Your armament?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

MacArther said:
Ok, two cowling firing miniguns. And, a pair of 50 cals in the wings ( one per wing), and a hub firing 20mm cannon

Okay I might be wrong, but were there even any "mini guns" (note that the mini gun is not that small) built in WW2 and even if they were they certainly would not fit into a WW2 fighter like a Mustang. Plus a WW2 fighter would not be able to carry the amount of ammo for a mini gun. The rate of fire would have been to high to make it worth it.
 
The Beaufighter was developed using as many parts of the Beaufort which was a Torpedo Bomber.
Why Beau? I don't really know, but its often used as a short name for something good, attractive.
Miniguns didn't exist in WW2 so I suggest you stick to things that did exist. As for space the Beaufighter and Mossie both had more space than most, in particular the Mossie which had an internal bomb bay that could be used for extra.
Also if you want a reasoned debate suggest that you work out the weight of the Guns carried by the real planes and then propose alternatives within or close to that weight. Then they are realistic alternatives instead of flights of fantasy.
 
Glider said:
Miniguns didn't exist in WW2 so I suggest you stick to things that did exist.

Thats what I said. :D

Glider said:
As for space the Beaufighter and Mossie both had more space than most, in particular the Mossie which had an internal bomb bay that could be used for extra.

The Mossie and the Beau could certainly carry the weight of the ammo, but the space required to put the large belt fed system and drums large eneogh to carry the ammo to sustain the heavy rate of fire, I dont think would have been worth building into the Mossie and the Beau. As both you and I stated though, mini guns did not exist though, so it does not matter.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back