Jump to content

M61 gun dispersion, once again


Swift.

Recommended Posts

 

Found this video of a Superhornet shooting its gun. I thought it might be interesting to compare that with with this:

 

 

Of Redkite demonstrating the new M61 dispersion.

 

Interesting to see the Rhino in real life has almost 2000ft extra range, and a much tighter dispersion as you can see.

 

Of course, yes, this is comparing two different airframes so obviously you wouldn't expect identical results. But I thought it was interesting nonetheless.

476th Discord   |    476th Website    |    Swift Youtube
Ryzen 5800x, RTX 4070ti, 64GB, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

intriguing. i would think there would be improvements over the years. however its the same cannon essentially with just an A1 and A2 model. so what would the engineers do do improve it? i do a lot of ACM in various planes and never had an issue with dispersion. i like to get in close to make sure i get them and not waste ammo. so dispersion is less pronounced. the same gun is used in VADS and CIWS. CIWS uses SABOT which by design has better range because of the higher velocity of the round.

AKA_SilverDevil AKA Forums My YouTube

“It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.” — Mark Twain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just did some napkin maths on that strafe from the above video:

 

Range across the ground = X = 2.5NM = 15,000ft

Strafe Angle = a = 50 degrees

From that we can calculate:

 

Height above target = Y = Xtan(a) = ~17800ft

 

this seems to match with the videos MSL altitude of ~17000ft

 

Slant range = Z = cos(a)/X = ~23300ft = ~3.8NM

 

 

Now that is interesting isn't it.

Seeing as in DCS, our pipper is completely inaccurate past about 7000-8000ft, and here we have some hornets IRL firing at about 3 times that range...

476th Discord   |    476th Website    |    Swift Youtube
Ryzen 5800x, RTX 4070ti, 64GB, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in full agreement swift, i'm still of the opinion that the M61 dispersion is still too high. For example we know from both pilots and a USAF film (which I can't find anymore unfortunately) the F104 had an 80% dispersion circle under 4mills and a 100% value under 8.

 

Which is what is sated in the F15-34-1-1

MzHPIf5.jpg

The AAA Vulcan using the default circular clamp has 5mill dispersion value.

yMRJ9As.png

I also had this footage for the F18 which would seem to indicate this as well. All the rounds fall within 30-40'ish ft from a 6000ft firing range. Which would indicate a 100% circle of around 5-7mills.

(target is 20ftx20ft poles are another 5-10'ish ft from the target)

 

 

Edit:

 

They are in all probability using PGU rounds hence the longer range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My second post wasn't so much about dispersion (not that I disagree nighthawk), but rather the accuracy (note: not precision).

 

Lex, however seemed to say that hornets gun pipper isnt accurate past it's IN RNG cue. So the marines in that video are in fact just squirting rounds at nothingness. Apparently in full knowledge that the rounds would fall 1-2NM short of the aimpoint.

476th Discord   |    476th Website    |    Swift Youtube
Ryzen 5800x, RTX 4070ti, 64GB, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last video they dont even get the IN RANGE cue before they shoot, so i dont think that was accurate at all.

^^^

 

 

 

No one straifs a target with an intention of hinting anything from 17 ThOuSaNd feet.

 

I would highly recommend looking up the affective range of the M61 20mm gun, specifically the ballistics of the 20mm round used. That will put into perspective what accuracy you should expect. I am pretty sure it is hardly 1 mile let alone almost 3.


Edited by Lex Talionis

Find us on Discord. https://discord.gg/td9qeqg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

 

 

 

No one straifs a target with an intention of hinting anything from 17 ThOuSaNd feet.

 

I would highly recommend looking up the affective range of the M61 20mm gun, specifically the ballistics of the 20mm round used. That will put into perspective what accuracy you should expect. I am pretty sure it is hardly 1 mile let alone almost 3.

 

Ummm no the shells can make it that far we can debate effectiveness of said shells at said distance but they can fly as far as in the above vid.

 

 

 

calculated in matlab using approx ED drag values

BUjLv8Q.jpg

CxTHbEN.jpg

jt3uSZP.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To put this in a more reasonable frame:

 

In DCS if I were to fire my gun at a slant range of 7000ft and an angle of 20 degrees, the rounds would fall well short, because before the IN RNG cue, the gun pipper is completely inaccurate (read inaccurate, not imprecise).

 

 

 

Now perhaps that's completely correct behaviour for hornet, in which case I would question whether the IN RNG distance in our HUD is correct.

 

Edit, and Lex, the effective range of M61 I found online lists it as 'several thousand yards'

Now what do we take several as?

2 = (6000ft)

3 = (9000ft)

4 = (12000ft)

 

good luck hitting anything at 1.5NM in hornet


Edited by Swiftwin9s

476th Discord   |    476th Website    |    Swift Youtube
Ryzen 5800x, RTX 4070ti, 64GB, Quest 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to see the Rhino in real life has almost 2000ft extra range, and a much tighter dispersion as you can see.

 

Of course, yes, this is comparing two different airframes so obviously you wouldn't expect identical results. But I thought it was interesting nonetheless.

 

I agree the airframes are completely different and absolutely not comparable rainbowdashwink.png

 

But IIRC the DCS Hornet IN RNG actually was appearing at around 6:30-6:00, just as in that video. I am now wondering I didn't notive the massive differece in RedKite's video when I first watched it or even when doing this myself. Probably because I didn't really pay attention to anyway since I fire at 2:30 which is what I learned to to before the changes were made to be efficient.

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm no the shells can make it that far we can debate effectiveness of said shells at said distance but they can fly as far as in the above vid.

 

 

 

calculated in matlab using approx ED drag values

BUjLv8Q.jpg

CxTHbEN.jpg

jt3uSZP.jpg

 

 

Im not debating anything. Rounds (especially intended for military use) are often advertised with an "effective range". Am i saying it will suddenly stop flying mid air or that it will do no damage the seccond that number is exceeded, heck no. But what i am saying is, if you have a weapon system with a function that tells the user when they can expect a repeatable and/or expected outcome from that weapon, (i.e. an "in range" cue) i think it is safe to asume the powers that programmed that system used something quantifiable and didnt just guess. In short, something had to define what "in range" means and i promise it isn't just how far the round flys. Marines memorize these "effective range" numbers for the weapons they train on as part of the , um, education package in boot camp. What i am referring to is not some fringe concept.

 

A quick google search (avoiding wikipedia of course) Most 20mm rounds balastic charts end around 2000m. Doesn't mean that is the "effective range", it may just be the "max range" with the effective range something less than. Still more research needed.

 

Treat it like any other long range round hand loaded to achieve a task. The round has a BC, muzle velocity, a distance it slowes to tran/sub sonic then becomes a tumbling rock, calculate-able drop values, etc. The equations are out there . There is much to this than simply, the game is messed up because it is not like other parts of the game. Discovering these numbers will give you much context of what "in range" should mean and what might actually be wrong in the game.

I may be drowning in the deep end with the "realism " but it is being talked about so im guessing someone is digging the hole for a reason.


Edited by Lex Talionis

Find us on Discord. https://discord.gg/td9qeqg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right and I see no reason that this would preclude the sight from being accurate out to the maximum range it can do so.

 

But it does ... we dont know what the maximum range in reality is yet. You can't deduce if the game "in range" cue is wrong, or if the max range of the actual gun in the game is wrong. Knowing the effective rang of the gun will give you both, or certainly a better idea of what it should be than guessing based off other game mechanics. Measuring the game against itself is not a good idea.


Edited by Lex Talionis

Find us on Discord. https://discord.gg/td9qeqg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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