pinehilljoe
Senior Airman
- 717
- May 1, 2016
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The problem is that wing mounts for the M2 were only really perfected in late 1942. Every US fighter with wing-mounted 50cals suffered significant stoppage issues in the first 9-11 months of the war, mostly related to the ammo feed getting dislodged during aggressive manoeuvres. A fully-functioning battery of 6x50cals would, indeed, have been formidable but I don't think it was a practical proposition in 1939.
Why would it be? The US Navy's estimate was that the standard four 20 mm Hispanos in Hawker fighters were twice as powerful as a battery of six M2s.Other than Lend Lease, the RAF seems to have kept the 20mm or 303 to the end of the War. Was the M2 ever consider for the later Hawker fighters?
Keep in mind that the standard US fighter armament in 1939/40 was one .50 supported by one or three .30's.
thanks. I was thinking of the P-35, P-36 and F3F as examplesFixed it.
with 250 roundswith 250 rpg of 0.5 in ammo, a gun has about 30 secs of continuous firing time. With 120 rounds per gun of 20mm ammo in belt fed versions of the weapon, there was about 1 minute of continuous firing available depending on the detail settings of the weapon. A 20mm shell does not need to hit a vital part to bring down an opponent, whereas a 0.5in still has to hit something essential
Like I said, a no brainer.