Author Topic: MK108 damage photos, please ? (Read 9946 times)

Pongo · « **Reply #75 on:** March 20, 2004, 09:30:32 PM »

I fyou look at the Bleinhem picture you can see the radial patern of fragments that has that effect.

GScholz · « **Reply #76 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:12:11 AM »

B17 getting shredded by FW190-A8

P40 getting shredded by Macchi (MG151 20mm)

Batz · « **Reply #77 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:21:30 AM »

That 2nd video is a 202 with 2 x 12.7 mm Breda-SAFAT not mg151.

GScholz · « **Reply #78 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:32:43 AM »

The 12.7mm Breda can't carry that much HE. Must be 151s IMO.

Batz · « **Reply #79 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:53:06 AM »

Its 202 its been posted on this forum and many others

Quote

12.7mm Italian Breda-SAFAT Machine guns: they all were armed with the multi-effect "S.I.T." - "Scoppianti"(explosive)+ "Incendiarie"(...incendiary)+"Traccianti" (..tracer)- bullets (a variant of Vickers 12.7mm x 81Sr cartridge).

Despite the smoke thats not alot of HE. Go to the Czech site and watch the 109s. You should see adifference.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #80 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:58:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tony Williams
Re: the MK 108's effectiveness - this is a quote from 'Flying Guns: WW2'. The information was supplied to me by an American serviceman who personally witnessed the test:

"It was not only the blast which inflicted damage; after the war, the Americans test-fired an MK 108 HEI shell into the tail of a B-24 at a typical angle, characteristic of a tail interception by an Me 262. The "spray" pattern of very high velocity, very small fragments cut most if not all of the control cables and many of the longerons. It was assessed that the tail would have separated if the plane had been in flight; a performance which made a great impression on the observers."

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

There we go, end of story. We have first hand account of an actual firing test that shows the full extent of destructive ability of MK108 against the primary WW2 US heavy bomber. And its considered credible by an acknowledged expert on ww2 guns so that he puts it into his book. I hope Pyro takes this into account when he models the B24, heck even the B17 may need be redon wrt to Mk108 damage.

GScholz · « **Reply #81 on:** March 21, 2004, 01:07:18 AM »

Unless you have a source that claims that to be a C.202 I'm going to have to disagree. The blast effect is very similar to the 109/190 guncam videos I've seen, and the projectile velocity (spreading) is similar too. If those are indeed Bredas I'm quite amazed at how destructive they were.

Batz · « **Reply #82 on:** March 21, 2004, 01:09:36 AM »

Quick search turns up this old thread.

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43507&highlight=BredaSAFAT

My contention that it is a 202 is substantiated by Lupo who claims to have that film on VHS.

Also if you look at where the tracers come from they appear to me to be relatively close to each other meaning 12.7 nose cannon not mg151 on the wings.

There have been other threads but I don feel like searching for them.

GScholz · « **Reply #83 on:** March 21, 2004, 01:15:12 AM »

If it is so the 12.7mm Breda is seriously undermodelled!

Wilbus · « **Reply #84 on:** March 21, 2004, 02:54:19 AM »

I remember that thread Batz, think everybody were equally surprised to see the destructive power the 202 had, specially compared to what AH has.

Maybe Mr.Williams have more info about this??

HoHun · « **Reply #85 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:30:05 AM »

Hi Hooligan,

>5 randomly placed hits would apparently not have been sufficient.

According to Luftwaffe figures, 4 - 5 randomly placed hits had a 50% chance of bringing down a heavy bomber, 8 - 9 randomly placed hits were required for a 95% kill chance.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

GScholz · « **Reply #86 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:36:05 AM »

Just look at the film I posted. After the first burst both wings were on fire. The second burst completely shredded the tail section.

_Schadenfreude_ · « **Reply #87 on:** March 21, 2004, 04:10:21 AM »

I hope AH2 treats the 108 more realistically than the current AH does - have spent the lst two weeks playing FB and the 108 is the weapon of choice - it's effects are in line with what was reported historically and since the a/c are a lot tougher than in AH you only get a chance to make one or two hits....

Hooligan · « **Reply #88 on:** March 21, 2004, 09:29:37 AM »

Hohun:

Thanks for the info. Can you tell me what document that data is from? It sounds like something I would like to get a copy of.

Hooligan

Shiva · « **Reply #89 on:** March 21, 2004, 01:49:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The only He219 that could have the MK103 (installed in the ventral tray) was the M3 option for the A-0 with 300r/gun.

The He219A-7/R1 had 2 × 30 mm MK 108 fixed forward-firing in the wing roots, 100 rounds each, 2 × 30 mm MK 103 fixed forward-firing in the ventral tray, 100 rounds each, 2 × 20 mm MG 151/20 fixed forward-firing in the ventral tray, 300 rounds each, and 2 × 30 mm MK 108 fixed in the rear fuselage in a Shräge Musik installation, 100 rounds each. The He219A-7/R2 deleted the wing-root Mk108s. The He-219A-2/R2 had 2 × 30 mm MK 108 in a Shräge Musik installation, 2 × 20 mm MG 151/20 fixed forward-firing in wing roots, and 2 × 30 mm MK 103 fixed forward-firing in the ventral tray.