DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion

Yeah I now it cross the sight line as it go up (but that really close of the plane and generally it's not at that point that you find your ennemy ^^ )

I have a pretty good idea of how it work. As part of my study I had to resolve numerous problems of parabolic shoot but it's not that easy for me to make clear explanation of this in english with the perfect terminology. But you can believe me, as a physicist, I have a pretty good idea of the problem. And I really start thinking that people don't understand what I ask because of terminology error.

I just tried all the warbirds with slightly modified valor for : elevation_initial value in planes lua.

So if I clearly understand the way it work, this value simulate the vertical angle of the gun in the wing. I didn't modify the azimuth_initial. I let that for tomorrow :music_whistling:

For in game example :

For Fw 190D9 I divided the original value by half and for spitfire I change it from 0 to 0.9 or 1.2 for each gun.

This mean for a real life plane adjusting only the vertical "screw" that hold the gun as it was a guess work.

But for the 190, it make the plane shoot far better than with original settings. Simply because I always get mad at my gun at close range with original value because the bullet past over the center of sight and I missed a lot of shoot because of that. I shoot lot of bullet over close target before.

My general use of the D9 is to come behind with high speed and shoot when closer than 250m from my target. As the EZ 42 don't change the center following gravity (which you explained me thzt it's not a bug), I missed a lot of target because the bullet passed little over the sight center and I sometimes make a bad correction during the fast attack. With my slight modification (changing 0.35 to 0.175), I have my gun that shoot in the middle of the sight at my usual shooting distance.

For the Spitfire I used to lost always my target in turn when trying to shoot and never used a lot the gun when leveled. Here I changed slightly and the plane is set better for how I use it in general.

Those kind of modification let me think that I do something some sources explained in my big post. Some squadron modify their guns setting to match their usual strategy. I fell like I just done that.

The value I put are guessed. But it make the plane better. I don't mean more correct, but I'm more confortable in it as it is set to follow how I use it in general.

The only think I hope is to be able to do the same with a correct system that don't allow me to use completely unrealistic angles for gun and allow me to not break integrity check.

Thanks for taking time to answer. :pilotfly:

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.

For the P47, you are true. Heard that a lot. But as you said it's recommended and not fixed. That the little difference between reality and game for now. But yeah, I agree each plane had recommended setting as not every pilot had exeperience and recommendation was always a good starting point.

I agree with you that Spit is used for 1G fire and ground attack. But as my preference, I have generally more time to correct the error in level attack or for ground attack than in turn (even more when I loose target). But I agree it's probably not the setting everyone would love. But the setting now in game is not perfect to me (and for some people)

That a question of preference from pilot to another I think.

Let's imagine that a WWII pilot says to his squadron leader:

- Hey, I'd like to increase elevation to have better results in turn fight!.

- And what if you meet a German in head-on attack? You will die for sure!.

- It's ok, I will respawn.

 

 

And, by the way, in 1 g shooting you, generally, have LESS time to correct. Lead firing in turnfight gives much more time than barrage fire or especially head-on attack.

The difference it's not that big.

But I completely understand your point with head on attack. And I agree there are many more case where the little addition of elevation is not perfect. But the pilot could have the same difficulty with the original fixed settings.

As I said I change them to try to see the difference. But as I have years of flying on this one and against it, I know, when flying it, 99% of my air battle are turn fight or end in turn fight. That's why I tried this setting as it seems to follow my way to use Spitfire. And it work and I'm still able to make good AG attack with gun and good 1G shoot. The difference is not big but is far more confortable 99% of the tim I fly it. But I completely agree that it's my personnal preference and I totally agree that you and some other people could dislike this setting completely. The discussion about this could continue similarly with topic like "Blue is the best color ! No I prefer red" :lol:

We could have the same argument with the D9 as I just did the opposite. I made it better for 1G close shoot as it wasn't set for this in game. As I have 10+ years using german planes in some squadron with really hard training (following procedure and tactics of this time), I get used to never shoot at distance over 250m. Now I have the capacity to now exactly where to place the sight and when to start to shoot. But the original setting did make shoot almost impossible (for me). I make some flight with the D9 and almost didn't miss a shoot since I modify those valor. Setting the gun to shoot with less elevation because in opposition to Spitfire, I almost never do turn fight with D9 and only 1G shoot is a great thing to me.

(It's funny but, yes, I prefer original setting of D9 on Spit and the one of Spit on D9 ^^ )

If I imagine I go ask a squadron leader by telling him I'm used to shoot closer than the plane is actually set, I don't know what he could tell me. And I think only squadron leader of that time would know what to answer. Maybe he would tell no. Maybe he would warn me or try to explain me that is (for him) a bad idea. I don't know. Maybe he could say "Ok, go set your guns and come back before 10Pm" :megalol:

On this forum, i think no one could tell a definitive answer about this as all squadron leader are different.

It's a difficult toppic to understand how it should be open to modification or lock in some way. I agree. But if you go for the idea of preset. It could end up terribly wrong or be completely nice.

There are so many possibilities of variation and so much variation occur during war it's hard to have a game with a complete and correct gun setting preset list. I think there are no solution 100% realist. But we have now the less one. Having no possibility to slightly change those two angles make it not correct. And I think that is a fact.

That's why I think pilot should be able to set completely personnalised gun setting** (and maybe yes having some preset to help them). And I think the Mission maker should have the possibility to lock or unlock convergence for each plane in there mission. Unlock so game use pilot personnal one or lock and use a preset the mission maker choose. This would be the best way as you could have preset if you prefer or personnalisation.

**By gun setting, I mean the two angles :

azimuth_initial

elevation_initial

(With obvious limitation)

Ps : Some talk about having feature lock/unlock linked to a K/D ratio or linked to a level. It's a way to work. But lock/unlock option in simulation world was never a good idea. (almost kill and kill some game/sim not only in aviation). That's why I think it would be a bad idea.

Or maybe having the possibility to unlock after flying x number or hours in the plane ? But nothing related to a level or to a K/D ratio. => This turn flight sim into plane FPS :joystick:

Or maybe having the possibility to unlock after flying x number or hours in the plane ? But nothing related to a level or to a K/D ratio. => This turn flight sim into plane FPS :joystick:

Exporting "funtionality" of other "simulator"...... :music_whistling:

Exporting "funtionality" of other "simulator"...... :music_whistling:

Where did I mean that ?

I ask to have a realistic feature.

To make it better if possible than any other sim (that how DCS could become the best)

And I said I hope DCS will not do like some other by using level to unlock feature.

I just give an alternative possibility ...

Where did I say let's copy what they do there ?

Thats is not a "realistic" feature. In fact a Ace has not gain "privilegies" over a fighter wing commander. A realistic "features" can be get responsabilities under a filght, squadron, etc by rank and "force" to the player make the "planning" and paper work as Wags talk about the dream to recreate a squadron manage rol on some day.

And about a "export" was a game (sorry to break rules) with you can harmonize guns (WW2 plane mechanical simulator), but you put the standard convergence to all guns based on the "standard pattern".

Thats is not a "realistic" feature. In fact a Ace has not gain "privilegies" over a fighter wing commander. A realistic "features" can be get responsabilities under a filght, squadron, etc by rank and "force" to the player make the "planning" and paper work as Wags talk about the dream to recreate a squadron manage rol on some day.

 

And about a "export" was a game (sorry to break rules) with you can harmonize guns (WW2 plane mechanical simulator), but you put the standard convergence to all guns based on the "standard pattern".

*vids*

Know it by name but didn't try. Didn't know there was a firing range to set up gun in it. (Please don't ban my comment because of this : But a similar thing would be awesome in DCS !)

But you know, Simulation is similar to other simulation. If not that would be weird.

There are Spitfire in every WW2 sim. Since it's not a copy. It's just part of every WW2 sim to simulate this plane.

But I don't mean to copy anything from other game. I hope to see just the better way to simulate things as DCS clearly say on each module : "We make simulation of xxx module that never get an equivalent before". About Flight model it's a fact (and it's why DCS is attractive). But about other feature that not the case now. Will be better and better (I believe it as I keep flying and buying new module). And as I previously said, modification of the plane (gun, miror addition, ammo belt, ...) is one of the most iconic feature of WW2. same plane on two different front were so much different.

I thought this was a P-47 thread. Silly me!

I thought this was a P-47 thread. Silly me!

I tried to make the discussion to another toppic but it was a fail ^^

Still I ask this for P47 too :music_whistling:

I thought this was a P-47 thread. Silly me!

I tried to make the discussion to another toppic but it was a fail ^^

Still I ask this for P47 too

S!

Was about to say the same :doh: .

 

 

Just wondering, maybe that tells you something? :huh:

 

 

S!

No it's just people keep talking here about that. Not there. ^^

No it's just people keep talking here about that. Not there. ^^

True yoyo did comment here, and also comment some cool tidbits about how the p47 is setup. Im excited for the jug as its being released in a completed state so thank the lord on that.:thumbup:

I hope they release the templates with the plane, Can't wait to make some CSAR with this skins.

Skyraider skins ?

Skyraider

P-47

I know what a A-1 is, and that's why we don't have one I will use the P-47 as my personal Sandy plane.

I love a guy with an active imagination!! :thumbup: The Jug will make a mhch better Sandy than the Pony did. :pilotfly:

I love a guy with an active imagination!! :thumbup: The Jug will make a mhch better Sandy than the Pony did. :pilotfly:

That's my idea!

Since the P-47 did the same job as the A-1, why not just use the P-47 as a.....P-47?

Because there were no P 47s in Korea or Vietnam ;)

Because there were no P 47s in Korea or Vietnam ;)

In vietanm ok but i think they were in Korea

In vietanm ok but i think they were in Korea

The P-47 was not deployed to Korea for the Korean War.

One of sad episodes post ww2, lots a scrapping to make toasters....

One of sad episodes post ww2, lots a scrapping to make toasters....

So true I read they was selling new Mustnags dirt cheap and now they are worth millions. So many great aircrafts scrapped.