German Minigun?

[drgondog]

A rotary cannon/HMG by necessity will have a greater volume and frontal area - impossible to place in the wings of conventional fighter. The theoretical application would be to those twin engine fighters with a centerbody separate from the wings.

Recoil is a function of the 'mass flow rate' of the ammo and raising the rounds per minute will certainly require a much stronger and heavier structure - similar to an engine mount - theoretically it wall also be longer/deeper than a conventional cannon.

So, greater firepower, heavier structure - probably also heavier ammo weight in a constrained volume. If similar to M-61, XM -188 etc this will be a real space grabber.

 

[The Basket]

The MG42 had to keep changing barrels and the crew had to carry its ammunition.

It's firing rate was never utilused coz of these issues.

I'm sure the QM was critical.

 

[muscogeemike]

I read someplace that the Germans were experimenting with an aircraft weapon that used either liquid or gas propellant - only the projectiles were fed into the weapon. Supposedly it had incredible rate of fire.
Anyone know more?

 

[tyrodtom]

I fired the modern version of the MG42, the MG3, when in Germany in the early 70s, even I could change the barrel in 5-6 seconds, the experienced Germans crew made me look like a cripple.

 

[parsifal]

The German involvement in the development of a workable design is actually quite late, as the following wiki extract shows:

The ancestor to the modern minigun was made in the 1860s. Richard Jordan Gatling replaced the hand cranked mechanism of a rifle-caliber Gatling gun with an electric motor, a relatively new invention at the time. Even after Gatling slowed down the mechanism, the new electric-powered Gatling gun had a theoretical rate of fire of 3,000 rounds per minute, roughly three times the rate of a typical modern, single-barreled machine gun. Gatling's electric-powered design received US Patent #502,185 on July 25, 1893.[1] Despite Gatling's improvements, the Gatling gun fell into disuse after cheaper, lighter-weight, recoil and gas operated machine guns were invented.

During World War I, Germany was working on the Fokker-Leimberger, an externally-powered 12 barrel Gatling gun in the 7.92x57mm Mauser round capable of firing over 7,000 rpm, but its spent brass ruptured.[2] None of the guns became operational during the war except the Siemens example which was tried on the Western Front with a victory using it during air combat. However, the Fokker-Leimberger was used in development of what eventually became the Minigun

I am not sure why yet, but i smell significant problems with this basic concept. There appear to be problems with the German development, evidenced in no small way by its virtual abandonment after the war. Weapons manufactureres do that for a reason.....usually ther are insurmountable problems that cause a project to be abandoned.

In any event the first successful minigun did not appear until 1962.....

 

[Shortround6]

The Fokker-Leimberger gun had a rather serious detail flaw. The ammo was not extracted from the belt. The "chamber" was actually in two pieces like meshing gear teeth. There has to be enough of a gap, at least in part of the chamber, to clear the belt. There also has to a recess in the chamber walls to clear the belt. With 50,000lbs or so of chamber pressure any unsupported area of case wall by the chamber is asking for a blow out or case rupture.
aside from using rotating barrels they is little that is the same between a Gatling/minigun and Fokker-Leimberger. The Gatling gun feed rounds into the rear of the barrels and each barrel had it's own breechblock and firing pin mechanism.

 

[davparlr]

If you could make it work such a weapon could replace all 8 wing mounted .303 machineguns in the Spitfire and Hurricane. Or perhaps a .50cal version for U.S. fighter aircraft.

Interesting. I remember, when I first started work at Northrop Grumman on the F-5E program, that one of the weapons engineer had proposed that the two 20mm cannons on the F-5 be replaced with a .50 cal Gatling gun, claiming it would be more effective against jets. The desire was possibly driven to save space. The F-5 was a very compact aircraft an space was always at a premium. I don't know, nothing became of it.

 

[davebender]

Supposedly a German minigun was mounted on a WWI fighter aircraft and achieved at least one aerial kill.

When did other nations achieve their first aerial kill with a minigun?

 

[parsifal]

Supposedly a German minigun was mounted on a WWI fighter aircraft and achieved at least one aerial kill.

When did other nations achieve their first aerial kill with a minigun?

No-one, but why is that relevant? By the time the germans were messing about with the technology, it appears the US (and who knows, perhaps other nations as well) had developed it
and discarded it, apparently because successfull development was beyond technological limits at that time. Other nations seemed to have realized it was not worth the effort. no-one was able to perfect a workable design until after WWII. We dont know the reasons for this delay, but all nations experienced it. I hardly think the germans pressing ahead with development of a concept that was based on a known failure, during the middle of a war is ringing endorsement of good R&D policy

 

[Shortround6]

Supposedly a German minigun was mounted on a WWI fighter aircraft and achieved at least one aerial kill.

When did other nations achieve their first aerial kill with a minigun?

There was at least one kill with a .455 Webley but that doesn't mean it was good basis to develop a aircraft weapon from. Unless you consider the Webley as the grandfather of revolver cannon.

Getting weapon to cycle that high is first problem, feeding it at that rate is next problem and in many ways it is the harder problem to do it reliably and while pulling positive and negative "G"s.

 

[parsifal]

Dave I should say this in support. As a piece of technical information, what you have found is very interesting and worth looking at. What i am taking you to task over is your belief that it was, or might have been feasible as a weapon of war for airborne forces 30 years before it was. Before you can attempt that argument, you need to know why it wasnt used in that way. What stopped it....Could it have been solved as a technical excercise prior to say 1937, in time for general adoption? Your case is unproven at this point, and the fact that it wasnt historically means you need to move forward cautiously and find out why it didnt happen.

 

[CharlesBronson]

Coug, cough...with photo and all...

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/weapons-systems-tech/fokker-gatling-gun-7-92mm-21631.html

 

[parsifal]

yES THANKS cb...ON THE BALL AS ALWAYS. tHE LINK ALSO GIVES PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE WEAPON WAS NOT FURTHR DEVELOPED....

SORRY FOR THE CAPITALS...MY MISTAKE, HAD CAPS LOCK BY MISTAKE...I AM NOT SHOUTING....