Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
If the Il-2 could absorb more total punishment than the B-17, I'll screw a sheep. I don't think it could take a shot from the 37mm M4 cannon (the one from the P-39) either.Tony Williams is the best, and readily available reference for this question I should think. Penetration is required for that armoured section, which the Mk108 doesn't have (a Mk101/103 would be far better) but certainly a shot or two in the wings or rear fuselage is bound to do quite a bit of damage. The Mk108 has been described as more like a grenade launcher than a gun, it has a hell of a charge said capable of bringing down a B-17 with only a few shots.
That said I've seen photos of an Il-2 with roughly half its tail section completely blown away by sustained FlaK and MG151 fire and a smiling aircrew standing beside it.
edit, also the Mk108 wasn't in production until late 43 and from what I can gather was only very rarely fitted until 1944, only a standardised armament in late 44 and even then by no means universal for the 109.
THe Russians, according to some accounts, had trouble with parts fitting in planes built in the same factory.
Some Western and even Japanese plans to use dispersed manufacture but central assembly points had troubles with sub assemblies not fitting together.
Some accounts speak of troubles with certain Russian planes were parts from one factory don't fit planes from another factory even though they were supposed to be built from the same drawings. ths mass manufacturing is not as easy as some peaple think.
FW190 was made in sub assemblies at 'cottage industry' dispersed factories. They had excellent quality.
Except all the dials on the lathe that control movement are already calibrated in thousands. The micrometers and calipers the the machinest is using to measure the "indicated values" are in thousands and not miillimeters. SO the machinist has to perform calculations a lot more often than he would if the drawings were in imperial units.
Actually the machinist has to make the calculations once, (or someone does), after that he should have the correct measurements written down and has only to refer back to them.
Western factories did not make their own nuts, bolts, screws, rivits, pipe fittings, tubing, etc. it was all bought in from outside suppliers who would not be happy trying to make "batches' of metric parts and then switching back to Imperial measure parts. the time it takes to set up these more automatic machines is time they ae not producing product.
That's the beautiful thing about a capitalist system, someone is going to jump at the chance to get a contract to make metric fasteners (if the producer was too lazy to redraw the plane to SAE standards). Not only would the metric fasteners be used on the western produced Soviet design, but they could be sold to other countries using metric fasteners. Lots of potential for profit there.
In the beginning, yes, toward the end of the war a totally different story.FW190 was made in sub assemblies at 'cottage industry' dispersed factories. They had excellent quality.
So you could design a spitfire sized plane that could take multiple 30mm hits and survive just as well as a B-17?
that's my point. I understand what Alder is saying, but he's being too extreme about it.
S I think without escort a single 30mm from the nose of a 109G would likely blow it out of the sky.
Agreed......A single 30mm round could blow any aircraft out of the sky.
Which is why I would have no use for being in an unescorted Il-2. With a P-39 along to help me (with its' huge cannon of course), I'd be happy, but flying a big slow garbage scow like the Il-2 and waiting for a Messerschmidt to bounce me from above with that cannon? Thanks anyway.Agreed...
The Mk108 with it's minengeschoß rounds were devestating to anything unfortunate enough to be it's target. Didn't matter if it was a B-24 or an IL-2, the m-geschoß packed 4 times as much HE as it's 20mm counterpart.
If I was producing an Americanized Yak-1 with an Allison engine, I'd send it to the Soviets, the Australians, the Indians, the Chinese, the New Zealanders, Phillipinos, pretty much anyone who couldn't otherwise get into a fighter plane.How many from 36000 Il-2's survived the war?
What was the really bomb load?
How good was the bombsight?
How goods was the accuracy of guns?
How good were pilotage properties?
And... In real fighting circumstances P -47 took the greater bomb/rocket load than Pe-2.
The production of the any Soviet plane in USA or Canada would not cause any problem. Only what for?
Surely only for this, it to send to USSR within the lend-lease. 8)
I'd be surprised if it it took less than six, even with a large team of draughtsmen.
A few years ago I worked for a British company that had an American parent company, they sent us the drawi….etc
….It's a very big deal and not one that's particularly "fun" or profitable.
Even ten years later that design is one of the least well regarded inside the company
Ask any design engineer: the worst job in the world is working on stuff that isn't your own.
Give me a clean sheet of paper and a set of specs every time. It's far less hassle.
Actually, they're right:...Wow! Only 102 days to design/create a complete sophisticated plane like the Mustang, and 6 full months only to make draws for a soapbox like a Yak-1? Even with a large team of draughtsmen at ¾ Europeans engineers from Sikorsky-Kartvelli-Seversky design bureaus.
There is something "strange" in your estimations I think.
NA-73X was the original designation of the Mustang Mk.I (P-51)British issued a MAP order for NA-73X project, March 1940. Prototype NA-73X was rolled out just 117 days after the order was placed, and first flew on 26 October 1940, just 178 days after the order had been placed—an uncommonly short gestation period.