Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Because they were compared to their opposition. There may have been occasions that Bf110s came across a Sunderland but most of the time it was Ju88s. Compare the forward armament of a Ju 88 to all a Sunderlands guns, with or without the fixed forward firing mgs. The Sunderland was surprisingly agile for its size and the Sunderland was one of the few aircraft where the turret concept really worked. Additional guns were in side positions against a beam attack. If you were in a Ju88 how would you attack it when you are 500 miles from land, he is in a flying boat and you are in a flying aeroplane? What guns have you pointing forward at him and what has he pointed at you. It was like attacking a group of machine gun nests with a single AK-47.Here's a question which has always intrigued me.
Why the nickname? In its basic form, the Shorts Sunderland was no better armed than any of the four engined heavies of the RAF (and even some of the twins...)
Depending on production model, it seems it had the standard four gun FN tail turret, a one or two gun front turret - and either a twin gun dorsal turret, or two dorsal openings with manually operated Vickers K (I'm presuming single mounts. All guns in 0.303
Later models introduced four fixed browning forward so the pilot could strafe the decks of U boats to keep their AA gunners heads down (but thats probably of little relevance to wary JU88 or 110 crew inventing nicknames, I would have thought...?)
I've read that occasionally a pair of .50s were mounted through the side hatches... but even with these, its hardly a 'porcupine'. I HAVE read *somewhere* (though lord knows quite where) that it could have mounted 'up to 16 guns'. But what? And where? Are there any photos or descriptions?
I'm particularly interested in the implication that extra guns were fitted (possibly only semi officially and once in squadron service) beyond the normal production installations as per the 'up to 16' snippet I read. That would certainly enhance that perception, wouldn't itBecause they were compared to their opposition. There may have been occasions that Bf110s came across a Sunderland but most of the time it was Ju88s. Compare the forward armament of a Ju 88 to all a Sunderlands guns, with or without the fixed forward firing mgs. The Sunderland was surprisingly agile for its size and the Sunderland was one of the few aircraft where the turret concept really worked. Additional guns were in side positions against a beam attack. If you were in a Ju88 how would you attack it when you are 500 miles from land, he is in a flying boat and you are in a flying aeroplane? What guns have you pointing forward at him and what has he pointed at you. It was like attacking a group of machine gun nests with a single AK-47.
You asked a question and I answered it, when 8 fighters attack a maritime recon plane and only two return to base, the two crews who returned would be entitled to say that they had attacked a flying porcupine, it had inflicted 75% losses in planes and crews for the loss of one plane and one crew member. The standard armament of a Sunderland was 8 guns in turrets, add to that 4 fixed forward firing guns makes 12. To take it up to 16 just needs another 4 in beam positions, and the Sunderland mentioned in the link had a crew of 11, when under attack why not give them a machine gun? In the infantry even the cooks are trained how to fire a gun and given access to one.I'm particularly interested in the implication that extra guns were fitted (possibly only semi officially and once in squadron service) beyond the normal production installations as per the 'up to 16' snippet I read. That would certainly enhance that perception, wouldn't it
C series JU88s had a fairly respectable nose armament with 3 x 7.92 machine guns and a 20mm FF. I presume they'd try and stay out of the effective range of the 0303s if they could and lob some shells at it. It would at least present a large target to aim at.
Doesn't work.C series JU88s had a fairly respectable nose armament with 3 x 7.92 machine guns and a 20mm FF. I presume they'd try and stay out of the effective range of the 0303s if they could and lob some shells at it. It would at least present a large target to aim at.
From Wiki -Here's a question which has always intrigued me.
Why the nickname? In its basic form, the Shorts Sunderland was no better armed than any of the four engined heavies of the RAF (and even some of the twins...)
Depending on production model, it seems it had the standard four gun FN tail turret, a one or two gun front turret - and either a twin gun dorsal turret, or two dorsal openings with manually operated Vickers K (I'm presuming single mounts. All guns in 0.303
Later models introduced four fixed browning forward so the pilot could strafe the decks of U boats to keep their AA gunners heads down (but thats probably of little relevance to wary JU88 or 110 crew inventing nicknames, I would have thought...?)
I've read that occasionally a pair of .50s were mounted through the side hatches... but even with these, its hardly a 'porcupine'. I HAVE read *somewhere* (though lord knows quite where) that it could have mounted 'up to 16 guns'. But what? And where? Are there any photos or descriptions?
The Sunderlands over the Bay of Biscay were being intercepted by mainly Ju88C, the fighter version with forward firing 20mm cannon. Sunderland mark III came with a front turret with 1 gun, a dorsal turret with 2 guns and a tail turret with 4 guns, With the U boats switching to staying on the surface and fighting in mid 1943 four fixed forward firing 0.303 inch machine guns were added plus at least some upgrades of the front turret to 2 guns, on top of that with the increased risk of interception single hand held guns were added to each of the galley hatches, 0.303 or 0.50 inch.
As for EJ134 N/461 versus the 8 Ju88 on 2 June 1943 the fight certainly took place, lasted 45 minutes and the Sunderland lasted long enough to return to base. Claiming 3 certain, 1 probable and 1 possible kills. V/KG40 reported the fight but no losses. See the book Bloody Biscay by Chris Goss (History of V/KG40)
Whether the Luftwaffe ever called the Sunderland the flying porcupine is an open question.
Do you happen to know what, in the article, is meant by Ju-88K?Debunking the Flying Porcupine Myth
A Sunderland in Action The Aeroplane – Published April 12, 1940 A Short Sunderland four-motor flying-boat of the Coastal Command was engaged with six two-motor Junkers Ju. 88K bombers while o…weaponsandwarfare.com
I bet the guy on the Port side wasn't too thrilled about the Starboard gunner shooting right over his headHere's a photo of a Sunderland's waist guns... one of the few aircraft where both beam guns can fire on both beams!
View attachment 645452