Jerry W. Loper
Airman 1st Class
- 121
- Oct 2, 2007
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Several Japanese planes such as the G4M and the H6k and H8K used them as well.
As for the gun positions on the 17 and 24 the power turrets will usually yield better kill scores because they are a stable gun platform compared to free swinging manual guns and because they often had reflector type gun sights.
Bouncing from astern is normally the preferred way to attack an enemy aircraft. So I suspect the tail gunner gets more then his fair share of targets.Has to be the tail gunner. Low or no deflection shot and no vertical stabiliser to get in the way. Also more time to hit target becuse of closure rate.
Also how many friendly fighters were hit or shot down?A B-17 box under attack is spraying thousands of poorly aimed .50cal rounds per minute. I wonder how many hit other bombers in this box or nearby bomber boxes?
The friendly fighters didn't have a habit of flying through the formations, the way a attacker would. They kept their distance.Also how many friendly fighters were hit or shot down?
Did anyone besides the USAAC employ manned waist guns? They strike me as a lot of additional weight (gun + ammo + gunner) for little additional protection. Not to mention some loss of aerodynamic efficiency from having a hole in the fuselage side with a gun barrel sticking out.
This is the type of incident I would expect when you've got hundreds of aircraft spraying .50cal MG bullets. Only it would be much worse during combat as bomber gunners don't have time to aim carefully or ensure there isn't a friendly aircraft 2 miles beyond the attacking enemy fighter aircraft.14/10/44:
One 401st BG B-17 took "friendly fire" from a gunner on a B-17 from another Group who was testing his guns, taking several 50 calibre bullet holes in the fusilage.