Author Topic: Accuracy test of 30mm  (Read 319 times)

Offline 214thCavalier

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1929
Accuracy test of 30mm
« on: August 26, 2000, 02:56:00 PM »
I believe Zig was interested in this and said i would post when i found it again.
I am sure somebody will probably have conflicting info tho  

The material is from "Messerschmitt Bf109" by Heinz Nowarra. The test was at theroretical one by ballistics experts at Rheinmetall-Borsig assuming a range of 500m in a rear quarter attack against a stable 4 engine bomber NOT taking evasive action. It was estimated 48 rounds fired would give a 50% chance of the 4 hits required to shoot down the bomber. At 1000m it would require 120 rounds to get a 50% chance of a kill. A 95% chance of a kill at 500m required 88 rounds from 500m and 230 from 1000m.
Heinz Nowarra's comment was: "...But if the enemy aircraft reacted immediatly, its evasive action prevented it from being shot down. It was very rarely that even the most experienced fighter pilots achieved this theoretical kill rate."
Of course the Mk108 only had a 60 round belt. And of course the German fighter pilots solved the inaccuracy problem by coming in very close. Whether they would have the same chances versus fighter aircraft is another question.

Originally posted by US354 Buzzsaw at http://www.geocities.com/weurger/main.htm    
Wed May 3 02:17:29 2000

I will leave it to somebody else to decide what that dispersion rate was but 48 rds at 500m only giving a 50% chance of getting 4 hits against a non evading bomber sounds like a sawn off shotgun effect.

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2000, 03:00:00 PM »
indeed it does, thanks for the info.

Offline Andy Bush

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 153
      • http://www.simhq.com  (Contributing Editor - Air Combat Corner)
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2000, 03:21:00 PM »
Thanks again for the info. It almost raises more questions than it answers, though!

The inclusion of the percentage chance of a hit makes me wonder what target aspect was being used in the calculation...obviously a tail-on (or nose-on) aspect would present a much smaller target than a planform aspect.

Given the muzzle velocity of the MK-108 cannon, it would have taken the rounds about one second to reach a target 500m away...in A2A gunnery, one second is a long, long time!

Thanks for the reference...I'll have to check it out!

Andy

funked

  • Guest
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2000, 03:44:00 PM »
WOW.  Nice research.  I guess the short barrel didn't help.  I've seen handguns with longer barrels than the MK 108.

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #4 on: August 26, 2000, 03:48:00 PM »
Mk 103 and Mk 112 for me plz...

funked

  • Guest
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2000, 05:05:00 PM »
AIM-9 for Allied planes please.  

Offline LLv34_Snefens

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 728
      • Lentolaivue 34
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2000, 08:44:00 PM »
When Zig asked for the accuracy of the MK108 I remembered that quote at once Cav. I couldn't remember where I heard it, and wouldn't start to blabber stuff like "I read once that..."

When you gave it I suddenly remembered. Thx for clearing the source up for me  

------------------
Ltn. Snefens
RO, Lentolaivue 34
Snefens, Lentolaivue 34.
Location: Aarhus, Denmark

"Luck beats skill anytime"

-towd_

  • Guest
Accuracy test of 30mm
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2000, 10:07:00 PM »
ok but om my opinion is that our is less accurate than that data at 500 yds you aint gonn hit with one rd. try it i have its pointless