ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 52

Favorite gun armament of WWII aircraft

Weapons Systems Tech. Discuss Favorite gun armament of WWII aircraft in the Technical forums; After playing numerous flight simulators I noticed that bigger guns on aircraft usually are not that much more powerful modelled ...

  1. #1
    Member Fokker D21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Dordrecht
    Posts
    63
    Country
    Netherlands

    Favorite gun armament of WWII aircraft

    After playing numerous flight simulators I noticed that bigger guns on aircraft usually are not that much more powerful modelled than smaller ones. So I decided to read more about the subject. The best book I read about this is: Flying Guns of World War II. One of the most interesting things in this book is a formula for calculating gun strength.

    The authors base their formula on momentum instead of kinetic and chemical energy because kinetic energy overstates the speed of the projectile and chemical energy is to complex to be compared with kinetic energy.

    I took the challenge to make my own formula. See my website: [URL="http://members.tele2.nl/harmstolk/gunpower.htm"]



    My question to the other forum members is:
    1) Do you think my and/or Williams/Gustin formula approaches historical accuracy?
    2) What is your favorite gun armament of WWII and why?
    Ceteris Paribus (meaning everything else is considered to have no influence on our investigation)

    http://members.tele2.nl/harmstolk/gunpower.htm

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,766
    Hi Fokker,

    >See my website: Back to my homepage

    Looks good! :-)

    I'd like to see a table comparing the individual guns, if possible sorted by efficiency. I'd also include the mass of rounds plus drums/belts into the efficiency comparison, as that will give a better impression of the entire weapons system.

    For my comparison, I have simply used total energy. The additional factors you introduce are entirely arbitary - a solid round piercing through aircraft skind wastes a proportion of its energy just like an explosive round, and I don't think it's possible to tell generically which type of loss is higher.

    Oh, and I noticed you used the term "effective range" - what's your definition of that term?

    Regards,

    Henning (HoHun)

  3. #3
    Senior Member comiso90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    3,672
    Country
    United States
    Favorite gun armament of WWII aircraft..

    Depends on the mission and theater.

    If your hunting 4 engine bombers... gotta have cannons.
    If your going after fighters... .50 is my choice
    If I'm shredding Japanese aircraft, I may even want 10 or 12 .303 brownings..

  4. #4
    Senior Member joy17782's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    logan ohio
    Posts
    273
    Country
    United States
    comiso i have too agree with you there on your picks , maybe a few more 303 lol !!!!!!

  5. #5
    “Archive” Micdrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,085
    Country
    United States
    Read this link on aircraft guns also. Lot of info in there provided by Hohun.

    http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/wea...ons-11037.html (Centerline Guns configurations)

    "Valor does not mean Hero."

  6. #6
    Senior Member toffigd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Gdansk, PL
    Posts
    316
    Country
    Poland
    "If I'm shredding Japanese aircraft, I may even want 10 or 12 .303 brownings"

    Where would you put theme? You'd need at least biplane Spitfire Mk.I with double A wing - 16x.303!

  7. #7
    Senior Member ToughOmbre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Jersey Shore, USA
    Posts
    4,176
    Country
    United States
    Like the P-38 armament, a 20mm and four .50s in the nose.

    TO


    “Let's get Enterprise and Hornet turned into the wind."

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,435
    I prefer the Whirlwind, 4 x 20mm in the nose, nasty

  9. #9
    Senior Member comiso90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    3,672
    Country
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by toffigd View Post
    "If I'm shredding Japanese aircraft, I may even want 10 or 12 .303 brownings"

    Where would you put theme? You'd need at least biplane Spitfire Mk.I with double A wing - 16x.303!
    Hurricane XII
    Canadian-built variant. Single-seat fighter and fighter-bomber. Powered by a 1,300 hp (969 kW) Packard Merlin 29. Initially armed with 12 0.303 inch (7.7 mm) machine guns, but this was later changed to four 20 mm cannon


    Hawker Hurricane - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pine Mountain Lake, California
    Posts
    981
    Country
    United States
    Gimme a Sturmbock Fw 190 A-8/R2; I'll take 2 30mm Mk 108's, 2 20mm MG 151/20's, and two MG 17's any day.

  11. #11
    Senior Member lesofprimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Long Island Native in Mississippi
    Posts
    19,141
    Country
    United States
    Same here Stich, unless I was going up top to handle P-51's, then lose the 30mms and stay with the 4x20mm and 2xMG17s...

  12. #12
    Banned Kurfürst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Aquincum, Pannonia Prima
    Posts
    1,076
    Country
    Hungary
    Quote Originally Posted by Fokker D21 View Post

    My question to the other forum members is:
    1) Do you think my and/or Williams/Gustin formula approaches historical accuracy?
    Tony`s formula is one approach to a very complex problem, and he readily admits that it has weaknesses; IMHO the greatest weakness is that it bases the projectiles 'destructive power' (for the lack of a better word) on Kinetic energy, and ie. HE shells only get their KE multiplied to represent Chemical Energy, and the two has little to do with each other. To illustrate with an example, a hand granade kills you all the same wheter it explodes sitting on the ground, flying in the air or hits you in the stomach after thrown and then explodes. There is no connection.

    But as said, it`s an extremely complex subject, depending on where the projectile hits (ie. if the bullet passes through the wingtip, the same amount of KE will be transferred, ie. the one needed to penetrate through, wheter we speak of a high velocity or low velocity round of similiar calibre), what it hits etc.

    I fear its simply impossible to give back the effect with a single number.

    2) What is your favorite gun armament of WWII and why?
    Late La 7 and Yak 3 with the pair or triple 20mm cannons. Its an excellent, light, compact cannon with high rate of fire and high velocity, the 20mm is simply the best all around armament and all of it is centered in the nose.

    Its a sexy combination of a neat and deadly package. Of course there were some monstrosities, but I prefer the reasonable package.

  13. #13
    Senior Member magnocain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    394
    Country
    United States
    How about 6x50 cal.s and 2x 30mm cannons.
    Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.
    --Napoleon Bonaparte--

  14. #14
    Pacific Historian syscom3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    12,112
    Why shred a Japanese airplane with .30's?

    Go with the 10 .50's!!!!!

    Plus you can also shred Japanese ships with the 50 cals.
    "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

  15. #15
    Senior Member rochie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    billingham nr middlesbrough uk
    Posts
    10,311
    Country
    England
    Quote Originally Posted by SoD Stitch View Post
    Gimme a Sturmbock Fw 190 A-8/R2; I'll take 2 30mm Mk 108's, 2 20mm MG 151/20's, and two MG 17's any day.
    i'll agree with that much better to be sat behind that lot than in front looking down the barrels


    I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.
    "Winston Churchill"

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91