One issue with the NS-45 was that there wasn’t any space left in the Yak-9T for a larger barrel.
Which meant the had to use the same barrel thickness as the NS-37 but bored out to 45mm.
Which only left 6mm of barrel thickness, if my memory serves me correctly.
(Edit: It was actually 4mm, compared to 7-8mm of the NS-37)
This was only possible with some new steel alloy but even then you are still left with the problems of a thin barrel:
Fast overheating, which then results in
→ Loss of accuracy for continues fire.
Probably the reason why they mounted 4 in the Su-8.
→
More guns = less shots fired per gun for a specific number of rounds on target.
The NS-45 is a crazy light gun for the caliber after all.
In fact it was even lighter as the NS-37, which makes sense considering the thinner barrel.
I didn’t consider this before but on the Dev server they made the German BK 37 overheat in just 6 shots. But the gun is based on the ground AA gun, which can fire 60-70 shots before overheating.
Compared to the NS-37‘s 160kg, it weighs 450kg and one of the reason is the much thicker barrel, meant for AA work on the ground.
While the NS-37 was a purpose built aircraft gun.
Now the NS-45 not only uses a lighter barrel than even the NS-37, the larger caliber also means that more heat is being transferred per shot.
So while single shots might be accurate, a burst would heat up the barrel very quickly, increasing dispersion.
Combine that with the strong recoil, at least comparable to the NS-37, which in WT has practically no effect on the airframe, and you have a gun that was simply a design failure for any of its intended purposes.
Now even if the NS-45 had all those drawbacks in WT, it would still be effective, simply because mouse aim makes lining up a target so much easier than in RL.