Conspicuous by Their Absence

[Ivan]

I got lazy and decided not to modify the canopy. These are views from the Virtual Cockpit fore and aft. Note the cutouts in the aft view. The cockpit aft wall is now three pieces to avoid concave polygons. The Carburetor Scoop has also been modified but it is barely visible from this angle.

- Ivan.

[Ivan]

Here are a few exterior views. The model is basically done and ready for the paint shop. The cutouts behind the cockpit are quite visible here as is the slightly lenghtened and reshaped carburetor scoop. The contours of the aft fuselage were also reshaped.

My son wants to fly this thing, so I guess he will take it up unpainted for the maiden flight.... But he has to finish his homework first!

- Ivan.

[Ivan]

My son had issues finishing his homework. He also decided he wanted to fly a TIE fighter instead. My daughter asked if she could take the first flight and with a little instruction, took the plane up for a short hop. The first attempt at a take off ended with a ground loop. Second attempt was successful. She rolled, looped, flew above the clouds, Split-S, and buzzed the runway. At her request, I landed it. The only minor glitch was a bleed of the flaps underneath. That bleed was a consequence of my "improved" assembly sequence and took about 10 minutes to fix.

Now for the DP and flight parameters. Surprisingly, for this aircraft I already have most of the information I need.

- Ivan.

[womble55]

[QUOTE=Ivan;450015]Hi Smilo,

If I were do to a flying boat, it would be either a PBY Catalina, Sikorsky, or a H8K Emily. It probably would be the Emily since I have never seen one for CFS before. No, it isn't on the build list yet.

Hey Womble55,

Which idea was the "Great Revelation"? The clown colours or the shadows? I am guessing it is the odd colours idea.

The vast variety of colours (colors) to help in the eradification of bleeds, I used to do a basic paint of say Red for the port wing with the words 'left wing' to help with this. The new method is easier toconcentrate on an idividual part or component.

As to a Flying boat what about a Blohm and Voss Bv222....
or one of the excellent examples from WW1 like the Hansa Brandenburg W29...

Keep up the good work

womble55

[Ivan]

Hi Womble55,

It looks to me like you already have a pretty good start to both the BV 222 and the H-B W-29.
I see you have what looks like a pretty decent lozenge patern on the W-29's wings. I need to do the same for my Albatros D.5A but can't find a good pattern to work from. Have you thought of making your components "sharp" so you can see all the edges?

I am just of the opinion that the Pacific Islands make great locations for operating Flying Boats and like the look of the H8K Emily, China Clippers, and perhaps even the Catalina.

If I were to build a float plane, it probably would be a Supermarine S-6, A6M2-N (easy considering I already have a pretty fair Zero), or a Kawanishi N1K1.

I don't know if you already have done AIR files for your seaplanes, but if you haven't, you might want to do what I did and use the Ground Effect Graph to kick the plane out of the water to break friction.

- Ivan.

[Ivan]

Hello All,

I have been working on a Damage Profile for the P-40C and hit something very unexpected. Generally, I use an existing Stock DP file and edit the boxes and values to match the plane I am working on. Thus far, just about all the weapons have had stock equivalents.

With the P-40C, I have lots of data regarding the weight of the ammunition. I believe the weight unit in a DP file is an ounce (1/16th of a pound). When I plugged in my values, I found that the weight was roughly three times what the stock values were for the .50 caliber Cowl Guns. The .30 caliber wing guns should have been somewhat similar to a .303 or 7.92, but was also much higher.

In checking the stock values, I found that the weights as specified in the DP file were just about a perfect match for the PROJECTILE weights of each weapon. I had always assumed that the values were the Per ROUND weight which would determine the weight of the load on board the aircraft. Seems like this is not the case, so.....

Where the heck is the weight of the ammunition (and links) load taken into account????

Any Ideas?
- Ivan.

[Dave Cumming]

I had always thought that the weight figure at the end of the guns row was for the consumable - link and round. The guns themselves were entered into the air file as part of the general weight. Not knowing my way round the airfile I haven't paid much notice where it is entered. Looking at the 1% website I looked at the values they recommend for the ammo weight. .303" is given as 11.3g or 0.399oz. US .5" is given as 48.5g or 1.711oz. These are the bullets themselves, not the complete round. A complete 6.5mm round is about 400gr which is 26g or 0.9oz (6.5mm is the nearest thing I have - 180gr case, 44gr powder, 140gr head) If someone weighs a link then all the components could be added to give the weight in ounces that is taken off the plane each time the gun fires. This is what the last figure should be.

[Ivan]

Thanks Dave,

I was also thinking consumables. I have some pretty good weight figures for the P-40C:
The two .50 caliber cowl guns had 380 rounds per gun.
Total weight of .50 caliber ammunition is stated as 228 pounds.
The four .30 caliber wing guns had 490 rounds per gun.
Total weight of the .30 caliber ammunition was 104 and a fraction pounds.

Like you, I also am fairly familiar with small arms ammunition. A .308 Wincheter round has a case that weighs around 170-190 grains. The bullet is typically 150-170 grain. The powder is around 40-45 grains, so the complete round should weigh around 360-380 grains. A .30-06 round has a heavier case (Ballpark estimate would be 200 grains) and a slightly heavier powder charge, so 410 grains would be about right.

I just don't understand why the values in the stock DP files are all projectile weights because I don't see how that value would be useful.

BTW, Can you send me a link to the 1% site for aircraft armament? I would like to look at some of their tables also.

Thanks.
- Ivan.

[hubbabubba]

I just don't understand why the values in the stock DP files are all projectile weights because I don't see how that value would be useful.

And I don't understand how it was overlooked for so long. I always assumed DP was giving the hole expendable weight. Nice find Ivan.

I was waiting for Dave's comments, which I was sure were forthcoming (thanks Dave).

I will now go have a look in my DP profiles. Have to go. A giant thunderstorm is approaching... it's scary!

P.S.- False alert. The skies turned pitch-black in minutes, but it passed away.

I was trying to say that I will look into my DAT files which I got from Simviation here

I'm no expert in ammo, but I will do my best to find informations on hole rounds-shell + links.

[Ivan]

The weights of a complete shell and link are not easy to find, but not all that impossible either. I rounded up 19 .50 caliber links at a local gun show (all the fellow had) and added one of my own for a total of 20 which I summarised in a spreadsheet a while back. I believe I have a couple WW2 AP .30-06 rounds someplace. For rifle calibers, these are not illegal. For pistols, they are illegal.

Hubbabubba, I tried to download the DAT file from your link. I was not able to. Does anyone have the 1% spreadsheet for aircraft guns?

BTW, now that we know what the weights should be, what do we do about it???

- Ivan.

[Dave Cumming]

It used to be at avhistory.org but they have moved totally to CFS3. I've attached Machine Guns & Cannons.zip which has the 1% spreadsheet that I downloaded years ago. The setting at the end of the Gunstation line should be the weight of 1 round and 1 link. The airfile places this at the co-ordinates given in the middle of the Gunstation line. The Guns line provides the details about where the projectile leaves the plane (and where the flash appears) as well as the trajectory. A P40 site at http://staff.jccc.net/droberts/p40/p40a.html

[Ivan]

Thanks Dave,

That was exactly the spreadsheet I was looking for. I had a copy way back but don't remember where it was stashed. The copy you sent pretty much confirms what I remember: THIS spreadsheet also uses bullet rather than round weight.

The US 30 caliber MG has a Bullet and Link weight of 0.343 ounce. This works out to 150.0625 GRAINS which is the approximate weight of the bullet only. A .30 M2 Ball round is 150 to 152 grains. Armour Piercing .30-06 bullets weigh roughly 170 grains.

For those who don't understand the point of the discussion: When loading ammunition for one of the .30 Caliber Wing Guns for the P-40, the 490 cartridges with bullets, case, powder and the little steel links holding them all together should weigh about 26 pounds.

In CFS, we only load the bullets that will be shot. Case, Powder, and Link are omitted. The weight of 490 bullets only is about 10.50 pounds.

Hey Hubbabubba,
I take it that this will seriously affect the loadout of your Killer Jeep?

- Ivan.

[hubbabubba]

May I kindly suggest that this line of posts should be worthy of its own thread?

Hey Hubbabubba,
I take it that this will seriously affect the loadout of your Killer Jeep?

Not really, the MG jeep only has 600 rounds and the load is carried at CoG so that it causes no parallax distortion in TG2. And the vehicle being already released, I have no intention to put the toothpaste back in the tube. I will certainly experiment on this for future releases though.

Could it be that the projectile weight has some influence on the ballistic trajectory? Penetration into "DP boxes"? Inertia? I'm thinking out loud here...

Here is the link for Simviation page; http://www.simviation.com/cfs1utilitites4.htm
you should be able to go to the download from there (next to the last at the bottom).

I'm pretty much convinced that they only take into account the projectile weight.

[Ivan]

Hello Hubbabubba,

I found that page also at Simviation. Try the download. It doesn't work. I believe it is the same file as you had in your earlier link.

I don't believe the weight of the projectile should really mean anything. The hitting power is determined by a multiplier. I don't believe the trajectory can be determined by projectile weight. Ballistic Coefficient (Drag) is a more important factor.

Knowing what we know now, what do you all believe would be the best idea? Round and Link weight or keep it as Projectile weight? It seems to me that this would also be a good time to also rationalise damage values and hit boxes. What I and others have noticed is that the hitting power of CFS weaponry is much worse than history would indicate.

IIRC, The consensus at the old 714th was that damage was about 1/3 what it really should be.

As an example, The typical heavy bomber (B-17) could be brought down with an average of about 15 hits (anyone remember the actual number?) of 20 mm cannon and average only THREE hits of 30 mm cannon such as the MK 108. The typical 20 mm cannon in CFS has 1D1 x 24 hit points and the 30 mm has 1D1 x 89 hit points. Just about every system on a plane has at least 100 hit points. That means that a single hit by a 30 mm can't destroy any system. In reality, a single hit in the right place could blow off an entire wing. A fuselage hit would blow a hole about 3 feet in diameter and rip up all the structure under the skin.

- Ivan.

[hubbabubba]

Hi Ivan, Dave

Yep Ivan, Simviation link is dead. Try Flightsim search engine with "arms.zip"; http://www.flightsim.com/file.php?cm=SEARCH

Dave spreadsheet says "Bullet & Link wt". So, people would have taken the time to take into account the weight of the link, which should not be more than a fraction of an ounce, but would have overseen the weight of the case and propellant? Bizarre...

On this site, the M2 AP .50 cal cartridge is weighting 1,248 gr (2.852571 oz) and the projectile 706.7 gr (1.615314 oz); more than 43% of the "discarded" weight would have been omitted?

So, my answer to "Round and Link weight or keep it as Projectile weight?" would be "round and link", as long as the case is discarded. I'm not sure, but I think that some German cannons would keep the case like in a giant revolver.

As for DP-boxes vs Damage point, what do you think; should it causes more or less damage? I've seen opinions that differ from yours and, in the case of the stock .303, they would have reduced the points "shaved" from a box.

In multiplayer games, bombers are dropping in a pretty decent manner when hit. The jeep gas tank will go BOOM with 4 .50 caliber bullets, and should probably go at two. But in QC, a one pass strafing by a P-47D does the job 99% of the time.

BTW- I think that the "weight question" should be asked at the CFS2 forum.

Regards,