Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums
 



Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Technical > Weapons Systems Tech.

Weapons Systems Tech. Technology behind the weapons and systems within aircraft.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-30-2007, 07:07 PM   #1
“Archive”
 
Micdrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 4,852
FN 50 Center Turrent

FN 50 Center Turret for a British Lancaster. I'm sure one of our ammo experts can explain more about it.

Enjoy Micdrow
Attached Images
File Type: jpg British top turrent.JPG (194.6 KB, 446 views)
__________________

"Valor does not mean Hero."
Micdrow is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2007, 09:47 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
genkideskan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kaluebbe
Posts: 106
Here the real thing
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 13.jpg (49.5 KB, 420 views)
File Type: jpg 36.jpg (51.3 KB, 416 views)
File Type: jpg 46.jpg (67.1 KB, 414 views)
genkideskan is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2007, 11:51 AM   #3
IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
 
FLYBOYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,051
Thanks for the pics!
__________________
"IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"
FLYBOYJ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2007, 02:00 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
genkideskan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kaluebbe
Posts: 106
Here are some more pics from the inside
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 03.jpg (85.2 KB, 398 views)
File Type: jpg 04.jpg (107.7 KB, 397 views)
File Type: jpg 06.jpg (74.4 KB, 397 views)
File Type: jpg 07.jpg (80.0 KB, 396 views)
File Type: jpg 08.jpg (91.4 KB, 392 views)
File Type: jpg 09.jpg (94.2 KB, 390 views)
File Type: jpg 10.jpg (93.2 KB, 387 views)
File Type: jpg 11.jpg (93.5 KB, 380 views)
File Type: jpg 12.jpg (71.5 KB, 380 views)
File Type: jpg 14.jpg (109.6 KB, 375 views)
File Type: jpg 15.jpg (92.7 KB, 375 views)
File Type: jpg 18.jpg (126.1 KB, 374 views)
File Type: jpg 39.jpg (70.7 KB, 375 views)
File Type: jpg 20.jpg (91.2 KB, 368 views)
File Type: jpg 26.jpg (60.6 KB, 368 views)
genkideskan is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2007, 03:21 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
CharlesBronson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,999
Send a message via MSN to CharlesBronson
Nice images, that turret is asking for more firepower.
__________________


Bronsonsīs videos
CharlesBronson is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 08:21 AM   #6
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesBronson View Post
Nice images, that turret is asking for more firepower.
Do you think it's asking for less ammunition as well ?
bomber is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2007, 10:30 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
CharlesBronson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,999
Send a message via MSN to CharlesBronson
Maybe...more ammo of a heavier calibre.
__________________


Bronsonsīs videos
CharlesBronson is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2007, 08:29 AM   #8
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 211
with the extra weight of heavier guns at 11m from the verticle datum point, to maintain the CoG you'd definately need to reduce the number of rounds carried...

it's a trade off.. a ballancing act

You could of course keep the number of rounds the same and ballance the plane up by adding larger guns and ammo at the front, but with these being so much nearer the verticle datum point you'd also have to add large amount of ballast (lead weight) in the nose...

And although your plane would now be ballanced within acceptable parameters it's now a lot heavier, so reducing the amount of ordnance or fuel you can take.

Simon
bomber is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2007, 08:26 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
CharlesBronson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cordoba - Argentina
Posts: 2,999
Send a message via MSN to CharlesBronson
Excuse me, I mean less ammo of a heavier calibre , like the .5 vickers or the .5 Browning.
__________________


Bronsonsīs videos
CharlesBronson is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2007, 11:38 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Maharg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 208
Thanks heaps for these pics fellas they are great.
Maharg is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2007, 05:32 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
k9kiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Kiwi Land
Posts: 850
Quote:
with the extra weight of heavier guns at 11m from the verticle datum point, to maintain the CoG you'd definately need to reduce the number of rounds carried...

it's a trade off.. a ballancing act

You could of course keep the number of rounds the same and ballance the plane up by adding larger guns and ammo at the front, but with these being so much nearer the verticle datum point you'd also have to add large amount of ballast (lead weight) in the nose...

And although your plane would now be ballanced within acceptable parameters it's now a lot heavier, so reducing the amount of ordnance or fuel you can take.

Simon
Um. Would that be why the Martin .50 turret in the Canadian built Lancs was 10 feet forward of the FN turret and carried less rounds.

In The Fire Brigade we tend to say...

It is a shyte load heavier, move it forward.
__________________
4 out of 5 voices in my head say I am normal. Majority rules.
You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me.
k9kiwi is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 08:15 AM   #12
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 211
Well moving the turret further towards the datum point certainly reduces it's moment... I don't think tho that the 0.5in turret was moved 10ft... more 4ft...

I've heard it was moved forward for various reasons.... it's physical size is so much bigger than the 303 turret requiring greater fuselage width and also depth for the crew (if needing to use the loo) to crawl underneath.

Sometime this week if I get the chance I'll do the calcs and work out just how many rounds of .5" the Lanc could carry if they'd left the turret in the same position as the 303....

Last edited by bomber; 06-18-2007 at 08:18 AM.
bomber is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2007, 08:21 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4
Thats some beautiful turret engineering, id love to have one to play with.
Cheers for the awesome reference.
propellerhead BF-109 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2007, 03:26 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1
Cannon armed Lancaster

Hello Gents,

Reading with interrest your information on the cannon armed Lancasters as I am researching my wife grandfather Sgt J Reid, a mid upper Lancaster gunner. He recalls testing a Lancaster cannon turret in 1943/44 and not liking it at all, too cramped and vibration problems. He cannot recall what Squadron he was with or where he was testing it (he's 88 years old) but believes it was in Lincolnshire. Can anyone help with details and or some photographs of the aircraft concerned?

Great site by the way.

Richardp
richardp is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2007, 08:30 AM   #15
Member
 
Panzerfaust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vercelli
Posts: 37
Send a message via MSN to Panzerfaust
nice pics comrade!
__________________
La fortuna guida dentro il porto anche navi senza pilota.(William Shakespear)
La speranza č un sogno fatto da svegli (Aristotele)
Vai a fare in c**o,str***o (Pino Scotto)
Panzerfaust is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
Design by HTWoRKS


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 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118