P-38 Cards
I found three cards for P-38s in files. All three have 19 damage. Two have H maneuver decks, the other E deck. What really is confusing are the gun factors. I can see the difficulty of finding an appropriate maneuver deck, but all three having different gun factors for identical guns? One has DBB short and CB long, the second BCC short and BC long, and the third CBB short and BB long. Which maneuver deck would be closest to the P-38 and which gun factors would be the best?
The maneuver deck differences are most likely due to them being different versions of the P-38. As for the different damage types, I think that comes down to Alan not knowing at the time how the damage types were worked out at the time. We know now that four .50 cals should be two B damage and a single 20mm cannon should be a C damage. So, for long you would have BBC and short you would have BB (half of the BB is a B and half of a C is a B as well).
Thanks Keith. Although I have almost everything for WW I, plus a lot of extras, I am just getting started on collecting some WW II planes. If I could just get caught up with spending on the WW I stuff!
Huh. You would think that having no synchronisation being need for all centerline mounted guns, there would be a reflection of that in the gun factors. The rounds all arrive en mass, without worrying about distances. That bugs me a bit.Originally Posted by Oberst Hajj
Well, comparing it to other planes that had wing mounted guns that are already out, it uses the same damage system. Even so, with the huge number of different gun types used in WWII, the damage system had to be simplified quite a bit. I don't think we'd enjoy the game as much if there 12-14 different damage chits we had to mess with.
There were -38s (up to the D-model) with a 37mm (Oldsmobile) cannon, so a BBD is a possibility.
Yes, but none of those saw combat. The D model was the first model delivered. The USAAF started to used the "D" to donate a plane with self-sealing tanks and pilot armor. So with the P-38 arrived in the service, it was already at the D model level.
I am not saying the p38 should have its own type of damage chits, only that the combination should not be the same as another aircraft with 4 .50s and one 20mm. Gun solutions are easier for the Lightning. Maybe a an extra counter or a plus one damage.
The D-model had the 37mm; as you note, tho', none saw combat. (The 37mm's problem? Lack of ammo capacity, and poor RoF -- gee, where have we seen *that* before? :) ) The Hispano 20mm was introduced on the E. I don't know if the Ds were refitted with 20mms.
"P-38 damage is always counted as 'sustained fire'."
Obrest should the damage be BB at LONG range and BBC at SHORT? Seems that greater damage would be at close range.
I don't think any of my cards have BCC on them as mentioned first... The majority are indeed BBC (short) and BC (long) whereas they should be BB (long). The one with a D damage was supposed to be the model with the 37mm cannon, but google didn't tell me it never saw action!
The BCC was my typo..it is BBC that I meant to put. I think H deck with the BBC and BB gun factors will be what I go with. It will probably be years before an official card for P-38s is released by ares.
As best I can tell: The -Ds were sent to the Aleutians, and Iceland; so were well away from the fronts. Apparently a D scored the first -38 victory in the European Theatre (the FW200 pegged near Iceland), but it's not reported what loadout it was carrying (some claim the 37mm was never mounted, due to poor performance).
I thought that the B and C decks produce the same mean damage but there is greater variability in the C deck. So half of a C (for long range) should be an A. However, it is well known that the P-38's centre mounted guns were more accurate at long range than wing mounted guns, so BB or BC at long range may be appropriate.
B and C do have the same damage average, but the C have larger individual damage amounts. Still, half a C is a B, and half of a B is an A, and half of an A is an A.
But then we have to look at other aircraft with all centreline mounted guns the same way, including the Luftwaffe's Bf110, Bf109F, and Bf109G which would no doubt cause an outcry!!!
Um -- the centerline MGs on the -109 had to fire through the prop, which required synching (the cannon fired through the prop hub).
I am sorry to disagree, Oberst Hajj, but the aircraft cards do not support your stement that half a C is a B, Take a look at the cards for the Dewoitine D.520 (where BC halves to B not AB), the Bell P-400 Airacobra (where BBC halves to AC not BB) and the Yak-1 (where AC halves to C not AB).
Oh no worries David, you are in fact correct. I misread Andrea's quote below:
We did quite a lot of research and evaluation, Pier Giorgio went especially deep into that. But in the end we wanted a very simple system anyway. So after judging caliber, bullet weight, muzzle speed, rate of fire and several other technicalities for the main weapons of world war two airplanes, in the end we saw that a good model could be to evaluate heavy machineguns (12,7 mm or 0,50") as equivalent to two light machineguns (7.7 mm or 0,303") or to half of a 20 mm cannon. We started with these guns, knowing that we could deal on a similar basis for future and more powerful weapons.
In the end, we made an A "deck" where a single card/chit accounts for 2 light machineguns or 1 heavy one. The B deck is just a more powerful version where a single chit accounts for two heavy machineguns, or 4 light ones, giving double the damages as A. The C is equivalent to B in average damages, but being meant for 20 mm cannons it has a more hit-or-miss distribution of damages. You hit less frequently, but when you do, you deal more damage. The D has a similar distribution but with more damage, and it is for 37 mm cannons and equivalents.
By the above, one 20mm cannon (C) should equal two heavy machine guns (B). Half of a C should be the same as half of a B, which is an A. That is shown by this plane:
Dewoitine D.520 (where BC halves to B, and it should be AA (which when group to reduce the number of chits is B))
But that leaves some of the other long range damages looking a bit odd as well.
Yak-1 (where AC halves to C, and it should be AA (which when group to reduce the number of chits is B))
Bell P-400 Airacobra (where BBC halves to AC, and it should be AAA (which when group to reduce the number of chits is AB))
It appears that in some cases he is bumping the long range damage back up to a C and in some he is not (look at the Yak-1 vs. the D.520).
Excuse my ignorance but what is the final verdict for the P.38's guns?
Unofficially the best answer would be...
Short = BBC
Long = AC
The same as the Bell P-400 Airacobra in practice.
There has been a big discussion on this subject on the Fighting Wings YaHoo list last month, which included a visit from our resident Troll. There are a great many factors involved that include wing gun harmonization, intrinsic spread of the firing gun, vibrational spread from the aircraft flying, variable ROF from syncronized/non-syncronized guns, etc.
The gist of it, for me, is that the WOGS mechanics are too generalized (more polite than saying crude) to account for all these. I'd just leave things the way they are.
Karl
I agree Karl, lost in simplification... which is a good thing in game terms me thinks!
Sure; if I wanted complexity...well I have Fighting Wings
Guess which I play more?
Karl
In the case of the Yak-1, the reason why is is C at long range may be because the Russian 20mm cannons were reputedly better than the Hispano ones.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks