Are ranging shots realistic ?

[thomas aagaard]

The danish test was done at 90m, so I can't comment on accuracy at longe range, but they did hit the x made by tape... 

 

My knowledge is mainly on landbased artillery, but (generalizing a lot) if you look at 12pounders, they had an effective range at 1km and Iam pretty sure they could hit a target the size of a ship with a good hit %.

My point is, In my view the problem is not the guns lack of accuracy... but the ship rolling.

 

anyway, back to debating ranging shots.

[BlouBulle]

I totally agree with that, about ranging shots, were they used, not often maybe... can you stop a player from single firing a weapon... nope that would really suck (only full broadside).

[SerrialKiller]

Ranging shits are realistic off course to make sure you would hit the ship.

[Magnum]

What we really really really need is the mechanic to skip low angle shots into the hull - it reality they were VERY effective and were a major factor that brought on the age of iron clads

[Ghroznak]

Range shot is nice for range estimation.

I dont think range shots are the problem, but rather how accurate a broadside is at very long ranges.

Using 6pd long barrels I can land the entire broadside accurately on target once I got the range. And getting range takes only 1-2 shots when you played awhile as you start to known the elevation required based on the distance to ship and ship size.

What I think is needed is a wider 'cone of fire', that is more spread at long ranges.

The cannons used were not rifled, but smoothbore, using round shots and fired through barrels that were not exactly a 'snug fit' but had quite a bit of free space around the cannonball. Those elements all contribute to inaccuracy, particularly at long ranges where wind direction, wind resistance and its effect on a round shape as well as the movement of the ship all come into play.

Firing a roundball musket at long range is more of a game of chance than marksmanship.

And smoothbore cannons is nothing more than oversized muskets.

Just a thought.

[thomas aagaard]

Cannons can use balls that fit the bore... since you clean the barrel after each shot. 
smooth-bore Muskets dont since you don't clean the barrel and when it fouls after a few shots it becomes much harder to load.

 

So you really can't compare accuracy of the two.

[Ghroznak]

Inaccuracy from muskets (and smoothbore cannons) is the result of round balls having very poor ballistics. The drag from wind will cause the shot to pull towards a random direction rather than cutting through it like a pointed round fired from a rifled barrel does.

The cleanliness of the barrel isn't the main cause of inaccuracy, though it can add to it.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

Inaccuracy from muskets (and smoothbore cannons) is the result of round balls having very poor ballistics. The drag from wind will cause the shot to pull towards a random direction rather than cutting through it like a pointed round fired from a rifled barrel does.

The cleanliness of the barrel isn't the main cause of inaccuracy, though it can add to it.

 

Due to lack of rifling, you're also missing the spin imparted to the projectile, which serves to "even out" imperfections and imbalances in the projectile, causing each to have a different aerodynamic drag which will emphasize that impurity/imbalance as it flies through the air, causing the projectile to swerve in an unpredictable direction.  Even a completely round projectile can obtain decent accuracy if a good amount of spin is imparted upon it.

[Ghroznak]

True Henry, the spin is a crucial factor. Even pointed rounds would end up tumbling through air if no spin is introduced.

However, round balls from smoothbore cannons had no spin whatsoever. At least no intended spin, nor enough to make much difference.

So again, on topic, the ability to fire single ranging shots in the game is not really the issue. The fact that cannons are so accurate that once you got range from a single shot, every single shot from broadside will be dead on target even at extreme ranges.

Introducing less accuracy on those long range broadsides would make ranging and extreme distance broadside sniping with long guns less desirable (and more realistic?)

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

True Henry, the spin is a crucial factor. Even pointed rounds would end up tumbling through air if no spin is introduced.

However, round balls from smoothbore cannons had no spin whatsoever. At least no intended spin, nor enough to make much difference.

So again, on topic, the ability to fire single ranging shots in the game is not really the issue. The fact that cannons are so accurate that once you got range from a single shot, every single shot from broadside will be dead on target even at extreme ranges.

Introducing less accuracy on those long range broadsides would make ranging and extreme distance broadside sniping with long guns less desirable (and more realistic?)

 

We're agreed on all of those points.

 

Ranging shots are important.

 

Vertical dispersion at longer ranges is far, far, far too small.  I've agitated in multiple threads to exponentially increase dispersion, both vertical and horizontal, beyond mid-range.

[Robert Danforth]

Ranging shits are realistic

 

I usually fire mine at point blank range, but I suppose if you really needed to go the distance....

[Sir. Cunningham]

I usually fire mine at point blank range, but I suppose if you really needed to go the distance....

 

Hahaha 

[Sir. Cunningham]

The danish test was done at 90m, so I can't comment on accuracy at longe range, but they did hit the x made by tape... 

 

My knowledge is mainly on landbased artillery, but (generalizing a lot) if you look at 12pounders, they had an effective range at 1km and Iam pretty sure they could hit a target the size of a ship with a good hit %.

My point is, In my view the problem is not the guns lack of accuracy... but the ship rolling.

 

anyway, back to debating ranging shots.

 

 

Test was done at 100 m, here's the video(s) 

 

http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2014/03/25/121431.htm

 

Bottom video is with wartime load, hence the more powerful recoil.

[thomas aagaard]

The vid say 100m, but that is not correct. I contacted the musem and ask for a few more details... and it was done at 90m.
They first fired off 1kg powder, with no round. Then 1,5kg for the first round, and then used the warload of 3kg for the rest.

The round that went high went 2200m

 

The rounds was originals that had been "sandblown" to remove rust - weight 14,9kg

[Thomas Blackwell]

Going back to the OP for a second, I disagree with the quote from the other forum. It may be unrealistic, but so are aiming guides and auto-targeters. It is the most realistic option imo and as such I would not be upset to see it's continued use in Naval Action.

[Rogues Salute]

I usually fire mine at point blank range, but I suppose if you really needed to go the distance....

 

Yes but at point black range splash damage can be a concern and negatively affect moral    

[mouse of war]

I've heard the term 'fire as you bare!' - meaning for each gun captain to fire when they could see their gun was lined up on the target. Perhaps this option should be added?

[coffeenthree]

love ranging shots, please don't change it