Jump to content

[CLOSED] M61 Dispersion


WindyTX

Recommended Posts

Whats the deal with the gun spraying rounds everywhere especially noticeable in A2G. While I have no time in the F18c I have plenty of A2G time in the Tornado and cant believe the 18's gun is so dam inaccurate. To be more precise it looks like a dispersion problem.

I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3

Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1.

 

GTX 1080 Has its uses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's not that it would take a lot of time to correct. It's literally a single value in a single line in the shell_table.lua. Changing from the current 22 mil extreme spread dispersion to something else is changing Da0 = 0.0022 to the new value.

 

ED must have some reason for giving the gun the value it has, and I wish one of their representatives would at least comment on why.


Edited by Aries144
corrected
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The video this image capture comes from explains that this is an 8 inch circle, 1000 inches from the cannon's muzzle. (making the circle 8 mil)

 

The video further clarifies that 95-99% of rounds impacted within an 8 foot circle on a target located 1000 feet from the muzzle. (again, an 8 mil circle)

 

The M61 was mounted to an F-106 and firing was performed on the ground.

 

 

 

QJnocwf.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's not that it would take a lot of time to correct. It's literally a single value in a single line in the shell_table.lua. Changing from the current 22 mil dispersion to 8 mil is changing Da0 = 0.0022 to Da0 = 0.0008.

 

ED must have some reason for giving the gun the value it has, and I wish one of their representatives would at least comment on why. I think the evidence for 8 mil is pretty convincing, especially given the amount of data available indicating that 8 mil is the proper figure- including an actual video of a mounted M61 being fired at a target with a clearly visible 8 mil circle on it.

Good information! I changed the Da0 for the M61 and I could finally hit and destroy a BTR-80 APC. And it works for A/A as well.

I doubt that there are any good reasons for the 22 mils.

LeCuvier

Windows 10 Pro 64Bit | i7-4790 CPU |16 GB RAM|SSD System Disk|SSD Gaming Disk| MSI GTX-1080 Gaming 8 GB| Acer XB270HU | TM Warthog HOTAS | VKB Gladiator Pro | MongoosT-50 | MFG Crosswind Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mil, 80% has been used because that was the only official figure available prior to digging up the above video. It seems apparent that 8 mil, 80% is a maintenance figure, which denotes the point beyond which a gun is considered too inaccurate to be serviceable.

 

The problem with this is that the above video, which features a brand new M61, is shooting "8 mil, 95-99%".

 

Essentially, the figure currently used (8 mil, 80%) is simulating a gun so worn out that it's about to be sent back to be rebuilt. A worst case of 8 mil, 95%, as can clearly be seen in the above video, is a better representation of a new gun.

 

The same would be true for the A-10's Gau-8 gun. A "5 mil, 95%" value would likely better represent a new gun.


Edited by Aries144
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 mil, 80% has been used because that was the only official figure available prior to digging up the above video. It seems apparent that 8 mil, 80% is a maintenance figure, which denotes the point beyond which a gun is considered too inaccurate to be serviceable.

 

The problem with this is that the above video, which features a brand new M61, is shooting "8 mil, 95-99%".

 

Essentially, the figure currently used (8 mil, 80%) is simulating a gun so worn out that it's about to be sent back to be rebuilt. A worst case of 8 mil, 95%, as can clearly be seen in the above video, is a better representation of a new gun.

 

The same would be true for the A-10's Gau-8 gun. A "5 mil, 95%" value would likely better represent a new gun.

 

If you're numbers are correct, I'd rather see a gun that is 8 mil, ~90% to replicate a typical "well used, well loved" gun, as opposed to a brand new gun. We have a well worn cockpit, well worn skins, lets get a well worn (but still serviceable) gun too. Just the jump from from 8mil 80% to 85% would be very noticeable, and to 90% even more so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not watch the video, perform your own examination of the pictures, and dispute the numbers yourself?

 

The issue with your suggestion is that no other weapons or aircraft in the sim are modeled with wear induced degradation of performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're numbers are correct, I'd rather see a gun that is 8 mil, ~90% to replicate a typical "well used, well loved" gun, as opposed to a brand new gun. We have a well worn cockpit, well worn skins, lets get a well worn (but still serviceable) gun too. Just the jump from from 8mil 80% to 85% would be very noticeable, and to 90% even more so.

 

And I suppose you would also want missiles' rocket engines arbitrarily fail to fire because DCS should simulate end of service life components there, too?

 

Or wait, let's start simulating worn out engine components, too! That would really enrich gameplay, wouldn't you say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I suppose you would also want missiles' rocket engines arbitrarily fail to fire because DCS should simulate end of service life components there, too?

 

Or wait, let's start simulating worn out engine components, too! That would really enrich gameplay, wouldn't you say?

Why not?

 

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started the thread because I have fired plenty of A2G Strafe IRL and I have never seen any gun fire with anything close to the dispersion demonstrated in the F18 old or new gun.

 

 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3

Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1.

 

GTX 1080 Has its uses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good information! I changed the Da0 for the M61 and I could finally hit and destroy a BTR-80 APC. And it works for A/A as well.

I doubt that there are any good reasons for the 22 mils.

 

Where is shell_table.lua? File searched my DCS install, then the entire computer and I don't have a file with that name.

i7 7700K @5.0, 1080Ti, 32GB DDR4, HMD Odyssey, TM WH, Crosswind Rudder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
And I suppose you would also want missiles' rocket engines arbitrarily fail to fire because DCS should simulate end of service life components there, too?

 

Or wait, let's start simulating worn out engine components, too! That would really enrich gameplay, wouldn't you say?

 

Yeah actually I would say that, this is a simulator, if it better simulates real life I'm all in favor. Missiles failing, service life, reliability are all massive factors in real air combat, why shouldn't it be in a sim as well? Besides an 8mil 90% gun (probably a value of .0010 or something) would still be a very usable accuracy and massive improvement over the current (.0022).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Tried changing that for testing purposes and it totally changes the world, in other words: The gun has a use in AG then and does it's job as you'd expect it. I hope they'll throw in a reasonable change in one of the future updates as it's really just a matter of seconds to change this, though it needs testing afterwards - but that's what we're here for having bought the early access product after all dealwithit.png

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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