The gun was also used in ground mounts. The M2 is basically the exact same gun. I would be willing to bet the same firing table would be found in the 1945 M2 manual since the clearing procedure is basically describing the exact same thing.
Be my guest to prove me wrong
1940 Aircraft gun manual:
So 75 is actually the longest burst allowed to be fired, while burst of 100 or 150 heat up the gun so much that you aren’t even allowed to fire it again before it cooled down.
Which checks out with the Fighter Gunnery manual from 1945.
Most likely everything above the maximum burst lenght stated heats up the barrel so much that bullets start to keyhole and then they fly all over the place. Or you end up with other mulfunctions.
3 Likes
Training guidelines doesn’t mean the gun self destructs. These conditions are likely not taking into account cooling from being flown at high speed either. Examining gun cam footage will show these guidelines being routinely violated and longer bursts being used.
Also not likely either. If cooking off over long bursts from aircraft mounted guns was such an issue then you would see it manifest in gun camera footage. The firing schedule in the training manual is just very conservative.
And we have split air and ground BRs.
J7W? nimble?? SMALL???
How do you know? Are you going around firing single shots?
Indeed, it was not fine… RealShatter “1.0” allowed you to make huge mistakes and get away with it.
The earliest mention I can find of it was in March 2023. So there was at least one BR change rotation (those are every 3-4 months).
VS first iteration of RealShatter where I was watching a fireworks show on the enemy plane while their damage display turned a subtle yellow? Again, no thanks.
You can say whatever you want. But the Ta 152 H is over twice as heavy. This is a stupid analogy anyway.
Which coincidentally pretty much only buffs germany hugely since they maximized HE filler at the cost of fragmentation potential, while everyone else is mostly on par with each other? And coincidentally, you too have your most played aircrafts be… GERMAN!?
This thread has a very noticeable pattern.
Tei is 4.3 because an armor plate was fitted over the engine to protect it from prematurely-detonating shells due to faulty fuses, adding even more weight.
For just a 15mm that’s still a lot of damage, and this is just one hit. Two guns will turn this entire plane black in the blink of an eye, and they’ll match much better with the MK103.
So yes, you should use the 15mm guns.
And did I ever say I wanted that?
It is not stupid, it is the exact same stuff that occurs with a round with over 29.76g is powercrept by a round with 6.05g.
The fact that it is actually harder to find out an aircraft’s mass is harder because you have to either leave WT and visit the wiki/open the laggy wiki from WT, look for your nation, look for your aircraft from an entire tree and then scroll down to look at wing loading, mass and a lot of stuff.
VS
Click “Armor”
Click “protection Analysis”
Click “Shell”
hover over the shell you want to see
One info is a lot more streamlined to find, but we should ignore because Mr. Cap here can’t do that
Tells me the dude who mostly play Japanese props, whose 20mils should be the weakest
hypocrite
Tell the people who mostly populate J7W1 and A6M thread are? Japan players, Do I blame them? No, they are being screwed over.
So you better don’t judge when a germany player comes here because that extra filler came with the cost of ballistics and fragmentation. Because they are paying the price for an upside that was made redundant by being given away for everybody
So where can you stop when someone want to take away the A6M’s turnrate? I already said said info is harder to find.
Also benefits Italy, France (post WW2 props), Finland, and in the Ki-61-I example, JAPAN.
What about Ki-61-I hei hien then? It can go fuck itself doesn’t it? Because “Im to lazy to check a number”, You skipped my point entirely.
Sure next time we’ll remove ballistics differences and belts, full 100% he belts and ballistics from the AP round of the Bk 5, because it is too obsure to find them!
Now suddently fragmentation is ok for you? But I DARE to propose fragmentation instead of structural damage for differentiate Mine rounds from regular fragmentation rounds and 20mm from +30mm rounds and im the enemy of the state of Dumbasskistan.
1 Like
Yes, compared to other cannon CAS planes, like Do-335B2, AD-4, AM-1, Me-262 A1/U4 and even F4U4B etc. etc.
It’s small in general.
Yes.
RealShatter 1.0 was broken.
15mm currently sucks and 20mm works way better vs ground and aircraft.
You don’t need another gun going where Mk103 goes, because Mk103 ALREADY GOES THERE,
2 Likes
This thread was created during Realshatter 1.0…you guys have been complaining about excessive damage since 1.0 and every iteration of it since.
So Percu, instead of twisting the entire core game mechanic in your favour, try to work BRs ok?
Because at this moment you look like you have a grugde for BR placement work on Japan and trying to justify your BR’s instead of trying to move them down.
I try and help every nation as much as possible, even USSR when in reality they take crowns in a lot of aspects.
That’s the proof, making up an new and easy to implement system to help ALL overtiered stuff.
(It was a separate topic but was moved into the Balance thread by Stona.)
And even the OP is saying german 20mils (the 20mil with most amount of explosive filler per round) are packing a lot more than they should.
1 Like
Yes.
So cannons were overperforming during real shatter 1.0 and the same people wanted to nerf them to below that level of damage. Them insisting that they now don’t want damage worse than it’s ever been in the game are lying and engaging in revisionism.
This system you are proposing basically means that people who play multiple game modes are not factored into the statistics. That’s an extremely flawed approach to start with; it is possible to play more than one type of vehicle and be good at any of them.
It also doesn’t change the fact that making a wider variation in gun damage will still cause the average player to perform significantly worse in basically the same ways that causes certain planes to move up or move down in BR.
Ok so tell us which one of these has more, and which has less filler
That’s cute. My most played are still german. But somehow I’m not under the belief that only german guns deserve to do good damage, despite also having some of the lightest HE shells.
…Fragmentation which is also not any worse than shells much heavier than it? The only real downside is ballistics (a one-sided change, I’ll give you that), but it’s not like german guns are struggling at all. MG151s still have great damage, placement, and magazine depth. Even MG FF/Ms hit like trucks.
Stats-wise, both TT and premium models are doing better than Ki-61-II (and that one better than Tei model). So clearly the MG151s are doing much better than Ho-5s if they can uplift that sad excuse of a 4.7.
And I told you that’s the legacy damage system, and it would change nothing because instead of wings or tails falling off, most of your plane will be turned black, set on fire, and the pilot likely killed. Either way the one getting shot at is going down.
Do me a favor and sort these by caliber in ascending order. If what you say is right, it’ll be impossible since there is no differentiation!
Corsair is longer and has a LOT more wing area. A single hit to the wingtip is enough to make the J7W unflyable.
You shoot someone, their whole plane is damaged and very likely set on fire.
You do because MK103 has like 500rpm and is just one gun.
Sucks so much I hit my enemies a couple times and their pilot dies because the fragmentation range is huge, even though I hit that last A-36 all the way back on the tail! That’s no exaggeration, everyone I shot at died because their pilot died, even the AI IL-2s.
Hit Analysis only saved a 7.92 AP-T hit, but it shows his condition shortly before dying:
This is what “sucking” looks like apparently. I’ll take ten, thanks.
How is it in my favor? I already have some of the most heavily-armed fighters in the game, and even before the cannon buffs/after the nerfs they still did great in that regard. This is for everyone’s sake.
As would anyone playing it. But it’s not so bad, their aggressive playstyle is my favorite.
That’s a lot of effort when you could just normalize each plane’s player statistics to the players flying them. So if you have a gigachad player doing extremely well in an Re 2005, it will be detected as normal, if not below average for that player. Likewise if you have timmy in the XP-50/Yak3/Pyorremyrsky doing badly, that’s just normal for him, so he won’t be contributing to an unfairly low BR.
Yeah, light because of what?maybe Extra explosives? Yohoo, almost there!
Other rounds are heavier because they had thicker cases and a lot more inertia, which allowed better ballistics and indirectly helped create decent fragmentation.
german Mine rounds tried to pack a lot more filler, which resulted in a more thin case, a lot less mass to keep inertia and poor fragmentation, which was done in favour on an extra powerful blast.
Would be translated as the current extra focused damage of today, while most 20mm would see spread out damage, case and point mg151/15 and mg151/20 FI-T.
But we don’t see that, only concentrated damage, fragmentation only manifest itself on 30mm and up calibers.
And does that look like an almost x4 difference or only a x1.2 difference? Both fragmentate the same, when in reality the bottom panel should be for the mg151/20, yes, that’s as much damage I want it to make.
Because mg151/20, even with extra filler is no wonder weapon.
The stats? the sames one telling me F8F-1 and P-47 D-28 deserves to be below Ki-61-I?
Spoiler
Don’t use stats, except in extremes cases like the BI-1, they most often than not end with one finding a bullet lodged on it’s foot, that’s why I avoid to use them. Trust me
I want you to fly both personally and compare them, if you don’t simply come with a false testimony of who was better.
By mostly the weakest 20mil in terms of explosive filler, which I repeat, instead of fragmentation, creates structural damage.
Now RPM matter to you? when you shot down my argument of 30mm recieving a negative in the firerate department? Because 20mils weren’t “so far ahead”.
It was proof I tried, unlike you who just decided to throw shit at germany mains for wanting a just difference of TNT filler.
also I included that in order to enter a premium vehicle’s “sample population” you needed have already have a TT vehicle rank above it in the same nation. maybe that’s more proof you barely try to read stuff, including shell stat cards.
In all cases the wing completely snapped. In fact, why use 30mils if they lose on ammo pool, firerate and sometimes even ballistics?
15mm requires focused fire, unlike the one/two-tap nature of cannons, it simply becomes obsolete
Let me clarify, I DO NOT WANT mg151/20 becoming one shotter and make every other 20mil complete ass.
.
It’s simple, the less TNT equivalent per caliber a cannon has, the more fragmentation oriented it becomes and the less structural damage it deals to stuff like spars and hopefully tail spars. This will be able to help simulate thicker cases.
The opposite will be true, mg151/20 (sorry for callin it so much, but it the literal exception) will have a concentrated structural damage with almost no “splash”, similar to today, but toned down. This will simulate the super thin case of these special rounds.
Side effect will include stuff like 23mil NS-23, because it has as much filler as the mg151/20, but comes with a thicker case, it would make a nice amount of structural and fragmentation damage, best of both worlds. And make it more desireable over the ShVAK or B-20, since NS-23 does come with a worse firerate and ammo quantity, since it only wins on explosive filler (redundant past 5g) and ballistics.
Yak-9T would see a considerable reason to be 4.0 apart from “Can kill tank”, since it would become an vastly more reliable one-shotter compared to the Yak-9 at 3.0.
Type 5 would recieve another upside, over simply just “better ballistics” and “99% chance of oneshot compared to usual 90%”
Planes with +3 20mils would benefit a lot too, since now they do make a difference apart from “accuracy by volume” they see now, There will be module health left for the extra 20mils to see use. case and point Yak-3 vs Yak-3P, J2M2 and J2M3/J2M5, Ki-84 Ko /Otsu.
Or simply differences in cannons swaps like ShVAK and B-20, ho-5 and mg151/20, AN/M2 and M3 and hispano MK.II and Mk.V, since firerate now can been as a visible difference in Kill time unlike now that it is simply “more lead for the headon/+800 snipe”.
It is a question to make room for other calibers and variable and allow extra depth and differentiation of aircraft armament to even aspects as firerates differences found above 700.
1 Like
Do this “test” 20 times on video. Real sh*tter allows for huge variety in damage, due to fragments dispersion and point of contact.
Also, I regularly 1-shot people with Shvak/Type 99 Mk2. How can you do more damage to a wing that rip it off in 1 hit? For practical purposes, there’s barely amy difference, MG151/20 requires more time on target than Shvak due to belt composition and ROF, the “power” advantage is theoretical, and maybe not even that, as your “test” is just dishonest.
Whatever, ace. I guess I have no experience playing this game. Oh well :(
Meanwhile, 15mm still sucks and requires a ton more clobbering than viable, especially with Do-335 which will lose a dogfight even to enemy shot several times. Hence 20mm is a way better choice, as 2.of those in the nose 1-shot people and hit when you overlead with MK103.
If you can’t hit with 450 RPM, tough shit, it requires keeping guns on target for like what, 130ms?
I score around 70% of my kills with 103 on A0, but around 85% with 103 on A1.
2 Likes
OK, I’ll give you that, vs wingroot there’s SOME difference.
I’ll give you that. Wingroot damage is non fatal in both cases, but MG151/20 will make maneuvering harder.
Vs any other part of wing, it’s just gone, so no difference.
But below the “different caliber” shots show really hilariousl small difference in damage.
If pilot did not get randomly taken out in one, the damage otherwise would not be practically much different from the others.
Now lets see the damage difference.
108g TNT vs 13g TNT.
550g shell vs 290g shell.
OH LOOK AT THIS SHIT.
8 times more TNT surely has translated into something substantial LMAO.
The idea 13g TNT completely wrecks 7 ton aircraft’s wing is pretty hilarious, not gonna lie.
Now, Shvak, 10 shots:
2 Likes
Shvak 10 shots:
MG151/20, 10 shots:
Did I aim at the exact same pixel?
No idea.
More testing to commence.
5 MG151/20:
5 Shvak:
Where’s the difference?
However, 5 Hoe-5:
Hoe-5 kinda sucks compared to Shvak. GJ Gaijin.
Everything but Hoe-5 deals basically the same damage:
The final verdict:
every 20mm HE shell that is not HEFI deals exact sam damage, actually I think FI-T deals more damage than HEI. HEFI with less than 10g filler deals lower damage. HEFI over 10g is basically the same as HEI.
3 Likes
I think I had a dream where explosive shells weren’t breaking planes apart but caused more realistic fragmentation. lol
Or maybe I was just thinking about it before I fell asleep 😂
4 Likes
Amyway, it seems that FI-T is a much better type of shell than HEFI. Even modern 16g TNT eq HEFI oftentimes scores only red.
Meanwhile FI-T at 6g TNT does just as well as HEI at 29g. HEF and HEF-T work basically the same regardless of explosive content as shown by Type 99 Mk 2 shots.
Also 25mm FI-at with 13g TNT basically performs the same as 37mm HEI with 108g.
In other words:
- explosive content has very small impact on damage
- only shell type and “class” have any real meaning, wirh 25mm being in the same “class” as 37mm, and being FI-T, thus dealing roughly same damage, because FI-T advantage over HEI basically can almost outweight 8 times bigger explosive charge
3 Likes
There was a time when ShVAK FI-T dealt more direct structual damage than Hispano shells but the Hispano shells created more fragments and damaged components in a wider area.
So on one hand the Hispano dealt more damage overall but on another the ShVAK damage was just preferable, when landing one shell on a wing can mean the plane is dead.
I suspect it’s just Gaijins damage slider. Or maybe their system changes how the shell behaves based on a filler/weight ratio.
Since Hispano shells are heavier, have more explosive content but have a slightly higher filler/weight ratio.
Yeah, probably just a broken damage system. Where shells with high weight but low explosive content deal very high structural damage, since the damage is only related to the fragments.
This also makes Ahead ammo break planes appart instead of damaging the internal components.
Since there are far too few sub-projectiles released to make them reliabe otherwise.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/7Sv1Ra7FSzh3
While against ground targets the opposite is the case. Now blast perfromance makes the shells more deadly because fragmentation performance is so poor that you need to rely on the ground based blast damage sphere, that can also damage open top crews behind armor.
So Mineshellls are more effective in killing ground vehicles than in killing planes, which they were designed to kill.
2 Likes