Name this Game definition

Started by Last Hussar, 10 January 2025, 12:50:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Last Hussar

I want suggestions (serious ones!) for a name of the firing area of a fighter plane

Planes are based on a square base (nominally 5cm square)

The arcs in the game are 90' - Left, right, forward, aft, drawn centre to corner

The firing arc is a forward passage, defined by the edges of the base - so 5cm wide along it's length.

What should I call it? Not keen on 'arc', to avoid confusion with forward arc.

'Firing [what?]'
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Steve J

Shooting zone, target zone? Or replace zone with area?

Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

Gwydion

Convergence zone, Convergence point.
Possibly Convergence pattern.
This may not feel right for you as it is the point around which the guns were harmonised to concentrate their firepower rather than the whole area through which the rounds were fired.
But it's what the pilots knew it as.

(Harmonisation changed from pattern where the guns were not focused on a single spot, to point where they were, at c250yds or even as close as c120yds! by half way through the Battle of Britain, around the end of August/start of September.  This supposedly gave better results.).

d_Guy

Encumbered by Idjits, we pressed on

Last Hussar

I like 'Convergence Zone' - I think that flitted through what passes for a brain a some point; Yes, I'll use that.

Officially the spread was supposed to be spread to increase chance of hit, but a lot of pilots had the guns converged - the distance depended on pilot preference.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Gwydion

Good choice! :D
Dowding was very keen on the spread pattern with no convergence point, for the reason you state, and that was officially the policy, certainly at the beginning of the war. Many of the better/more self confident/arrogant pilots adjusted their guns to a convergence point and it appears, from combat debriefs at least, got better results. So official bore sightings were allowed to be adjusted to the points I mentioned above. Although 120 yards feels a bit close to me - the length of a rugby pitch including both in goal areas!

fsn

The tone of your question suggests you're only considering the fixed, forward firing weapons, thus excluding the contributions of such luminaries of the second crew members of the Bf110, the Potez 631 or the Boulton-Paul Defiant.

I would suggest "endangerment envelope" for these weapons.

Otherwise, I support "convergence point/zone". However, the pedant in me hints gently, that the convergence  point is just the point at which all weapons are aimed. The bullets will perforce go beyond that - the "danger area" is not one triangle, but two.


Lord Oik of Runcorn (You may refer to me as Milord Oik)

Oik of the Year 2013, 2014; Prize for originality and 'having a go, bless him', 2015
3 votes in the 2016 Painting Competition!; 2017-2019 The Wilderness years
Oik of the Year 2020; 7 votes in the 2021 Painting Competition
11 votes in the 2022 Painting Competition (Double figures!)
2023 - the year of Gerald:
2024 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

kipt


Last Hussar

Fsn, yes I know it technically excludes outside those two lines, but the rules do state it can be assumed that the pilot has more latitude than represented.

With non fixed weapons, eg turrets, then they have the whole quarter they are facing.

The rational is this; the firing point is fixed in game, but Fighter combat happens at high speed - I am not saying that the shots happen at that exact moment,  but at some point the trigger was pulled. It might have been a second or two earlier, maybe it was perfectly timed, maybe it was a "BUGGER" moment of realisation. 

We have aircraft moving at 300 mph, in unpredictable vectors. The alternative is move mm by mm, and call the shots after each creep forward.  I wamt something fast moving that FEELS right, and damn the physics.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry

Raider4

Quote... I wamt something fast moving that FEELS right, and damn the physics.
The Battle of Britain - Again! rules by Mike Crane. Certainly fast moving. More abstracted than you're going for, I think.

Been mentioned on here a few times, by BigJackMac and Westmarcher among others.

pierre the shy

10 January 2025, 07:42:03 PM #11 Last Edit: 10 January 2025, 07:53:04 PM by pierre the shy
Yes as Raider 4 says these are a good basis for basic air combat. I have evolved a much modified version of them that I use for mainly Indian Ocean/Pacific scenarios, though I may add a few more aircraft for other theatres this year. They use squares not hexes for movement.

Not sure if they meet your level of detail LH but Paul R can vouch for them as giving good smooth and quickly resolved games?
"Welcome back to the fight...this time I know our side will win"

paulr

Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - 1 x Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - 1 x Runner-Up!
2023 Painting Competition - 1 x Runner-Up!

Last Hussar

11 January 2025, 09:19:42 AM #13 Last Edit: 11 January 2025, 09:25:03 AM by Last Hussar
I've got rules, just breaking them out and fiddling with them to make them hopefully run a bit quicker.

Have downloaded these though, thanks. Mine are very much 1 on 1 dogfights.
I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

GNU PTerry