the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
the large link at the bottom of the site will take you to a page with thousands of profiles, it's a very good site...............
Tank Busting Armaments... Whats The Best Setup???
- Thread starter lesofprimus
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
cheddar cheese
Major General
I dont think the tempest was really used for tank busting, it was more a fighter.
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
- Thread starter
- #24
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
LMFAOROFL......
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
why that's positively engenious................
Tony Williams
Airman 1st Class
For details of the tankbuster and their armament, and which was best, see: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/tankbusters.htm
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum
Nonskimmer
Captain
Mmmmm...Typhoon... 
cheddar cheese
Major General
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
Nonskimmer
Captain
Cute!MP-Willow
Staff Sergeant
Sweet, but what about the USAAF aircraft? I know that ours were not as freindly to cannons, but the 8x0.50inch machine guns on the P-47 and its rockes were very good!
Question that 75mm cannon on the HA-129, did it work as well or poorly as the oe tried on the B-25s? The USAAF foud that the slow fireing times and small amount of rounds made it hard to use in aircraft and that was on shipping mostly, not even tanks that have a lot more of them.
Question that 75mm cannon on the HA-129, did it work as well or poorly as the oe tried on the B-25s? The USAAF foud that the slow fireing times and small amount of rounds made it hard to use in aircraft and that was on shipping mostly, not even tanks that have a lot more of them.
Tony Williams
Airman 1st Class
MP-Willow said:Question that 75mm cannon on the HA-129, did it work as well or poorly as the oe tried on the B-25s? The USAAF foud that the slow fireing times and small amount of rounds made it hard to use in aircraft and that was on shipping mostly, not even tanks that have a lot more of them.
The BK 7,5 used in the Hs 129 was much better than the US gun; partly because it was more powerful, but mainly because it had an autoloader whereas the B-25's gun needed a man to chuck a fresh cartridge into the breech each time it fired.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum
cheddar cheese
Major General
MP-Willow
Staff Sergeant
Thnks, but I still think the 75mm guns were stil to slow for aircraft. I would have loved to see some 40mm cannons on the B-25, but the US loved the .50 so much and why not it as great for what it did!
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
against soft targets yes but there were some things that required a bit more beef............
cheddar cheese
Major General
I believe that was a dietist remark...please consider veggies/vegans in future
MP-Willow
Staff Sergeant
Beef is beef and no I will not and hope Lanc wil not make some posts overly Politicaly Corect. I agree with Lanc, that Hurts, and the 0.50s were light, but the rate of fire dose make up for it. The P-38 seemed to have the bst mix. And some Hellcats had 20mm with the 0.50s as well.
I think that the arms need to be able to stay over the lines for a long time, and the 0.50s had lots of round to put out and hit you.
I think that the arms need to be able to stay over the lines for a long time, and the 0.50s had lots of round to put out and hit you.
JCS
Senior Airman
Stupid question... What the hell is a "Tiffy"?
