.50 cal?

[Baron]

Got fed up with the weak (relativly) armement of early jap planes the other week and just to prove a point i swiched sides and climbed into a F4F.

Got 6 Zero kills in one sortie, of wich 2 simply exploded, the rest lost theire wing/wings or started burning..and had ammo to spear at the end of the mission.


50 cals are just fine.


In the ETO its a bit harder, as it should be, but the 50`s are just fine

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Baron

Got fed up with the weak (relativly) armement of early jap planes the other week and just to prove a point i swiched sides and climbed into a F4F.

Got 6 Zero kills in one sortie, of wich 2 simply exploded, the rest lost theire wing/wings or started burning..and had ammo to spear at the end of the mission.


50 cals are just fine.


In the ETO its a bit harder, as it should be, but the 50`s are just fine

Using early Jap planes as an example is completely useless.

You can set them on fire with two LMG's. Anything can set them on fire.

The USN did a complete study of the .50 calibre versus the 20mm Hispano, which included all manner of damage tests.

Their conclusion: Three .50 cals do the equivalent of one 20mm in damage.

The question we have to ask, in the game, does an aircraft with six wingmount 50 cals, such as a Mustang D, do the same damage as an aircraft with two 20mm in the wings, such as a Spitfire. I know that most of the time, I don't bother firing the LMG's in the Spitfire wing, I save them for defence after I run out of 20mm's. And I find the Spitfire's guns far more effective than a Mustang D's.

[Brain32]

And if you really read all those pilot accunts you posted here, none of them was dead six shot, the most usual line being "...I observed strikes over fuselage and cockpit...".
Well ofcourse the .50 could penetrate plexiglass, especially at deflections you see comonly described in those pilot accounts, that's hardly an achievement.

What happens in-game though is another thing, dead six pilot kills, controls shot off/jammed, not to mention what kind of skin damage can 50 cal make in-game, it's pretty funny that it does not matter if 20mm or 50cal hit you in the wing, you will often loose 100kmh+ and struggle to keep a level flight after only one or very few 50cal hits.
All this adjusted by Oleg and Co after years and years of crusade for the super powered 50cal, point convergence, box convergence, sync them, unsync them, make them smell funny..., seriously I believe Oleg starts considering a vacation every time he sees yet ANOTHER "My 50cal's can't explode Tiger tanks!!!" thread.

One could write a book about il2sturmovik game called:
"Exploding a Triptiz with a single bullet: A dream of a 50cal."


Yeah just keep throwing pilot accounts and spread some more BS, maybe in SoW too late 109's will struggle to manouver with P47, Tempests will fly like light aerobatic planes and any idiot will be able to win the teh war before his wife comes home.
Well atleast it will sell great

[KG26_Alpha]

Testing the new moderator are we ???



Seriously though this thread is redundant.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

I flew the P-51 a lot and I really like the 50s in the game. You usually have to aim a bit better than with most large-caliber-guns, but they are surely not undermodelled if used correctly.

(if at all the damage-model is undermodelled and of course the pilots are undermodelled. In RL if you shreddered a plane or got it smoking, it would retreat. In IL2 it fights back until it explodes and even if it turns and runs, some a$$hat will follow even wingless and burning wracks to get the final shot in and earn the 100 points.)

The circle of the P-51 is set to a FW-190 IIRC at 175 yards. As a yard is .9144 meters, you can set your convergence at 150-160meters. Now if the wingtips of a 190 touch the sides of the ring, with the fuselage in the center, you have a maximum kill chance and it mostly is a kill with a short burst at that range.

At ranges of 300m you can try sniping. In some very stable planes like the P-38 or a trimmed P-47 you can be lucky to get a Pilot-Kill or critical hit on controls or the engine, usually though, you see a lot of hits and small debris coming off, but do little damage.
The Cal50 bullets do their damage primarily through inertial energy, they lose effectiveness dramatically over that distance and they scatter a lot more. Convergence at 300m means that a lot less bullets actually hit the convergence-point than at 150m range.

I think you mean the pilot & damage are a bit over modelled yes? I agree too... IRL no pilot would fly around in a burning plane unless he couldnt get out... and of course if he couldnt get out he couldnt fly around and still try to shoot you down either... like the AI in this sim often do..

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

I think 0,50 cal are not undermodelled but i think pilot health is too good in game. Mostly attack from 0,50 cal from six o clock should heavy wounded or just killed pilot. No WW2 fighter have armour plate which could hold 0,50 bullet. In game you could shoting from 0,50 cal to e.x. Fw190 or 109 from six o clock and PK happend very rare. YOu could PK only from angle- deflection shoting in canopy. In WW2 P-51 and P-47 very often wounded or killed german pilots with such rear attacks. In game shoting from six o clock position is just wasting ammo should wounded or killed pilot but these doesn't happend :/

Exacty .. hey Kwaitek are you the pilot formerly known as Kwaitos that was an UberKiller in the FB.o P-47 a few years back?

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

There have been like over 10 zillion discussions over on at the zoo regarding the .50s.
Here is the deal in short. The .50s hit great and they do quite a bit of damage period.
The challenge with them is their accuracy in the game. Wheather it's right or wrong it really doesn't matter but the fact is they aren't very accurate far out. Set your convergence <200 meters and don't shoot until you are well with in that range. The 50s hit quite nice.

Rgr that.. not only that but stick settings are veryh important with the 50s depending on the plane.. the P-40 is a much more stable platform than the P-51 or the Corsair.... and therefore it gives the apperarance of having different .50s.. If you increase the deadzone I& fitlering on your controls you will find a bit more accuracy .. especially in the P-51.

[Golf Pro]

The trouble with 0.50's is a lot to do with AI FM. When you get hit by them yourself, while rarely fatal in the first burst, they generally have sufficient effect to curtail effective manoeuvring of your plane.

However, the AI generally control their planes just as well even with quite extensive damage, which leads to the rather tedious process of chipping away at them until they fall out of the sky.

The only solutions to this are either to become an expert in one type of 0.50-armed plane so that you can pull off the kind of convergence/deflection shots that will get you a quick kill, or to switch to a cannon-armed plane, and not worry so much about expertise, as you can get first-burst-fatal shots in with less precise shooting.

I prefer to do the latter, and am therefore in the "0,50s are lame" camp.

[*Buzzsaw*]

The Cal50 bullets do their damage primarily through inertial energy, they lose effectiveness dramatically over that distance and they scatter a lot more. Convergence at 300m means that a lot less bullets actually hit the convergence-point than at 150m range.

The .50s hit great and they do quite a bit of damage period.
The challenge with them is their accuracy in the game. Wheather it's right or wrong it really doesn't matter but the fact is they aren't very accurate far out.

We have people admitting the .50 calibre is not accurate at range, here is the first example of why the modelling is wrong.

Anyone who has bothered in the slightest to look at ballistics and how slug design affects it will understand that the .50 calibre round has excellent accuracy characteristics over distance.

There are two main reasons for this.

Aerodynamics in a projectile shape require a tapered, sharp pointed tip, and a 'boat tail', or tapered rear, with the taper starting at about the mid point of the round and extending to the rear, for maximum efficiency. The .50 calibre round satisfies both of these criteria.





That is in contrast to rounds such as the MG151/20 or Mk 108 whose ballistic aerodynamics are very poor. Both of these have rounds with flat noses, and no boattailing to the rear. The Mk 108 is the second from the left below in the first photo, and the MG151/20 (20 X 82) is the fourth from the left in the second photo.





Rounds with poor shape will lose speed much faster, and diverge from their path more often.

The other major factor in ballistic efficiency is muzzle velocity. The .50 calibre round has a muzzle velocity of 880 meters per second compared to the MG151/20 at 725 m/s and the abysmal Mk 108 at 505 m/s. The Mk 108 will suffer a bullet drop nearly twice as far as the .50 in the same distance.

All of these factors combine to give the .50 cal a much better accuracy at range than these other two weapons. So to find that the .50's are less accurate at range in the game has to raise questions.

[Brain32]

Actually, atleast on western front, 50cal IS the most accurate weapon and has the greatest range, for example after 800m mk108 round dissapears, this does not happen with 50cal all the way to 1800m.
What does happen though, they are not that powerfull at greater distances, that's probably because...====NEWSFLASH====...physics affects the super holy mighty planet destroyer a.k.a. 50cal too and it too looses hitting power as it travels.

The only thing you might have on in-game 50's is tracer visibility, they are really hard to see comparing to other bullets/shells, but all those fairy tales in effort to really make them planet destroyers are hilarious

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Exacty .. hey Kwaitek are you the pilot formerly known as Kwaitos that was an UberKiller in the FB.o P-47 a few years back?

I fly in HL as 303_Kwiatek and nick Kwiatos i use only in some forums.
I flew a lot P-47 before 4.XX patch when it had good firepower and accurate roll rate at high speed - it was real Fw190 and Bf109 killer these times. As i remember 1 pass 1 enemy shot down. Now i dont fly it too much. Im nervous with its curenlty moddeled roll rate and 0,50 cal effectivness. Now im rather taking P-51 with much more chance to hit target then in P47. Many players can hear you engine and break off before you have chance to shot so in P-51 you have more chance to aim target then with poor manouverbility P-47 even if it has 2 guns more. Before 4.XX Fw190 and 109 pilots have hard days but now they could just laught when P-51 or P-47 try to shot them.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

I fly in HL as 303_Kwiatek and nick Kwiatos i use only in some forums.
I flew a lot P-47 before 4.XX patch when it had good firepower and accurate roll rate at high speed - it was real Fw190 and Bf109 killer these times. As i remember 1 pass 1 enemy shot down. Now i dont fly it too much. Im nervous with its curenlty moddeled roll rate and 0,50 cal effectivness. Now im rather taking P-51 with much more chance to hit target then in P47. Many players can hear you engine and break off before you have chance to shot so in P-51 you have more chance to aim target then with poor manouverbility P-47 even if it has 2 guns more. Before 4.XX Fw190 and 109 pilots have hard days but now they could just laught when P-51 or P-47 try to shot them.

Yes.. above all when your screen turns black or a single burst cut your controls.. if you are lucky you'll lose only 100Km/h of top speed... but all depends on pilot's accuracy.

Anyway everybody have the sound engine problem and 190 and late 109 aren't good to "have more chance to aim target" more than a P51.