Jump to content

3cm Mk108 in new dmg model


Recommended Posts

So the table and the cropped text afterwards say that 1 round in the wing will be lethal, but it might take 3 to the fuselage of a Spit to bring it down.

 

What'ever led you to that conclusion??

 

As the report says of the 10 shots fired 3 were immediately lethal whilst the rest were probably lethal, as in "not likely you're flying this one home". Hence why the final conclusion was that it would on average take just one hit anywhere to down a Spitfire with the Mk108.

 

You're just not flying home with this type of damage man:

 

cKwdwqH.jpg

FIltzEX.jpg

6LjgTqf.jpg

QaIq0i7.jpg

ffKKSTt.jpg

jjcIZmT.jpg


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we get some CloD-level damage graphics so we can see the spars and longerons beneath the skin when it's blown away, that'd be cool.

 

Could have the internal parts 3D modeled and textured, but have it blocked out similar to how the current DM is, to que different sections of the internal model. When skin is blown away, the internal model for that section called up. This way it'll optimize performance a bit, so the computer won't always render the normal plane AND the internal model that you won't see anyways.

Cool idea anyways

 

Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

Hardware: T-16000M Pack, Saitek 3 Throttle Quadrant, Homemade 32-function Leo Bodnar Button Box, MFG Crosswind Pedals Oculus Rift S

System Specs: MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS, GTX 1070 SC2, AMD RX3700, 32GB DDR4-3200, Samsung 860 EVO, Samsung 970 EVO 250GB

Modules: Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, FC3, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-5E, P-51D, Spitfire Mk LF Mk. IXc, Bf-109K-4, Fw-190A-8

Maps: Normandy, Nevada

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
The British tested from all sorts of angles (the on in the video was from 30 deg from the back), the result was always the same, 1 hit was fatal.

 

Also keep in mind that ground testing doesn't reflect the extra damage subsequent aerodynamic forces will cause.

 

Really there is zero proof thus far that a Spitfire could survive more than one 30mm hit to the fuselage or wing, like litterally zero. A P-51 shouldn't fair much better either.

 

I mean the it would cut even a small bomber in half:

image%20we%20have%20all%20seen%206001%20times

 

SO why didn't the immediately swap out all guns for cannons, have you asked yourself this?

 

At any rate, I am pretty happy with cannons vs the new DM right now. If you want your aircraft to explode on hit of 1 cannon round no matter where it can be easily done in the Mission Editor.

 

Anyways, here was a good example when it made sense, 190 went vertical and I followed as he stalled at the top of his climb and started to come back down I squeezed off one cannon round into his belly. I didn't have the damage log open at the time, but the aircraft was spent, most if not all controls gone, fuel and engine fire, etc.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=242425&stc=1&d=1594704241

Screen_200619_215247.thumb.png.3b3591d9398b8533342f21aa3d08a6a3.png

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

 

You're just not flying home with this type of damage man:

 

more%20images%20that%20have%20already%20been%20posted

 

P-47 says "hold my beer"

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=242426&stc=1&d=1594705245

 

A_Brazilian_fighter_plane_damaged_by_German_flak_WWII.jpg

 

Maybe the last one isn't fair, it got in a fight with a church or a chimney I believe.

95223290_41-6620-LtFoster-1.jpg.ab0f2e3ba50c19855e08dffe54cc5e1d.jpg


Edited by NineLine

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO why didn't the immediately swap out all guns for cannons, have you asked yourself this?

 

Who, where, when?

 

If you're talking why didn't the British just switch to cannon, they were already in the process of doing so, but you can't just do so from 1 day to the next during wartime without upsetting logisitics. Besides the Allies weren't worried about armament capable of quickly taking down a bomber as they hardly ever faced bombers, this was more of a German concern, hence they were quick to employ the Mk108 in number.

 

Also the Mk108 heavily influenced the decision todesign the ADEN cannon which was constructed as a consequence of the demonstrated effectiveness of German 3cm cannon shells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P-47 says "hold my beer"

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=242426&stc=1&d=1594705245

 

A_Brazilian_fighter_plane_damaged_by_German_flak_WWII.jpg

 

Maybe the last one isn't fair, it got in a fight with a church or a chimney I believe.

 

1) Not even remotely the same damage as inflicted to the Spitfire, main spar still completely intact. (Also why is the prop bent? Crashed?)

 

2) 2nd photo is not actually that severe damage, just the tip of the wing

 

FcD52q7.jpg


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not severe? Ok this is just another Hummingbird trap ;)

 

Trap? Mate the main spar isn't damaged, hence there's nothing preventing the aircraft from flying on. The extent of the damage is a lost flap, and by the looks of it due to a hit by AA, maybe a 3.7cm APHE round, we don't know.

 

 

By contrast the damage to the Spitfire is fatal, and we know this not just by observation (main spar all trashed, i.e. wing will collapse), but because the British report says so.

 

 

Really you're arguing against real world findings here, not me. So if you don't believe the British, German & US conclusions in regards to the average effect of Mk108 hit then just say so. I just hope the devs don't share that view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

How am I arguing against real-world findings? I am saying the cannon rounds with the new DM are most times critical damage, as in bail out you are not flying home. How is that against any of your "findings" I mean you really try too hard to pick a fight.

 

All I said was those tests done were perfected shots with no chance of miss, they know what they were aiming for, and they were not going to miss, and THEN, you contradict yourself, as you say that a cannon round means a destroyed plane, yet a cannon round could do similar damage to that chimney collision, and they still made it home... a B-17 was almost cut in half from a collision, still made it home, a B-17 had its cockpit almost removed, still made it home. SO which is it? Could a cannon it the right place that an aircraft could survive? Or is it a guaranteed kill. Pick a lane.

 

Nothing in life is a 100% guarantee unless your idea of combat is being parked in a field and shooting a cannon at me. I'm sorry, but I don't think you know what you are fighting for. SO its best you just wait for the DM to come along, then you can park a Spit in a field and shoot at it. Then try landing those rounds on a superior pilot in combat, or on a Bomber with swarms of escorts on your backside.

 

Will the DM look like those pictures, no, computers and the DM have not come so far to model every fragment of the aircraft to a 1 to 1 hit visually for every round (although it is being researched), but the internal damage under the hood, the results of a canon round will most definitely be witnessed, and you will want to get out of that plane if you are still able to.

 

PS, yes, that was severe damage on that aircraft, and the event of hitting something that could rip off that amount of the wing to take it almost to the gear, and then keep it under control, and get it home is an amazing feat, and sort of sad to downplay that at all. I mean you can look at that picture and see what you think, but you don't know what was done to that plane structurally or what other damaged that cause in that event, it wasn't taken off with a laser, it was taken off with a chimney. But again... I am not sure what you are arguing about, if what I have shown isn't good enough then again, killing an aircraft dead with one or two cannon rounds, wait and see.


Edited by NineLine

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NineLine

 

I find it odd that you think I am trying to pick a fight when it was you who effectively challenged my statements with:

 

1) "Those were perfectly placed shots in ground testing"

2) "SO why didn't the immediately swap out all guns for cannons, have you asked yourself this?"

3) "P-47 says hold my beer" *posts random pictures of damaged P-47s*

 

In effect those three things is you insinuating that it would be rare for a Spitfire or P-47 to go down due to a single hit by a Mk108 in actual combat, which is completely the opposite of the conclusions drawn by the RAE after testing, and in contrast to what I said, i.e.:

"Indeed' date=' and I think a P-47 would be very lucky to make it back home if hit by a single 3cm HE(M) shell, 2 hits I almost wouldn't believe it could survive and if it did it would only be via extremely careful flight all the way back."[/quote']

 

There's a reason the British chose to test from all sorts of angles and hit locations, they wanted to know how effectiev the weapon actually was. They even tried to see if the shell would skip if they hit the wing at acute angles, which it turned out the shells didn't, they penetrated the skin and tore the wing to shreds regardless.

 

Finally you post this: "Not severe? Ok this is just another Hummingbird trap ;)"

 

You just categorized me as someone who lays down traps and then you think I am trying to pick a fight for responding to that? :P

 

I just don't see it.


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also just to be clear I have at no point criticized the new upcoming DM you posted pictures of.

 

All I've done is state (& shown) what would most likely happen in real life when a fighter got hit by the Mk108, that's it.

 

So if what you say about the new DM is true, that is:

the internal damage under the hood' date=' the results of a canon round will most definitely be witnessed, and you will want to get out of that plane if you are still able to.[/quote']

then you wont hear any complaints from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How am I arguing against real-world findings? I am saying the cannon rounds with the new DM are most times critical damage, as in bail out you are not flying home. How is that against any of your "findings" I mean you really try too hard to pick a fight.

 

All I said was those tests done were perfected shots with no chance of miss, they know what they were aiming for, and they were not going to miss, and THEN, you contradict yourself, as you say that a cannon round means a destroyed plane, yet a cannon round could do similar damage to that chimney collision, and they still made it home... a B-17 was almost cut in half from a collision, still made it home, a B-17 had its cockpit almost removed, still made it home. SO which is it? Could a cannon it the right place that an aircraft could survive? Or is it a guaranteed kill. Pick a lane.

 

Nothing in life is a 100% guarantee unless your idea of combat is being parked in a field and shooting a cannon at me. I'm sorry, but I don't think you know what you are fighting for. SO its best you just wait for the DM to come along, then you can park a Spit in a field and shoot at it. Then try landing those rounds on a superior pilot in combat, or on a Bomber with swarms of escorts on your backside.

 

Will the DM look like those pictures, no, computers and the DM have not come so far to model every fragment of the aircraft to a 1 to 1 hit visually for every round (although it is being researched), but the internal damage under the hood, the results of a canon round will most definitely be witnessed, and you will want to get out of that plane if you are still able to.

 

PS, yes, that was severe damage on that aircraft, and the event of hitting something that could rip off that amount of the wing to take it almost to the gear, and then keep it under control, and get it home is an amazing feat, and sort of sad to downplay that at all. I mean you can look at that picture and see what you think, but you don't know what was done to that plane structurally or what other damaged that cause in that event, it wasn't taken off with a laser, it was taken off with a chimney. But again... I am not sure what you are arguing about, if what I have shown isn't good enough then again, killing an aircraft dead with one or two cannon rounds, wait and see.

 

Remember your words after the new DM will be released. ;)

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hummingbird, i think the point is taken and you are always trying to poke the bear so to speak. How about you read the words that have been written, digest them and also comprehend the xray screenshots. I think the mk108 will do just fine with the new DM. This drama is a waste

Intel 8700k @5ghz, 32gb ram, 1080ti, Rift S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense Hummingbird.

 

You take ANY disagreement with your absolutism to mean we that we adopt a perspective polarised to your own - which is not the case.

 

If you can't understand that in 99% of cases we agree and that the difference being is that we allow for the fact that 1% of the time sh*t happens and sometimes no amount of logical reasoning can account for that errant outcome, then that's your problem.

 

Christ, it's so perverse the desperate validation you crave; it's a game, chum, in case you hadn't noticed, and even if the DM calculations were perfect down to the atomic level you'd still have stuff like your erstwhile target suffering a ping spike that could completely nix your apparently accurate 30mm shot.

 

Grow up and get over yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense Hummingbird.

 

You take ANY disagreement with your absolutism to mean we that we adopt a perspective polarised to your own - which is not the case.

 

If you can't understand that in 99% of cases we agree and that the difference being is that we allow for the fact that 1% of the time sh*t happens and sometimes no amount of logical reasoning can account for that errant outcome, then that's your problem.

 

Christ, it's so perverse the desperate validation you crave; it's a game, chum, in case you hadn't noticed, and even if the DM calculations were perfect down to the atomic level you'd still have stuff like your erstwhile target suffering a ping spike that could completely nix your apparently accurate 30mm shot.

 

Grow up and get over yourself.

 

What in the ???

 

Has it ever occured to you that maybe you were misreading MY posts ?

 

For example: I HAVEN'T SAID THE NEW DM WAS WRONG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember your words after the new DM will be released. ;)

 

Here we go; the "Anti-Jagdwaffe Bias" brigade back again.

 

You need to find a new soap box cos yours - frankly weak and barely able to support you even when new - has collapsed and no-one seems to hear you anymore. If they even were in the first place....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hummingbird, i think the point is taken and you are always trying to poke the bear so to speak. How about you read the words that have been written, digest them and also comprehend the xray screenshots. I think the mk108 will do just fine with the new DM. This drama is a waste

 

Mate, I haven't been criticizing the new DM at any point. I was initially responding to ONE thing NineLine said. He apparently took that as me criticizing the new DM, which I never did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go; the "Anti-Jagdwaffe Bias" brigade back again.

 

You need to find a new soap box cos yours - frankly weak and barely able to support you even when new - has collapsed and no-one seems to hear you anymore. If they even were in the first place....

 

Sorry but you're the one who suddenly seems to be on a crusade to devalue the opinion of those whom you don't agree with here.

 

Next time you tell people to quote "get off their soap box", then notice who it is that is egnaging in ad hominem attacks instead of just keeping it civil by sticking to the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What in the ???

 

Has it ever occured to you that maybe you were misreading MY posts ?

 

For example: I HAVEN'T SAID THE NEW DM WAS WRONG.

 

I agree.

 

But what you have done is fought ON EVERY THREAD where someone suggests that there's no 100% PK weapons out there.

 

You aren't listening. You see measured, philosophical dissent with your black and white analysis and assume we want Allied planes surviving multiple Mk108 hits.

 

What we are saying is that IN REALITY the gross majority of cases 1 hit should bring a Spitfire or Mustang down, but that you simply cannot account for all cases, especially on the basis of one test, and there could exist some chance confluence of factors that in a very small percentage could result in an airframe surviving one albeit in a much crippled state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that many people here don't understand the concepts of statistical significance or standard deviation or normal distribution and yet they base their arguments on null hypothesis or single trial outcomes as depicted in 'one_bomber_came_home_it_means_all_bombers_came_home' type of argument. That's right, learn about them first then try to make valid arguments.

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that many people here don't understand the concepts of statistical significance or standard deviation or normal distribution and yet they base their arguments on null hypothesis or single trial outcomes as depicted in 'one_bomber_came_home_it_means_all_bombers_came_home' type of argument. That's right, learn about them first then try to make valid arguments.

 

:doh:

 

Do you have any concept of the cosmic scale of the hypocrisy you've just committed.

 

My god, it's almost funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

 

But what you have done is fought ON EVERY THREAD where someone suggests that there's no 100% PK weapons out there.

 

You aren't listening. You see measured, philosophical dissent with your black and white analysis and assume we want Allied planes surviving multiple Mk108 hits.

 

What we are saying is that IN REALITY the gross majority of cases 1 hit should bring a Spitfire or Mustang down, but that you simply cannot account for all cases, especially on the basis of one test, and there could exist some chance confluence of factors that in a very small percentage could result in an airframe surviving one albeit in a much crippled state.

 

No Fenrir, anyone who has expressed that opinion (which is identical to my own I might add) I have not ever "fought" or even addressed. I have addressed a comment on the British tests that insinuated it was invalid.

 

If you can't see how saying "it only shows what happens with perfectly placed shots on the ground" comes across as "it rarely happens in combat", then I don't know what to say.

 

And don't misread this as me saying it is easy to make hits with the Mk108 (NineLine apparently thought I meant that), because I know it's damn hard thanks to a 550 m/s MV. In other words: The Mk108 is far from a ideal fighter v fighter weapon. But IF you manage to score that hit, well then obviously you'd expect it to be either fatal or atleast very crippling by far the majority of the time, that is all. In short not a 100% sure kill irrespective of hit placement, ofcourse not, and we obviously don't disagree on that, hence I'm astounded how NineLine & yourself could translate it as such.


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My god, it's almost funny.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Yeah, almost, but it stops being funny when you realise they really believe what they say :doh:.

 

 

Mates, why not just WAIT until you can test yourself before complaining :thumbup: . I mean, we all know you two will complain anyway, but at least we get a break until we actually have the DM to talk about… :music_whistling:

 

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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