They said the standard M1 Inc could withstand the “cook-off” test, while the lead core version of it failed in the test.
Could it be that the Tetryl caused the failure? The explosive said to be ignited above 180 degree C.
1 Like
Must be the case 🤔
No wait, it says the round has a detonator.
Maybe that’s the issue.
Detonators are generally more sensitive than the explosive they carry.
Which makes me wonder, if the Berezin UB had the same problems with its explosive ammunition.
Bullets in copper jackets are much better at conducting heat than steel shells 🤔
So that tubular dowel in the M1 probably also served as a layer of insulation, which the M23 lacked.
On the other hand the Soviet MDZ also has a steel tube on the inside.
So probably no issues with self-ignition.
1 Like
It completely slipped away from me that I have to substract the projectile mass from the whole cartridge weight. Ki-44’s guns + spent cartridge + belt weight is 120kg, not 140kg. Not much of a difference though. I don’t think gaijin cares about the cartridge weight in the first place, though.
I was thinking back to this… shouldn’t it be the other way around? With a 4-blade prop, the synchronizer would try to fire the guns more often as it’d have more ‘gaps’ to do so, while with a 2-blade prop it’d be only twice per rotation - half as often.
I’m not sure about that.
Someone?
As far as the Ki-84 is concerned, the synchronized gun firing timing appears to be twice per propeller revolution.
The above figure shows the “Synchronous Cam Advancement Device” of the Ki-84.
The cam mountains are depicted in two.
This is only the case for the Ki-84 and does not apply to other 4-blade airframes.
It is not definite that there are two cam mountains with two blades, and with three blades, there will either be one or three cam mountains.
The answer is “it depends on the aircraft”.
Well, it doesn’t matter that much since the speed of the propeller is often much higher than the gun’s rate of fire to begin with.
In the case of the Ki-84, a reduction ratio of 0.5 for 3000 rpm results in 1500 rpm; in the case of the Ki-44-II, a reduction ratio of 0.6875 for 2650 rpm results in 1822 rpm.
7 Likes
That’s an insightful diagram. Thanks for the very detailed explanations.
had to fight on in a p38E. Needless to say i got absolutely trashed, nothing i could do, nothing.
Best bet is to drag them high where their engine power diminishes. Other than that, yeah you’re screwed, they out speed you in SL. RIP
I was screwed yes, i was the only guy left, vs… this guy… who job it is to fly ki44 it seems… StatShark - See All Player, Missile, and Vehicle Statistics
so, yes, i had ZERO chance of winning or killing him, he also had full team around him, very bad situation D:
But really the P38 is trash, pure garbage, regret flying it, it is good FOR NOTHING.
Interesting that the A6M2 (slightly!) outkills it, but Japan 3.7 in general is just super strong.
well now i know what i will use to progress through japan tree haha
The P-38E is kinda mid, but the G is a free kill machine. It’s almost impossible to do poorly in it.
i dont really want to fly more p38’s for the moment, maybe later, im much more interested in the different corsairs, at least you have fighting chance wtih them
You do you, but the P-38G and later all offer the best chances at good results.
1 Like
oh i will try later but right now i just never want to fly a p38 again, its so awkward to fly…
Checked his stats and it seems more like you got into an unfortunate battle against a statpadder.
Chin up man.
1 Like
P-38L is good to try, also the P-38K but this thing is so rare.
i think he had like +1000 kills in the ki 44 like XD idek statpadding was a thing too, why play the same vehicles over and over again hah
at least now I have a new plane to fly on my list!
i will give them try later on but for now im tired of p38’s, maybe in a few weeks when I want to refresh and try something new, i saw p38L gets boosted ailerons, so its probably more nimble
I don’t know if it is possible in air RB, but you should be able to significantly speed up roll rates using rudder.
With joystick controls (including Simple and Realistic with autotrim and all that), you put the stick in a “4/8 o’clock position” (ergo - maximum roll, slight pitch up) and stomp the rudder in the same direction to put yourself into a controlled “snap roll.” This bleeds energy (you’re intentionally slipping/skidding) and has risk of losing control/spinning out, but it allows for insane roll rates if you manage to be confident in controlling it.
I think with mouse aim just doing stuff like concurrently Q+A or E+D while lightly tapping S should replicate it? Instructor might not let you do it. If it does, it’s very important to go easy on the elevator because the way this maneuver works is to more or less intentionally stall your “inner” wing and if you pull too hard it develops into a very violent spin.
For comparison, in the Yak-9k the impact is insane:
I go from ~120 deg/s roll rate (zero rudder input, unloaded roll (I’m at ~1G or less) to 180 deg/s roll rate (using the above described 4’o clock/8’o clock + rudder stomp. The 140 deg/s was me failing to pull it off). To note though, this does rely on whether you roll left or right if using a control mode without autotrim (as prop torque adds roll rate)(you can see how negative roll rate seems lower (~100 deg/s) compared to positive (120 deg/s).
When I have time I’ll measure with my P-38G in test flight too.