Ares Games
Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: Tracer Rounds!

  1. #1

    Default Tracer Rounds!

    Thought that this could be fun. LMK what you think.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	TRACER BULLETS.JPG 
Views:	106 
Size:	76.9 KB 
ID:	313905

  2. #2

    Default

    Historically, there were versions of tracer rounds early in WWI. There was even a doctrinal use of tracers to defend against Zeppelins in the Home Defense squadrons in Britain.

    However, tracers were dangerous when used against wood and canvas planes. It is one of the reasons the 'Chivilrous Pilot' Ace Skill doesn't allow incendiary bullets, and I would include the aversion to 'Tracer Bullets' for the same reason.

    One of the more interesting stories I remember reading about 'Buzz' Beurling in WWII was that he didn't allow his gun plumbers to load tracer rounds in his guns. The reason he gave was that if he missed his first shot, the target pilot wouldn't see the tracer rounds passing by and start evasive maneuvering. This would apply in WWI, too, perhaps, but engagement distances and speeds were not the same. Also, please note that 'Buzz' Beurling was a master of deflection shooting, and tended to shoot at targets most pilots wouldn't waste bullets attempting to hit.

    So, Tracer Bullets are probably a thing, but with limitations or specific applications?
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  3. #3

    Default

    I had no idea that they had incendiary properties! Thanks for the info!

  4. #4

    Default

    The glow that allows the firing pilot to see the round is caused by a few different things, but mostly magnesium.

    It was why, against Zeppelins, it was very effective. Bullets punched holes, allowing slow gas leaks that would, over time, cause problems with altitude. Burning metals would ignite the Hydrogen gas, and that was a whole different issue for Zeppelins.

    For planes, usually only if you hit gas lines, or the bullet lodged into a flammable material, would it cause problems. But, there were too many parts of WWI planes that were flammable, and pilots didn't want to be in a burning plane (for the most part). On the battlefield, at ranges of hundreds of yards, the tracer element would be exhausted, and not an issue. In a plane, where engagement distances were hundreds of feet, it would be much more trouble.

    I don't know if tracers were used by many pilots, but they probably weren't used much. Except for balloons and Zeppelins, I expect.

    Then, there were Incendiary rounds, with phosphorus, specifically to cause fires. However, in WWI, they mostly used 11mm ammunition, and not a standard machinegun round. Willy Coppens flew a plane with an 11mm MG for balloon busting (IIRC, he may have flown in the late war with one each of a standard and an 11mm MG). I have seen images of American SPADs with the two sizes of MGs in their cowlings.
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  5. #5

    Default

    Luke had two different guns on his SPAD if i remember well from the book i read on him.

  6. #6

    Default

    Pulled this from one of the forums where the topic was explained by some who knew what they were on about:
    The early tracers were used by the RFC/RNAS.
    The earliest was the Royal Laboratory tracer round of 1915/16 which was largely ineffective and gave a white trace for about 100 yards. This was followed in 1916 by the Mark VIIT or "Sparklet" which was far better and traced to about 500 yards. Then came the Mark VIIG (SPG) tracer which remained in service as the GI until the WW2. At the same time, the Buckingham incendiaries were often referred to as smoke tracers, since the burning phosphorus that was thrown from the bullet left a distinct white smoke trail and they had progressed to the Mark III version by 1918 and a Mark IV type with the distinctive "step" in the bullet envelope was under development. This was designed to cut a larger hole in aircraft and balloon fabric to give a better chance of igniting the hydrogen. The war ended and it was not until 1929 that the B Mark IV entered service. This remained in service until about 1943 and gun camera film from the Battle of Britain often clearly shows the smoke trails. There was an experimental Mark V incendiary in 1937 that did not enter service and then the Mark VI was introduced in 1940. https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/...tracer-rounds/
    I've certainly recall reading accounts from pilots mentioning smoke tracer & took it that they were used all the time once available. I think Jan has it right about Luke's set up, that also reinforces using the guns independently.
    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Moth View Post
    Thought that this could be fun. LMK what you think.
    I think it's too much myself, it's better than the Sharp Eye skill. At best I'd give it a +1 Aim bonus on the first shot - this is the same as the Perfect Aim skill, so I'd only employ it if not using ace skills and every one could have one !

    "He is wise who watches"

  7. #7

    Default

    In the way I designed the game, I implicitly suppose that the standard plane has a tracer bullet every 4/5 in its drums/belts. Tracers that can somehow increase chances of igniting a fire, not incendiary bullets that were purposedly designed to set fire to balloons and dirigibles.

    Some Italian aces took tracers away to decrease chances of fire on board of the target, for humanitarian reasons. That's why on the cover of Watch Your Back both planes are firing (you see condensation from both), but you only see tracers for the Austrian plane.
    In the game, taking away the tracers is simulated by the Chivalrous Aptitude ace skill (Rules & Accessories Pack, p. 21).

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	<acronym title=WoW - Cover Wyb.jpg  Views: 91  Size: 116.8 KB  ID: 313915" class="thumbnail" style="float:CONFIG" />

    Using true incendiary bullets is instead simulated by the Incendiary bullets rule at page 35.

    Here an optional rule from a future supplement:

    Saint Petersburg Declaration
    The Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 limited the use of projectiles under 400 grams of weight, if explosive or charged with combustible or inflammable substances. According this treaty, these incendiary bullets could not be used against the soldiers of nations signing the declaration. During WW1, the treaty was respected by British and German pilots, who used incendiary bullets only against balloons. Only pilots flying against drachens or dirigibles carried them, bringing a signed declaration by their commanders they were flying such a mission. This prevented them from being sentenced to death, if captured with such ordinance in their plane. Twin-machineguns planes used for balloon busting often had one loaded with incendiary bullets, to be used against drachens, and the other without, to fire against attacking airplanes.
    If this rule is in use, B-firing machineguns equipped with incendiary bullets cannot be used against airplanes. Take one incendiary bullets counter.
    If an A-firing plane has incendiary bullets, the pilot must decide before the start of the game if both machineguns feature them (take two incendiary bullets counters) or only one (take one counter):
    - If both, the plane inflicts A damage cards on balloons according to the Incendiary bullets and balloons rule in Wings of War Rules & Accessories set, but cannot fire at planes.
    - If loaded in only one machinegun, the plane can fire either with both machinegun at balloons, drawing A damage cards, with 5 points damage cards not inflicting fire (exception to Incendiary bullets and balloons, Wings of War Rules & Accessories set), or with one only at planes, inflicting B damage cards. As normal, the pilot may not select two different targets in a single phase.
    If one machinegun of an A-firing plane jams, the other can still be used; apply the Twin Machineguns Jamming rule: If a machinegun has incendiary bullets and the other has not, the jammed one is the one without if the jamming happens while firing at a plane while the jammed one is chosed at random if the jamming happens while firing at balloons.
    This is the general rule normally applied. As well as rockets, incendiary bullets are given in balloon busting scenarios of appropriate period with no additional points cost. Individual pilots can decide to use incendiary bullets anyway if they buy the Incendiary bullets skill; If they do so, they have them on all their weapons and use them against both planes and balloons with no limits. This unfair and illegal aptitude would have been paid with life, on the field, if they had been captured.


    Of course, feel free to houserule differently!

  8. #8

    Default

    Haha, this is exactly how we have played it lately. We also keep secret which pilot has what purpose until they reveal themselves not firing or firing Bs on other aircraft

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angiolillo View Post

    Here an optional rule from a future supplement:
    A FUTURE SUPPLEMENT??????

    YAY!!!!
    I laugh in the face of danger - then I hide until it goes away!

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Moth View Post
    Thought that this could be fun. LMK what you think.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	TRACER BULLETS.JPG 
Views:	106 
Size:	76.9 KB 
ID:	313905
    I have some problems with this rule.
    One, as Flash noted, it seems to be overkill so the +1 aim would be more reasonable.
    The second issue is that the tracer rounds had a different ballistic trajectory than non-tracers, due to weight, and the burn at the rear.
    It wasn't much, and was more pronounced in WW2 with larger caliber MGs firing at longer ranges, but it was still there.
    So with 1/5th tracer, at long range, you're aiming where only 20% of your ammo is going.

    In WW2, they found this was more of a problem; also, with closed cockpits you can't here the crack of the bullets going past you, so tracers
    announce that someone is shooting at you. I was to understand that by mid '42 or '43 at the latest, most fighters had removed tracers from their
    ammo belts, so seeing all the late-war footage of fighters hosing down their opponents with tracers is a surprise.

    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Helmut View Post
    A FUTURE SUPPLEMENT??????

    YAY!!!!




    what he said!!!

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    I have some problems with this rule.
    One, as Flash noted, it seems to be overkill so the +1 aim would be more reasonable.
    The second issue is that the tracer rounds had a different ballistic trajectory than non-tracers, due to weight, and the burn at the rear.
    It wasn't much, and was more pronounced in WW2 with larger caliber MGs firing at longer ranges, but it was still there.
    So with 1/5th tracer, at long range, you're aiming where only 20% of your ammo is going.

    In WW2, they found this was more of a problem; also, with closed cockpits you can't here the crack of the bullets going past you, so tracers
    announce that someone is shooting at you. I was to understand that by mid '42 or '43 at the latest, most fighters had removed tracers from their
    ammo belts, so seeing all the late-war footage of fighters hosing down their opponents with tracers is a surprise.

    Karl




    i agree. plus id add that the target pilots not going to play along and just let you keep shooting them when they see the tracers wizing by, or impacting. theyre going to start evading as soon as they can.

    id maybe just give a +1 damage on the 1st shot instead of having to line up a subsequent shot.

  13. #13

    Default

    Wow! Thanks for the feedback, everyone!

  14. #14

    Default

    I love these conversations

  15. #15

    Default

    I have to agree with Iain, these discussions do lead to some interesting game options. Though in this case, I am undecided as to whether or not to incorporate the option in games I'm directing. One, as Andrea, ths ues of tracers is implicit in the original game; 2. As Karl points out, the tracers were only a rough guide: if they were way off the target, you can use them to correct, but because of the different trajectory, it quite possible to overcorrect, and miss anyway.

  16. #16

    Default

    I'm with Andrea - no need for Tracer Rules for me.
    I laugh in the face of danger - then I hide until it goes away!

  17. #17

    Default

    Has anyone thought about the armor piercing, tungsten-core K-bullets? I don't think that they made any difference against enemy aircrafts, but if anyone uses tanks, they could have a purpose!

  18. #18

    Default

    From the June of 1917 you could employ them against the light tanks if you were German, but apparently they were ineffective against the heavy tanks later introduced Luke. One reason for them not being sprayed around willy-nilly was their price.
    Rob.
    "Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Moth View Post
    Has anyone thought about the armor piercing, tungsten-core K-bullets? I don't think that they made any difference against enemy aircrafts, but if anyone uses tanks, they could have a purpose!
    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Officer Kyte View Post
    From the June of 1917 you could employ them against the light tanks if you were German, but apparently they were ineffective against the heavy tanks later introduced Luke. One reason for them not being sprayed around willy-nilly was their price.
    Rob.
    Interesting; I had not thought them to be used in MGs, just in the Mauser 13mm AT rifle.
    If you're attacking from an aircraft, the top armor would be the thinnest, and possibly not proof against MG fire.
    Or a small hand dropped bomb

    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  20. #20

    Default

    One hazard to watch for, tracers frequently HURT accuracy IRL rather than help it because they're not usually tuned for the same ballistics as their regular-ammo counterparts. The best use I've heard for them was friends who served in Nam would load them at specific intervals in their magazines to give some warning about when they'd need to hot-reload to avoid a "full stop" in firing.
    Historical Consultant/Researcher, Wings and Sails lines - Unless stated otherwise, all comments are personal opinion only and NOT official Ares policy.
    Wings Checklists: WWI (down Navarre Nieuport, Ares Drachens) | WWII (complete)

  21. #21

    Default

    I'm not sure that at the short ranges involved in air combat the ballistics of tracer rounds would make that great a difference to aiming, after all, if it didn't do the job, why would they use it ?

    "He is wise who watches"

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honza View Post
    Luke had two different guns on his SPAD if i remember well from the book i read on him.
    What book was this, Jan?

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    I'm not sure that at the short ranges involved in air combat the ballistics of tracer rounds would make that great a difference to aiming, after all, if it didn't do the job, why would they use it ?
    Never underestimate the power of a theory-addicted Senior Officer who's been visited by the Good Idea Fairy...
    Historical Consultant/Researcher, Wings and Sails lines - Unless stated otherwise, all comments are personal opinion only and NOT official Ares policy.
    Wings Checklists: WWI (down Navarre Nieuport, Ares Drachens) | WWII (complete)

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
    Never underestimate the power of a theory-addicted Senior Officer who's been visited by the Good Idea Fairy...
    Diamondback! Thank you so much for the laugh.

    With 36 years of experience with three different elements (Army, Navy, and Air Force) of the Canadian Military, this is sooo true. Especially with officers that haven't read the After Action Reports from previous attempts.
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OldGuy59 View Post
    Diamondback! Thank you so much for the laugh.

    With 36 years of experience with three different elements (Army, Navy, and Air Force) of the Canadian Military, this is sooo true. Especially with officers that haven't read the After Action Reports from previous attempts.
    You lost me at...

    Just kidding.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Moth View Post
    You lost me at...

    Just kidding.
    Unlike a lot of countries, the Canadian military allows transfers between services. In fact, there are programs within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) that actively promote transfers. Combat arms members that want to acquire trade skills can transfer to technical trades with a simple request, after 3-5 years in the Infantry/Armor/Artillery. Not exactly what I did, as I was medically transfered. Another possibility with the CAF.
    Mike
    "Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
    "Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59

  27. #27

    Default

    I don't think that it's encouraged in the U.S. military, but I know several guys, personally, that transferred branches: one Air Force and two Marine Corps; all three ended up in the Army. Airman wanted a less sedentary MOS and marines wanted to pretty much keep doing what they were doing, except with a port-o-john, instead of having to dig a hole.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldGuy59 View Post
    Unlike a lot of countries, the Canadian military allows transfers between services. In fact, there are programs within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) that actively promote transfers. Combat arms members that want to acquire trade skills can transfer to technical trades with a simple request, after 3-5 years in the Infantry/Armor/Artillery. Not exactly what I did, as I was medically transfered. Another possibility with the CAF.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Moth View Post
    I don't think that it's encouraged in the U.S. military, but I know several guys, personally, that transferred branches: one Air Force and two Marine Corps; all three ended up in the Army. Airman wanted a less sedentary MOS and marines wanted to pretty much keep doing what they were doing, except with a port-o-john, instead of having to dig a hole.
    Grandpa kind of became a football between Army Air Forces and Army Ground Force when he was drafted, different old sports injuries made him undesirable to each. His flat feet made him unsuitable for Infantry and a shoulder injury meant he couldn't fly, so when they saw that he was a GE-trained Master Machinist, Tool & Diemaker they stuck him wrenching on planes to get 'em ready for the WASPs to ferry and come up with last-minute "trick plays" correcting manufacturing defects to nudge whatever he could into "fit to fight".
    Historical Consultant/Researcher, Wings and Sails lines - Unless stated otherwise, all comments are personal opinion only and NOT official Ares policy.
    Wings Checklists: WWI (down Navarre Nieuport, Ares Drachens) | WWII (complete)

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OldGuy59 View Post
    Diamondback! Thank you so much for the laugh.

    With 36 years of experience with three different elements (Army, Navy, and Air Force) of the Canadian Military, this is sooo true. Especially with officers that haven't read the After Action Reports from previous attempts.
    Oh, if only I could get my old prof the retired LTC to join us and share some stories from his Pentagon-tour days ramming the A-10 down a hostile Air Force's throat... (The irony is he was an F-106 driver, a "has-been member" of it but still Pointynose Mafia, and there he was shoving something through as "opposed to The Tribe" as he could get.)
    Historical Consultant/Researcher, Wings and Sails lines - Unless stated otherwise, all comments are personal opinion only and NOT official Ares policy.
    Wings Checklists: WWI (down Navarre Nieuport, Ares Drachens) | WWII (complete)

  30. #30

    Default

    For the Germans, improved tracer ammunition was developed by Th.Goldschmidt corporation (Aktiengesellschaft or AG) in Essen, Dec. 1917. Tracer ammunition previously in use did not work effectively, causing repeated failures of tracer compositions, ignited at 200 meters, and was therefore unsuitable. From Dec 17, the Th. Goldschmidt corporation was the exclusive supplier of tracer ammunition to the Navy. Goldschmidt had developed a tracer composition which ignited reliably at a distance of 30-50 meters, burning up to 800 meters. A company named Autogen in Berlin bagan producing this particular type of ammunition in Jan. 1918.

  31. #31

    Default

    Here's an idea—armored vehicles! I bet that they were effective against them throughout the war!

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Officer Kyte View Post
    From the June of 1917 you could employ them against the light tanks if you were German, but apparently they were ineffective against the heavy tanks later introduced Luke. One reason for them not being sprayed around willy-nilly was their price.
    Rob.



Similar Missions

  1. First rounds on me.
    By Shadowcat in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-19-2016, 19:28
  2. Its Friday! Rounds are on me.
    By Captain Chum in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-16-2014, 00:47
  3. Next TWO rounds on me: Double gonged!
    By MoonSylver in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-01-2013, 08:24
  4. Bagged Brumowski with only 20 rounds! Can anyone confirm the kill?
    By James Denberger in forum Officer's Club
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-07-2011, 02:47
  5. Incendiary Rounds
    By Hunter in forum WGF: General Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-24-2011, 02:31

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •