Authentic Ballistics & Sniping

[Grobut]

Placeholders? What do you mean by that?

Durring production, game developers will often use "placeholders", if something has not been created yet like a texture, model or sound, they will just take a similar one from their old games (or just make a crude mock-up if a suitable alternative does not exist) and put it in there as a temporary placeholder, so they can still play test and refine the game even though parts of it are not done yet.

Thease placeholders are then replaced by the finsihed models/textures/sounds later on as they get created.

 

[sniper1991]

Been firing m91/30 PU sniper rifle's for 5 years now,never had any problems losing zero - you could drop those rifles from 10 feet,pick it up and still hit a head sized target at 400 yards,heck id put mine up against any modern hunting rifle anyday. I will find the link to an article on German sniper's who fought in Stalingrad - (its in Russian but it can be translated) one German sniper recalled how he met a group of other German snipers all armed with Russian m91/30 sniper rifles which they told him "Its the German sniper's rule to use Russians rifle - Our scopes are poor quality."
Scope system looks fine in the game,Grobut is correct they did say the current reticles are placeholders

 

[VariousNames]

Well the original RO has bullet drop, and less damage over distance. I'm not sure if they modeled the actual loss of velocity over time/distance. So I'm sure we can expect at least that a mount of detail in ROHOS. And I'm pretty sure they used authentic ballistic coefficients to calculate the projectile behavior.

Incidentally, I requested this information from Tripwire in a thread I authored in the Ost Front subforum, for which I received a response from Tripwire.

Here is the link to the thread.

[url]http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=41778[/URL]

Here is the response from Ramm-Jaeger:

The in-game ballistics modeling is highly advanced, and does track each bullet, including gravity and drag calculations. One optimization however is that it doesn't do ballistics calculations for rounds fired very short distances where the bullet drop is so negligible it has almost no impact on where the bullet would hit.

And here is an additional response from Tripwire's Wilsonam who gratefully provided a great deal of information (much more later in the thread):

The ballistics calc does pretty much what you'd expect it to: velocity, use the relevant ballistic coefficient to calc the loss in velocity (air resistance, temp, humidity), use that information (and gravity) to figure out the drop. We don't play with the odds and sods such as coriolis effect, as the impact (pun unintended) is very small at the engagement distances we are normally dealing with.

As for calculating the ballistic coefficient: can be a bit of a nightmare, as it is very hard to either find the relevant (1940s) data, or to find the relevant ammo. We have the weapons, plus modern ammo for them - but I am wary of relying on modern test data to derive the BC from. Drag function is a lot easier

 

[[TW]Wilsonam]

Actually, Jeff put me in touch with a specialist in Germany (who's name and book I have in the office and I can't remember on a Sunday morning). He provided me with a personal copy of a small privately-published book he did, focusing on the exterior ballistics of WWII-era weaponry.

The info in that book actually showed that we had a couple of the weapons calculating incrorrectly in the old game. Believably, but incorrectly. One of the other items that it brought to light was the disturbance/destabilization of rounds in the trans-sonic region. Doesn't affect the high velocity rifle rounds for game purposes, but it does affect some of the SMGs.

 

[LemoN]

Actually, Jeff put me in touch with a specialist in Germany (who's name and book I have in the office and I can't remember on a Sunday morning). He provided me with a personal copy of a small privately-published book he did, focusing on the exterior ballistics of WWII-era weaponry.

The info in that book actually showed that we had a couple of the weapons calculating incrorrectly in the old game. Believably, but incorrectly. One of the other items that it brought to light was the disturbance/destabilization of rounds in the trans-sonic region. Doesn't affect the high velocity rifle rounds for game purposes, but it does affect some of the SMGs.

Should also affect most pistols.

Depending on the load, the Walther P38 has between 310m/s and 390m/s, with standard 9mm it should be around 350m/s

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Been firing m91/30 PU sniper rifle's for 5 years now,never had any problems losing zero - you could drop those rifles from 10 feet,pick it up and still hit a head sized target at 400 yards,heck id put mine up against any modern hunting rifle anyday. I will find the link to an article on German sniper's who fought in Stalingrad - (its in Russian but it can be translated) one German sniper recalled how he met a group of other German snipers all armed with Russian m91/30 sniper rifles which they told him "Its the German sniper's rule to use Russians rifle - Our scopes are poor quality."
Scope system looks fine in the game,Grobut is correct they did say the current reticles are placeholders

Urban myths my friend nothing more. The trained German snipers all preferred the K98k, and understandibly so considering it featured superior ammunition, scope, trigger sensitivity and thus acurracy.

Sepp Allerberger used a PU scoped Mosin 91/30 for a very long period before being introduced to the K98k sniper rifle during training in Seetaleralpe. And Sepp makes it very clear that not only is the K98k a much superior rifle, the scopes made available to them by Zeiss, Hensoldt & Dialytan respectively were far superior to any Russian scope.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Durring production, game developers will often use "placeholders", if something has not been created yet like a texture, model or sound, they will just take a similar one from their old games (or just make a crude mock-up if a suitable alternative does not exist) and put it in there as a temporary placeholder, so they can still play test and refine the game even though parts of it are not done yet.

Thease placeholders are then replaced by the finsihed models/textures/sounds later on as they get created.

Ah I see, thanks for the explanation. Good to hear that these might just be placeholders

 

[LemoN]

"Its the German sniper's rule to use Russians rifle - Our scopes are poor quality."

I highly doubt that.
Two words: Argon Coating

Up until the late 1930s the standard way to make lenses employed a series of concave and convex mirrors usually two back to back pairs.Each lens lost ~ 10% clarity with the limit being around 40% reduction before clarity became seriously impinged. Also the more lenses the more restricted the field of view. In 1938 the Ziess company pioneered a technique for introducing Argon gass coating over the lenses that cut this per less loss to about 3-4%. What that meant was that german sighting systems with 4 lenses were as clear as western sights with 1-2 lenses. You can see it in the comparison between maginfication and field of view. For the same magnification they achieved twice the field of view... thus making it much easier to detect and acquire the targets in the first place.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Actually, Jeff put me in touch with a specialist in Germany (who's name and book I have in the office and I can't remember on a Sunday morning). He provided me with a personal copy of a small privately-published book he did, focusing on the exterior ballistics of WWII-era weaponry.

The info in that book actually showed that we had a couple of the weapons calculating incrorrectly in the old game. Believably, but incorrectly. One of the other items that it brought to light was the disturbance/destabilization of rounds in the trans-sonic region. Doesn't affect the high velocity rifle rounds for game purposes, but it does affect some of the SMGs.

Yeah, the point at which the bullet goes from supersonic to subsonic causes a slight disturbance to the stability of the bullet.

Incase you don't have the figures here are some MV figures from the German weapons manuals:

K98k = 755-760 m/s (198 gr sS), 785-790 m/s (178 gr SmE, SmK), 865-870 m/s (154 gr S patr.)
G43 = 745-750 m/s (198 gr sS), 775-780 m/s (178 gr SmE, SmK), 855-860 m/s (154 gr S patr.)
MG42 = 740-745 m/s (198 gr sS), 770-775 m/s (178 gr SmE, SmK), 850-855 m/s (154 gr S patr.) 805-850 m/s (V-patr. [MG only] sS, SmE, SmK, B, PmK)
MG34 = 755-760 m/s (198 gr sS), 785-790 m/s (178 gr SmE, SmK), 865-870 m/s (154 gr S patr.) 815-860 m/s (V-patr. [MG only] sS, SmE, SmK, B, PmK)
FG42 = 730-735 m/s (198 gr sS), 755-760 m/s (178 gr SmE, SmK), 790-830 m/s (V-patr. [MG only] sS, SmE, SmK, B, PmK)

StG44 = 685-690 m/s (125 gr SmE Patr. 43), 7.92x33mm Kurz.

Ballistic Coefficients & Sectional Density (weights in gram this time):

7.92x57mm JS:
12.8 g sS patr. FMJBT = BC: .594 (G1), SD: .204
11.5 g SmE, SmK patr. FMJBT = BC: .515 (G1), SD: .183
9.97 g S patr. FMJ = BC: .404 (G1), SD: .158

7.62x63mm (30-06):
9.71 g M2 Ball FMJ = BC: .407 (G1), SD: .167
11.14 g M72 Match FMJBT = BC: .520 (G1), SD: .191

7.62x54mm R Caliber:
9.52 g M1908 L FMJ = BC: .405 (G1), SD: .160
11.8 g M1930 D FMJBT = BC: .511 (G1), SD: .198

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

I highly doubt that.
Two words: Argon Coating

Spot on LemoN.

 

[sniper1991]

When I find the interview you will see the facts,Also see the documentary Survivors of Stalingrad,An actual German veteran is interviewed and he tells how The Russian snipers always had an advantage and that their rifle scopes were superior to the Germans,this is Coming from an actual German vet who served in Stalingrad - starts at 1:36
YouTube - SURVIVORS Of STALINGRAD - 2nd Part - Trailer - WW2 Eastern Front Battle 1943

German scopes were obsolete compared the the Russian models,Requiring a screwdriver to zero in and most couldnt even adjust for windage... Argon coating does not make a scope better,my PU/PEM scopes are as crystal clear as any modern scope and offer a good field of view for their magnification.

Today the m91/30 PU is in frontline use with Russian Spetsnaz and VDV Airborne,Where's the scoped k98?

Regarding Sepp Allerberger,You get this info out of that book he didnt even write,correct? The author of that book pretty much made everything up which has been proven,Sepp didnt even know the power of the PU scope yet in the book the author has him saying 4X PU scope,Never once have I heard any WW2 veteran tell how they looked through the scope and seen heads explode like watermelons. Sepp in his own words did say the m91/30 PU yielded good results,later in the interview saying the K98 was best when compared to the G43

whats fact is yes "some" German scopes had more power/field of view but required a tool to zero in.

Martin Peglar who runs a firearms museum in the UK and is an expert in the devlopment of firearms said himself "If my life were to depend on sniping I would choose the Mosin m91/30 PU"
YouTube - Snipers,battle of Stalingrad-Rifle comparison

Are you not aware that special manufacturing went into M91/30 sniper rifles? they were given lighter trigger pulls,hand selected barrels for accuracy and each rifle had to perform pin point accuracy on the range before being sent to the field

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Oh come on! Posting snippets from obscene docs doesn't even begin to present any form of argument worth taken seriously, yet alone prove anyting.

Here are some facts for you however:

There were no trained German snipers in stalingrad for the first year, and the only rifles equipped with scopes were 1.5x ZF41 equipped ones, which according to German snipers was pretty worthless, might as-well use the iron sights according to them. It wasn't until a year later that the more powerful scopes arrived, and they were far superior to anything the Russians had.

German scopes were obsolete compared the the Russian models,Requiring a screwdriver to zero in and most couldnt even adjust for windage

That is incorrect.

All German scopes could adjust for windage, and no screwdriver was needed to zero in the scope. Every scope was provided with a "key" used for adjusting windage, and the available precision of the fine adjustments was unrivalled. The advantage of this setup was that the scope could be taken off for travel and put back on without any loss of zero, something no Russian scope could.

The Germans did manufacture a scope with a simple adjustment system similar to that found on the PU series in their ZF4 scope though. This scope was meant for weapons such as the G43, FG42 etc etc, both weapons known for drifting their zero over time, lacking the precision of the K98k, and therefore requiring more frequent zeroing in. The Mosin needed a simply adjusted scope for the same reason, the inferior ammunition, loose tolerances, insensitve trigger and long wobbly barrel causing zero to drift all the time.

Regarding Sepp Allerberger,You get this info out of that book he didnt even write,correct? The author of that book pretty much made everything up which has been proven,Sepp didnt even know the power of the PU scope yet in the book the author has him saying 4X PU scope,Never once have I heard any WW2 veteran tell how they looked through the scope and seen heads explode like watermelons. Sepp in his own words did say the m91/30 PU yielded good results,later in the interview saying the K98 was best when compared to the G43

Err, Wacker has had many long interviews with Sepp over several months, and that is a documented fact. Plus Sepp signed the book. So where exactly has it been "proven" that he made anything up?

Furthermore you can't write off a whole book because of one memory mistake by Sepp (yes thats right, Wacker only wrote what Sepp told him), regarding the magnification power of the PU scope. You obviously haven't read the book as Sepp said himself he couldn't remember the exact power of the PU scope. So so much for yet another one of your out of context examples.. I really wish people would stop pretending to know anything about a book they've never even read.

Oh and when asked which rifle was the best, Mosin or K98k (no G43 mentioned), Sepp he made it very clear that it was the K98k.

Are you not aware that special manufacturing went into M91/30 sniper rifles? they were given lighter trigger pulls,hand selected barrels for accuracy and each rifle had to perform pin point accuracy on the range before being sent to the field

Hand selected barrels? You're kidding me right?


Argon coating not an advantage?... oh please


Oh and as for heads exploding like water melons when hit by a rifle bullet, take a peak at what happened to President Kennedy's head when he was shot on November 22nd 1963, I'd say that description sounds pretty accurate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSXxJuSWNWI

 

[Grobut]

Hand selected barrels? You're kidding me right?

Nope, in the (gun) industry this is common place, each barrel ends up a little different (ergo you can match a projectile to a gun in a murder case), and some turn out better than others, thease are commonly called "accurized barrels" in the industry.

Creating sniper versions of a military rifle commonly involves building them on the base a normal gun, but hand picking thouse with accurized barrels for the conversion, the Germans where doing it too, everyone was, and they are still doing it.


It's pretty obvious you want to sell the whole "german optics where better" angle here, and in some cases they where (though the Russian optics where more durrable), but it's to no avail, because there are NO SNIPERS IN RO2, not even one, not even a little bit, the "sniper" class in RO2 will be designated marksmen, sharpshooters, not special trained snipers.

And in the engament ranges and style of combat the game portrays, any slight advantage the trained sniper might have had means nothing, you will still be well within the effective range of my PPSh-41 and there's a good chance i'll shoot you first if i spot you, useing the bloomin ironsights of that thing, any slight advantage Argon Coating and a better FOV may have had will mean nothing at thease ranges and with the intensity of the combat, even if they do model the scopes to be 100% what you dream of, the Russians wont be at any measurable disadvantage, not at thease ranges.
This is not a sniper sim, it's a war sim that has marksmen in it, no less, and no more.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Nope, in the (gun) industry this is common place, each barrel ends up a little different (ergo you can match a projectile to a gun in a murder case), and some turn out better than others, thease are commonly called "accurized barrels" in the industry.

Creating sniper versions of a military rifle commonly involves building them on the base a normal gun, but hand picking thouse with accurized barrels for the conversion, the Germans where doing it too, everyone was, and they are still doing it.

I don't think you quite understand. Barrels weren't hand selected, to say that is quite simply dead wrong. No, rifles found to be unusually accurate were picked out from the production line to be used as sniper rifles, same thing was done in Germany, Britain & the US. There was no such thing as accurized barrels in WW2, just wasn't done. Today on the other hand the barrels for sniper rifles are specially made, with different machines and special care being taken during manufacturing. During WW2 it was quite simply just the rifle which performed the best during the obligatory factory zeroeing in stage that got selected for sniper use.

And I'm really not trying to sell anything, I'm quite simply posting the facts regarding each system.

The German system had the following advantages:

1. Better ammunition (sS Patr.)
2. Much higher tolerances (For both gun, mount & optics)
3. Better optics (Higher magnification, wider FOV, Argon purged etc.)
4. Better mounts (No loss of zero once zeroed in)
5. Better triggers
6. Range calibrated scopes

The Soviet system had the following advantages:

1. Fast and easy to learn adjustment of scope

And no, these advantages might not make themselves stand out at the most common ranges occuring in Stalingrad, but this game is going to feature maps with distances where it WILL matter. And it's not about it being a sniper sim as it already is approaching this by having the scope and ballistics system that it has, it's about it being accurate in regards to what it's trying to simulate; which is a large number of things at the same time, which is exactly what makes the RO series great.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Just to demonstrate the importance the ammunition alone has to the accuracy of the system as a whole:

7.92mm sS / Weight: 12.8 g / Average G1 BC: .584 / MV: 760 m/s / 9.45 barrel twist / 59 deg Fahrenheit / Sea Level Atmosphere:

7.62mm Type L / Weight: 9.52 g / Average G1 BC: .404 / MV: 860 m/s / 9.5 barrel twist / 59 deg Fahrenheit / Sea Level Atmosphere:

 

[sniper1991]

Unus Offa, Unus Nex So now your even doubting an actual German Veteran of Stalingrad? You really cant accept the facts can you.... Im having trouble replying to such nonsense sorry - Have you ever fired a rifle,yet original WWII sniper rifles like I have? I know guys who have traveled to the Tula and Izhevsk factorys and have all the docs. how the m91/30 sniper rifle were made - hand selected barrels,hand fitted scope setups etc... As far as I know the only special ammo German snipers were using was explosive bullets - pretty sick if you ask me,Read V.Zaitsevs memoirs and you will see the horrible damage these bullets did to the Russians. The common German scope in Stalingrad was not that crap 1.5X ZF but the 4X Zeiss and Dialtyn - look at photos of German snipers in Stalingrad or the scopes in Moscow Armed forces museum that V.Zaitsev took as trophys - All 4X big scopes.

This is where your really making me laugh - and where you lost all credability,Are you not aware that the PU scope setup can be removed from the rifle with just turning the main screw with your fingers and it will not lose zero - And dont try to tell me otherwise because I own several original m91/30 PU sniper rifles.

Sepp Allerberger's book? You couldnt pay me to read it,The nonsense ive heard thats written in that book is laughable,Russian soldiers eating their dead comrades - I wont even go any further what a lie,the author is an obvious anti Communist,I wouldnt trust anything he writes. All he did was take some notes from a few interviews he did with Allerberger and jumble them together,Why is it that initially Allerberger refused to let his real name be used in the book? Im not debating rather a bullet explodes a head,but that WWII vets do not talk that way! Ive read 1st hand accounts of many Soviet snipers and a few German snipers,Not ONE talks in such a manner - saying "I looked through the 4X PU scope and seen his head explode like a watermelon" Authors fantasy. What a real sniper say's which you can read in memoirs would be something like "I squeezed the trigger and watched his head fall back" Fact is killing was not fun for these guys and Allerberger especially had trouble post war because of what he had seen/done and I seriously doubt he got into such graphic details in these interviews,End of conversation.

Vassili Zaitsev said in his short story from 1943 that his m91/30 PEM was better than a Scoped k98 - what do you say to that? Because Zaitsev said that it must be a fact right,right? No its not its an opinion,do you know what an opinion is? What Sepp said (if he said it) is an opnion just as Zaitsevs. And who the heck wants to mess with a key to adjust for windage when the Russian scope just requires your fingers,really. Your talking about stuff you dont even know about,You dont even own a m91/30 PU yet your talking all this stuff that you cant simply remove the scope and pack it away when you can with 3 turns. All you know is nonsense you read online - and have that typical attitude that "Germans are #1 no questions asked" Well that aint true. An original m91/30 PU is capable of hitting a man sized target out to 800 yards with no problem - consistently,Ive done it many times. I know my sniper rifles.
1943 PU - WWII served,Ukrainian National Police issued post war


Now show me one of your 100 percent original WWII k98 or m91/30 sniper rifles? Until you show me an original WWII sniper rifle you own your opinion does not matter to me,with no 1st hand experiance.

And do I need to mention again that the m91/30 PU is in front line service with the Russian Army today?


Wheres the scoped k98?

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Problem with you Sniper1991 is that you actually haven't managed to post any facts yet. You post youtube clips which contain snippets taken out of context from various documentaries, ignoring what the people in the doc are actually talking about. Unsurprisingly there is no sound on the documentary either.

I've fired many weapons in my time, both in the military and in civil life, including both the K98k & Mosin, not that it actually matters to this discussion. Currently I am participating in a lot of competition shooting with modern match rifles, and I know my stuff about rifles, ammunition & ballistics. You on the other hand clearly know very little, you're just a Mosin fanboy relying on Russian propoganda to tell you what's right.

As for what happens to a head when hit by a rifle bullet, you obviously haven't ever seen the aftermath even once in your life. It aint pretty! Infact exploding water melon fits the bill rather well, esp. if you hit where Sepp did when he mentioned it.

And as for the Russian scope not losing zero when being taken off, bollocks, try taking it off and then put it back on and then see how accurate it is.

And finally regarding the hand picking of barrels, sorry but it just didn't happen, and you haven't got a single document to prove otherwise despite claims there'of - if you did you'd have posted them by now.

And that's going to be my final post to you, I'm done with you from now on, can't have an intelligent debate with a highly biased fanboy blinded by wartime Soviet heroic fantasy tales anyway.

Oh btw:

 

[sniper1991]

You really dont know how M91/30 sniper rifles were made,Contact Vic Thomas of "MosinNagant.net" and he will prove your opinions wrong - he is the Authority on M91/30 sniper rifles with 20 plus years of research. A Mosin fan boy? Why because I know the PU scope is better than the obsolete Zeiss? Ive fired everything from a .22 to a .50,My Grandfather was a Russian sniper during the Great Patriotic war,My father a Sergeant who fought in the Soviet Afghan war - He also agrees the m91/30 PU is better than the original scoped k98 we have fired.

As stated I own SEVERAL M91/30 sniper rifles,NEVER have i had zeroing problems,go get yourself an original m91/30 PU and you will see,so far all you have done is lied.

And whats this photo you post? LOL - some 50 year old mercenary? Probably from a movie,and whats up with the windows paint job all around? Im talking about that original WWII setup,he's got some $3,000 scope on that thing!

 

[LogisticEarth]

You know I've heard Navy Seals tell me that 5.56 NATO spins through the air end over end, and that even a near miss from .50 BMG will rip your arm off because of the massive shockwave!!!!

herfderf internet is serious business!



"Sniper" fanboys are the worst.

 

[Nimsky]

I think we found 7thGuardsTankDiV's long lost brother in sniper1991, or maybe it even IS him! :IS2:

*Drives off in :IS2:*