P-47 Ait to Ground Role - Different Armament?

[Anonymous]

Ya, you could set the guns up to have a large cone of fire, and harmonize them to cover a wide pattern, and it would be very easy to score on any fighter target and a few hits would be enough to cripple/kill it.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i don't really think it'd be that suited to air-to-air combat would it??

 

[mosquitoman]

Or harmonize them so 1 burst would make almost any plane disintegrate

 

[Anonymous]

i don't really think it'd be that suited to air-to-air combat would it??

Why not? The B20 had 800 rpm RoF and 800 m/s velocity, a necked up BMG would have been about the same. Ballistics would be a little worse than the .50 BMG, but still good to 400 meters. Because the 20mm would be HE fewer hits would be needed to defeat a fighter target, so the guns could be harmonized to create a larger "shotgun" pattern, greatly increasing the chances of scoring a few hits, but reducing the number of hits scored a bit for a given time-on-target. Alternatively they could be left more tightly harmonized to give more lethal effect, but it would probably be over-kill for fighter targets. Half a dozen 20mm hits was enough to pretty much ensure killing or severly crippling any Axis single engine fighter.

I see no reason why such armament would not have been possible and quite effective for aerial combat.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well what about the ammo count??

 

[Anonymous]

Should have been able to manage 250-300 rpg. The P-47 could carry up to 425 rpg of .50's.

Actually it might be able to carry 425 rpg. The B20 was a necked up Brezin UBK (or S) 12.7 mm. The 20mm ammo fit in the same disintigrating linked belts the 12.7mm fit in, the only difference was that rather than the forward part of the cartridge necking down to 12.7mm, it was strait (like a .22). So by length of belt, their was no difference. Weight would be the only limiting factor - the rounds themselves are about 35% heavier (for HE).

 

[Snautzer01]

Yes a very old thread raised back up. Would be a waist too.

By coincidence i found a picture of a p-47 with a 20mm set up

As you can see it wasnt what one would suspect but then again it would be a test.

and a crop of it

 

[Glider]

The British tried a few aircraft with 6 x 20 so I also don't see why the P47 should have a problem. The MB3 was armed with 6, the Meteor originally was planned to have 6 and I believe there was even a Spifire mocked up to carry 6 but have no idea how they were going to squeeze them in. That would have been tight.

 

[Colin1]

...The .50 BMG weighed about 30 KG, the Hispano II (or AN-M2) about 50 KG, and the Hispano V (M3) about 42 KG. So eight .50's weighed about 240 KG, 6 x AN-M2's about 300 KG, and 6 x M3's about 252 KG. There would be room for at least 200 rpg

I believe the .50 was closer to 38Kgs
I'll need to check that when I get home but I'm sure the weight difference between the .50 and the 20mm wasn't all that pronounced

 

[HoHun]

Hi Colin,

>I believe the .50 was closer to 38Kgs
I'll need to check that when I get home but I'm sure the weight difference between the .50 and the 20mm wasn't all that pronounced

In direct comparison of entire batteries, the weight of the ammunition also plays an important role. Here some batteries with firepower based on total muzzle energy (kinetical plus chemical energy):

6x Hispano II - 186 rpg, 19 s duration - 575 kg - 6,4 MW firepower
8x ,50 Browning M2 - 315 rpg, 24 s duration - 575 kg - 2,3 MW firepower
24x Browning ,303 - 464 rpg, 23 s duration - 575 kg - 1,8 MW firepower

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[tomo pauk]

Methinks that two 37mm, with a pair of BMGs would nicely fit into (under?) Jugs wings. Of course, the variation of AA gun, not the gun from P-39.