Hurricane convergence

[gavagai]

With the option of 4 different convergence settings for each pair of guns, I would like to adjust the convergence on the Hurricane in a more sophisticated way than what I have attempted in other flight sims. Right now, I find the gun convergence to be *too* precise. If my aim is off by a hair I miss completely, so I would like to try a slight spread instead of having all the guns converge at the same point. My first idea is to have something like this, with 4 being outermost and 1 being innermost:

4: 200m
3: 185m
2: 170m
1: 155m

Here I'm assuming the same range for both horizontal and vertical convergence. Would this spread be too wide? Thoughts?

[ATAG_Torian]

Hi gavagai,
U will no doubt get a number of differing opinions on favoured convergence settings with all pros & cons.
So to get the ball rolling here are my thoughts.
If I were u (and I do this myself frequently) spark up an offline game or even host an online game. U can change things around in preset maps in the full mission builder to enable air starts and add in a lot more AI aircraft. Then allow icons and even unlimited ammo if u want. U can also make the AI planes empty as far as weaponry is concerned so they won't be able to shoot back. In your test game u can then test every convergence and ammo type to your hearts content.
One of my 1st observations doing these type of tests is that enemy aircraft are often further away than what u think. I see this a lot online when watching a fighter on the tail of an enemy fighter and u see them firing way too far behind. In the heat of battle u sometimes don't get the luxury of lining up ur enemy neatly in your reticle.
I used to use very close convergences from 150m to 220m. If u are in tight on an enemy to those convergences then all is good. I found however that it is very easy to quickly have more distance than that between u and your target and shooting at anything longer than your convergence isn't gonna hit anything in reality imho.
I now set the convergence to the game default. This is 338.something which translates to just about 370 yards...this is what I set in my gunsight reticle. So what does this mean....it means that my guns are always converging up to 370 yards. Now I don't open fire to often at that range except on big fat bomber formations which is actually a healthy distance as a lot of the AI bomber formations have sniper level AI gunnery. But even when engaging another fighter u still gonna get hits if within that range. Might not do any damage but might put a bullet in a strategic oil/water line. And there is nothing more unnerving for a pilot than taking hits...even if not much damage being done but u may get them to do something stupid because of it.
Anyway, there are some thoughts. See what works for u.
Torian

[Robo.]

With the option of 4 different convergence settings for each pair of guns, I would like to adjust the convergence on the Hurricane in a more sophisticated way than what I have attempted in other flight sims. Right now, I find the gun convergence to be *too* precise. If my aim is off by a hair I miss completely, so I would like to try a slight spread instead of having all the guns converge at the same point. My first idea is to have something like this, with 4 being outermost and 1 being innermost:

4: 200m
3: 185m
2: 170m
1: 155m

Here I'm assuming the same range for both horizontal and vertical convergence. Would this spread be too wide? Thoughts?

Hi mate, yes everything is possible and you can set up every singe gun separately if you prefer to. Please do have a look here:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=35407&highlight=pattern+convergence

Somebody was toying with the same idea, creating similar pattern that the one used by the USAF later in the war. I personally prefer my guns converging to one point and shooting precisely at convergence distance. The effect on impact is then much more devastating. But I would give it a go, the spread should be not too big at that range. What distance would you be pulling the trigger at?

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Torian is right. Convergence is down to personal preference.


Here's why I have, if you're interested; All guns to 150m on both horizontal and vertical.

But, be warned, this means that my bullets cross over, and therefore start diverging away from each other at 150m in front. At 500m away, by bullets are almost twice their original distance away from each other! This setup is, therefore, only suitable for close-in shooting. I almost never engage a target that is more than 200m away.

consider the image below:
2466

Four different scenarios are presented.

1. The hurricane uses a close-in convergence when the 109 is slightly further out. In most cases, provided the 109 is not too far away the hurricane can get a spread of hits. However, it's important in this case to note that the 109 gets beyond the sweet spot (where all bullets converge) very quickly - The hurri really needs to shoot when the 109 is much, much close. And also note that with close convergence, the bullets diverge quickly. By the time the 109 is 400m-500m away, the spread of bullets is very wide, and therefore most are likely to miss, if the 109 is in the middle of the gunsight.

2. the hurri has long convergence, and the 109 is "inside" that range. In most cases, the hurri will still get reasonable hits on the 109. The angle between the lines of hurricane fire is low too, so the 109 could slide further out, or close in and still would be getting hit, if it was in the gun-sight.

3. In this case, the convergence is close-in. However the 109 is far away. The only way the hurricane can now get hits, is to put the 109 off-center to his gun-sight, so that one of the streams of bullets will hit the 109 AFTER crossing the convergence point. I've done this to good effect quite often. The 109 pilots get awfully confused** when they see the tracers from my left-wing guns go flying out to their right, whilst "invisible" bullets from my right gun slam into their fuselage.

4. In this case, the convergence is long range, and so is the target. This seems sensible to use this set up. However, be warned, at more than 200m to target, a tiny change in your heading will throw your bullets off course. At long range (350m plus) you really do have to be a perfect shot.

My preference is to have short convergence. I try to hold off until the target is well close in - less than 200m, sometimes as close at 50-100m. At that distance, it's almost impossible to miss. But if you have close-in convergence, you really have to be disciplined in when you open fire.

** I've even had enemies blaming the net code for this. They only see the bullets which are missing wildly, but their aircraft is getting hit. So they think the game is playing up.

[Flanker35M]

S!

In Aces High you can adjust all guns separately for convergence very easily. I wish something like that would be in CoD too.

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

S!

In Aces High you can adjust all guns separately for convergence very easily. I wish something like that would be in CoD too.

Yes, entering values into all 16 boxes in cloD is a bit painful.
I'd love a check box to set all guns to the same.
Or 16 sliders instead of text boxes.

[Broodwich]

No kidding, adjusting the belts and convergence in all of them is a PITA. I really hope at some point soon TF will make the menus and options less of a clusterfak.

Torian is spot on for everything. Practice offline to get a feel for it. And longer convergence is better than short distance like 150m, because you are usually taking long shots at fleeing 109s. It is much easier to hit something well inside your convergence than it is to hit something well outside it. Especially with the hurri all its guns are tight together already, you can do quite a bit of damage just ruddering over and hitting with one bank of guns, even if the other is just punching holes in the sky

Personally ive been using 250 for everything which works out just fine

[gavagai]

Thanks for the feedback. I've been trying out a few different harmonizations offline, but I see the point about shooting outside versus inside convergence.

[1lokos]

Yes, entering values into all 16 boxes in cloD is a bit painful.
I'd love a check box to set all guns to the same.
Or 16 sliders instead of text boxes.

What CLoD need to solve this question of loadout/bombs/convergence is that someone make a external program
like a JoyControl to Il-2 (need for CloD too), that allow, by drop box or sliders set loadout and convergence.
Since all this is write in .ini files is "easy" to (for someone with skill) make.

Sokol1

[ATAG_Torian]

What CLoD need to solve this question of loadout/bombs/convergence is that someone make a external program
like a JoyControl to Il-2 (need for CloD too), that allow, by drop box or sliders set loadout and convergence.
Since all this is write in .ini files is "easy" to (for someone with skill) make.

Sokol1

That's a great idea. An external utility that writes to the user.ini
Might b worth making a separate post to see if we can get any of these guys who are good with programming to have a stab at.
I'll start a separate thread and see if any1 is up for it.

[310_cibule]

Hi mate, yes everything is possible and you can set up every singe gun separately if you prefer to. Please do have a look here:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=35407&highlight=pattern+convergence

Somebody was toying with the same idea, creating similar pattern that the one used by the USAF later in the war. I personally prefer my guns converging to one point and shooting precisely at convergence distance. The effect on impact is then much more devastating. But I would give it a go, the spread should be not too big at that range. What distance would you be pulling the trigger at?

This is stated in TF mode manual:

Gun Convergence issue where labels in the setup were reversed now fixed.

What has changed actually? How was it before and how is it now?

Is the above mentioned suggestion from 1cpublishing forum good for pre-moded version or moded one? If the first option is true how does it change for present version?

Any suggestion? Thx.

[ATAG_Deacon]

~S~ gavagai,

I have something similar to this, but reversed:

Yours =



4: 200m
3: 185m
2: 170m
1: 155m


I have the opposite with 1 being outer and 4 being inner :

1:170
2:180
3:190
4:200

I find the inner guns reaching longer and the outside side guns
being tighter gives me a very very nice spread...

It really comes down to personal preference though. Find what
works for you :thumbsup:

[1lokos]

This is stated in TF mode manual:

Gun Convergence issue where labels in the setup were reversed now fixed.

What has changed actually? How was it before and how is it now?



Cibule,

Just correction of GUI labels for convergence adjust, are inverted in some localizations of the game, due bad translation (like the infamous "afterburner").

In 1c final version - first two English and Spanish are wrong labeled. German and Russian are correct.

http://i47.tinypic.com/24e3muw.jpg

With TF patch, English version correct

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/284/convw.jpg

Sokol1

[310_cibule]

Thx Sokol. This is exactly what I want to know (thought originally it had something to do with order how particular guns were labeled)

[Gromit]

I set mine at 250/250yds, that way the guns are at a maximum spread equal to the distance between the guns at 500yds and all I have to do is estimate the drop, so I can and do get some long shots in !

[gavagai]

~S~ gavagai,

I have something similar to this, but reversed:

Yours =




I have the opposite with 1 being outer and 4 being inner :

1:170
2:180
3:190
4:200

I find the inner guns reaching longer and the outside side guns
being tighter gives me a very very nice spread...

It really comes down to personal preference though. Find what
works for you :thumbsup:

There's another interesting idea. So far I've gone for a 250,225,200,175 spread from outter to inner, and that has worked pretty well (got 2 109s with the Hurri a little bit ago on the ATAG server). A lot of people seem to panic the moment they take hits, or they try to force an overshoot, which makes the close convergence very useful. I suspect that it is easier to make a Spit overshoot than a Hurri because of the roll rate difference...too bad for them!:thumbsup:

[310_cibule]

I really like this setting (published by hegykc at 1C forum last Autumn)

Guns Horizontal Vertical (after TF mod)
1/8----121----109 white tracers, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
2/7----100----107 DeWilde, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
3/6----153----200 white tracers, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
4/5----241----205 DeWilde, army piercing, balls Mk. VII

Gunsight distance set to 150-170 yards. Should be effective from 70 to 200 yards/meters.

It works perfectly for me.

[=0T=Robert Galant]

With the option of 4 different convergence settings for each pair of guns, I would like to adjust the convergence on the Hurricane in a more sophisticated way than what I have attempted in other flight sims. Right now, I find the gun convergence to be *too* precise. If my aim is off by a hair I miss completely, so I would like to try a slight spread instead of having all the guns converge at the same point. My first idea is to have something like this, with 4 being outermost and 1 being innermost:

4: 200m
3: 185m
2: 170m
1: 155m

Here I'm assuming the same range for both horizontal and vertical convergence. Would this spread be too wide? Thoughts?

Hello Gavagai ! Good to see you on COD . Problems with convergences ? I think me and Hubert Bigglesworth can help you . As you know , Hubert is a perfectionist about gunnery , so ... hope to see you soon on a server . Welcome Gav !

[Gromit]

I really like this setting (published by hegykc at 1C forum last Autumn)

Guns Horizontal Vertical (after TF mod)
1/8----121----109 white tracers, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
2/7----100----107 DeWilde, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
3/6----153----200 white tracers, army piercing, balls Mk. VII
4/5----241----205 DeWilde, army piercing, balls Mk. VII

Gunsight distance set to 150-170 yards. Should be effective from 70 to 200 yards/meters.

It works perfectly for me.

Are you seeing any results with the De-Wilde?
It's supposed to flash on impact and have an incediary effect yet it seems totally ineffective to me?

since changing my belting to -
1-3 ap/ball Vii, 4+5 white tracer incend, 6-8 ap/ball vii

I have been getting much better results!

does anyone find De-Wilde effective?

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

does anyone find De-Wilde effective?

Not really. It seems to me to have that puff-of-smoke effect on impact, like the Observer rounds.
I use a little bit, but mainly AP. I'm tempted to ditch the DeWilde.....

I do not use tracers at all; but if I did, I would recommend the tracers that also double up as incendiary. The white ones.

[Catseye]

Hi Guys,
The weapons are being remodeled in the next patch.

Please be aware that at this time, the DeWilde ammunition is not working as it is designed to do.

My suggestion: Rather than DeWilde - use white tracer and ball - you will be pleasantly surprised.

Also, historically, the AP did not work very well and was discontinued on the RAF side. Insufficient penetration because of .303 round not having enough mass.

So, hang in there for a bit until TF get the damage model and the weapons model sorted out for the next go around.

TF is well aware of the issues surrounding the damage/weapons model and has the information at hand necessary for corrections. It just takes time for us to come up for air after the first go-around and then to painstakingly get into the next phase, which, is very complex.

Cheers,
Catseye

[Gromit]

Happy to plod on as we are for now Catseye, I think you guys work too hard!












not complaining mind :)

[Catseye]

Happy to plod on as we are for now Catseye, I think you guys work too hard!
not complaining mind :)

NP Gromit:
Nice to read the discussions from other pilot's perspectives. It actually lends additional support for TM in the way of confirming issues already flagged and bringing up some that may have been missed or on the back - back burner.

Cheers,

[ATAG_NakedSquirrel]

Not really. It seems to me to have that puff-of-smoke effect on impact, like the Observer rounds.
I use a little bit, but mainly AP. I'm tempted to ditch the DeWilde.....

I do not use tracers at all; but if I did, I would recommend the tracers that also double up as incendiary. The white ones.

Pfft


http://youtu.be/pDzrAedZk3M

DeWilde rules

[rollingstoned]

i dont know squat, i just started flying the 100 rotol .. but i have 200 on all my guns except my inners which are at 400... ive been killing very successfully but that is my prefference

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

DeWilde rules

lol!
Incidentally, I have since put De-Wilde back into my load-outs ;)

[Roblex]

I would agree with deacon, If you are going to set four different convergences you should have the longest ones on the inner.

To take a more extreme example, if you set the inner guns to 400yds and shoot from 100yds then the bullets will still be close enough to hit the wing roots or fuselage at 100yds. If you set your outer guns to 400yds then shoot from 100yds the bullets will be hitting mid-wing. Also if the outers are set to 100 when you are at 100yds then the bullets are coming in from a steep angle and maybe by-passing the pilot armour.

Just a theory that may be complete B*llox :-P

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

I would agree with deacon, If you are going to set four different convergences you should have the longest ones on the inner.
:-P

I would go for the reverse, personally, based not on convergence, but divergence.
If you set your outer guns close in, they become useless more quickly after they converge. The inner guns remain much close together until much further beyond the point of convergence.

Just goes to show how there's no such thing as "best"! lol

[Roblex]

I would go for the reverse, personally, based not on convergence, but divergence.
If you set your outer guns close in, they become useless more quickly after they converge. The inner guns remain much close together until much further beyond the point of convergence.

Just goes to show how there's no such thing as "best"! lol

Fair point. Have you looked at both on your spreadsheet? It could be there is no difference between the effectiveness of either approach.

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Fair point. Have you looked at both on your spreadsheet? It could be there is no difference between the effectiveness of either approach.

OK, I've just made a setup in the sheet with the two options;

1. inner weapons converging beyond 300m (~330), and the outer guns converging at ~120m.

The inner guns don't give you anything better (narrower) than 1m separation until about the 250m mark. Despite being a few meters apart at the wing, when ranged to convergence beyond 300m the angle of convergence is so low that that distance between the guns remains intact for a long way out.

If the outer guns converge at ~120m, you don't get anything better than a 1m separation until the 100m mark, and then you only get 40m of range within which you have that level of convergence. Once you are beyond 150m, the bullets will have diverged out to a 3m spread.

2. inner weapons converging at 120m, and the outer guns converging at ~330.

The inner guns now give you a 1m seperation from about 90m, to 170m. That's a range of 80m within which these guns have a fairly tight concentration. This, I think is effective for most mid-range shooting (75-200m)

However, the outer guns are now more problematic. They don't convergence to less than 1m until about 280m out. Good for some long pot-shots... but very ineffective at anything closer than 250m really.


Hope the above helps somewhat. If you want the spreadsheet, flick me a pm Roblex.

[Roblex]

Thanks for that P-Style. Now I don't know what to do any more:D

Those inners set to 120 seem very effective for close in work but on the other hand if I leave them at 400 then they will still be close enough to hit 109 wing radiators at 200 and I can still take potshots at fleeing enemies. Hmm, on the *other* other hand maybe I should just forget chasing fleeing enemies and set my guns to 120,150, 180 & 200 and have the whole killing area covered as my poor graphics means I often can't ID fighters well enough to risk shooting until I am within 200yds anyway. You have succeeded in convincing me to at least try the spread method :D