Why was the US the only nation to rely on the 50

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Richard_H

The Spit IXc Didn't fly without guns, it either flew with 2x Hispano 20mms and 4 x .303 Brownings or 20 x 20mms and 2x .50 cals brownings.

An earlier mark, Mark V (not Va as it was only equipped with guns) but Mk. VB (2 cannons, 4 guns) and VC (4 cannons) often flew with only cannons.
At least i know that the Spit Mk Vc with 4 cannons tended to only fly with 2 because it weighed a lot more with 4 cannons

To a degree I believe you to be correct but I have little doubt that some changes were made in the field.

For instance, the 303 was of little if any good against German Aircraft. If you accept this, then there is no reason why you shouldn't take them out as they are simply dead weight. I am not saying this was common particually late in the war when GA was often the mission, but it wouldn't suprise me if some pilots had them removed.

[Tony Williams]

To return to the original subject, this article examines the US choice of fighter armament: CANNON OR MACHINE GUN

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

[Twitch]

This has been discussed in so many other later topics why did this guy revive an 8 month old thread?

[the lancaster kicks ass]

newbe.......

[MacArther]

Maybe he's a n00b, or maybe....HE LIKES MY POSTS!! HE REALLY DOES!!! YAYYYY

[Twitch]

Yeah let's just make a post on this topic once a month just for shitts and giggles.

[MacArther]

OK, if you insist.