Jump to content
Spartan0536

ArmA III Ballistics Overhaul WIP

Would you use this ballistic code in your mod?  

158 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you use this ballistic code in your mod?

    • Yes
    • Not Sure, perhaps you could site your findings more in depth
    • No


Recommended Posts

UUUMMMM those barrel lengths are MASSIVE, bigger than any personal weapon I have ever seen, I don't think even the South African NTW 20 with the .50BMG barrel has a 40+ inch barrel. I know for a fact that there is no 44 inch barrel chambered in .338 Lapua, it would be pointless, the L115A3 AWM only has a 27 inch barrel and that is BIG, it gives even the high powder loads a 90-95% burn, I think .338 Lapua requires a 26 inch barrel for average full powder burn with high pressure loads its recommend to use a 28 inch barrel, I am pretty sure the longest .338 barrel I have heard of in production is 30 inches which is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I can't get a simple operation right, double checked...

.50 BMG 29-inch barrel

.416 Barret 29-inch barrel

.408 Cheytac 29-inch barrel

.375 Cheytac 29-inch barrel

.338 Lapua Magnum 26 inch barrel

Would you mind PMing me the results when you can?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballistics Update! 9/24/2014

Ok so I am currently on my 3 day break from work (finally), and I have been working on ballisitcs, I seem to have lost all my data on 6.8x43mm SPC that I had worked on before, but that was no real issue, however I am stuck with this and I am not sure you will like it...

For 6.8x43mm SPC there is only 1 Full Metal Jacket bullet on the market (6.8x43mm SPC is .277 Caliber), its made by Remington the company that designed 6.8x43 SPC, its a 115 Grain Boat Tailed design, it sounds great, until you look at the bullet and find out that it has a TERRIBLE ballistics coefficient of .292, this is WORSE than ANY of my 5.56x45mm NATO rounds. Lets keep in mind here that 6.8x43mm SPC was never adopted by the military and that many 6.8x43 shooters are civilian hunters using the cartridge for hog/deer hunting or competition shooting, this means that many rounds will be Ballistic Tipped, Hollow Point Boat Tailed (OTM), or Spitzer bullets. FMJ rounds are VERY uncommon with this cartridge, in fact only 2 companies that I have found manufacture FMJ bullets and they both use Remington 115 Grain FMJ-BT bullets, they are Remginton and DoubleTap. Barrier performance in 6.8x43mm may not be as good as the M855A1 as the FMJ-BT round is designed to punch paper cheaply at 300m ranges, its not designed as a combat load.

Now for some good news, since there is a HUGE call for Hollow Point Boat Tail rounds in 6.8x43mm (OTM based is what I look for) I am able to get a really nice selection of Sierra MatchKings which I can 100% confirm that NATO forces currently use in the field on select rounds, what I came up with is right from Sierra Bullets themselves. I looked up Sierra Bullets reloading info and with some help from Paulo Santos on 68forums.com I custom made a combat load for OTM-BT, here is what I ended up with....

Sierra MatchKing Open Tip Match Boat Tail

135 Grains

2,346 ft/s

1,650 ft/lbs KE

.488 Ballistics Coefficient

Featuring:

SSA Brass

CCI #41 Primers

Lee FCD Crimpings

Corbin Cannelures

28 Grains of X-Terminator powder

This is the exact bullet I based the OTM-BT off of from Sierra....

1833.jpg

As you can tell the OTM-BT round will DEVASTATE targets even out to 600m with little to no problems what so ever, as for the barrier performance, its marginal, should be a bit better than the OTM 5.56x45, but probably not much better, the problem again lies in the fact that 6.8x43mm SPC is not a military round and thus does not have MilSpec bullets designed for barrier penetration. This same issue goes for .300 AAC Blackout, however .300 Blackout uses .308 Caliber round and inherently will penetrate barriers better and has a much better chance of being adopted as a MilSpec round than any other especially 6.5x38 Grendel which would be a terrible military load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballistics Update! 9/24/2014 part II

I am back again with another update, this time on the .300 AAC Blackout round. I have been doing some extensive research on this .300 Blackout round that everyone has been talking about, I have heard the hype and figured it to be another wildcat knockoff that would die in a few years, however my research has shown me this is anything but the case. I have been completely sold on .300 AAC Blackout.

Some neat features on .300 Blackout

1. Its parent case is 5.56x45mm NATO (yes seriously)

2. It uses .308 Caliber bullets (that's right 7.62 NATO bullets)

3. Full capability in short barreled rifles with MINIMAL velocity loss

4. Can be suppressed and use subsonic ammo to achieve almost identical decibel performance of an MP5-SD, yes a suppressed subsonic MP5, except it has 2x the power and 2.5x the range!

5. .300 Blackout will work 100% in ALL STANAG 5.56mm magazines, Lower receivers, upper receivers, and bolt carriers, gas piston and direct impingement systems with NO part changes, only thing that needs to change is the BARREL.

6. .300 Blackout hits HARDER than 7.62x39mm Russian, yet it TUMBLES like a 5.56 in ballistics gel.

All of this has me really excited for .300 Blackout making its appearance in ArmA III, and I am spending LOTS of time making sure to get the data just right. In fact I will even give you a sneak peak at my WIP, enjoy!

.300 Blackout (I call it .300 Lights out) *Note: All performance data located here is for a 16 inch barrel, I am working on the 9 inch barrel version as well (there is not much difference at all)

PNW Arms FMJ-BT

Full Metal Jacket Boat Tail

147 Grains

2000 ft/s

1305 ft/lbs KE

.393 Ballistics Coefficient (G1)

548909.jpg

Sierra Bullets MatchKing OTM-BT

Open Tip Match Boat Tail

135 Grains

2150 ft/s muzzle

1385 ft/lbs KE

.370 Ballistics Coefficient (G1)

2123.jpg

DoubleTap Ammo Sierra MatchKing OTM-BT

Open Tip Match Boat Tail Subsonic

240 Grains

1025 ft/s

560 ft/lbs KE

.685 Ballistics Coefficient (G1) <- Yes I do mean .685 G1 BC, this was NOT a typo!

9245.jpg

So just how good in SBR's is .300 Blackout compared to 7.62x39, 5.56x45, and 6.8x43 SPC? Check this out, and keep in mind that the Ballistics Coefficients of .300 Blackout are better than anything I have in 5.56x45, 7.62x39, and 6.8x43 SPC, so down range other than the OTM in 6.8x43, .300 Blackout reigns supreme out to about 400-500m....

300-chart2.jpg

Now I want you to watch this video, look closely at the recoil and remember one is a 9mm SMG and the other is a .300 Blackout SBR shooting a RIFLE Cartridge that is firing .308 cal bullets, also listen closely to the sound difference, I suspect you will be impressed.

1 very interesting to keep in mind here is that you CAN load MilSpec 7.62x51mm BULLETS into a .300 Blackout cartridge, this means AP rounds could theoretically be loaded and fired, however there is a distinct velocity difference between 7.62x51 and 7.62x35, so an AP round would be less effective in .300 Blackout, however that does not reduce its viability and a blind barrier and or AP bullet can easily be designed from the ground up specifically for .300 Blackout.

Edited by Spartan0536
More info....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spartan,

Would/could you add support for advanced ballistics to your code? Or would that be up to whoever makes the ammo addon? I don't know if adding those parameters would effect your damage values or not. I know it does effect the trajectory of the rounds. But whether that effects the terminal ballistics I do not know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruthberg and I have talked about working in coordination and we both agree that it should be done, I do have plans to work in conjunction with Rutheberg, this will be happening after my current release for RobertHammer. Part of Rutherbergs work is knowing the rate of twist for the barrel the weapon is using which affects stability and ultimately accuracy, this is kind of out of my hands, however I can still get the info to him if I know what weapon systems I am developing the ballistics for, other than that I have all the data Ruthberg needs to make the ballistics spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ruthberg and I have talked about working in coordination and we both agree that it should be done, I do have plans to work in conjunction with Rutheberg, this will be happening after my current release for RobertHammer. Part of Rutherbergs work is knowing the rate of twist for the barrel the weapon is using which affects stability and ultimately accuracy, this is kind of out of my hands, however I can still get the info to him if I know what weapon systems I am developing the ballistics for, other than that I have all the data Ruthberg needs to make the ballistics spot on.

I was looking at gathering information to make my own ammo similiar to what you were doing but I think this is further along. I think you could get away with generalizing the twist rates based on caliber. At least for general issue MIL-SPEC rifles. My knowledge of how ammo is based in the game is still limited and even further limited when thinking about how the game figures out which values to use based on barrel length. I was under the impression that the ammo used in the M4 and M16 of RHs addons were the same since the magazines were interchangeable. I didnt know the values would change based on the barrel length.

Edit: Did you ever think about releasing a stand alone ammo addon that just adds these different ammos to the game in magazines that people could then configure their weapons to use?

Edited by Raytesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have considered it, however there are issues to that, I believe Lukrop has a mod that is exactly that and I gave it my complete support, its called IKR Ammo I believe. As for my rounds being different per barrel length that is completely true, as the barrel of a firearm is shortened you gain more maneuverability and are more effective in CQB environments however you greatly suffer at range, vice verse for long barrels. Different rounds have different powders and different amounts of powder, some powders are ultra fast burning allowing for better performance in short barrels, others are slower burning and are made for better stability with heavier bullets and longer barrels, my ammo values take this into consideration where applicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lukrop Ammo has not been recently supported if I remember correctly...

I don't think I have seen anything about if for months most likely.

(I do realize this isnt your fault/responsiblity, just letting you know)

Also nice to hear you are doing all that .300 stuff, also I am looking forward to RHs stuff coming out once you give him the values or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have considered it, however there are issues to that, I believe Lukrop has a mod that is exactly that and I gave it my complete support, its called IKR Ammo I believe. As for my rounds being different per barrel length that is completely true, as the barrel of a firearm is shortened you gain more maneuverability and are more effective in CQB environments however you greatly suffer at range, vice verse for long barrels. Different rounds have different powders and different amounts of powder, some powders are ultra fast burning allowing for better performance in short barrels, others are slower burning and are made for better stability with heavier bullets and longer barrels, my ammo values take this into consideration where applicable.

Oh I know about powder burn rates, etc. I'm fairly well versed in shooting and reloading. I just didn't know how it all applied into the arma engine. As generally when I looked at the ammo configs they were generally the same in Lukrops mod, and then that magazine was used in multiple weapons like the M16 and M4. I was wondering if the values were modified by the weapon configs.

I know generally when comparing our own M193 load shot out of a 16"(M4s are 14.5") and a 20" AR-15 platform. The loss of muzzle velocity was about 200 fps. Now for some shooters that means pretty much nothing other than a loss of a little bit of range in competitive shooting. (I can still hit a man sized steel at 500 yards with the same elevation adjustments on both rifles.) The 55gr bullet never really had that great of terminal ballistics other than it tumbles into soft tissue which wounds more than stopping the target. It doesn't have much of anything beyond 500-600m (55gr round.)

Now as a general rule when I've searched and done research on what i was going to build as a new firearm barrel length only really mattered when thinking about maneuverability. 14.5, 16, 18, 20" barrel length AR-15 style weapons are all just as effective at the same ranges with the correct ammo. The only difference was how maneuverable did you wanna be with said firearm. Even among the military currently in the special ops community they are favoring shorter rifles with different ammo to still effectively engage and eliminate targets at distances you wouldn't think possible with that. Best example I have found is this video here.

At about 7:00m they will switch to him hitting a man sized steel target at 750m with a 7.5 inch barreled 300 blackout rifle with a suppressor and an Aimpoint micro dot. And its still hitting with some energy behind it.

But this is where the modern sporting arms industry is going with things. I know its not applicable so much to the military values we see in arma. Anyways i went of on a tangent.

Mainly if and when you code the ammo and in the code there is only one 5.56 nato round in the magazine. Does the weapon configs change the value of the ammo config or do you have to code it into the ammo config. I guess that's where I'm a bit confused, because when reloading, you make the same ammo that whole lot of ammo you made is all the same. Bullet weight, powder, primer, case weight (if your shooting match ammo) are all as close to identical as possible. (Ammo configs.) Now depending on what rifle you fire that ammo from the velocity, range, and accuracy all change. Barrel length. (Rifle configs) And that rifle is ultimately what changes determines what the energy (HIT) of the round will be. Penetration is determined by the type of bullet and its velocity. I'm trying to figure out how arma figures out the ballistics vs how it's calculated in real life.

Because i would really like to create an Advanced ballistics compatible ammo mod to use on our server. And if it works out well even maybe release it to the community. Its something that is lacking a little bit a standardized ammo. Especially for sniping. There is just something i found about being able to hit enemies at 800m with 5.56 without a real challenge. (No Kentucky windage or any real challenge.) The bullets just flew straight with a certain drop. For a while things just felt more like a shooting gallery than an actual firefight.

Edited by Raytesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a feedback tracker ticket for having BIS implement the correct ballistic values that we can vote on?

It would be really nice if improved ballistics did not require a mod and wasn't just applicable for weapon mods that used those values, while the other weapons/magazines would remain messed up. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a feedback tracker ticket for having BIS implement the correct ballistic values that we can vote on?

It would be really nice if improved ballistics did not require a mod and wasn't just applicable for weapon mods that used those values, while the other weapons/magazines would remain messed up. :(

RobertHammer and many other dev's myself included have voted on just a Magazine CFG where we don't have to make 3-4 different magazines for different rounds, we have had this on the dev tracker for almost a year if not a year and still nothing. IMHO, if you want real ballistics in ArmA 4 try to get BIS to hire Ruthberg and myself so that we can write the ballistics code and assist them with material densities, perhaps while they are at that they could hire X39 and he can instruct them on how to simulate a human casualty. I don't mean to sound like an asshole, its not my intention and your question is very valid, its just that I am not convinced of BIS's interest in working on ArmA's ballistics system. The mod community here is what really makes ArmA what it is and its why I do what I do and why many other dev's also do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In someways I think its good that we have great modders like you, RH, X39 all the map makers and everything else because I've seen this in Skyrim the mod authors make the game popular. I hope that the BI devs can learn a bit and implement the changes the mod authors seek to make their game even better. After all it will increase sales maybe even more than expansions. After all I consider every mod created a mini expansion. And the more mod authors that work together the less bugs. Which is why I'm trying to learn as much as possible and hopefully contribute a bit myself back to the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My attitude is that BIS put things in there as a start, or a base. Sure ballistics and damage isn't great for their 5.56, but seriously my mindset that Spartan0536 does excellent work so while I use BIS mags in my weapons as a a matter of practicality, I use his bullets more than anything else. So yeah it would be great if BIS fixed their ballistics but as long as Spartan0536 puts out good values I can care less what BIS does or doesn't do. I mean if I can take on a squad by myself and with luck come on top, then that's a good deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well my .300 AAC Blackout rounds will be available today (9/28/2014), I managed to get a median percent of velocity decrease between a 9 inch SBR and a 16 inch AR by measuring 4 different rounds each fired from a 9 and a 16 inch barrel, I then calculated their percentage differences, then took those differences and compared them to get an averaged difference. My averaged velocity difference between a 9 inch SBR and a 16 inch AR in .300 AAC Blackout is 7.231%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.300 AAC Blackout has been released! (9/28/2014)

Please check my completed thread for more info including a Q&A about the values.

---------- Post added at 06:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------

Progress Update! (9/28/2014)

Hello everyone, after releasing my .300 Blackout rounds I decided to smooth out any errors my pistol calibers would have and I have smoothed out A LOT of errors. I have now triple checked all my mathematical calculations and my source information has been cross checked multiple times. I have now standardized my 4 main pistol calibers, I will list the standardization corrections below....

9x19mm Parabellum

Pistol - 5 inch barrel (Based on a Sig P226 Mk25)

SMG - 9 inch barrel (Based on an H&K MP5A5)

.357 Sig

Pistol - 5 inch barrel (Based on a Sig P226 Tactical Operations)

.40 S&W

Pistol - 5 inch barrel (Based on a S&W M&P40 Pro)

SMG - 9 inch barrel (Based on an H&K MP5/40)

.45 ACP

Pistol & SMG - 5.5 inch barrel (Based off of an H&K Mk23 & TDI/Kriss Vector SMG)

5.7x28mm FN

Pistol - 4.8 inch barrel (Based off of an FNH Five-Seven)

SMG - 10.4 inch barrel (Based off of an FNH P-90 SMG)

*Please note that 9x19mm Parabellum will be featured first as RobertHammer needs this ammo soon for a new secret project.

Edited by Spartan0536

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good deal, I need to get my Glock 45CL better rounds...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am expecting my 9x19mm Parabellum rounds and 6.8x43mm SPC to be finished by 9/29/2014, I am working as hard and fast as I can while being accurate to get these ballistics out to everyone who has be so patient with me for the past 2 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well cool, I do have a couple MP5s that could use that stuff anyway, nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume the pistol ammos are based off standard nato ball rounds? Standard pressures, etc

The Full Metal Jackets for 9x19 Parabellum and .45 ACP are, the subsonic and +P JHP loads are civilian/LE spec, that is because the US miliary only uses Ball ammo in their SMG's/Pistols as that is all they are allowed to use outside of Counter-Terror/Counter Insurgency operations. According to the Hague Convention of 1904 a sovereign countries military may not use any munitions that are designed to expand to cause addition "suffering" or wounding against another sovereign military. However in 1985 USSOCOM and many other NATO allied nations declared that Terrorists and non nationalist sanctioned forces ex. "Insurgents" do not qualify for restrictions called for under the hague convention. However Open Tip Match ammo like a Sierra Matchking is able to be used against sovereign national forces as its reverse drawn jacket is NOT designed to increase wounding but add stability to flight making it more accurate and is deemed suitable for general military use by NATO countries. For these reasons you will see my ballistics represent this with FMJ's, JHP's, OTM's, AP's, and Hardcast bullets as they all quality at some degree or another for military use against different targets.

Addendum: The 9mm FMJ M882 round is considered by velocity and pressure to be a 9x19mm +P even though it is military ball standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE 9/30/2014!

I have finalized and released my v2.0 9x19mm Parabellum rounds, they are available for use in my completed thread, enjoy! Next up is 6.8x43mm SPC, followed very shortly by 7.62x51mm NATO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being that guy again (for a brief moment).

It's been a full week since the last progress update.

What caused this lull and also, how goes the 7.62x51 NATO research?

Wish you the very best and hope you've cured any hangovers you got during the celebration of the 9x19mm Parabellum release :P

PS/Disclaimer/Whatever: I was "that guy" for a brief moment not to spite the mod author but to have a tidbit of information so the next guy doesn't come 2-3 posts down and asks the same thing. I.e. Pre-emptive info?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he meant - Why 9mm and 300acc are prioritized over 7.62x51? As I remember RH is holding of his update just because 7.62?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had to completely re-write 7.62x51mm NATO as my information was a bit faulty thanks to some friends of mine who are in the US Military as officers, one of which has a friend who works at Picatinny Arsenal for the US Army. He got me some exact specs for various different barrel lengths and accurate penetration ratings as such, these 7.62x51mm Ballistics should be spot on now, but as I said I have to re-write everything which is going to take some time. As for 6.8x43mm SPC, All I have to do is run the calculations, I have everything needed and its accurate, I have just been working on 7.62x51mm NATO like crazy as RobertHammer is expecting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×