Why no heavier RAF machine gun calibres?

[Clayton Magnet]

The Soviet used 0.50 just because it was already manufactured and supplied, moreover it had sufficient performance - it was not significantly worse than the UB.

I think I should have been clearer and more specific. Where I said the Soviets used 0.50, I was referring to the 12.7mm UB, NOT the Browning M2.
And I agree with you regardless, that the Soviets used the supplied lend-lease M2 0.50 cals because they were basically free, and hand delivered, so why not?
But the UB was a better option than the M2, as it was lighter (4kg?), faster firing (when unsynchronized) and each cartridge contained a higher percentage of HEI content

 

[bf109xxl]

The domestic Soviet 20mm I was referring to, was the ShVAK, which was 42kg, and complex and expensive.

The UB-20 was successfully tested in 1941. The problem was in the ammo production after the war outbreak. The use of ShVAK ammo required a significant redesign of the cannon which continued even after the beginning of mass production in Oktober, 1944 (approx. 4-5k built until the end of war).

The B-20 didn't enter service in any significant numbers until late 1944, but in my opinion, was probably the best aircraft gun of the war

2275 built in 1944 - not significant? The best gun - IMHO - was NS-23 despite of certain drawbacks.

 

[bf109xxl]

I think I should have been clearer and more specific. Where I said the Soviets used 0.50, I was referring to the 12.7mm UB, NOT the Browning M2.

Agreed. My fault. Sorry about it.

And I agree with you regardless, that the Soviets used the supplied lend-lease M2 0.50 cals because they were basically free, and hand delivered, so why not?
But the UB was a better option than the M2, as it was lighter (4kg?), faster firing (when unsynchronized) and each cartridge contained a higher percentage of HEI content

Agreed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The .50 cal Browning specifically gave the allies global air superiority? For such a wonder weapon, its a wonder why it was replaced so quickly as a fighter armament.

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

 

[buffnut453]

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

The F-86's armament was obsolete. Every other contemporary fighter of note was armed with cannon, as was its replacement, the F-100, which first flew in 1953.

 

[Shortround6]

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

Ah yes, the F-86s used .50 cal guns fable, sort of.

F-86s did not use M2 50 cal guns. Nor did F-84s or even F-80s (probably).

They used M3s that fired at around 1200rpm.
They also used M23 incendiary ammunition.

See here for information on the M23 ammo.
.50 M23 incendiary?

So you had 6 guns firing about the same number of bullets as 9 WW II .50 cal guns, using ammo that was undergoing trials at the end of WW II and that they never got to operate satisfactorily.

And that shows how good WW II .50 cal guns and ammo were?

 

[Clayton Magnet]

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

The US Navy accepted zero new fighter designs after 1943 armed exclusively with 0.50 cal machine guns, the F8F-1 was the last one, but even it was quickly rearmed with 20mm cannons in the F8F-1B.
As buffnut453 said, the M3 Browning 0.50 armed F-86's were behind the curve, although thanks to their radar gunsight, still managed to give better than they got. A report was filed in which the airforce estimated that 2/3's of MiGs hit by Sabre's 0.50 cals escaped.The USAF then started a program called "Gunval" to explore the idea of arming F-86's with 20mm cannons during the Korean war. 8 of them made it into combat in 1953, armed with T-160 revolver cannons

 

[Admiral Beez]

The F-86's armament was obsolete. Every other contemporary fighter of note was armed with cannon, as was its replacement, the F-100, which first flew in 1953.

Wasn't there a .50 cal gun pod for the F-4C Phantom II in the 1960s? It was ultimately rejected, I think, but someone thought enough to give it a go.

 

[z42]

Wasn't there a .50 cal gun pod for the F-4C Phantom II in the 1960s? It was ultimately rejected, I think, but someone thought enough to give it a go.

Some enterprising company trying to cash in on the .50 cal mythos?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wasn't there a .50 cal gun pod for the F-4C Phantom II in the 1960s? It was ultimately rejected, I think, but someone thought enough to give it a go.

Pretty sure those were M61 Vulcan cannon-armed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Pretty sure those were M61 Vulcan cannon-armed.

Likely true.

List of U.S. aircraft gun pods - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not too many post-Korean War fixed wing aircraft were armed with .50 gun pods, and all of those were slow.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Likely true.

List of U.S. aircraft gun pods - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not too many post-Korean War fixed wing aircraft were armed with .50 gun pods, and all of those were slow.

The Avro CF-100 was armed with 8x M3 machine guns in a ventral gun pack. But it was designed before the Korean war, although it entered service in 1952.
The choice of machine guns for a dedicated bomber interceptor as late as 1950 seems strange, but was probably a result of the close ties between the RCAF and the USAF. You would think that the new ADEN cannon would have been a more attractive alternative at the time.
Either way, the CF-100 ditched the machine guns in favor of rocket pods

 

[PAT303]

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

Were only the American Sabres armed with .50's because the RAAF's had 30mm Adens.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Were only the American Sabres armed with .50's because the RAAF's had 30mm Adens.

Is this a question?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Likely true.

List of U.S. aircraft gun pods - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not too many post-Korean War fixed wing aircraft were armed with .50 gun pods, and all of those were slow.

The 20mm pod wasn't rejected. I don't have a citation for you right now but I clearly remember seeing combat footage of F-4Cs on pod-strafing runs in Vietnam. Maybe it was in the docu Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War?

 

[Shortround6]

Were only the American Sabres armed with .50's because the RAAF's had 30mm Adens.

Quite a few Sabres were armed with 20mm cannon. Around 360 of the H model and and around 280 of the K model (NATO special D with 2omm cannon instead of rockets, simplified explanation). This is not many compared to total Sabre production.
This does not count the Navy Furies. All but the Fury I (straight wing) had 20mm cannon.

 

[BiffF15]

The 20mm pod wasn't rejected. I don't have a citation for you right now but I clearly remember seeing combat footage of F-4Cs on pod-strafing runs in Vietnam. Maybe it was in the docu Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War?

One of my sim instructors at F15 school had a MiG21 kill with the gun pod.

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/newsherald/name/james-beatty-obituary?id=6618739

Great guy!

 

[Greyman]

The choice of machine guns for a dedicated bomber interceptor as late as 1950 seems strange, but was probably a result of the close ties between the RCAF and the USAF. You would think that the new ADEN cannon would have been a more attractive alternative at the time.

The CF-100's specification called for 4 x ADENs, but at an early stage this gun wasn't sufficiently developed and wouldn't be available in quantity. The switch to 8 x .5-inch was made at this point.

I think the only other gun armament that got anywhere was 4 x 20-mm T160 guns. Investigations began in November '52 and air firing took place May '54. Throughout ground and air trials there were a litany of problems with the guns (T160E3, specifically), and the project was abandoned.

 

[swampyankee]

It was? F-86s were fighting over Korea with their .50 cals.

...which the USAF was finding increasingly ineffective against contemporary aircraft.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The 20mm pod wasn't rejected.

I was referring to a .50 cal gun pod.