DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion - Page 202 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-20-2019, 04:09 PM   #2011
Yo-Yo
ED Team
 
Yo-Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JG13~Wulf View Post
(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
Yo-Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 04:15 PM   #2012
iFoxRomeo
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 576
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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??


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

Fox
iFoxRomeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 04:18 PM   #2013
grafspee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 1,427
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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
__________________

Last edited by grafspee; 11-20-2019 at 04:37 PM.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 04:37 PM   #2014
Yo-Yo
ED Team
 
Yo-Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weta43 View Post
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
Yo-Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 04:48 PM   #2015
Sniper175
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzU View Post
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
Sniper175 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 06:30 PM   #2016
JG13~Wulf
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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.


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)



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.
__________________
JG13~Wulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 07:18 PM   #2017
Yo-Yo
ED Team
 
Yo-Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,919
Default

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
Yo-Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 08:01 PM   #2018
JG13~Wulf
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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


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.
__________________
JG13~Wulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 09:22 PM   #2019
grafspee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 1,427
Default

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
__________________

Last edited by grafspee; 11-20-2019 at 09:26 PM.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2019, 09:24 PM   #2020
JG13~Wulf
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grafspee View Post
Acording to this drawing spitfire lenth is about 100m
uh ? You are talking about the scale of the not scaled 1:1 drawing ? Or I didn't understand ?
__________________
JG13~Wulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
p-47, ww2

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 04:28 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.