The best thing about the Spitfire Mk XIV was that there were so few of them
- Thread starter MarkusZeller
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Typically, the WB-151/20 mounted on the Fw190, was the Fw190G-3/R1, which was mostly used for ground attack.
They were also used in the A-6, A-7 and A-8 variants, which did intercept bombers.
The Fw190A-6/R2 and Fw190A-8/R2 were fitted with the MK108 cannon pod.
The WB-151/20 was also fitted to the Bf110.
They were also used in the A-6, A-7 and A-8 variants, which did intercept bombers.
The Fw190A-6/R2 and Fw190A-8/R2 were fitted with the MK108 cannon pod.
The WB-151/20 was also fitted to the Bf110.
Which were an utter failure.
That's what I find out, the recoil forces were too high.
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 903
- Feb 16, 2013
That's nuts!
But I can't help but think that 88 submachine guns would have been better used in the hands of the troops. Firing a pistol bullet from an aircraft couldn't have been very effective, even a spicy one like a 7.62x25mm.
Ah yes. And it would've been hard to fit the 88 men in to fire the guns anyway.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The Tu-2Sh making a low pass over a soft target can unleash the firepower equivellent to a platoon or better.
All at once.
One thing that wasn't in short supply, were shouldered weapons, so having 88 PPsh-41s loaded in the bomb bay was not depriving any ground forces of weapons plus the added benefit of delivering the concentrated firepower of a platoon without warning - unlike an actual platoon trying to advance on an enemy's position which would take time, losses and lacking the concentrated firepower.
All at once.
One thing that wasn't in short supply, were shouldered weapons, so having 88 PPsh-41s loaded in the bomb bay was not depriving any ground forces of weapons plus the added benefit of delivering the concentrated firepower of a platoon without warning - unlike an actual platoon trying to advance on an enemy's position which would take time, losses and lacking the concentrated firepower.
glennasher
Senior Airman
Not an original idea, Auto Ordnance, the company that designed the Thompson Submachine Gun, had drawn up plans for this type of use in the 1920s, the Sovs may have got this idea from their sales brochures (Colt built the original TSMGs on contract for Auto Ordnance, who had no facilities for building anything). The Thompsons were, of course, 45 ACP, and would have required someone to change the drum magazines when they were emptied. The 1921 Thompson had a similar rate of fire, which was later slowed down because the US military was terrified of supply issues had they been left alone. They didn't think they could keep them in ammo.
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 903
- Feb 16, 2013
45 ACP would have had an even shorter effective range than 7.62x25mm. You would have to make sure you were tree top height at the most
Shortround6
Major General
The PPsh -41 was supposed to have a rate fire of about 1250rpm.
Or 20-21 rounds per second.
With 71 round drums you were good for 3.5 seconds at best. Unless you could select rows or groups of rows to fire?
Or 20-21 rounds per second.
With 71 round drums you were good for 3.5 seconds at best. Unless you could select rows or groups of rows to fire?
Shortround6
Major General
Something of a myth.
.45 had a curved trajectory but the main problem was that most troops couldn't shoot it well. And at more than tree top height (60-80ft) many had no idea where to aim it.
They listened to barracks talk and most aimed too high.
Melvin Johnson did some experiments with a variety of weapons in early WW II that included a pair of .45 cal submachine guns. They concluded that a .45 cal submachine gun was less as effective at 275 yds as the 30-06 guns were at 600yds but they were getting about 22% hits on an man sized silhouette at 275 yds . Granted the .45 bullets were not penetrating much of anything at 275yds (like the target stakes) but I don't know what the 7.62x25mm would do at that range.
The main focus of the tests were 30-06 rifles and "Machine-rifles) as Johnson was still trying to sell his rifle and LMG (machine rifle) to the US military,
The M-1 carbine was tested at later date to include in the results.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The .45 fired from a Thompson M1928A1 (later M1A1) has an effective accurate range of 164 yards (492 feet). This is shouldered and aimed.
From the bomb bay of a low flying aircraft firing a battery of these weapons, you can be sure that even at 800 to 1,000 feet, the .45 bullet still has the capacity to easily kill/wound.
And in regards to someone mentioning upthread about the chance of the PPsh-41 being related to the Thompson SMG: not likely.
The concept had been around for some time and many nations had their own native types. If anything, the PPsh-41's drum magazine was a copy of Finland's KP/31 drum magazine.
From the bomb bay of a low flying aircraft firing a battery of these weapons, you can be sure that even at 800 to 1,000 feet, the .45 bullet still has the capacity to easily kill/wound.
And in regards to someone mentioning upthread about the chance of the PPsh-41 being related to the Thompson SMG: not likely.
The concept had been around for some time and many nations had their own native types. If anything, the PPsh-41's drum magazine was a copy of Finland's KP/31 drum magazine.
33k in the air
Staff Sergeant
- 1,354
- Jan 31, 2021
How would dropping clusters of fragmentation bombs compare to strafing with machine guns in terms of damage to ground troops?
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,682
- Dec 6, 2006
How do you get the bullets on target? I would also note that flying straight and level at 1,000 feet against German Flak would be a very short-lived experiment.
glennasher
Senior Airman
^^^^ Dropped with accuracy, I would think that a fragmentation bomb would be more effective, frankly. Tex Hill and others did do wholesale damage to Japanese troops who would fire at aircraft from a phalanx formation when being strafed, but he used the P=40's guns AND fragmentation bombs.
Then again, wholesale destruction was done to German troops on D-day and often thereafter, by Allied aircraft on those interdiction missions, using mostly their machine guns. I guess it's hard to quantify.
Then again, wholesale destruction was done to German troops on D-day and often thereafter, by Allied aircraft on those interdiction missions, using mostly their machine guns. I guess it's hard to quantify.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
I'd imagine that shooting from above would lessen the windage even on a .45 round, given that it's using gravity rather than fighting it.
Hi
One of a series of trials with different armament fits using the TU-2Sh (shturmovik). This was 1944, the same year a single forward firing 75 mm was tried out. In 1946 a two seater version fitted with two ShVAK, two NS-37 and two NS-45 was also tried out. None of these went beyond trials, one of the reasons the PPSh fit was not gone ahead with was its limited firing time and lack of ability to reload.
Indeed from WW1 onwards downward firing guns have been tried out, mainly not as successfully as hoped and forward firing guns for ground attack have been found to be better, especially for aiming at a target.
Mike
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The IL-2 armed with the four 5.5 lb. PTAB bomblet dispensers (48 per dispenser) probably did a much better job at clearing the field of the enemy than the Tu-2Sh, but you still have to admit that 88 barrels peeking out of the bomb bay is an impressive sight.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
