Stick Shake When Firing Guns

[John Kunkel]

Just watched another WWII dogfight movie scene where the control stick
shakes in unison with the firing guns.
Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?
John

[Jukka O. Kauppinen]

> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?

Hollywood thing. I've asked about this from various Finnish war pilots
and they haven't anything like that. For example Colonel Pokela on the
contrary described, that the Messerschmitt 109 fighter was "steady as a
train" when shooting.

jok

[B2431]

>
>> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
>> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?
>
>Hollywood thing. I've asked about this from various Finnish war pilots
>and they haven't anything like that. For example Colonel Pokela on the
>contrary described, that the Messerschmitt 109 fighter was "steady as a
>train" when shooting.
>
>jok
>
Take a look at the instruments on the panel when they do that. No matter what
the airplane is doing on the screen the indicators always show zero RPM,
straight and level, field elevation, zero climb/dive....etc.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[QDurham]

>Take a look at the instruments on the panel when they do that. No matter what
>the airplane is doing on the screen the indicators always show zero RPM,
>straight and level, field elevation, zero climb/dive....etc.
>

Also, based on my SNJ experience 50 years ago, pull + g's and the tracers
apparently droop out of the gun. Go for - gs and they arc gracefully upwards.
Kijk rudder and they apparently slew to omne side or the other -- depending.
Pull hard +gs and the rate of fire sl;ows dramaticaly -- probably due to the
increased "weight" of ammo belt. Pull -gs and the rate of fire picks up
considerably.

Air to air gunnery, as discussed here, is miserably hard to do. Like sitting
on your front porch trying to aim your house. Also fun.

Quent

[Dudley Henriques]

"QDurham" > wrote in message
...
> >Take a look at the instruments on the panel when they do that. No matter
what
> >the airplane is doing on the screen the indicators always show zero RPM,
> >straight and level, field elevation, zero climb/dive....etc.
> >
>
> Also, based on my SNJ experience 50 years ago, pull + g's and the tracers
> apparently droop out of the gun. Go for - gs and they arc gracefully
upwards.
> Kijk rudder and they apparently slew to omne side or the other --
depending.
> Pull hard +gs and the rate of fire sl;ows dramaticaly -- probably due to
the
> increased "weight" of ammo belt. Pull -gs and the rate of fire picks up
> considerably.
>
> Air to air gunnery, as discussed here, is miserably hard to do. Like
sitting
> on your front porch trying to aim your house. Also fun.
>
> Quent

You're right as rain Quent! My experience doesn't go back beyond the A4
sight however, which solved for gravity drop, trajectory shift,and velocity
jump, as well as ranging.....all solved as a prediction solution.
We had it easy though!!! Those guys in the prop fighters during the war had
to be a mixture of Annie Oakley, Buffalo Bill, and Wild Bill Hickock!!
It's funny though, even with "modern" sights, the "real good shooters"
through the sixties still took a quick glance at the ball just before
hitting that trigger....out of pure habit!! :-)))
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
For personal e-mail, use dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnet
(changeztoe)

[QDurham]

> We had it easy though!!! Those guys in the prop fighters during the war had
>to be a mixture of Annie Oakley, Buffalo Bill, and Wild Bill Hickock!!

Yeah, BUT! Once I tried being a little smug with a WWII relative who flew
Stearmans. How easy he had it. How much greater I was! Ta Dah!!!! He then
asked me if I ever had flown an "Inverted Falling Leaf."

"A what?"

Quent

[Dudley Henriques]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
> >> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?
> >
> >Hollywood thing. I've asked about this from various Finnish war pilots
> >and they haven't anything like that. For example Colonel Pokela on the
> >contrary described, that the Messerschmitt 109 fighter was "steady as a
> >train" when shooting.
> >
> >jok
> >
> Take a look at the instruments on the panel when they do that. No matter
what
> the airplane is doing on the screen the indicators always show zero RPM,
> straight and level, field elevation, zero climb/dive....etc.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

I remember sitting down with a few of the Doolittle guys at one of their
reunions some years ago. We were watching Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo and
having a few beers. Lawson was there. (He wrote the book :-)
He was laughing like hell as Van Johnson skimmed the rice patties with what
was being depicted as Lawson's #7 airplane, the Ruptured Duck. He said,
" Look at how steady I was flying that baby will ya?. That Artificial
Horizon ain't moving an inch is it?" Doolittle smiled back, "You were smooth
all right Ted, but not THAT smooth!!!!" :-)))

Side note; those shots in the movies are done in a mockup as I'm sure you
know :-)
Some of the mockups are damn good, being the real thing like the B25 cockpit
used in "Tokyo". Other films that used a real cockpit mockup for the inside
cockpit shots were "God Is My Co-Pilot", and "The Flying Leathernecks".
There are many others to be sure, but these two come to mind as in both
films, there are scenes looking over the pilot's shoulder at ther panel
during maneuvering flight where the AH and other instruments as well are
absolutely solid.
But Ted Lawson's "return" over the rice patties in Japan is a classic
example for the "extremely hard to please" critics among us :-))))
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
For personal e-mail, use
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
(replacezwithe)

[Dudley Henriques]

"QDurham" > wrote in message
...
> > We had it easy though!!! Those guys in the prop fighters during the war
had
> >to be a mixture of Annie Oakley, Buffalo Bill, and Wild Bill Hickock!!
>
> Yeah, BUT! Once I tried being a little smug with a WWII relative who flew
> Stearmans. How easy he had it. How much greater I was! Ta Dah!!!! He
then
> asked me if I ever had flown an "Inverted Falling Leaf."
>
> "A what?"
>
> Quent

I know what you mean. The first time I flew a Stearman, it had a 650 Pratt
and Whitney in it. Breezy SOB!! On take off, everything sucked up off the
belly right into my eyes. (Also happens in the T6 to the guy in front if you
leave the canopy cracked in the back on takeoff :-))))
I damn near lost the Stearman that day!!!!! :-))
The one thing that sticks out in my memory about that airplane was how damn
wide I had to spread my legs on the rudder pedals. After the Mustang, that
cockpit was WIDE!!! Only airplane I can remember with a wider pit was the
Jug (P47N)
That Stearman was really fun to fly. It gave me the same feeling I always
had in the Pitts......VERY strong!! The roll rate was a bit slower than the
Pitts :-)))
but a lot of fun anyway!!
Dudley

[Jeff Crowell]

John Kunkel wrote:
> Just watched another WWII dogfight movie scene where the control stick
> shakes in unison with the firing guns.
> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?

Never felt the stick shake, at least in an irreversible-controls
A-4 Skyhawk... but the damn sights sure did! The fixed
pipper (adjustable only in elevation wrt aircraft boresight)
would jitter all over the shop.

FWIW, Robert S. Johnson (well, Martin Caidin in RSJ's name*)
claimed that on the occasion of his first kill, the noise of all 8 of
the Jug's fifties firing together scared (or at least startled) him to
the point that he let go of the trigger. Up 'til that point, he'd only
fired one at a time, at towed socks.

*note that Johnson left that part of the tale in when he revised
and re-released Thunderbolt!


Jeff

[Dav1936531]

>From: "Jeff Crowell"
>

>>John Kunkel wrote:
>> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
>> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?

>FWIW, Robert S. Johnson (well, Martin Caidin in RSJ's name*)
>claimed that on the occasion of his first kill, the noise of all 8 of
>the Jug's fifties firing together scared (or at least startled) him to
>the point that he let go of the trigger. Up 'til that point, he'd only
>fired one at a time, at towed socks.
>
>*note that Johnson left that part of the tale in when he revised
>and re-released Thunderbolt!
>Jeff

I can't imagine that, while firing all eight of those .50's in a P-47, that the
whole plane wasn't shaking....much less just the stick. Anybody with shooting
experience in that plane care to detail their experience?
Dave

[Howard Austin]

> >>John Kunkel wrote:
> >> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to the
> >> controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?
>
> >FWIW, Robert S. Johnson (well, Martin Caidin in RSJ's name*)
> >claimed that on the occasion of his first kill, the noise of all 8 of
> >the Jug's fifties firing together scared (or at least startled) him to
> >the point that he let go of the trigger. Up 'til that point, he'd only
> >fired one at a time, at towed socks.
> >
> >*note that Johnson left that part of the tale in when he revised
> >and re-released Thunderbolt!
> >Jeff
>
> I can't imagine that, while firing all eight of those .50's in a P-47, that the
> whole plane wasn't shaking....much less just the stick. Anybody with shooting
> experience in that plane care to detail their experience?
> Dave

Never flew the P-47 but firing the six guns in the Mustang created a
lot of noise but little if any vibration. Certainly didn't shake the
stick.

Howard Austin

[Richard Brooks]

Howard Austin wrote:
>>>> John Kunkel wrote:
>>>> Is this Hollywood or did the firing of the guns carry through to
>>>> the controls and cause stick shake as the movies depict?
>>
>>> FWIW, Robert S. Johnson (well, Martin Caidin in RSJ's name*)
>>> claimed that on the occasion of his first kill, the noise of all 8
>>> of
>>> the Jug's fifties firing together scared (or at least startled) him
>>> to
>>> the point that he let go of the trigger. Up 'til that point, he'd
>>> only
>>> fired one at a time, at towed socks.
>>>
>>> *note that Johnson left that part of the tale in when he revised
>>> and re-released Thunderbolt!
>>> Jeff
>>
>> I can't imagine that, while firing all eight of those .50's in a
>> P-47, that the whole plane wasn't shaking....much less just the
>> stick. Anybody with shooting experience in that plane care to detail
>> their experience?
>> Dave
>
> Never flew the P-47 but firing the six guns in the Mustang created a
> lot of noise but little if any vibration. Certainly didn't shake the
> stick.
>

I suppose it's quite difficult to portray vibration that can only be felt,
without resorting to subtitles.

One piece I read was of a Lancaster pilot who said that on full revs as the
Lanc' lurched forward at the start of its take-off run, the control column
felt like you were holding a hive full of angry bees.

Richard.

[ArtKramr]

>Subject: Re: Stick Shake When Firing Guns
>From: "Richard Brooks"
>Date: 9/28/03 4:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id:

Firing the nose gun on a B-26 didn't provide enough vibration to tumble the
Norden gyro. And it takes damn little to tumble a Norden gyro. There was more
noise than anything else. Same for the 4 package guns on the Marauder.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

[M. J. Powell]

In message >, ArtKramr
> writes
>>Subject: Re: Stick Shake When Firing Guns
>>From: "Richard Brooks"
>>Date: 9/28/03 4:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>>Message-id:
>
>Firing the nose gun on a B-26 didn't provide enough vibration to tumble the
>Norden gyro. And it takes damn little to tumble a Norden gyro. There was more
>noise than anything else. Same for the 4 package guns on the Marauder.

I've noticed that on the camera gun film shown on some TV programmes
sometimes the whole picture vibrates and at other times it is quite
steady.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

[Michael Williamson]

M. J. Powell wrote:
> I've noticed that on the camera gun film shown on some TV programmes
> sometimes the whole picture vibrates and at other times it is quite steady.
>
> Mike

Depends largely on the installation of the gun camera, and its
position relative to the guns. In the P-38, the camera was
initially installed in the nose, pretty much just below the 20mm
cannon. The result was very poor to unusable footage. The camera
was later moved to one of the underwing pylons, and the result was
very steady gun footage, if from a somewhat unusual perspective.

Mike

[Regnirps]

M. J. Powell wrote:
> I've noticed that on the camera gun film shown on some TV programmes
> sometimes the whole picture vibrates and at other times it is quite steady.
>
> Mike

Mostly what you are seeing is easily explained. The cameras in many of the
fighters in the ETO had a seperate switch for turning it on and off. You can
sometimes see a little flag in the uper left or right of the frame that
indicates trigger pull. On some the flag means firing and some its absence
means firing! So a single film shot can have firing and nonfiring portions and
sound affects are often added to match the vibrating portion. You also get some
shots of enemy pilots under their chutes. This is done with the camera switch,
uhm, most of the time.

A good example is the famous very long chase at treetop level by Harry Dayhuff
(or someone in the 78th) in a P47 that culminates in his blowing the left wing
off a German plane.

On the P47 the camera is mounted in the wing and you see a lot of vibration,
mostly due to the low shutter speed of about 1/30 sec. Since the P47 was very
heavy and double skinned, the pilots I have talked to never mentioned feeling
much in the way of vibration.

-- Charlie Springer

[Dav1936531]

>From: (Howard Austin)
>

>> I can't imagine that, while firing all eight of those .50's in a P-47, that
the whole plane wasn't shaking....much less just the stick. Anybody with
shooting experience in that plane care to detail their experience?
>>Dave

>Never flew the P-47 but firing the six guns in the Mustang created a lot of
noise but little if any vibration. Certainly didn't shake the stick.
>Howard Austin

Thanks for the details. It just seems soooo counter-intuitive, between the guns
blazing and the huge engine running, that there wasn't enough vibration in the
cockpit of those planes to jiggle the pilot's teeth loose. The dampening
mechanism on those plane's guns must have been more effective at killing
vibration then I supposed, never having flown any of them.
Dave

[Matthew G. Saroff]

In the case of the A-10, I would figure that everything
in the immediate vicinity of the cannon would shake when it was
fired. ;)
--
--Matthew Saroff
Shrub stole the election, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt
http://www.pobox.com/~msaroff/liar