|
Pygmalion -> RE: Community Project: CWDB Gun RoF (5/14/2020 12:39:09 AM)
|
Find attached an edited version of MountRoF.xlsx with updated data.
I've preserved the original data, so find the new ROF under nROF (measured in seconds between shots); that number is rounded from the RPM, which is included under RPM in case you want to override rounding. Where an RPM range was available (e.g. 50-75 RPM), I always used the highest value. I made exceptions for a few cases where historical performance was consistently recorded as significantly worse than the theoretical RPM. For artillery (mortars, howitzers, etc.) with rapid-fire and sustained ROF, I have used the sustained ROF. Notes are included after many entries, so you can track my declining sanity...ah, er, I mean, see useful explanatory info. Sources listed as well.
You'll note that many mounts are highlighted yellow. This indicates a mount which I did not check, either because it was obviously correct based on common knowledge (e.g. an MG with ROF 1) or because it represented a platform for which "rate of fire" doesn't really apply. Ballistic missiles, for example, don't have a "rate of fire." They just...go. With that said, it appears that various DB editors have assigned various arbitrary ROF values to these "unclassifiable" platforms: ROF 5 for missiles; 15 for silos, TEL, and SLMs; 2 for CIWS missiles (e.g. RIM), etc. This system is generally, but not always consistent: therefore, if you see a yellow-highlighted mount with an unsourced nROF and a note to the tune of "standardization," that's what I'm on about.
One thing I wasn't able to figure out was whether there is any pattern for changing ROF between single, double, etc. mounts. Does a 2x machine gun fire at 2x the rate? Does a 100rnd burst fire at ROFx100? Based on the original numbers, it didn't appear that there was any such system in place, so my numbers treat every mount as a single weapon; if I was wrong, lemme know.
A few mounts are highlighted red; these indicate weapons which I either could find no record of (typos in the mount names?) or which I could not find any ROF. If anyone can fill those gaps, that would be much appreciated!
One final note re: sources. Where possible, I have looked for reliable sources. However, for many weapons -- especially tank guns -- Wikipedia ended up being the most accessible source. Usually I wouldn't do this. However, I've found that with technical data, e.g. RPM, Wikipedia is generally reliable: the Wiki's greatest weakness is that it is inherently vulnerable to bias, but numbers don't change even as sentences are rephrased and inconvenient facts omitted. Moreover, people don't usually make up numbers: they generally find them somewhere. For what it's worth, as I discovered new sources, I cross-referenced some of the Wiki data and corroborated everything I checked.
|
|
|
|
