[NO BUG] M-61 Vulcan and Gau-8 Avenger dispersion values - Page 8 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-08-2019, 09:15 AM   #71
NineLine
Community Manager
 
NineLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 24,795
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthawk2174 View Post

Yeah should do it for the A10 someone did do it for the hornet though:

Except this question has been answered by Wags above, and previously by Yo-Yo.

This is a note from Yo-Yo on the Hornet image you shared.

Quote:
first of all - his approach is inaccurate because 80% circle diameter <> full side deviation he plotted and his 100 ft at 500 ft is absolutely weird and he can not prove it. The median for this case is something about (100/8 )/500 = 0.025 which is at least 100 times more than is typical for any barrel.
But again, this has been answered. I really don't see the point of carrying on now.
__________________
Nick Grey - "I have had the privilege of flying most marks of Spit, the I, V, IX, XIV, XIX and enjoyed working with Eagle to make this simulation of the IX the 'mutt's nuts'."
Artist formerly known as SiThSpAwN
Forum RulesForum Rules Guidelines
ED Facebook PageED YouTube PageWags YouTubeMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine #0440
**How to Report a Bug**
NineLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 09:46 AM   #72
Shadow KT
Senior Member
 
Shadow KT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,524
Default

Well, okey.... if his approach was "inaccurate", what is the accurate one ? We have the methods to do it.... lets do it accurately

Why not make a test and be done with it ?

Is there a different reason ? Does it just HAVE to be like that ? If so, I think people will understand, but they have to know...

How come when people "feel" that something is not right, the typical answer is that hard data and documentation is needed, but when people start posting videos, documentations, tests..... the answer that a pilot gave of a "it's fine" is good enough ?

Using the same evidence, how come some pilots (real A-10 pilots like Habu) say the opposite ?

If the test are not done correctly, tell us what we are doing wrong.... nobody looses in this situation..... everyone wants the best for this brilliant simulation. Lets not just discredit someones work, but actually give feedback to it

There was a question some time ago that even in the lua, the mil number was different from what it was real spec wise and when it was modified to the same number, it actually performed as expected. What happened with that ? The only answer I've seen from yoyo, is that we don't understand what the value in the lua means

Does "It's fine" mean it is good enough for the procedural simulations they do ? Or it actually means it is accurate ? Really depends how you put the question.
__________________
'Shadow'

Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days

Last edited by Shadow KT; 11-08-2019 at 10:01 AM.
Shadow KT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 02:45 PM   #73
nighthawk2174
Member
 
nighthawk2174's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 379
Default

Agreed with shadow if its wrong why and how?


also that building is 100ft wide...

and when I tried to replicate it I pretty much got the same result, I just couldn't quite get my nose down far enough so for the building so instead I put a btr80 up there (25.3ft in length).

bassed on this i'd say its not unreasonable to say that 80% or so of the shells landed in-between the central hub of the first wheel and the front of the third wheel. Which according to the ruler in the ME is just under 10ft. With the maximum being somewhere in the realm of near the front of the vehicle to just after the central hub of the third wheel or just under 17ft maybe 15ft being more reasonable.

Now lets mod some of those values:



In the end the best way to be able to tell would be if we had a target like in aces high where it would spawn locked in front of your jet and whenever it was hit by gunfire it would draw a black dot where the bullet hit. From there we could compare to the pictures from the earlier documentation.

In the end if you want a fixed gun for SP or just to try it out here's the file I use:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qgtzrbjy9q...unMod.zip?dl=0
nighthawk2174 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 02:59 PM   #74
Yo-Yo
ED Team
 
Yo-Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow KT View Post
Well, okey.... if his approach was "inaccurate", what is the accurate one ? We have the methods to do it.... lets do it accurately

Why not make a test and be done with it ?

Is there a different reason ? Does it just HAVE to be like that ? If so, I think people will understand, but they have to know...

How come when people "feel" that something is not right, the typical answer is that hard data and documentation is needed, but when people start posting videos, documentations, tests..... the answer that a pilot gave of a "it's fine" is good enough ?

Using the same evidence, how come some pilots (real A-10 pilots like Habu) say the opposite ?

If the test are not done correctly, tell us what we are doing wrong.... nobody looses in this situation..... everyone wants the best for this brilliant simulation. Lets not just discredit someones work, but actually give feedback to it

There was a question some time ago that even in the lua, the mil number was different from what it was real spec wise and when it was modified to the same number, it actually performed as expected. What happened with that ? The only answer I've seen from yoyo, is that we don't understand what the value in the lua means

Does "It's fine" mean it is good enough for the procedural simulations they do ? Or it actually means it is accurate ? Really depends how you put the question.
The accurate approach is to accurately measure 100% diameter circle or 8 medians band. Of course, one can count 80% of hits and draw a circle around it... but I think it's a business for perversions fans... If you have no automation means.

Then, it's necessary to convert this value to 80%, 50% or 30% circle diameter, whatever you want to compare to. It's just a common math... requires less efforts than 5 posts on the forum.
__________________
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
Yo-Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 03:56 PM   #75
Quadg
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 564
Default

I have watched a10 shoot up ground targets at RAF donna nook, plenty of times. back in the cold war.

and I can say that watching a10 shoot up ground targets in dcs from a similar position is remarkably similar.

good enough for army work..

I probably still have a 30mm spent brass case somewhere in the attic. they used to get washed off the range by high tide so you could get them without trespassing.
although playing with spent munitions is definitely a bad idea..
__________________
My Rig: i7 4930k 4.5Ghz, 16GB DDR3 2400, 2x SSD, EVGA 1080 Superclocked, Warthog Throttle and Stick, MFG Crosswinds, Oculus Rift.
Quadg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 04:11 PM   #76
nighthawk2174
Member
 
nighthawk2174's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 379
Default

Ok, and ontop of that what do the values in the shell_table.lua mean (DA0) mean exactly.
nighthawk2174 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 05:06 PM   #77
Shadow KT
Senior Member
 
Shadow KT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,524
Default

Well, it does seem like the values are pretty close, I guess it is settled for the GAU-8.

Wasn't that hard now was it ?
__________________
'Shadow'

Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days
Shadow KT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 05:17 PM   #78
Tippis
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 609
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthawk2174 View Post
Ok, and ontop of that what do the values in the shell_table.lua mean (DA0) mean exactly.
This is really the important question since that's pretty much where the whole thing started, and it really has never been addressed, much less answered.

On the one hand, we have a set of weapons that have values that clearly correspond to specific published test-bench figures, and these values are supposedly accurate for the weapon in question. On the other hand, we have a weapon that have values that are nowhere near any published test-bench figures, and these values are supposedly also accurate.

So which one is it? The only way for both to be accurate is if each weapon is coded so wildly differently that the shell table values are essentially meaningless. Otherwise, one of the two simply must be wrong: the values that correspond to published data, or the values that don't.
Tippis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 11:23 PM   #79
nighthawk2174
Member
 
nighthawk2174's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tippis View Post
This is really the important question since that's pretty much where the whole thing started, and it really has never been addressed, much less answered.

On the one hand, we have a set of weapons that have values that clearly correspond to specific published test-bench figures, and these values are supposedly accurate for the weapon in question. On the other hand, we have a weapon that have values that are nowhere near any published test-bench figures, and these values are supposedly also accurate.

So which one is it? The only way for both to be accurate is if each weapon is coded so wildly differently that the shell table values are essentially meaningless. Otherwise, one of the two simply must be wrong: the values that correspond to published data, or the values that don't.
Agreed, the GSH23, 30-1, and BMP gun (forgot the name) all have values in the lua file that seem to be accurate. .0005,.0007, .0004 respectively. Yet the Gau8 and Vulcan with similar dispersion values to the first two Russian guns respectively are .0022 and .0017 many times the values used for the Russian guns stated to have similar dispersion values irl.
nighthawk2174 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2019, 08:40 PM   #80
nighthawk2174
Member
 
nighthawk2174's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 379
Default

Ok so i've done in game tests at a 1000 inches to allow comparison with the project vulcan documentation I showed in my first post. Hopefully this can be the new standard for all testing in this regard as it is what is most often used in testing. I set up an F18 at 1000" (83.333 ft) with active pause on then fired at the target (same as in my last analysis post). After this using tacview I extracted the initial and final positions of each bullet. Each test was done with 100 rounds. I ran this test twice with the third time using the value of .0008 for the dispersion. Units for the graphs below are inches. Additionally I then used the data to figure out what the 80% and 100% circles where for each grouping.

Vanilla results:
Spread:
Spoiler:

- Vanilla Trial 1
- Vanilla Trial 2
- Modded


Green = 80% within 10.04mills
100% within 25.78mills

Red = 80% within 9.45mills
100% within 22.86mills

Orange = 80% within 4.27mills
100% within 10.18mills

When all of them are overlayed together along with dispersion pattern 11 you get:
nighthawk2174 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.