Cannons 109E firing rate

Actually with 10 rounds per second you will have every 0.1s a round from one cannon. With two cannons basically I have two rounds every 0.1s with one shell being slightly behind the first one.

Assuming a travel speed of a plane in a turn of 250 kph, this equals to a travel speed of a little less than 70 m/s. In 0.1s this plane will have travelled 7m. A fighter is about 10m in length. So in between 0.1s it would not have slipped through between two rounds of one cannon as it would had just moved by 70% of its length.

So basically I will have 1.3 rounds shot during the time the fighter enters the shooting spot and leaves it. This is based on one cannon. With two cannons this will be 2.6 rounds.

But please take into account that this situation is only when I do not track the target but only shoot straight at a fighter that passes at 90° to my flight path. Usually I will track him at least slightly and hence will increase his exposure time.

And please remember: The mentioned situation occurs at close range (difficult to miss) and while I let him fly through my shots (so not big g applied to my plane; I start firing before really well he enters my sight to accound for lead and I stop after he has left it)

I understand that a fighter is not a flying square and that quite a few rounds might just pass through and often I just miss. But really in almost EVERY case? This is what I cannot understand.

[robtek]

Is your conversion set to 60 -80 m?

If not your target for the cannon are the wings only because the fuselage is only 0,8 m wide, so the cannon shell pass by the sides.

As the wings are max. 1.5m wide there is a lot of space left for the rounds to pass.

To hit a fast moving target with the cannon is pure luck!!!

The cannon works well against stable targets at conversion range (fighter dead six) or big targets (bombers).

[JG53Frankyboy]

according to Saburo Sakai to hit anything with the canons (the Zero canons are very simiular to the 109E canons) was VERY difficult. He got his most kills with the MGs only...

one of the "funny" things about the BoB is for me, that the LW had the better weapons to kill bombers but their main targets were fighters and in the RAF it was otherway round.

[SNAFU]

The success of the Bf109 depended on the surprise and positional advantage. Some JG leader on escort duty was reported to have waited 15 minutes for the chance to dive on steady targets before he ordered to engage, because he wanted his 109s to make kills and no just to drive off the interceptors. They experienced that they had only one chance to shoot down a Hurricane or a Spit, and that was the first bounce out of a favourable position. In that time the Hurricanes caused havoc amongst the bombers and the JG leader a few friends less.

What we are used to from 1946, to get scores with high deflection shots on evading targets, was reserved for some few virtuoso pilots like Marseille methinks. Well, on the other side the pilots back then, didn´t have endless hours of combat experience as we have. Anyhow I think hits as you described or in the situation a matter of luck and maybe only your AP rounds hit, so you simply don´t see the impact at all.

[drewpee]

In my own experience I found it easier to hit things in IL2. I could bring down a tough target like a FW-190 or a P-47 by wrecking control surfaces. In COD I struggle to bring down a target. I do have more success destroying targets in a Spitfire than a BF109 but I prefer to fly the BF109.
It's harder to use historical reference's for tactics and AC design because no one really knows what parts of the game are accurate and whats not. For me I think my flying skills have improved but the ability to quickly dispense of an opponent has not.

[robtek]

drewpee, that is the difference between sim-light, sim and real life.

In a sim-light you need instant success, i.e. wings ripped off, huge explosions

In a sim you get more authentic damage, most of the time a delayed kill.

In real life pilots with even minor damage would have extended and returned home, not fought to the end if avoidable.

[Varrattu]

“In Pursuit” by Johan Kylander:
Learning how to play a computer game should be an easy matter. Most games ARE easy to master once you’ve figured out what makes them tick, but the massively multiplayer online air combat game is a striking exception because it isn’t predictable. There are simply too many factors to consider at any turn: beyond certain automated functions the action is totally unscripted, unregulated and unpredictable because every action or piece of the
environment is that of another human being - and it all happens in real time.

This Work-of-Art “In Pursuit” by Johan Kylander is a MUST READ:

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&...Pzfe3Q&cad=rja

Regards Varrattu

[drewpee]

Originally Posted by robtek

drewpee, that is the difference between sim-light, sim and real life.

In a sim-light you need instant success, i.e. wings ripped off, huge explosions

In a sim you get more authentic damage, most of the time a delayed kill.

In real life pilots with even minor damage would have extended and returned home, not fought to the end if avoidable.

Sorry I think you miss my point. Not being a Computer programing WW2 fighter pilot most of what we talk about is just assumptions based on our own experience. None of us have flown a actuarial bf109 and a Spitfire in battle. Therefor I for one have no idea how quickly an AC can be brought down.

To say COD is newer so there for is more realistic is incorrect. Sorry to dampen debate.

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by drewpee

In my own experience I found it easier to hit things in IL2. I could bring down a tough target like a FW-190 or a P-47 by wrecking control surfaces. In COD I struggle to bring down a target. I do have more success destroying targets in a Spitfire than a BF109 but I prefer to fly the BF109.
It's harder to use historical reference's for tactics and AC design because no one really knows what parts of the game are accurate and whats not. For me I think my flying skills have improved but the ability to quickly dispense of an opponent has not.

well.

the other day was flying with comms with a mate, and he shreaded me to pieces, i ahd no controls, bleeding, my wings ahd holes bigger than head and fuel was leaking badly. i was as good as dead. why am i telling this?

My mate was complaining on how he could not kill me and how we wasted all of his ammo to do no damage too me.

i believe the kill eficience, and the fast dispense of an enemy is the smae as off old il2, yet, due to the new complexety of damage model, the game will not jump wings and tails off as often becouse it has new ways of "killing players".

be sure, if yo usee the 20mm shells hitting the target he is not fighting back, and if he is we will be a broken wing bird.

cheers, and good hunting