MK 103 cannon

[LLogann]

Is the narrator in error?

[Lusche]

Is the narrator in error?

No, I was. It's actually a 101, the precursor of the 103.

[Charge]

"Also we don't have a FW 190 with Mk103 gunpods, which did see combat in small numbers too."

And the reason for rarity in use was that they could not get MK103s to fire sychronously, so if mounted in wing pods as in A6/R3 and A8/R3 the momentum of unevenly firing cannons would start to yaw the plane and the accuracy would suffer badly. In fuselage mounting this was not a problem as in Me410.

I wonder which saw more use in Me410, MK103 or MK108?

***

"No, I was. It's actually a 101, the precursor of the 103."

Actually you were right. It is MK103 in the picture of mechanics loading the gun. The MK101 had a round muzzle brake and it was a bigger gun.

-C+

[MORAY37]

.

[MORAY37]

And after you said that I asked you to explain..........  Because what you said was basically "Very few used it but it is still a big part of the history of the plane."  Right, that's what you're saying, but how? Please explain.
Read my post again. I said "It's" (=Me 410) history. And then answer my question again.

And tell me where I contradicted that.

Logan you really can't be this dense.

To use the "other" prospective A/C as a bench example...2 atomic bombs were carried by B29's. 3,970 built... two used the bomb. It was an integral part of the history of the aircraft.

Now apply it to the 410.  Let the hamster run.  The Mk103 was a huge part of the 410's history.

[SWkiljoy]

Ohh this is like tying a cinder block to your leg then jumping into a lake trying to swim back up...it's a lose lose situation. Might as well quit while were all ahead of ourselves. 

[LLogann]

Oh yes I am....   

But really Brotha, you're comparing apples and oranges.  You can't compare the atom bomb to a cannon.  Think about it........  If you talk to a military historian, odds are the A-bomb isn't going to be as big a part of the B29 history as you might think.  They would talk about the loadout and they would talk about the CFS and they would talk about the size of the aircraft and they would talk about the power to weight ratio and they would talk about the problems with the Wright powerplant, all as being BIG parts of the B29's early history........  Then they would mention that it also carried two atomic bombs. 

Logan you really can't be this dense.

To use the "other" prospective A/C as a bench example...2 atomic bombs were carried by B29's. 3,970 built... two used the bomb. It was an integral part of the history of the aircraft.

Now apply it to the 410.  Let the hamster run.  The Mk103 was a huge part of the 410's history.

[Krusty]

1 out of every 17 would mention the atom bombs first....

 

[LLogann]

That sounds right.....   

1 out of every 17 would mention the atom bombs first....

 

Thanks for backing me up on this Krusty.   

[Krusty]

Just in case anybody falls for his posts, I am not backing him up. He's clueless.

[JOACH1M]

What size is the mk103? I heard there's a 50mm gun on this plane, I don't know is that true and if it is I don't expect it to be on the gun

[Larry]

Mk103 is a 30mm. The BK-5 is the 50mm.

[LLogann]

hhmmmmm... Well I said few historians would mention the atom bomb as a big part of the B29 and then you gave a stat.... 1 in 17.  That agrees with me.... Who is clueless? 

Just in case anybody falls for his posts, I am not backing him up. He's clueless.

Thanks for playing Krusty!

[JOACH1M]

Mk103 is a 30mm. The BK-5 is the 50mm.


(Image removed from quote.)

O ok lol, that's a massive gun on the pic but what's the difference from the mk108 30 then mk103? Rate of fire? Or velocity?

[LLogann]

Both Sir.

O ok lol, that's a massive gun on the pic but what's the difference from the mk108 30 then mk103? Rate of fire? Or velocity?