposition shooting at me in a P-39. Note the Ace Wellington III tail gunners shooting and scoring hits at over 600 m range against a small and (somewhat) maneuvering target!

FWIW, I will point out that historically doctrine was for bomber gunners to hold their fire until the enemy got within about 300-500 m because fire beyond that point was ineffective.

[Pursuivant]

On the theory that Soviet inline fighters might be a bit more "durable" than their Western or Axis counterparts, I flew some missions using the LaGG-3 Series 3, against my nemesis the Ace Wellington III squadron.

As with the Yak-1 series, I was gratified by the ruggedness of the Klimov engine, which was able to absorb 5-6 times as many hits as those powering inferior planes such as the P-40, P-51, Spitfire or Bf-109, with only a slight coolant leak which didn't diminish performance at all:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403850536

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403850536

Additionally, you will notice that the pilot was only very slightly wounded by a clean shot to the chest at about 300 m by a rifle-caliber bullet, despite the lack of armor glass in the LaGG-3. Obviously, the copy of Das Kapital in his breast pocket saved him from more serious injury! (In fairness, I later collected a leg hit which slowed me down a small bit, and ultimately succumbed to a head shot, so LaGG pilots aren't invulnerable.)

Had I been flying a Decadent Capitalist Imperialist fighter, the results would have been very different! Truly the designs of the Revolutionary Proletarian LaGG design bureau, and the Inspired Labor of the Peasants, Workers and Soldiers, have yet again proven their worth in the Glorious Defense of the Motherland against the Fascist Butchers!

Mind you, I'm not saying that Soviet inline engined fighters are deliberately tougher than their foreign equivalents, but given that the notably delicate (at least in IL2) Bf-109 and P-40E series were modeled in the game at roughly the same time as the Yak and LaGG series, I'm thinking there are some mistakes in DM which make the Soviet fighters a bit too tough, and the Axis and Western fighters a bit delicate.

Additionally, while the screenshots don't show it, it seems to be virtually impossible to get a leak or fire in the LaGG-3's wing tanks. On a different flight, my LaGG-3 was turned into a sieve due to engine and wing hits, yet all I got was smoke from the engine (but no noticeable loss of performance). Ultimately, what got me was another head shot; the plane was flying just fine before that, and actually performed some impressive posthumous acrobatics before it finally crashed.

[Pursuivant]

And about those Ace gunners . . .

Head shot against the pilot of a maneuvering Me-262 traveling at nearly 650 kph, at over 350 m range, at the extreme edge of the Wellington's front turret arc of fire, at what had to be at least 60 degrees of deflection when the gunner began to track me, and which was still 20 degrees or so of deflection at the time of the hit. Screenshot was taken a second or so after the kill; I was slightly climbing and banking at the time.

Realistically, I'm not even sure that the Wellington's turrets can track that fast, nor would the gunner have much chance to acquire his target and aim against such a fast-moving and distant target.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1403857587

That's the sort of accuracy that aerial gunners could only dream about during WW2, but in the skies of IL2, it happens every day.

At least the damage modeling was good this time - the bullet just missed the armor glass behind the pilot's head.

[Mabroc]

P-39 and P-63 engines just got the same coat of Adamantium paint when assembled or painted on Russia that the local planes, be sure.

From a post I made several years ago:

http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php?topic=17831.0

"The DB and Jumo engines cook very quickly when damaged, if the engine is smoking it dies in 3 or 4 minutes (depends on the power setting), if you are leaking it start to overheat pretty quickly at combat power and dies in 5m top, only going to cruise power give you more time to escape, but in no way you can pull the crazy stunts the P-39/63 does at full power when leaking or even smoking.

Very few times I got a engine instantly stop with the dead prop, but it happens, sometimes I saw hits then a high pitch from the RPM controller going out of control and the engine seized. The radial engines can survive hits and still work for long times, giving less power off course (less pistons working) if you are not loosing much oil or fuel (usually the fw190 get the fuel lines leaking on the cowling and even when the engine still works you loss all your fuel in 3m). Sometimes I noticed hits on La-5 cowling (little bullet holes) and no leaking whatsoever but that could be right or error on the damage decal.

There are several DM errors on the planes, a structural weakening MOD by damage limiting the maximum G stress allowed would fix for example when you put 1 or 2 MK108 shells in a P-51 wing or P-47 mid fuselage (did that yesterday) and the damn plane keep fighting, turning, diving at full combat power. Only showing some holes on the skin instead of breaking the plane. The now very limited G stress will only allow for a escape run, if the plane keep tryng to fight, it should break right there. So the errors on the DM would now be atoned at least in a simple and broader way. No need to check and fix every f%&%ck·$ing plane DM."

and

OK guys, after 90m of searching, quick resume:

OIL (pilot manual) 9.4 gallons (35.58 Litres) for the P-39 L/K
P-39Q 8.2 US Gallons (31.04 Litres)
P-63 used the same engine (more advanced model only) and similar airframe, couldnt get the manual but from all the warbirds I found OIL tank info, they were pretty much equal size, even the P-38 had a similar sized tank for each engine to the Spit or Mustang

For comparison:
The Spitfire XIV, without a long-range tank, carries 110 gallons of fuel and 9 US gallons of oil.

Bf-109G2 One light-metal oil tank, type NKF. Oil capacity 8.1 gallons (30.66 Litres) with an additional air space of 1.3 gallons.

The Mustang III with maximum fuel load has between 1.5 and 1.75 the range of a Spitfire IX with maximum fuel load. The fuel and oil capacities are 154 gallons and 11.2 gallons respectively, as opposed to 85 gallons 7.5 gallons of the Spitfire IX, both without long-range tanks
NOTE: PROBABLY IMPERIAL GALLONS BECAUSE 7.5 Imperial gallons = 9.00712816 US gallons

SOURCES:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/tec...nfo-10838.html
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/oth...ons-20503.html
http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_tri..._WdimPerf.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-tactical.html

So.....can we get a ending to the "Highlander" Allison engines now??? By the way, the oil tank on the P-39 is behind the engine, close to the tail, so when you get a 6 o clock shot at them that is the first thing to get screwed.

AND REMEMBER GUYS THAT BESIDES THAT "BUG" I WAS WONDERING ABOUT A "COMBAT DAMAGE REDUCING G STRESS ENVELOPE LIMIT" MOD

[ElAurens]

"Highlander" Allison?

You have obviously never flown a P 40 in this sim.

It's the king of the rifle caliber one shot insta stop.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

That doesn't match with my experience. Typically, the P-39/P-400 series is damned near invulnerable to engine damage.

OTOH, I guess that once the engine catches on fire, it explodes fast.

Originally Posted by ElAurens

"Highlander" Allison?

You have obviously never flown a P 40 in this sim.

It's the king of the rifle caliber one shot insta stop.

To me, the strangest thing is how different the engine damage models of the P39 and P40 are, despite the engines being the same. Flying the P39 you almost never have time to bail out after the engine is seriously hit, which seems to be after fewer hits than other engines. The P40 loses engine power frequently, but it's engine never blows up killing the pilot like the P39s engine always does. All of this from playing single player, mostly in the Forbidden Battles careers.