Jump to content

DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion


Barrett_g

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team

Reopened thread.

 

A reminder to all, we have rules here, please read them before posting.

 

Thank you


Edited by BIGNEWY

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Yes please keep on topic " DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion "

 

The main thing here is be nice and remember the rules. Thanks

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question, diving flaps in p-47 do they have speed limit ??

 

I found some info on the dive flaps, but not speed limits. I honestly don’t think there’s a maximum speed limit as they were used in emergencies to pull out of dives when speed were reaching the sound barrier. You wouldn’t retract them because you were going too fast... you’d just keep pulling that flight stick back while hoping the plane would pull out! Some info on the P-47’s dive flaps:

 

http://legendsintheirowntime.com/LiTOT/Content/1945/P47_Av_4502_dive-flap.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the point is you should fookin' earn the right for adjustment, just as IRL.

 

 

Would you also have to earn your right for deciding your amount of fuel or your external stores?

 

Would you have to earn your right to decide when and where to fly?

 

 

Harmonisation was changed in rl and like the other options there is nothing wrong on letting the virtual pilot decide how to. Unless we decide to implement a true chain of command where you only fly when and where you are told. With the fuel and armament you have been given and obviously ban the virtual pilot for choosing any of those at all in the sim.

 

 

I think that harmonisation should be an option as well. Obviosly, subjected to availability of time and resources to implement it.


Edited by Zunzun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you also have to... Would you have to...

 

A dead horse, plus a wrong thread anyway. Go check the WW2 wishlist sub-board for a pertinent thread. Though I'm not participating anymore, since I really don't care that much one way or another.

 

Anyway, there're some older threads about this on the boards too. One of the devs gives his opinion on the matter in one of them, and suffice it to say that I agree with him wholeheartedly. Toodlers for now and happy flying mate.

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

(don't tell me those picture were made at factory ...)

 

 

Will not. Gun harmonisation actually was a routine maintenance procedure, but there is a nuance: the gun harmonisation patterns were included in the maintenance manuals. Setting the target crosses to the right position following the manual was a simple task any crew member can do, but calculation of a new desired pattern was not a very simple and fast thing. It requires a bit of mathematics, ballistics and even aerodynamics (AoA determination). The spreadshits, even Lotus 1-2-3, was not widely spread that time... so, logarythm ruler and at least one graduated engineer were necessary to design a new harmonisation pattern.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will not. Gun harmonisation actually was a routine maintenance procedure, but there is a nuance: the gun harmonisation patterns were included in the maintenance manuals. Setting the target crosses to the right position following the manual was a simple task any crew member can do, but calculation of a new desired pattern was not a very simple and fast thing. It requires a bit of mathematics, ballistics and even aerodynamics (AoA determination). The spreadshits, even Lotus 1-2-3, was not widely spread that time... so, logarythm ruler and at least one graduated engineer were necessary to design a new harmonisation pattern.

 

Wooot, ist was not just a slider that needed to be moved from left to right??:megalol:

 

 

Will the P-47 include a engine damage model right at EA start?

 

Fox

Spoiler

PC Specs: Ryzen 9 5900X, 3080ti, 64GB RAM, Oculus Quest 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will not. Gun harmonisation actually was a routine maintenance procedure, but there is a nuance: the gun harmonisation patterns were included in the maintenance manuals. Setting the target crosses to the right position following the manual was a simple task any crew member can do, but calculation of a new desired pattern was not a very simple and fast thing. It requires a bit of mathematics, ballistics and even aerodynamics (AoA determination). The spreadshits, even Lotus 1-2-3, was not widely spread that time... so, logarythm ruler and at least one graduated engineer were necessary to design a new harmonisation pattern.

 

Lots of pilots were high educated people they could do the math by them self, but another problem is that for gun harmonization maintenance ground crew had special constructions, which were put from certain distance from plane, was showing where exactly each gun should aim, and this thing would be quite hard to make i think. This distance was about 50m i think, so way before gun converge point so meddling with it would lead to crazy results .

What i am looking for is to not get converge point slider but 2-3 set of converge ranges like short and long set something like this.

Same thing is with ammo belt customization, airfield command was getting ammo for its planes, i doubt that at this level any ammo customization was available so they got 50% HE rounds and 50%AP, sp it is logical the ammo belts had to be set in that way which will make HE and AP usage similar, Average pilot had no access to custom ammo belts and gun converge range, maybe ace pilots had this because big credit earned in battle, but average nop


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Either this, or nothing.

 

IRL only the 'Stars' got to personalise their convergence.

Maybe everybody thinks they should be a star, but if everyone's a star, no-one's a star.

No personalisation is more realistic than everyone gets personalisation.

 

If it's included, it should - like in real life - be for those that show they've earned it.

 

The right approach could be to have few REAL approved harmonisation charts. It could be different patterns, for example, for aerial combat and for ground pounding.

 

And, by the way, I remember the long story about the same matter for P-51. It was a lot of wishes, expectations, high hopes that a special convergence will increase score dramatically... And, finally, somebody decided to readjust the battery.. srarted with calculations, tried one variant, another variant, got disappointed in both and returned to the default.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quick question.

 

After waiting so long for the P-47. When we finally get it. Will it be early release?

 

Hey Buzz if i remember correctly in that recent AMA with wags he stated it will be complete upon release. At least that is what im remembering his wordage as.

 

Here is the portion i saw

 

"What are plans for DCS WWII after the P-47 and Me-262 have been completed?

 

The P-47D is far along and will be released at a completed state in Q1 2020. However, new World War II assets such as the completed A-20 and Ju-88 will be released this year. After the P-47D will come the Mosquito. We are still collecting the necessary data to correctly simulate the Me.262 and until we have enough granular detail we will not start development. In parallel with the new units, we are working on some new World War II maps that we will announce soon. Quite a lot is happening on the World Word II"

I7-8700 @5GHZ, 32GB 3000MHZ RAM, 1080TI, Rift S, ODYSSEY +. SSD DRIVES, WIN10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right approach could be to have few REAL approved harmonisation charts. It could be different patterns, for example, for aerial combat and for ground pounding.

 

And, by the way, I remember the long story about the same matter for P-51. It was a lot of wishes, expectations, high hopes that a special convergence will increase score dramatically... And, finally, somebody decided to readjust the battery.. srarted with calculations, tried one variant, another variant, got disappointed in both and returned to the default.

 

What do you mean about patern exactly ?

 

The patern for me (as my english is not the best) is the shape of the surface perpendicular, in front of the plane at a desired distance were the majority of the bullet are shoot.

 

If looking at this, picture, the shoot patern at a particular distance is the area were majority of the bullet goes. If all gun are the same and converge to one point, it should look like a circle (like the illustration). With multiple convergence point, it should look like another surface (maybe kind of rectangle or elliptic area). The pattern size for a gun at a particular distance is not something we should be able to modify and I don't think most of people ask about that. As Patern directly linked to gun dispersion and because gun dispersion is something we can't modify.

gun-dispersion.png

 

But the patern shape can change only for two reason. The convergence of each gun will modifiy the area were the bullet from all the gun go and and distance we choose to look obviously implied a defferent dispersion area from another distance. The more we go far, and the more the surface is big.

 

This is nothing we have to change. As it is working in game today, it's not perfect but it's really great (can't be perfect as it's not reality).

 

The convergence setting which is asked is only the vertical and horizontal angle of the gun in the wing. I agree it would be nice to have the official list of preset for each plane. But I think you should consider adding at least more preset as there are squadron using personalised convergence settings for all their planes. I don't think those convergences were official manufacturers one, but theses were used. (See my post linked later)

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQdNB6SMjcJ8MJY1oqJ-3pdtZ-OMnutbBBnFZUNCWpAxYoAxLO3&s

 

But I feel it would be more easier to add the possibility to set manually the convergence but in a limited logic area ("not too close not too far"). Still would be happy with a list of preset, but I'm scared to see only two in game as AA/AG.

 

Pattern modification is a result of convergence settings. But in reality, pattern of each gun don't really change. They just "cross the line of sight of the plane" at variable distance.

And as the distance is a parameters of the size the area the gun shoot, convergence is a setting to allow pilots to choose a sector/volume in front of the plane were they want the bullet to go.

 

My way to usually set them is to fire at close range (were gun have less dispersion and bullet are still in almost horizontal path). This mean all my gun shoot in front of me at the same level and I don't have canon shooting over machine gun. But then, at greater distance, canon drop faster and separate for the other bullet.

 

I know some who prefer to set convergence far. That happen more with US plane as these plane have lot of guns (all the same) and a big fire rate, they prefer to fire at larger area. They just need to place plane in an unprecise area in front of their nose and then the gun dispersion allow them to have few hits. But as .50 cal are powerfull and shoot straight and as the gun have a big rate of fire, they can make some dammage to target at good distance.

 

It's a question of way to flight and way to fight. It's sad you follow the thinking of some that say it's useless because they didn't get able to make better results against ennemy fighter (if I clearly understand some of your answer from before). As I used moded convergence years and years ago (mod given in 1.5 for some mission with P51) I can say there is a difference. The first shoot are bad as it's something that need to be set, reset, ... But when you get something that match with your usual way to fight, air combat become another world. I would be really happy if you let me show you how this setting could make a big difference in a plane like Bf109 or Spitfire. Having the ability to set the canon to shoot the same trajectory as bullet (almost) for the 150 / 200 first meters make an enormous difference.

 

(Maybe it's a better idea to talk about this subject there rather than on P47 toppic ?)

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=255399

 

Ps : I don't think convergence will increase score dramaticaly as it is not the magical thing that make pilot shoot better and better. training, working on deflexion, learning how to use the plane and how to fight the ennemy is the only way to make better result. Then convergence will help by allowing to losing less ammo by having gun shooting the area where we need them to shoot in general air battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

The pattern here is a term of how the EACH pair of guns are adjusted. The convergence (or point convergence), as your book stated, is not the best pattern. The best patterns that were developed for 6 and 8 guns optimised coverage of a consistent areas with bullets hits for the largest range of distances. So, any pair of guns has not only its own convergence distance but its own elevation to cross the sight line.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pattern here is a term of how the EACH pair of guns are adjusted. The convergence (or point convergence), as your book stated, is not the best pattern. The best patterns that were developed for 6 and 8 guns optimised coverage of a consistent areas with bullets hits for the largest range of distances. So, any pair of guns has not only its own convergence distance but its own elevation to cross the sight line.

 

Ok, I will made some more terminology error, sorry for that.

 

I understand that guns should be adjusted by pair. Ok with that. It's completely logical.

Convergence is not the best pattern following the terminology you explained to me. I totally agree.

 

Convergence as I understand it, is an imaginary point where a bullet following perfectly physics theory without any real world error should cross the sight line. To have the point at a desired distance of 200m, it need to have the gun set (elevation and horizontal angle). Convergence point is a point in a 3D world where "perfect bullet" hit the sight line.

 

So I agree with everything you tell until there. So gun are linked by pair (except obviously nose canon). And the pair of gun is set for a theorical convergence point at desired distance on sight line. And guns are set to have an optimised coverage of a consistent areas. And the setting of the gun is made to tweak where this area is (distance from nose) and how big it is.

 

Preset would be nice. A good way to choose between small area, medium area, wide area. As those would simulate unique/close convergence point or multiple convergences points as it as in reality.

 

What I don't like about the preset idea is that the covered area distance wouldn't be modifiable (if i clearly understand what those preset would mean).

For example, It would be useless to have a list of preset settings for pattern if we can't set small/medium/large for a desired distance. The same pattern at 500m or at 200m don't have the same size.

 

Maybe more clear with drawing than with "medium" english

g2hvIFE.gif

 

Hard to clearly explain all of that with the correct word when not english ^^

Hope my text mean what I tried to explain. I rewrite some sentence few time but still not completely sure. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guns dispersion is not adjustable so no point taking consideration in gun settings.

I think Yo-Yo said that single converge point for 6-8 guns is not optimal, 2 guns converging closer another a little bit farther making nice spread in target area. At least how i understand that


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uh ? You are talking about the scale of the not scaled 1:1 drawing ? Or I didn't understand ?

 

Yes i was talking about proportions in this drawing.

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really ... You never see any schema anywhere ?

Where proportion are not respected ?

 

Please ...

 

I don't even want to try to explain you ...

 

I saw a lot, but drawing with real proportions would give better view on subject.

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a lot, but drawing with real proportions would give better view on subject.

 

Yes I know that but the goal of this one is to show that convergence setting change the orientation of the cone, not their size (as some believed).

 

Then it was to show the size of the gun covered area. It increase when setting a convergence point that is further.

 

So converging guns are not more precise.

But convergence 300m and shoot target at 300m should cause more damage as more bullet are concentrated in this area than convergence 100m and shoot target at 300m.

 

This is all the point of my request. I shoot usually at 200m, why should I keep plane that have fixed setting to shoot at 600m (example with random value I prefer to precise !!!).

 

------------------------------------

@Yoyo: I just tried to make slight modification with Spitfire elevation.

I don't know who tell you it's useless to modify elevation and gun azimuth, but he should make some fire practice. Change the elevation of 7.7mm from 0 to 0.9 and the elevation of the canon from 0 to 1.2. It need some shoot to understande the path of the bullet, but it work better than original setting.

 

I choose to try this set as majority of my combat are dogfight. The little elevation force me to think when shooting while level. But in turn it make lot of difference. Target go less under the nose as I don't need to place the sight too much in front (during smooth turn).

 

It don't change balistic of the bullet. Each bullet still does the same amount of damage. In my spit they just go a bit over the sight at first before going down ...

 

Edit : I use Spitfire as it has tracers on each gun and so I was able to understand faster how valor in the files work.


Edited by JG13~Wulf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Convergence as I understand it, is an imaginary point where a bullet following perfectly physics theory without any real world error should cross the sight line.

 

That is not completely accurate definition, because the bullets trajectory can converge at one distance and cross the sight line in the vertical plane - at the different. And, by the way, generally, the bullets from wing guns cross the sight line twice - the first one at very short range and then - at much longer. The bullets elevation betwen these two distances is noticable, but not so much to be within the target height with respect of dispersion.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Yes I know that but the goal of this one is to show that convergence setting change the orientation of the cone, not their size (as some believed).

 

Then it was to show the size of the gun covered area. It increase when setting a convergence point that is further.

 

So converging guns are not more precise.

But convergence 300m and shoot target at 300m should cause more damage as more bullet are concentrated in this area than convergence 100m and shoot target at 300m.

 

This is all the point of my request. I shoot usually at 200m, why should I keep plane that have fixed setting to shoot at 600m (example with random value I prefer to precise !!!).

 

------------------------------------

@Yoyo: I just tried to make slight modification with Spitfire elevation.

I don't know who tell you it's useless to modify elevation and gun azimuth, but he should make some fire practice. Change the elevation of 7.7mm from 0 to 0.9 and the elevation of the canon from 0 to 1.2. It need some shoot to understande the path of the bullet, but it work better than original setting.

 

I choose to try this set as majority of my combat are dogfight. The little elevation force me to think when shooting while level. But in turn it make lot of difference. Target go less under the nose as I don't need to place the sight too much in front (during smooth turn).

 

It don't change balistic of the bullet. Each bullet still does the same amount of damage. In my spit they just go a bit over the sight at first before going down ...

 

Edit : I use Spitfire as it has tracers on each gun and so I was able to understand faster how valor in the files work.

 

The recommended pattern for P-47 gives consistent hit field starting from 240 to 450 m. It is universal. In head-on situation the longer distance of starting firing the better, especially because German planes has a lot of fuselage and wing root mounted guns. Shorter distance allows to decenter the sight and have good concentration of 4 guns.

 

Regarding the Spit, I can say that the default seting is a standard British setting... And the elevation instead of right DEFLECTION is a thing that I can not accept, because very often you need to shoot in 1g flight or strafing a ground target.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...