- Thread starter
-
- #21
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I admit to not understanding the comment 'The ammunition should be manufactured to fit the chamber of the gun it which it will be fired and not to fit the British or American 20mm. What were they supposed to make.
The estimate of a 15-25 year development period for an optimum aircraft weapon is shall we say, pessimistic, in view of the development period of the Aden and Defta 30mm guns
I know its a bit of a cheek but this smells like a cover up. The USA knew from about 1942 what the problem was with the 20mm produced in the USA. All they had to do to get it working was to adapt the American production to cater for the changes introduced by the UK.
Not the best example, as that was only a 20mm M3 modified to take the more powerful 20x110 USN ammunition and speeded up somewhat.Agreed with you. 15 or 25 is ridiculos excessive, the Colt MK-12, gun wich replaced the Hispano An-M3 in Navy usage was developed in just 6 years, between 1946 to 1952.
I now believe that the RAF's 20mm ammunition was probably coated in hard wax at the factory to provide lubrication. That way, they didn't have to grease the cartridges when loading them, as the Americans did.The ammunition thing is a bit laberynthic, specially when you think that the cases teorically were the same for both US and RAF guns, must be related with the cartrigde overall lenght.
I now believe that the RAF's 20mm ammunition was probably coated in hard wax at the factory to provide lubrication. That way, they didn't have to grease the cartridges when loading them, as the Americans did.
P.S. I seem to recognise some of those ammo photos...
using an inverted periscope that came out through the belly of the ship to aim the guns.
Regards the 37mm cannon, I've read that when fired (from Airacuda) the ORIGINAL non reinforced airframe "shook". When the side mounted 0.50s were fired, "rivets popped and the skin wrinkled and fractured."