Remove the fantasy - Ar-234

[FLS]

You guys are just being silly now. Lyric posted 3 different sources saying some 234B's had guns in the other thread.
I only copied the one he claimed referred to the 234C since that was the most egregious error. If you think anyone
proved that none had the guns you are mistaken.

Edit: I went through the thread again and counted 7 published sources Lyric posted saying that some B models had the guns.

[Karnak]

You guys are just being silly now. Lyric posted 3 different sources saying some 234B's had guns in the other thread.
I only copied the one he claimed referred to the 234C since that was the most egregious error. If you think anyone
proved that none had the guns you are mistaken.

Did he?  I didn't see any.  What you posted wasn't a valid source either.  That leaves two, per your claim.

[FLS]

Did he?  I didn't see any.

I'm not surprised.  

Edit: I was being too hard on Smith and Creek. Smith is a respected historian but I'd like to see
his explanation if there was a change in different versions of his book.

Lyric posted 7 published references to guns in some 234B models as well as Arado documents of the bomber version with guns.
I think that's enough to keep an open mind on the subject.

[Denniss]

I'm not surprised.  

Edit: I was being too hard on Smith and Creek. Smith is a respected historian but I'd like to see
his explanation if there was a change in different versions of his book.

Lyric posted 7 published references to guns in some 234B models as well as Arado documents of the bomber version with guns.
I think that's enough to keep an open mind on the subject.

Please explain why primary source aircraft manuals do not show a single word of an alleged MG 151 gun package, neither for removal nor installation as Rüstsatz ?!?
Counting only on one author while ignoring others is dangerous, do you remember the "inventions" of William Green, a formerly respected author of the 1960s/70s. MG 151 as cowl guns in the Bf 109 K-4 and other never existing beasts?

[FLS]

Please explain why primary source aircraft manuals do not show a single word of an alleged MG 151 gun package, neither for removal nor installation as Rüstsatz ?!?
Counting only on one author while ignoring others is dangerous, do you remember the "inventions" of William Green, a formerly respected author of the 1960s/70s. MG 151 as cowl guns in the Bf 109 K-4 and other never existing beasts?

One reason would be that the manuals are for the earlier production models without the guns. Every source that mentions the guns states that they were on some later production models. It's likely that they would try that first if they planned on putting them on all the C models. In any case those manuals don't look like original scans.

Only 1 of the 7 mentions of rear guns that Lyric posted is from Price. Of course it's possible that everybody else copied him.

Why are there Arado technical drawings showing a B model bomber with the guns where the recon model has cameras?

Lyric posted a lot of good information but it includes information that some B models had guns mounted.

[Denniss]

The 12/44 manual (data from 12/44, released 12/44) lists a lot of equipment present in the Ar 234 but no MG 151, it shows instructions to install the cameras but again, no instruction to remove MG 151 or fittings prepared to hold MG 151.

There are a lot of Arado drawings in "Luffahrt Dokumente LD21" and almost all of them note a plan to install a MG 151 package. But all these drawing are from the Arado planning department and not found in official docs/manuals. A 12/44 drawing shows a B-1 recon with a rear-firing MG 151 underfuselage pod while B-2 and C-series plans state either "Einbau MG 151 rüstsatzmäßig vorgesehen" (MG 151 installation planned via upgrade kit) or "Raum für MG 151 starr nach hinten ist vorgesehen" (space for rear firing MG 151 is planned).
Such a rear firing device is already seen in 1943 plans/drawings so why isn't it listed in a 12/1944 manual if it was available or planned to be available soon?

[lyric1]

One reason would be that the manuals are for the earlier production models without the guns. Every source that mentions the guns states that they were on some later production models. It's likely that they would try that first if they planned on putting them on all the C models. In any case those manuals don't look like original scans.


Lyric posted a lot of good information but it includes information that some B models had guns mounted.

Yes I have sources that say rear guns were fitted.
One of those books in fact says they don't have rear guns & few pages later they say they do? In that case the book written was based off of other books listed as his sources. The author was so busy quoting every one else he did not even realise he contradicts himself in his own book.

As I pointed out in the other thread Author's wrote a book & then years later totally changed their minds Why would authors totally contradict themselves from one edition to the next on the same titled book?

Maybe they dug a little deeper & found out something they didn't know from established Dogma?


That is why I have bought so many to find the truth & will buy more to do so.

Your one source Jeff Ethel and Alfred Price's book has all the facts correct with regards to the AR-234B from your perspective.
Since my sources are lacking the facts & this thread is partially about removing rear guns.

I will play   advocate again.
Please show me from Jeff Ethel and Alfred Price's book the information needed to warrant inclusion.
Because all my books either say yes they had them & no they didn't have them.
I have evidence for exclusion of rear guns.

I just don't have any evidence needed to meet AHII inclusion if the skin criteria is correct for ordnance inclusion.

Did the AR-234B with rear guns serve in squadron strength?
Did any AR-234B with rear guns see service during WWII?

[FLS]

It's possible the author you refer too didn't contradict himself. I can only guess without seeing the full text. You really have to have the author tell you why there was a change in the text or accept that you're just guessing. If 2 books disagree it doesn't automatically follow that the last one printed is correct. Sometimes books are not properly proof read or edited. Record keeping in Germany near the end of the war wasn't always accurate. It's not uncommon to find conflicting information and it can be hard to put documents in the proper context when you only have a few of them.

The ferry pilot you linked was accepted by some as proof but he only proved that the planes he ferried had no rear guns and we don't know if they were fitted later or if he simply didn't ferry the few B models referred to in several books as having guns mounted. You posted one account of an early B model on the way to have guns fitted. It seems unlikely that they gave up on guns after that then changed their minds again for the C model which was faster and had less need of rear guns.

At this point we have no definitive proof of the number of Arado 234B aircraft with rear guns mounted whether that number is 0 or higher.

[bustr]

Are there any after war interviews with Arado combat pilots to at least verify if the guns were added as field kits, or never mounted?

[lyric1]

The ferry pilot you linked was accepted by some as proof but he only proved that the planes he ferried had no rear guns and we don't know if they were fitted later or if he simply didn't ferry the few B models referred to in several books as having guns mounted.

So at what point did the gun loaded AR-234B's roll out of the factory based off of his statement?

 "In December, 1944, they called me up to fly the Arado 234, the jet bomber.  It was originally a reconnaissance plane but then they switched it over to a bomber.  So that’s what I did until the end of the war, ferrying Arado 234’s from the factory to different places where they installed optical equipment, bombing equipment, etc. I flew the first one on Dec 12, 1944, from Hamburg to Kampfgeschwader 76 and the last on May 1st 1945.”


http://www.evanflys.com/willi_kriessmann

WWII ended a week later.

The Allies had captured the plant in early May. Hence the reason we have photos of C models with rear guns as they were found in hangars.

So you have a one week window of opportunity to make your case of rear facing guns on Arado AR-234B's if they were fitted later.
 

[Babalonian]

The Typhoon was upgraded recently with its correct armaments, I would argue both P51 and mossy need to be upgraded as other aircraft that need it.

Many will cry "Nerf", but I for one would LOVE a 10-rocket option.

[Karnak]

Typhoons also had a 12 rocket loadout that was used operationally.

[FLS]

So at what point did the gun loaded AR-234B's roll out of the factory based off of his statement?

 "In December, 1944, they called me up to fly the Arado 234, the jet bomber.  It was originally a reconnaissance plane but then they switched it over to a bomber.  So that’s what I did until the end of the war, ferrying Arado 234’s from the factory to different places where they installed optical equipment, bombing equipment, etc. I flew the first one on Dec 12, 1944, from Hamburg to Kampfgeschwader 76 and the last on May 1st 1945.”


http://www.evanflys.com/willi_kriessmann

WWII ended a week later.

The Allies had captured the plant in early May. Hence the reason we have photos of C models with rear guns as they were found in hangars.

So you have a one week window of opportunity to make your case of rear facing guns on Arado AR-234B's if they were fitted later.
 

Based on that statement the guns would have been loaded elsewhere along with the optical and bombing equipment. Note in this post of yours that the guns were to be fitted at another site.

[lyric1]

Based on that statement the guns would have been loaded elsewhere along with the optical and bombing equipment. Note in this post of yours that the guns were to be fitted at another site.

You still did not read about  Rüstsatz & how it applies to the AR-234B series did you?

Yes I posted that & yes it says that guns were fitted in that book & other sources at different sites.
The best part of this aircraft V9 it is very very well documented.
So here we go.
Find a single picture of this very aircraft V9 PH+SQ fitted with rear guns.
Find me a photo of V9 fitted with a periscope?
I mean for the pilot to shoot backwards he needed a periscope to see who was behind him right?


Also even if it did get fitted & it didn't.
It was a prototype never used in combat never sent to a squadron plus it was not an AR-234-B2 model it was an AR-234-B model.

I would post all the pictures I have on this plane but I wont as there is just to many to scan & copy.

I will post this snippet of information though.




 

Another example of old books being wrong & newer books with evidence saying otherwise.

If my books are in question watch the plane on video find a periscope find rear guns.

Go to the 23 minute 51 second mark the aircraft is clearly shown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O_jcI4fQVw

All of that aside MR Kreissmanns job was in part to take those aircraft to those plants to be fitted with hardware.

That would include guns under your premise if they were fitted.

He says.

"The Arado had no weapons"

[FLS]

It still shows that aircraft were flown to other locations to have that equipment fitted.

If the book was wrong about that particular aircraft that says nothing about the production aircraft
and your ferry pilot link states that he flew the aircraft without guns to where the final equipment was fitted.
Maybe it reads differently in German but I assume he's talking about his personal experience.

The problem with the video is that we don't know that date it was filmed. It could have been filmed prior to equipment being installed.
The 2 Arado's taking off afterwards had the periscope but you can't read the fuselage ID. I expect they're different a/c but the point is
that you have a date for equipment being added and no date for the video.

As to the Rüstsatz those appear to be packages to convert the bomber to other roles not to convert the airframe to the bomber roll.

You are clearly convinced that none of them had guns, I'm OK with that, you may be correct, but I don't see compelling evidence.