Luftwaffe, a bit better in 1939-40

tomo pauk · Sep 30, 2020

stona said:
Luftwaffe pilots were very keen to get cannon armament. When JG 52 received two cannon armed Bf 109s on 12 September 1940 Steinhilper and his Staffelkapitan managed to bag them. Steinhilper wrote to his mother the following day.

"Yesterday we received two aircraft which are fitted with the cannons in the wings. I'm taking one and the 'Chief' is taking the other. Therefore it is with a broken heart that I am abandoning my '16'. It's sad because it was the most loyal aircraft in the squadron, but cannons are cannons."

I have read dozens of accounts in recent weeks as I have been compiling a day by day account of the BoB. I don't remember any Luftwaffe pilot complaining about a 60 round drum for the cannon. What they appreciated was the power of the cannons, they had after all been fighting aircraft with double their weight of armament. I have read several accounts in which British pilots were shot down by just one cannon strike.

Thank you for the excerpt.
If the 60 rd drum was enough even for prolonged sorties above enemy-held ground, one wonders why they bothered with extra two drums for each MG FF cannon on the Bf 110s. Or the pilots of non-drop-tank outfitted 109Es were 1st experiencing and were more worried by 'Bingo Fuel' state rather than 'Winchester'?

Fitting another machine gun in each wing might be more difficult than fitting a cannon, given the nature of the MG 17s ammunition feed, extending out almost to the wing tip.

Yes, the ammo feed needs to be changed.

Glider · Sep 30, 2020

tomo pauk said:
Thank you for the excerpt.
If the 60 rd drum was enough even for prolonged sorties above enemy-held ground, one wonders why they bothered with extra two drums for each MG FF cannon on the Bf 110s. Or the pilots of non-drop-tank outfitted 109Es were 1st experiencing and were more worried by 'Bingo Fuel' state rather than 'Winchester'?

Yes, the ammo feed needs to be changed.

My guess would be that they may have been prolonged sorties for the 109, but they only spent a limited amount of time over the UK and 60 rds were sufficient. The 110 was designed to spend a lot longer over enemy territory hence the additional drums

tomo pauk · Nov 4, 2020

How might the possible 'fast Do-17' have looked - note the streamlined front end nicked from the early Do-17s grafted on the rest of the prototype Do 17R. So nothing fancy, but it should be faster then the Do 215 with it's blocky cockpit.

Shortround6 · Nov 4, 2020

Or the Do 17K

Gnome-Rhone 14 cylinder radials.

But even so, more than a single 7.9mm machine gun with 75 round drums is needed firing to the top rear.

nuuumannn · Nov 4, 2020

tomo pauk said:
nuuumannn - thanks for the pics.
What exact parts of He 111 bomb 'bays' were made of the rubber?

Didn't see this question, Tomo, the doors were rubber.

nuuumannn said:
with its rubber doors,

nuuumannn said:
He 111 bomb bay doors. Note the rubber material.

Just to be certain.

tomo pauk · Nov 5, 2020

Shortround6 said:
Or the Do 17K
Gnome-Rhone 14 cylinder radials.
But even so, more than a single 7.9mm machine gun with 75 round drums is needed firing to the top rear.

I'd try to go with twinned MG 17 for the top rear.
The Do17K with DB 601 or Jumo 211 should've looked pretty much as what I was doodling in the above post.

Something like this real-world example (but with DB 601/Jumo 211 instead of low-level DB 600A, with proper exhaust stacks): link

nuuumannn said:
Didn't see this question, Tomo, the doors were rubber.
Just to be certain.

Thank you.

Luftwaffe, a bit better in 1939-40

More options

tomo pauk

Creator of Interesting Threads

Glider

Captain

tomo pauk

Creator of Interesting Threads

Shortround6

Major General

nuuumannn

Major

tomo pauk

Creator of Interesting Threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads