If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
4. In the case of the Japanese, they had trouble get up to the B-29's altitude. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"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. Probably not which is why a replacement wasnt pursued. Keith |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
-40 (F or C, it doesn't matter, much) Doesn't matter at all, to judge by my thermometer. They appear to be equal. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
I have read that the Canadian squadrons with Halifaxes had a ventral
mounting - not a turret - where a gunner had a good chance of spotting and shooting at a LW night fighter moving in under him. I also remember the source cited the RCAF had a much greater survival rate in their Halifaxes than did the RAF for that very reason. Sorry - I can't remember the source but believe it was a semi-offical history of the RAF bombing campaign. Walt BJ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
As for strafing with an upward pointing gun - I was surprised to
discover that the USAF had forgotten all about high-angle strafe. I was taught the technique at Nellis back in 1954. 60 degree dive angle - designed to negate the advantage of a foxhole. At Da Nang I worked up my own sight settings for 45 and 60 degrees and used the gun in 45 degree dive bomb passes to keep the flak gunners busy. With a little work and a -34 one can derive a sight setting that works for both gun and bomb (different release altitudes, though). Some conditions used 12 o'clock on the F4's 50 mil reticle for the gun and 6 o'clock or the pipper itself for bombing. Amazing what a guy will do when bored . . . but hell, they worked just fine. Walt BJ |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
WaltBJ wrote:
As for strafing with an upward pointing gun - I was surprised to discover that the USAF had forgotten all about high-angle strafe. I was taught the technique at Nellis back in 1954. 60 degree dive angle - designed to negate the advantage of a foxhole. At Da Nang I worked up my own sight settings for 45 and 60 degrees and used the gun in 45 degree dive bomb passes to keep the flak gunners busy. With a little work and a -34 one can derive a sight setting that works for both gun and bomb (different release altitudes, though). Some conditions used 12 o'clock on the F4's 50 mil reticle for the gun and 6 o'clock or the pipper itself for bombing. Amazing what a guy will do when bored . . . but hell, they worked just fine. Walt BJ To Cub Driver, Walt BJ, et al: Does anyone remember the B-25J with a 75 millimeter cannon firing off center, used in the Pacific theater? |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
John Boyle wrote in message ...
To Cub Driver, Walt BJ, et al: Does anyone remember the B-25J with a 75 millimeter cannon firing off center, used in the Pacific theater? Indeed - an interesting beast. The M4 gun was based on the Sherman tank's 75mm gun, and was still manually loaded. It must have been fun chucking those big shells in the breech while trying to stay balanced as the plane made its attack run. I understand that the recoil was such that by the end of a typical four-shot attack run, the plane was slowed by about 10 mph. Tony Williams Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/ |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Emmanuel Gustin wrote:
There was a 'Preston-Green' ventral gun mount for a .50 in gun, which was widespread until the installation of H2S radar required its removal. Many units improvised other ventral gun mounts. A simple clear-vision panel, with or without gun, was a much better solution than the available turrets. I am reading R. Wallace Clarke's book "British Aircraft Armamant", and he says that the Preston Green under defence mounting was fitted to all Halifax Mk III's. Aircraft production was outstripping radar set production, so it was gun or nothing, not gun or H2S. When H2S production ramped up, the turrets were replaced by radar scanners. Some Halifaxes and Lancasters had ventral turrets, but the Boulton Paul 'R' and the Frazer-Nash FN.64 were of the retractable periscope-sighted kind and therefore rather useless even by day. (Coastal Command nevertheless had the FN.64 turret installed on its Halifaxes.) Can you say what your source is for this, please? According to Clarke, HP aircraft never seem to have had FN turrets (save for the Harrow). Coastal Command made use of the FN77 Leigh Light, a modified FN25 under turret, in its Wellingtons. The 'low-drag' FN.21A apparently fitted to some early Manchesters and Lancasters was a retractable dustbin turret with extending 'shoes' to accomodate the feet and legs of the gunner, which must have resulted in a truly enormous amount of drag when lowered. According to Clarke, the FN21a was only fitted to Manchesters. The FN64 (derived from the FN60 fitted to Blenheims) was fitted to early Lancasters, and refitted to four of 5 Group's squadrons in June 1944 for daylight raids (replacing the H2S scanner). Lowering the dustbin under-turret apparantly produced a marked change in trim, and a gunner described the experience of manning one as like getting into a refrigerator with the lights out. All accounts seem to agree that the only successful ventral defence mounting was the Sperry ball turret. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aircraft Walkaround Center alive and well, new URL | Voigt Lander | Military Aviation | 7 | December 10th 03 04:16 PM |
Center vs. Approach Altitudes | Joseph D. Farrell | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | October 21st 03 08:34 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Aircraft Walkaround Center update, new section | Robert Lundin | Military Aviation | 0 | August 30th 03 08:12 PM |
PACAF’s Hawaii air ops center sets new goals while adding 109 positions | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 20th 03 09:44 PM |