Has there ever been an off-center gun?

"Gord Beaman" ) wrote in message . ..
"Bob Martin" wrote:

For example... at 4000 feet, the bullets will only drop about 10
feet--random dispersion will be greater than that.


But that puts the centre of the dispersion pattern ~ten feet
below the aim point at that range doesn't it?

Yeah, but that's only about a sixth of a degree of arc...

also, a tank is what, 6-8 feet tall at least? Ten feet at that range is
very little to be concerned about... anyways, the point being that gravity
drop is less of a factor with the GAU-8 than with other guns.


I see...that's interesting...how do they do that? (your last
sentence I mean)

The GAU-8/A projectiles have a much better ballistic coefficient than
most aircraft gun shells because they are particularly heavy and
well-shaped, so they slow down less and arrive at the target more
quickly - so gravity has less time to act on them. They are not magic,
however, and will drop by the same amount as any other shell in the
same time.

By comparison with ground-based AA guns, the A-10's weapon also
benefits from the forward speed of the aircraft, and the fact that it
is firing 'downhill', which gives it a couple of built-in advantages.
However, if the AA gun is firing FAPDS that would restore the balance,
as an aircraft can't use this ammo.

BTW, the current Russian 30mm shells are almost as good as the
GAU-8/A's.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

During WW2, many German night fighters were fitted with a gun firing upwards,
to attack bombers.

Actually: 1. It could be one or *multiple* guns
2. They were at an oblique angle
3. It came about when some genius in the
Luftwaffe realized that RAF
bombers had *no* belly defenses;
[GEE! IF Churchill had asked NICELY; we COULD
have sold
him some B-17/24 type BALL
TURRETS OR THE PLANS
FOR SAME! ]

4. the Germans called then
"Schrage" (sic, needs unlauts!)
Musik" or "Jazz Music" in
German!

4. the Germans called then
"Schrage" (sic, needs unlauts!)
Musik" or "Jazz Music" in

German!

Umlauts-R-Us

ü Alt 129
ä 132
ß 225
ö 148
Ä 142
Ö 153
Ü 154

"DBurch7672" wrote in message
...
During WW2, many German night fighters were fitted with a gun firing
upwards,
to attack bombers.

Actually: 1. It could be one or *multiple* guns
2. They were at an oblique angle
3. It came about when some genius in
the
Luftwaffe realized that RAF
bombers had *no* belly defenses;

Not strictly accurate , some Lancasters had ventral guns, the
problem was that the space was needed for the H2S radar
installation



[GEE! IF Churchill had asked NICELY; we
COULD
have sold
him some B-17/24 type BALL
TURRETS OR THE PLANS
FOR SAME! ]


Given that the RAF had a number of B-17's complete
with ball turrets I rather think the idea was not completely
unknown.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Given that the RAF had a number of B-17's complete
with ball turrets I rather think the idea was not completely
unknown.

Would it really have helped anyway? AIUI ventral ball turrets were very
uncomfortable and in day bombers, gunners moved to them only when fighters
were detected. Besides ventral gunner is still in enormous disadvantage
against a night fighter, he doesn't have a radar and night fighter can see
the bomber easier against the sky.

nt (Krztalizer) wrote:


4. the Germans called then
"Schrage" (sic, needs unlauts!)
Musik" or "Jazz Music" in

German!

Umlauts-R-Us

ü Alt 129
ä 132
ß 225
ö 148
Ä 142
Ö 153
Ü 154


Thanks Gordon Ü
--

-Gord.

Why yes, the AC-47, AC-119, and the AC-130A/E/H/U, to name a few.
--
Les
F-4C(WW),D,E,G(WW)/AC-130A/MC-130E EWO (ret)

In article ,
"Yama" writes:

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Given that the RAF had a number of B-17's complete
with ball turrets I rather think the idea was not completely
unknown.

Would it really have helped anyway? AIUI ventral ball turrets were very
uncomfortable and in day bombers, gunners moved to them only when fighters
were detected. Besides ventral gunner is still in enormous disadvantage
against a night fighter, he doesn't have a radar and night fighter can see
the bomber easier against the sky.

Considering that climbing into, or out of, a ball turret wasn't a
trivial task, and that doing so at 25,000' would require handling
latches & controls that have cold-soaked at -40 (F or C, it doesn't
matter, much) for several hours, not to mention that you'd have to be
juggling Oxygen, connunication, and suit heater power leads, (Oh,
yeah, and you can't climb into the turret with it in the trail
position, you've got to hand crank it so that the guns are pretty much
straight down, then climb in), I'd rather doubt it.
Oh, yeah, the cold temperatures would freeze up the traverse &
elevation gear if it weren't energized & exercized.

You weren't supposed to be in the turret for takeoff or landing, but
the gunner would enter the turret sometime before passing through
10,000' on the climbout.

Now, those "dustbin" things that the Germans & Japanese were so fond
of - those strike me as a bit, well, optimistic.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

"Yama" wrote in message ...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Given that the RAF had a number of B-17's complete
with ball turrets I rather think the idea was not completely
unknown.

Would it really have helped anyway? AIUI ventral ball turrets were very
uncomfortable and in day bombers, gunners moved to them only when fighters
were detected. Besides ventral gunner is still in enormous disadvantage
against a night fighter, he doesn't have a radar and night fighter can see
the bomber easier against the sky.

Quite so. The idea of upward-firing guns for use against bombers
originated in WW1 (mainly to attack airships) and there were British
experiments with upward-firing cannon interwar. Although the
difficulty in defending this area was probably a factor in the German
use of Schräge Musik, I think that more important issues we

1. The bombers were generally much easier to spot from below.

2. The fighters were harder to spot from above.

3. The fighters had a nice, big, steady target to aim at in the
bomber's planform, instead of aiming at a much smaller end-on target
while being bounced around in the slipstream.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

During WW2, many German night fighters were fitted with a gun firing upwards,
to attack bombers.

Likewise in Japan (day fighters also).

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com