Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[Tempest123]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

I keep myself out of that other 'discussion' and pick a sympatic request:





There is a long time plan to rework default skins systematicly.
To have best results, we prefer to have done them nation-wise, by one or two skinners per nation only. This is a huge task (with not so high priority though), either by painting work and organizing work. What we will not do, is picking out single plane types (except if that planetype is fixed also in the model like i.e. Hs129) and asking authors for single skins.

But you are right, there are some wonderfull skins out there.

K, thanks for the reply

[Flanker35M]

S!

Really funny to read that the SC is considered less damaging because it has not a "pre-fragmented" shell. Bomb's destructive power is not measured by shrapnels only as their density decreases over distance rather quickly and shrapnel is not the main damage for a big bomb. The blast alone and it's pressure kills far out, damages/weakens structures to various degrees that can cause secondary explosions, collapses etc. increasing the destruction that the bomb detonation started. And also converts anything loose(stones, pieces of glass etc.) to a shrapnel.

Seems pretty useless to debate over a game that is 10+ years old, riddled with bugs/features/whatever. The engine alone can cause some of them and some are because of human error or whatever. Maybe TD could consider looking into issues as they have the tools and data as someone of the team members said.

[rga]

Hades, I admire your effort to bring the most historically realistic aspects to the game, especially in terms of FM and DM. But do you think it's quite impossible to make everyone united in this sensitive matters? Firstly, people have never been united on the ultimate answer of the question: what should it be in real life? You got 1001 theories, twice that number of counter-proof. Secondly, we normal people never know what really happend inside the game engine. You proclaimed that Russian bombs have twice larger effect radius than German ones, TD said that those numbers don't always say the truth (but refuse to give the right numbers). I, having no idea of java or IT, cannot say who is right and who is wrong.
But, since you have the tools to change it (with mods), I'm pretty sure that you'll change it sooner or later, no matter which outcome of this discussion is. So, what's the point of bring up the whole debate? Those who think you're right (including myself), just use the mods. Those who believe in Oleg, don't use it. Isn't it the win-win situation? Everyone got his candy. Remember, IL-2 is just a game. No one will punish you for having the wrong data of bomb blast radius.

And some words for you DT. Your works have brought the ten year old game a new life. You've done, are doing and can do things that we never think that's even possible. So my big big thank you for all of you. I know you intend to fix some old issues regarding DM and FM. Just my humble suggestion: leave it alone. It's not the matter of "can you do it", but "what should you do". As I said above, this matters are extremely sensitive. I've read numerous threads debating about FM and DM in ubi forum, and not one of them came to a consensus, or even a compromise agreed by both sides.

[Viikate]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

Really funny to read that the SC is considered less damaging because it has not a "pre-fragmented" shell.

Yes, less damaging at the extreme lethal radius of the bomb. Lets say that the 2.5kg charge that you experienced would have been cased in pre-fragmented metal body. Would you have still liked to stand 300 meters from it knowing that it will throw thousands or tiny pieces of metal at you? In this case (very far from the explosion) which would have killed more likely? Fragments or the pressure from the blast?

[Furio]

I always look with suspicion at performances charts. In my old club, we had two planes of the same type (don’t ask me which type, I won’t tell you). If you look at the published performances a cruise speed of 137 knots is listed. Our examples cruised much more sedately at 115 and 110, the older one being faster and having also a better climb rate (1,000 fpm versus 800).

Another interesting example: most sources agree in saying that the F4U Corsair was faster than the F6F Hellcat. It’s surprising, if you consider that both planes had the same engine and prop, a similar weight and wing area with the same airfoil. US Navy was puzzled, to say the least, and delivered a Corsair to Grumman, asking to make the Hellcat equally fast. Grumman test pilot discovered that the two types had exactly the same combat performances, and maintained formation at all altitudes with similar power settings, with only slight advantages and disadvantages changing sides with altitudes. The Corsair airspeed indicator, however, was constantly reading 18 mph faster than the Hellcat. The reason was traced down to an incorrectly positioned static port on the Hellcat’s fuselage. The fault was remedied, but the Hellcat speed remained listed as slower forever (and the F6F in PF is accordingly “porked”).

Who is telling this tale? Corky Meyer, Grumman test pilot who flew extensively both types (read in “Corky Meyer’s Flight Journal”, pages 68-69).
Is this fact hard enough to ask TD a fix? Perhaps yes, but I don’t feel it’s so important. What matters, in my opinion, is that published performances can vary for a lot of reasons (including different testing standards) and that a general consensus is hard to reach.

[Ltbear]

Originally Posted by Viikate

Yes, less damaging at the extreme lethal radius of the bomb. Lets say that the 2.5kg charge that you experienced would have been cased in pre-fragmented metal body. Would you have still liked to stand 300 meters from it knowing that it will throw thousands or tiny pieces of metal at you? In this case (very far from the explosion) which would have killed more likely? Fragments or the pressure from the blast?

sir. The werry design of the bomb is an important factor, how it was cast etc....

German bombs was cast so they had a thick nose and a thick end, so the explosion would find the thinnest place to get out. The werry aloy of steel used was also a factor and the most important part is that aluminum powder adds gigantic to the power of the explosion. Its not about fragments alone, its about the structure of the bomb it self and what kind of explosive used..

If you go by the basics of the power of the explosive used, some German bombs(not fragmentet) was considered 80% more effetive as british fragmentet bombs....this was design and the chemestry the germans used in the bombs......

Please.....fragments dont meen better bomb as pr word........we are not talking about IED`s but highly effective aerial bombs....

werry fast example

you have a 100KG fragmentet bomb, standard impact detonator in there you have TNT as explosive

leathel radius would be around 250-300m then you have to add the depth of impact and the angle of the explosion, plus fragment mass and energy.

You have a 100KG hole case cast bomb, standard impact detonator, in it you have a mix of TNT and aluminum powder..

The force alone from the explosive would make it atleast 50% more powerfull than the fragmentet.

Bomb casing is thinner to the sides, so the angle of the explosion is not as steep as the fragmentet one, so you have a more directet explsosion to the sides with atleast 50% more power...

It will move more soil in a greater area. The presure wave alone would cover the fagmentet bombs 250-300m

A bomb IS NOT ABOUT grooves in the casing, a bomb is about design and explosives......

To make the best bomb you need the perfect combination between design and chemicals......

The Germans got more destructive power out of a solid casing using design and better explosives than the allied did with average explosives and a better casing.....

a fun little example....(laying on the ground )

you can survive a handgrenade that is fragmentet in a distance of 3 m

A hole casing handgrenade you need to be 5 m away

you have a better kill zone with a fragmentet bomb, but a full casing bomb will take 15% away of lethality but add lethal distance so you loose 15% in outch but add 30% to the outch distance...

[Viikate]

Your standard hand grenade is built to limit the effective radius of the fragments or else it would kill the user too often.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m61.htm
See that fragmentation coil there. It is limiting the fragment killing radius to few meters.

Here is some calculation for the same grenade in ideal conditions without the fragmentation coil. 185g of Comp-B should be enough to give 2g fragment 480m/s speed at 100m.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...s/Warheads.htm

Flanker since you've calculate these before then could you perhaps calculate the same thing with 2500g and 300m

If you still after calculating it say that 2500g of explosives cannot deliver deadly fragment to 300m, next step is to take this to Mythbusters.

Some more interesting reading:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/bombs.htm

Blast is caused by tremendous dynamic overpressures generated by the detonation of a high explosive. Complete (high order) detonation of high-explosives can generate pressures up to 700 tons per square inch and temperatures in the range of 3,000 to 4,500º prior to bomb case fragmentation. It is essential that the bomb casing remain intact long enough after the detonation sequence begins to contain the hot gases and achieve a high order explosion. A consideration when striking hardened targets is that deformation of the weapon casing or fuze may cause the warhead to dud or experience a low order detonation. Approximately half of the total energy generated will be used in swelling the bomb casing to 1.5 times its normal size prior to fragmenting and then imparting velocity to those fragments. The remainder of this energy is expended in compression of the air surrounding the bomb and is responsible for the blast effect. This effect is most desirable for attacking walls, collapsing roofs, and destroying or damaging machinery. The effect of blast on personnel is confined to a relatively short distance (110 feet for a 2000 pound bomb). For surface targets blast is maximized by using a general purpose (GP) bomb with an instantaneous fuzing system that will produce a surface burst with little or no confinement of the overpressures generated by excessive burial. For buildings or bunkers the use of a delayed fuzing system allows the blast to occur within the structure maximizing the damage caused by the explosion.

Fragmentation is caused by the break-up of the weapon casing upon detonation. Fragments of a bomb case can achieve velocities from 3,000 to 11,000 fps depending on the type of bomb (for example GP bomb fragments have velocities of 5,000 to 9,000 fps). Fragmentation is effective against troops, vehicles, aircraft and other soft targets. The fragmentation effects generated from the detonation of a high-explosive bomb have greater effective range than blast, usually up to approximately 3,000 feet regardless of bomb size. The fragmentation effect can be maximized by using a bomb specifically designed for this effect, or by using a GP bomb with an airburst functioning fuze.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/35978019/T...-December-1943

"SC designates a thin wall high-explosive bomb, achieves its effect chiefly by blast."

[robtek]

All this data is a smoke screen that doesn't explain the huge differences in the blast radius of relatively similar bombs, i.e Fab 1000 vs SC1000

[[MAG]Pappy]

This reminds me of the Iraqi military communication officer who denied the presence of the American forces having penetrated Baghdad when you could clearly see behind him the advancing America forces.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck it is probably a duck.

There have been numerous flight model error brought out by experienced individuals on many occasions. The most notable for me is a statement by a P-38 driver (in the book "Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38" written by Martin Caidin) that states he could out turn a 109. No way you're going to do that in the game.

I also find it rather ironic the condescending attitude towards "Moders". Consider the roots of TD.

One needs to recognize the type of "Moder" that we have in IL-2 versus other arcade games. The Moder for IL-2 tends to be historically motivated and not out to simply create a "cheat".

[Gryphon_]

Originally Posted by Viikate

Your standard hand grenade is built to limit the effective radius of the fragments or else it would kill the user too often.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m61.htm
See that fragmentation coil there. It is limiting the fragment killing radius to few meters.

Here is some calculation for the same grenade in ideal conditions without the fragmentation coil. 185g of Comp-B should be enough to give 2g fragment 480m/s speed at 100m.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...s/Warheads.htm

The purpose of the fragmentation coil on a hand grenade is to provide the fragments, not to limit the fragmentation range in some way.

Your link to the Gurney equation covers the fragmentation part of the picture theoretically but note that the calc is per fragment, and there are a lot of 2g fragments in a fragmentation coil. The 5m statistic is just that; it is probable that enough frags will hit you to kill you at under 5m, injure you badly at under 15m, but might injure you to some degree a lot further out than that. Last time I threw a hand grenade I put something solid between me and the bang. Much safer than statistics..

The Gurney equation doesn't cover blast effect.