|
|
Reply
| | From: Flashman191 (Original Message) | Sent: 9/22/2008 8:55 PM |
I hope this will be the start of a large thread, and i ammopening this in response to James TRD's question "Please Doctor why has it turned purple? --" NO! Wrong one. Sorry this one: seems to me a 20mm cannon is wasted in the nose of a bomber considering most attacks would be from above and to the side and the rear... surely Flash will elaborate on that... I can understand needing rapid fire in the rear, but what good is a cannon in the nose? |
|
Reply
| |
That's right, Tincan B17 G. if you read my chart you will see the .5 BMG round was a pretty powerful projectile. Twin mount very good This of course was remote slaving so the gunner sitting in the nose glazing was comfortable un like those in our Lancasters. Note .30 cal "cheek" guns and twin .50 cals RHS Short barrels. |
|
Reply
| |
James German aircraft had very short production runs I'll try to fish some pix out. You also had a far bigger variety of cannon then you had 13 and 15mm guns which were almost cannon. Allies had .303, .30, .5, 20mm and that was it! Go back to my charts and see the enormous variety which the Germans tried. I'll return to this tomorrow. |
|
Reply
| |
The smallest calibre of cannon available before the First World War was 37 mm because of the Declaration of St Petersburg in 1868, which renounced the use of any projectile weighing under 400 g which was either explosive or "charged with fulminatory inflammable matter" This was because early experiments had been made with explosive bullets and the resuklts were not too pretty. The possibility of making an explosive rifle-bullet soon engaged Mr. Metford's attention, and in the year 1856 he invented the rifle shell which bore his name, and was eventually adopted by the Government. In the year 1857 he was applied to by Colonel Dixon, the Chief of the Select Committee, to send in his explosive shell for experiment, and it, in his hands, defeated all other rifle shells tried, and was eventually exhibited as the best shell before Lord Panmure, Secretary of State for War, and others, and gave great satisfaction. This, however, was in Mr. Metford's absence, for he had recently left for India, and for the moment no such shell was adopted THE USA THOUGH USED EXPLOSIVE BULLETS IN THE CIVIL WAR UNTIL OUTLAWING IN 1868 |
|
Reply
| |
TC...re11... the RAF used this tactic during the Battle of Britain, as it had the effect of breaking up the bomber formations. Flash.... Why were guns not fitted in the wings of bombers, so that the pilot could shoot at oncoming fighters. That pic in 12 seems mighty cluttered to me. |
|
Reply
| |
Interesting question but in fact many fighters were not fitted with wing cannon or Mgs either. cannon are extremely heavy especially their ammunition, and the simplest ones were drum fed. The Me 109 had a very narrow wing and wing MG 131s caused a lot of drag. their favouirite was hub cannon (MK - Motor-Kanone) and twin MG 17s (7.92mm) firing through the prop. If you had prop synchronised guns you needed electric percussion for accurate sychronisation. if you are aiming at oncoming fighters you have to turn, and (see WW2 Bomber "box" defences) you are using a lot of airspace. Better, a traversing gun. At the end of WW2 the Lancaster had twin Hispanos in a dorsal turret. more hitting power than a Battle of Britain Spitfire. Too late |
|
Reply
| |
This message has been deleted by the author. |
| |
Reply
| |
"Free" mount MG 151/20mm much higher velocity Doirnier Do 17Z It will be superfluous to describe all the aircraft wich employs this gun, some like the Me-109, Fw-190, Me-110G, Ju-88C, Ju-88G, Ju-87D, Me-210/ Me-410, He-177, FW-200, etc. It enough to say the it became the most used cannon trough the war. Note underneath ejection tube
|
|
Reply
| |
This message has been deleted by the author. |
| |
Reply
| |
This message has been deleted by the author. |
| |
Reply
| |
| We were talking about scare guns. this is an MG131 13mm machine gun (the German equivalent of a .5 BMG but much lower velocity) just ahead of the black 'C' which is aimed by the gunner in the rear cockpit. he holds a pistol grip and looks through an optical sight. The bulge at the rear of the gun mount is an ammunition belt tank. Close up. Sighting position Note pistol grip in centre for aiming guns | | | <FORM name=DelThr action=general.msnw?action=delete_thread&ID_Message=1635 method=post><INPUT type=hidden value=9JQZtl654ETlylyvY6Y1Pl4Ml2Eh7tOI!*yAIq2E8RaeK7tZq2LuogfwIdvT!Y0QCuzFLhANYTfPuU7hi54n8HHw$$ name=UChk> </FORM> language=Javascript> function confirmDeleteDiscussion() { if (confirm('This action will permanently delete this discussion, including all replies.\n\nAre you sure you want to continue?')) document.DelThr.submit(); } function navAway(url) { window.location.href = url; } </SCRIPT> <FORM name=DelMsg action=general.msnw?action=delete_messages&ID_Topic= method=post><INPUT type=hidden value=9JQZtl654ETlylyvY6Y1Pl4Ml2Eh7tOI!*yAIq2E8RaeK7tZq2LuogfwIdvT!Y0QCuzFLhANYTfPuU7hi54n8HHw$$ name=UChk> <INPUT type=hidden name=ID_Parent><INPUT type=hidden name=IDs></FORM> language=Javascript> function confDelMsg(idMsg, idParent){if (confirm('Are you sure you want to delete the content of this message?')){document.DelMsg.IDs.value = idMsg;document.DelMsg.ID_Parent.value = idParent;document.DelMsg.submit();}} </SCRIPT> | </TABLE>
|
Reply
| |
SEAN THOSE CHIN GUNS ARE VERY LONG ABOUT THE LENGTH OF A 20MM CANNON. MARK YOU THEY DID EXPERIMENT WIDELY. THIS WOULD BE THE NORMAL PROPORTION; THE .5 BMG WAS SHORTENED I BELIEVE TO REDUCE AIR RESISTANCE AND WEIGHT |
| |
Reply
| |
wished I saved the instructions, they would of said what they were. what I do know about the bomber I built, was, it was shot down on the 8th of Aug. 1944, over France |
|
Reply
| |
This was a surprise for me the other day, experimental armament for the B17. I never realised this existed Top left and right are interioir and exterior shots of a 20mm Hispano cannon, nose mount. now the yanks tried installing our Hispanos in lieu of their 6 x .5 brownings in their fighters and made a mess-up, poor machining so I wonder if they had more success with these. Bottom LHS is a H-S 20 mill again, tail gun Bottom right is a 6 gun chin turret, too much drag I believe. I don't think they produced any with ALL these extra guns |
| |
Reply
| |
This B17 is an example of the JB 17 produced by the US procurement (pork barrel) div. They decided they could charge more for the extra engine. In reality At that stage the aircraft had 1200 HP engines, totalling 4800 HP. So they made a test bed for the Wright 6,000 HP turbo-prop, and in fact the one engine could fly the whole aircraft., The jet engine overcame this project. |
| |
|
|