Plz stop!!! I surrender!!!
truely pathetic
imagine you have to cope like that because you dont even have any valid arguments
still waiting on valid arguments or critisim on how the report should have looked
Imagine - thinking that you be worth my time 😂😂😂
apparently thinking isnt worth your time
imagine not having an argument so you half to insult me instead truly mature behavior
1 Like
Seriously - plz stop, my stomach starts to hurt 😂😂😂😂
man never seen ragebait this bad
and you seem to invest quite alot of time into this despite me not being woth it
all you gonna achive is that this thread is going to be locked down becasue it is off topic
1 Like
Yeah I tried playing the Bf 104 F-4 recently and it was quite awful how the guns do no damage.
its all intendet - on top of that you have the worst flight models → fw190 flys worser than medium bombers and the garbage bf109 can only climb.
3 Likes
Yea no, the 109s are great.
It’s definitely something how the 190s fly, but its by no means unuseable
2 Likes
I know I’m going to sound like a contrarian here but I’m having no issues with the MG-151 in SB. I’ve got footage I can share if you’d like of my 1x 20mm cannon dissecting a B-17 in a single pass and tearing the wing clean off of a P-47 in a short burst.
What we need to do at all costs is avoid what the MG-151 cannon was before. Something that 1-tapped (literally 1 round) bomber tails clean off and microscopic snapshots would blast off your entire wing. That was completely unrealistic and it makes you wonder why Germany invested in the 30mm cannons when 1x20mm could eviscerate anything in front of it.
I can’t find a direct source but it’s mentioned quite a bit online that apparently the British and the French tested minengeschoss rounds and determined that it did less damage than thick walled rounds like the Hispano due to the thicker walls causing more widespread damage than the explosion of the mine rounds and reasonably weak secondary damage due to the thin walls of the shell.
To be fair if you watch German gun cam footage I don’t think I’ve ever seen a wing get sawed off. You certainly see chunks getting ripped off but nothing like we saw in War Thunder before the mine rounds were “nerfed”.
I wonder if to an extent some of the issues are with the instructor being a bit too good at compensating for battle damage.
2 Likes
However, we should not artificially nerf them. The American AN/M2 and the Russian ShVAK, needless to say, have very straight and stable trajectories.
Considering that the Allied officials had a good opinion of the MG151/20’s machine gun after the war and that the French continued to use it for decades after the war.
if the MG151/20’s performance in the game is accurate, there is no reason for them to continue using the MG151/20 with its spray-like bullet dispersion, raindrop-like ballistics, and inability to properly damage even lightly armored fighters.
And it is difficult to kill a large bomber like the B-17 with a single shot even if you bring a large caliber 30mm cannons like the MK108 or MK103 instead of a 20mm machine gun like the MG151/20 or Hispano.
Axis nor the Allies included AP shells in the fighter machine gun belt configuration.
The purpose of HE rounds crushing off the outer skin of a bomber is to puncture the bomber’s skin, reducing its overall durability and increasing drag to slow it down, but SAPHEI and APHE rounds can penetrate the armor of a bomber and destroy the internal crew and airframe, splitting the bomber in two as you say.
However, this could not be achieved with one or two shots, and dozens to hundreds of shots had to be fired.
The reason Germany created extremely large caliber cannons like the MK214 and MK112 cannon at the end of WW II was to split the bomber in half with a single-twice shot.
In the game, all 20mm machine guns except the MG151/20 are overrated and the bomber’s durability is underrated.
1 Like
It is not really contradicting - your engagement ranges in SB are just way closer to reality and you fire from much shorter distances, that’s all.
So the mortar like ballistics and the totally absent long range kill ability (>800 meters) is bothering most RB players. The low damage output is imho just annoying as you need way more gun time and hits than with ShVaks, Type 99s or Hispanos.
I use currently just the 410 and the SM 92 (2 center mounted cannons) with MG 151/20 mine shells - so the lower damage output plays not a decisive role if at least 2 shells hits their targets in BnZ attacks and/or high angle deflection shots.
This is happening right now in Air RB - with 20mm ShVaks, Type 99s or Hispanos. It works also with the JP 12.7 mm with HE.
One tapping bombers is a damage model issue and not related to mine shells.
The goal of larger cannons was to reduce the number of necessary hits AND being less exposed to return fire due to high kill probability in one determined pass.
The UK had after the BoB no real threat by daylight bomber fleets but lost more than 8.000 night bombers to mine shells and flak - and France was irrelevant in WW 2 - at least regarding aerial warfare after May 1940 & aircraft research.
1 Like
I do agree in general.
But: You can’t even accuse gaijin for actively nerfing the weapon as technically seen gaijin just added imho realistic ballistics for irl combat ranges (400-100 meters) to the 151/20 mineshells. As a side effect all other HE cannon shells have superior ballistics and are way easier to use.
The comparably low damage output is part of a massive upgrade of all other 20 mms (=Real Shatter 2.0 & 3.0) whilst they “forgot” to update the 151/20 mine shells.
But - if you have a closer look at how the game is played by most players the way better ballistics of non-MG 151/20 cannons give them a significant advantage.
I use occasionally the 20 mm ShVak in the I-185 - long range kills of 1.2 km or more (if chasing an enemy) are possible without any efforts - impossible with the MG 151/20.
Exactly 👍
2 Likes
Luftwaffe logistics officeres calculated how many 20mm Mineshells were needed in average to down an allied strategic bomber. In the old forum this was posted several times. There are figures for every attack direction. From the rear it was like 8 shells in average. Frontal attack were like 4 or 6. Hard to remember. But the numbers were like this. Mineshells were extremly potent, due to their huge filler compared to other ammunition types. And the very thin walls of the ammo had much better fragmentation than thick walled 20mm shells which much less filler.
2 Likes
I also have a reference like that from a book about aircraft ammo. But the test was about hitting fuel tanks in bombers.
That’s like saying HE is worse than AP when it comes to defeat armor plates or damage engines.
Each shell type has a specific use case in which it will outperform another type.
20mm Mineshells have enough blast damage to take down fighters in a few hits to their wings, which also represents the biggest target, but are less effective in taking down large bombers, compared to simply targeting their large fuel tanks with regular explosive ammunition.
That’s why 30mm Mineshells and 20mm Incendiary shells become necessary.
The idea of Mineshells is to have a shell that on average is going to take down a plane in least amount of hits, by making the entire plane a target and dealing high damage to the structure.
An AP round might kill an engine or pilot in one shot but to do that you also need to hit them, which then requires a large number of hits to accomplish.
2 Likes
Never seen one that included attack direction.
But I have a 1945 document which puts the number of 20mm Mineshells at 20 and 30mm Mineshells at 5.
Because Mineshells can damage the vast majority of the plane, it makes it much easier to estimate the average number of hits required to down a plane.
A single 20mm Incendiary might bring down a B-17 when it causes a lethal fuel fire but for that to happen you not only need to hit a fuel tank but also probably at the right distance and angle.
For attacking bombers, late war MG 151/20 belts were a 1:1:1 mix of HEI, Inc and API.
So landing 20 Mineshell hits was obviously not the goal.
Instead each shell had a chance to inflict some more some less lethal damage to bomber during an attack.
Instead of bringing down a bomber in a single attack, it was good enough to inflict enough damage that would prevent it from returning to base, or cause it to get seperated from a formation.
A B-17 might fly on just two working engine, but that doesn’t mean it will make it back savely when it has also damage to controls and fuel leaks.
2 Likes
MG151/20 could be buffed in hitpower terms if they don’t wanna change it’s code, since that formula generates a more realistic amount of fragments anyways compared to 3-5 in realshatter.
But there are changes that could’ve be made in realshatter that also would make it more reliable and logical for both 20mm and especially higher calibers. It uses a very defaulty value for all guns… which makes no sense.
1 Like
It’s the only cannon round in game still not using real shatter it’s been that way since real shatter was introduced a while ago
There’s been atleast 7 reports spanning a long time and nothings changed
1
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/oggFsAIR7vIy
2
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/85QAfcqUV5Tp
3
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/fsQsRgkWZkcc
4
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/JHLRBn18SIlR
4 Likes
Just some math Btw
SHVAK cannons ingame have 4 grams of explosive mass in there HE rounds
MG-151 Mineshcobe rounds have 18grams and do less damage in protection analysis which doesnt make sense
shvaks use TETRYL and MG151s use HA-41 which HA-41 is more powerfull then tetryl when i comes to explosive power per gram
hispanos also use Tetryl and have higher amount at 6.4Grams
the RE or (relative effectivness factor) is 1.0 RE for Tetryl which is equal to TNT at 1.0 RE
HA-41 has a RE of 1.4
ballistics arent the problem as the MG151 fires HEI at 785 m/s and shvak shoots HEF at 800m/s a difference of 15m/s which is very small this would only increase armor penetration which doesnt matter on planes as all aircraft skin is 1mm thick
18GRAMS of HA-41 is equal to 21-23 grams of TNT
4.13 GRAMS of A-IX-2 is equal to 6 GRAMS OF TNT
6 grams of tetryl is 7.08 grams of TNT
3 Likes