Firepower

[Hard Sarge]

do the numbers for the different weapons seem right

a early spit with 8 303 Mg's should that be stronger then a 109 with 2 20mm and 2 30 cals ?


why does the Mk 103 have the same pen and effect as the Mk 108, but a lower acc (that is the one with the higher mussle Vel)(seems strange to give a plane a better weapon and have it be less effective)

LOL so many old complaints to remember

now I been though a number of the old, 50 cal vs the 20mm, but never seen many saying the 30 cal was the better weapon

[Denniss]

The eight 7.7 mm was never better than the two 20 mm and two 7.92 mm, remember how many german bombers, riddled with 7.7 mm bullets, were still able to fly home. A hit with a .50 or bigger did do greater damage.

As to MK 108/MK 103: The MK 103 carried more explosives so effect should be at least one point higher, range was also better than the short-legged MK 108. Acc is because of low RoF.

AFAIK the brit 20mm carried more explosive than the german ones so their effect should be one point higher,too.

[Nikademus]

The Firepower or gun value rating is determined by adding up the effect value of each weapon. The .50cal weapon has an effect rating of 3, So a 6 x .50cal Browning selection would be 6 x 3 = 18.

[otisabuser2]

do the numbers for the different weapons seem right

a early spit with 8 303 Mg's should that be stronger then a 109 with 2 20mm and 2 30 cals ?

Should be even stronger vs a Bf109E with 4 X 7.92 mgs. [;)]

regards Otisabuser

[Hard Sarge]

and what model of the 109 are you talking about ?
the E's were armed with 20 mm wing guns ??

[von Shagmeister]

Early model Bf109E-1 had 4x7.92mm (MG17), still in use during BoB I believe (BoB not really my area of expertise)

von Shagmeister

[otisabuser2]

and what model of the 109 are you talking about ?

The Bf109E-1 was originally manufactured with only mgs in the wings.

This mg only model made up about one third of the S/E fleet for the Battle of France, and a significant number in The Battle of Britain. The wing cannons were added by units where available.

Not saying we should have mg-only Bf in the game. Just they were there.

regards Otisabuser

[Hard Sarge]

it "should" of been replaced by then, but it is not in the game

I do see where at least one Gruppen was still flying the E1 as late as Sept 15th 1940

[otisabuser2]

Cheers Shaggy !

What would be interesting to know is whether the game uses the crude Firepower total or the individual weapon stats to determine a hit or damage.

ie are the Stats like range and penetration just eye candy ?

[Hard Sarge]

JC has said the combat system is very detailed
in fact, most of what is going on, is never even reported, as it would totally bog the game down

maybe JC can give us a detail account of what is all going on during the fight

[otisabuser2]

I do see where at least one Gruppen was still flying the E1 as late as Sept 15th 1940

It is annoying how just about every book I have read on the period ( except one ) states the Bf was cannon armed. Yet there are abundant pics around of 109s from that battle without cannons. It's become a myth that authors seem to copy and continue.

The units, I beleive were a mixture of marks and weapons. The aces got to pick out the cannon armed ones, while the lower echelon pilots got the older refurbished ones. That's why you'll always see Galland or Wick etc standing beside a cannon barrel. Meanwhile the photos of the bent one flopped on the field in Britiain will have mgs.

regards Otisabuser

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: otisabuser2

Cheers Shaggy !

What would be interesting to know is whether the game uses the crude Firepower total or the individual weapon stats to determine a hit or damage.

ie are the Stats like range and penetration just eye candy ?

They arn't eye candy....but there is going to be a degree of generic-ness. I'm basing much of this on my understanding of WitP/UV but while the results are vastly different in that game vs BTR, the general principle of Gary's original formula is much the same. A gun 'device' has three basic attributes, Accuracy, penetration and effect. (There are others such as "range" but those three are the basic ones)

Gary's formatic scale for "effect" was based largely on the reletive 'size' of the rounds.

LMG/30cal/.303/"rifle" sized slugs are given an effect rating of 1.

Bigger MG/50cal/12.7mm+ etc are given an effect rating of 2

Cannon shells are given an effect rating of 3.

How weighted each variable is will vary from program to program.

[DBS]

The point, as made in Williams and Gustin's "Flying Guns", is that in crude terms the 8 rifle-cal armament of the RAF would probably have suited the Bf 109 better (not that it could ever have found mountings for them), given its anti-fighter role in BoB, while the RAF would have benefitted more from the twin 20s and twin rifle-cals of the E-3 given its primarily anti-bomber role, given that the 20s in question had low muzzle velocity and rate of fire. The RAF weapons were perfectly good at shredding 109s, which were probably less well protected than the British fighters - 109s lacked self-sealing tanks at this stage, although the 110 had very good ones. Indeed, the decision in 1939 to fit armour to the RAF fighters was driven by the intelligence that the new 109 models were touting 20mm cannons. The RAF did have the de Wilde incendiary round which Williams and Gustin estimate doubled the .303's effectiveness, but during the BoB it seems that only one of the eight guns were loaded with the nature, presumably due to limited supply. And of course, the RAF fighters had sixteen seconds of ammo, while the 109's 20s only had seven seconds.

The German bombers had good self-sealing tanks, but poor armour - only the pilot seems to have merited any protection.

[Nikademus]

I read in one source that the primary weakness of the German bombers was that their armor protection for the engines didn't cover their backsides. Pretty amazing given that the UK's standard doctrine of formation attack patterns stressed a simple 6'oclock approach for an easy no defection shot.

I agree, you can't discount the overall firepower of 8 x rifle caliber bullets if they converge on a target successfully though as in all things air combat...it often depends on the circumstances. I once read an interesting excerpt from a F4F pilot who commented that if you had to have a Zero facing you alone the best place for that Zero to be was on your six......because the two rifle caliber 7.7's would just ping off the back of the pilot's armor plate till kingdom come [:D]

However that said......it only takes one bullet to ruin a pilot's day if it hits in the right place.

[Hard Sarge]

Roger and Roger, and of course Roger

one recent book on BoB was talking that the idea with the 8 gun planes, was that it would take 8 modern weapons, to fire for 3 seconds, to drop a GE bomber

(man that is some shooting and flying to be able to hold the target in your sites and lined up for 3 seconds of fie !)

of course, in the long run, that is not what was really needed, but is what the plan was for

a BIG HASSLE is with games to start with, I fly a lot of flight sims, the 30 cal, is pretty much not going to do anything, I would hate to see how many planes really were shot down with 30 cal ammo, I think a lot of designers would be shocked

also, interesting on how people think combat worked, even more so in the Air, the GE had slow firing 20 mm, well, the 30 cal was a spotting weapon, you got into place, and fired them, to see if your line is right, then if so, you tapped the stud for the 20mm, the more skill you had, you could tell when you were on or when you were off and would just wait till you were right before you fire

(if you watch some of the US guncamera films, you can see the guy is off target, but he knew he had the ammo and the plane, to stick with the target, and would fire wide, and then walk the rounds to the target)

as Niki says, all it takes is one round to ruin your day

[HMSWarspite]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Roger and Roger, and of course Roger

one recent book on BoB was talking that the idea with the 8 gun planes, was that it would take 8 modern weapons, to fire for 3 seconds, to drop a GE bomber

(man that is some shooting and flying to be able to hold the target in your sites and lined up for 3 seconds of fie !)

of course, in the long run, that is not what was really needed, but is what the plan was for

a BIG HASSLE is with games to start with, I fly a lot of flight sims, the 30 cal, is pretty much not going to do anything, I would hate to see how many planes really were shot down with 30 cal ammo, I think a lot of designers would be shocked

also, interesting on how people think combat worked, even more so in the Air, the GE had slow firing 20 mm, well, the 30 cal was a spotting weapon, you got into place, and fired them, to see if your line is right, then if so, you tapped the stud for the 20mm, the more skill you had, you could tell when you were on or when you were off and would just wait till you were right before you fire

(if you watch some of the US guncamera films, you can see the guy is off target, but he knew he had the ammo and the plane, to stick with the target, and would fire wide, and then walk the rounds to the target)

as Niki says, all it takes is one round to ruin your day

The reason why the Spit and Hurri had 8 guns was a study by the Air Ministry that said 8 guns was the minimum to deliver a lethal burst to a 'modern' twin, in the likely firing opportunity. I cannot remember how long that was. I have never seen a numerate analysis but I think that would have been for a properly delivered burst at harmonisation range, and possibly with a slightly optimistic idea of bomber fragility. Having said which, there were cases (e.g. Ginger Lacey) of getting He111 kills with remarkably short bursts. The easiest way is harmonise close, fire close, and shoot straight! I think, for average pilots, you would just get a few holes on target, for a 'damaged'. Getting the lethal burst needs skill. A 20mm needs a couple of rounds on target in the same area. A 20mm on an vulnerable spot will quite ruin your day!

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

Having said which, there were cases (e.g. Ginger Lacey) of getting He111 kills with remarkably short bursts. The easiest way is harmonise close, fire close, and shoot straight! I think, for average pilots, you would just get a few holes on target, for a 'damaged'.

I concur.

From what i've read and seen vets trained their guns to harmonise at a closer range. This clearly gave them less of an opportunity to get a kill (timewise) but in general rookies fire too early and end up using all their ammo in a very short space of time for little damage. The vets moved in close and...........

Good old Ginger, Sailor and Bader[8D]

[Hard Sarge]

okay to clear up the post, I found the part I was looking for

it was decided that at the speeds of the current aircraft, the Fighter would only have 1 chance to destroy the target bomber, and it would only have this chance for 2 seconds, so to do the damage needed in that 2 seconds, it would take 8 MG's fireing at there full ROF (hence wing mounted over engine mounted) (1000 RGP/PM)

really, is sort of a strange design/plan to work for, since none of the planes carried anywhere close to the ammo load that was "said" to be needed to knock down a bomber

[Nikademus]

Yes...I read in one (of two sources i have specifically on BoB) that a positive feature of the 8 x r.303's was that it allowed the very green UK pilots to spray the target and (hopefully) do something. As long as they didnt' fire too soon as Speedy related, ruining their shot, all that bullet powerful slamming into the target could ruin your day if it got past the armor.

But as always....to give the flip side of the coin it's fair due as well.....the cannon controversy also caused it's share of outcrying. In the end a harder hitting weapon was deemed desirable.

ooo....dont mention flight sim......i really want to find time to reinstall and boot up EAW. After reading the 2nd BoB book i wanted to (of all things!) try my luck in a Zoerstor (Sp!) and see how long i last. [:'(] Was having no luck piloting 109's anyway.

Alas....patch testing makes that a fantasy.

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Alas....patch testing makes that a fantasy.

As does you providing a decent PBEM opponent [:'(]