Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: fscott on December 26, 2000, 09:44:00 PM
-
EOM
-
In the books. Listed as F6F5-N.
Put that radar pod on the right wing of the F6F5, add the drag it causes, add the weight it adds, and add the negative maneouverability it causes.
And then you can get your 20mm
-
They put 20mm's on non-nightfighter versions also. However, I haven't seen any information which is at all specific about how many were produced.
http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/f6f-5.pdf (http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/f6f-5.pdf) has some more information.
Hooligan
-
Yes, my thoughts also. I know they put two 20mm cannons plus 4 .50 cals on the normal batch of f6f5's but do not have any numbers on them. My thoughts if your going to model a plane of which only 200 were produced (f4u1c), then why not have this as an option. No need to change the designation, just add the 20mm cannons as an option in the hanger.
fscott
-
I have to agree with RAM on this one.
I'm glad they gave us a Hellcat with the classic Hellcat armament.
We have enough cannon armed aircraft. If you really want cannon, grab one of them.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Who gives a darn about how many of what a/c was produced? This game isn't modeled for the most numbers of planes...but about those that were in the war. F4U-1C was in WWII....so why can't it be here? Cannons on the F6F...there was a version of it...so why not here?
I mean it...those who post "only 200 were built so it shouldn't be here" are only whiners. Let's not call it a WWII sim...let's call it "Combat Sim with Most Popular Aircraft That No One Whines About"
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Lt. Col. Aaron "txace-" Giles of the 457th BG
"Fait Accompli"
-
According to Hooligan's site, the mixed 20's/.50's "could be fitted".
So, it's just an armament loadout option, like gondolas on LW aircraft?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Kinda makes your knees shake, doesn't it?
Put it in. It's worth it just to hear the screams!
-
Yeah, and then there's 4x20mm Spitfires(all marques post VC), 2x20mm gondolas for Fw 190(6x20mm total), MK 108 gondolas, 2x20mm+1x23mm for Yak-9U etc...
Funny thing - I've never seen a single photo of a F6F with cannon - only diagrams -hmmmm... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Texace, are you lobbying for the me-262, the He-162, the Komet, the Ar-234?
Cheers,
Pepe
-
Originally posted by texace:
Who gives a darn about how many of what a/c was produced? This game isn't modeled for the most numbers of planes...but about those that were in the war. F4U-1C was in WWII....so why can't it be here? Cannons on the F6F...there was a version of it...so why not here?
I mean it...those who post "only 200 were built so it shouldn't be here" are only whiners. Let's not call it a WWII sim...let's call it "Combat Sim with Most Popular Aircraft That No One Whines About"
OK texace, we will do one thing. Everyone here knows that some (not many, still some means HUNDREDS) Fw190As got their cowling MGs removed, along with their ammo.
That means about 350lbs of dead weight...you remember the uberwhines about the Fw190A5 in 1.03?...that was because the FM was that of a G3 with no cowling guns.
AS way more 190s had MGs removed than F6Fs had cannons, I want my option to remove those dirty useless things from my plane, to get back the 4500fps climbrate at 0feet of the 1.03 A5.
then you get your cannons for the hellcat (And the MK108 gondolas for the 109G, and the MG151 gondolas to make 190A8 have 6x20mm cannons, and...you follow me?)
sorry if I sound a bit harsh. Just got one teeth removed this morning and I'm in bad mood.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
Wheres pair of torpedos and 1000kg (+2000lb) bombs from Ju-88?
-
Originally posted by RAM:
sorry if I sound a bit harsh. Just got one teeth removed this morning and I'm in bad mood.
Sounded pretty normal. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) In fact, totally normal. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Toad:
Sounded pretty normal. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) In fact, totally normal. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Strange...toad jumping into a thread without being called and with no other motive, nor reason, than to slam people he dislikes...
Really, man, you need more my calmants for the pain than me. Maybe that way you can stop the shudder and shivers you suffer each time you see a post from the people you so much "like"...
Toad I suggest you to learn to go into a thread when you have SOMETHING to say on the topic (I dont mind if its constructive or not)...simply I think that its a good thing that you learn how to avoid jumping on anyone you dislike each time that the guy postes something.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
Wheres pair of torpedos and 1000kg (+2000lb) bombs from Ju-88?
Don't forget the 20mm cannon. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Camo
------------------
Camouflage
XO, Lentolaivue 34
www.muodos.fi/LLv34 (http://www.muodos.fi/LLv34)
Brewster into AH!
"The really good pilots use their superior judgement to keep them out of situations
where they might be required to demonstrate their superior skill."
-
The problem is Toad... RAM is dead right! If we're gonna model aircraft with such restricted numbers, why not allow deletion of the 190's cowl guns? (assuming that there are sufficient references to show this was a fairly common practice)
I mean, we DO want to be fair to all sides here, don't we? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
=357th Pony Express=
Aces High Training Corps
-
well, I flew that beast last night for several sorties, it really doiesnt "need" cannons. What a sweet handling AC.
but, im am no gun control proponent either (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(http://home.nc.rr.com/ammo/public.html/unw_sig.jpg) (http://www.jump.net/~cs3)
-
Ram,
Check it out, Duuuuuuuuuuude!
I DID give my opinion on the topic, without the BAD ATTITUDE you ALWAYS bring, toothache or not. So here's a tissue, dry your eyes. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
BTW, your second post sounds even more like the RAM that has made himself infamous on these boards. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Jekyll:
Are you hijacking this topic to Luftland? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Did I say ANYTHING about FW 190 cowl guns? Is this a topic about FW 190 cowl guns? Do you want my opinion on FW 190 cowl guns?
Well, too bad, 'cause here it is: (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
If I were King, I'd allow deletion of the cowl guns. If it was done during the war as a field mod, I have no problem with it.
There were lots of field mods. My father's B-25 Wing tried a few aircraft with 12 .30 cal machine guns racked in the bombbays at a 45 degree angle for flak supression. Didn't work out the way they thought, so they changed them back. But, I'd even allow that here....
The problem is Jekyll...this is an F6f 20mm topic!
I now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 12-27-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
dangit I just want the cannon version of the Ju-88 =) =) =)
-
Which one?
Ju 88A-14: 1x20mm
Ju 88C-6: 3x20mm
Ju 88H-2: 6x20mm!
Maybe you want bigger guns?
Ju 88P-1: 1x75mm
Ju 88P-2: 2x37mm
Ju 88P-4: 1x50mm
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Oh yeah, and that P1Y1 with 10 forward-firing 20mm would be nice too...
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
The cannon Hellcat was a loadout for the Hellcat. It should be allowed. If all the mg's worked as they should it would not be that popular anyway but... Since they don't, let's allow any armement that was made. As far as removing cowl guns.... The Corsair had 2 outer MG's removed in some island based planes as well as the very common removal of the tail hook and some other carrier gear. I don't know if I want the planes to be able to have equipment removed tho... Hellcats with 2 cannon and two mg's would also be lighter. Some Goodyear -1's had no folding wings or tailhooks and were probly close to half a ton lighter.
Point is... lots of field mods were done on all planes but certainly, we should be able to have any STANDARD, factory installed guns or equipment package/loadout.
lazs
-
They made a P1Y1 Frances with 10 20mm cannons??? Where did you get that from?
Please share (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
U want all the LW loadout options too lazs? Whats that? No? I didnt think u would.
-
grun... sure, give them the loadouts that were factory installed loadouts. I got no problem wityh that. If it's a field mod then allow me to run 65 lbs of manifold as was a common Corsair "feild" mod as well as carrier gear removal.
Oh, the removal of two 13mm cowl guns will lighten up a 190 350lbs and make it climb 4500fpm? Wow.... The goodyear Corsair musta climbed at least 5,000 fpm.
lazs
[This message has been edited by lazs (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
Hehe I was waitin for this one! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) The door is pretty much wide open with the 4-cannon Niki and the 4-cannon Hog; i.e. Aces High is NOT about limiting the plane set to only "historically-significant" aircraft, is it?
It will be interesting to watch the same guys who rationalize why the cannon-Cat should NOT be included, then go on to explain just why the Ta-152 and Dora and 4-cannon Ki-84 SHOULD be included, won't it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
And let's not even talk about the 150 4-cannon Mustangs and the various 4-cannon Spitfires that saw combat, shall we?
Either model ONLY the "most representative" armament suite for each marque, or model ALL the loadouts, let the players choose, and get over it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
--jedi
-
Toad...I wont waste my (Now painless (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)) time with you
Originally posted by lazs:
Oh, the removal of two 13mm cowl guns will lighten up a 190 350lbs and make it climb 4500fpm? Wow.... The goodyear Corsair musta climbed at least 5,000 fpm.
lazs
The removal of the 7.9mm MGs plus the ammo on the Fw190A5 will make a plane that climbs 4000fpm at SL climb more than 4500 fpm. It happened on 1.03, we had the 190G3 model here (a 190A5 without cowl MGs) and the whines were so loud that they were heard on Beijing.
About your 2x20mm on the Hellcat that "should be allowed" regardless the numbers, and your 65 Manifold for the Corsair, regardless the numbers, and the fact that it was a field conversion...I want:
- MW50 for BOTH the Fw190A8 and Fw190A5. They had provision for it,right?...so I have the right to ask for it and for the 400hp boost it means.
- Cowl gun removal available on BOTH A5 and A8.
- I want ETC racks on the wings of my 190A5 to carry four 50kg or two 250kg bombs, making the 190 A/G load of 1000Kg (500Kg+2x250Kg)-------->Fw190A5/U3.
- I want the long range Jabo Fw190A5/U8 (ETC250 rack and wing drop tanks)
- I want the Fw190A5/U9...with four Mauser MG151/20.
- I want The Fw190A5/U11...with two Mauser MG151/20 and two MK103 cannons.
- I want the Fw190A5/U12...with six MG151/20 cannons.
- I want the Fw190A5/U14...with a LT F5b Torpedo (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
- I want the Fw190A5/U16...with two Mauser MG151/20 and two MK108 cannons.
- I want the Fw190A8/R3 ...with two Mauser MG151/20 and two Mk103 cannons
- I want the Fw190A8/R7... with heavy frontal armour
- I want the A-8/R11...with the turbosupercharged BMW801TS for increased altitude perfornamce
- I want the Fw190A8/R12...with BMW801TS, Two MG151/20 and two MK108 guns
- I WANT THE X-4 AIR TO AIR MISSILE
more or less half this list was only experimental, but they were USED and TESTED in combat...and as the Fw190A could receive all those modifications I WANT ALL OF THEM!
The Jabo configurations were widely used and we lack them here in Aces High.
So, you get your 20mm for the hellcat and your 65Manifold for the Corsair... And I get ALL those modifications available...wanna trade, Mr Lazs?
In a Mw50 Fw190A5 with four Mauser MG151/20s, no cowl MGs, and wing drop tanks...I will beat the hell out of any blue bird (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 12-27-2000).]
-
Well, it sure doesn't take long for some to find something they don't like about the latest effort to improve our sim.
Open your eyes and realize how ridiculous it is to critcize HTC's effort the very day a new version is released.
Why ask where the cannon Hellcat is when you should know the answer when you ask the question....they didn't include it in 1.05!
They didn't indicate in any news posts that they would include it.
I'm sorry...it must just be me...I'm delighted that we are part of a sim which has outgrown all others in the market within it's first two years in business. It just doesn't cross my mind to find something wrong with something that is as good as this is. It's not perfect, or totally realistic, it is what it is...if ya don't like it just go somewhere else....please.
Of course, here comes the crap in a wrapper about how unreasonable I am and how it's a valid opinion, blah blah.
Is it half empty or half full?
Ltr
Ice
-
My glass is presently overflowing. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
The Cragganmore is running over the top, spilling down the sides, dribbling across the table and even the dog is lapping some up off the floor.
We are lucky little bastiges indeed. All this for $30.
The amazing news is that it's going to get even BETTER! There WILL be further additions/improvements.
Ignore the malcontents. HTC is even now, as you read this, working to make this even better!
-
On top of that....€/$ is raising! More $ per €! Maybe now I can buy another glass, since mine is like Toad's (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Pepe
-
I think it would be better to do new game (unless Oleg will succeed in somewhat terrific game which has this and that for plane)
-
Rgr that, Toad. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) To everything you said.
Hiya RAM, my old mate.
------------------------------------
I am English.
I like Football.
I am a Football fan.
I go to watch Football games.
Therefore I am a football hooligan.
Quad Eract Demonstrata.
Copyright RAM, 2000
-
Well, I'm just so excited about these other sims coming out that I can hardly contain myself...I mean think about it....they will be an absolute utopia where all is well and folks just post of warm fuzzy things...not like this jungle of unjust and inaccurate flight models and ridiculous loadouts.
Ya know....I'm beginning to feel better already...Ram and Fishu and others will be filled with peace and the satisfaction that they were right all along, and I'll be flying in a sim without them....perhaps there is hope after all?
Ice
-
Oh well, so we will have also the DB603 engined G.55 "Centauro". More than 700Km/h at 23K with 2x12,7mm and 3x20mm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Pyro has already stated earlier in some thread that they will only do an F6F with 20mm as a nightfighter.
-
ram... Like I said, if the factory made it an optional loadout then go ahead and allow it. Pick whatever armement the factory put on those wussy 190's.... No matter what they did to em... There was allways a Corsair that was better. Allways a corsair that was faster, better armed, turned better, had a lot more range, accelerated, rolled and climbed as well and.... Could take off from carriers. And... was tougher. When you add the fact that Corsairs are blue and handsome..... Ya gotta pretty much ignore a bunch of butt ugly, trucks with wings, 190's. couldn't be worse if they were made in spain.
lazs
-
Hmmmm lazs
I wonder what kinda pictures You got in yer bathroom.....
-
Actually RAM:
350 lbs is about 4% of the loaded weight of an A5, so it is going to change the climb rate by about 4% or 150 to 200 feet per minute, not the 500 feet that you think.
Hooligan
-
Why is it so many of you guys get hooked into threads like this? Gotta prove that my plane had waaaay more firepower than yours! Yes! Mine was good! Yours was bad!
Thats the most tired load of BS on the boards. Everybody arguing that their plane was better than the other guys plane.
Think about it. If you all get your wish and you get all your cannon, uber this or that, are you not the biggest dweeb around for flying it?
I flew the hellcat last night and had 2 or 3 7+ kill sorties in it. (of course, all those kamikaze TBM rides buggered my score (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)) I have .12 gunnery in the F6F. If you can't kick bellybutton with these 50's, then it's time to see the optometrist. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
BTW
I read a book long time ago by a polish pilot,who ended up in England,and fought in the RAF against germany.
I remember him saying,when the spit II came out,some of them were fitted with cannons,instead of the 8x303.
The pilots that got assigned on thoes planes,
hated it,and wished they could get their machineguns back.
In fact the 6 .50 cal guns had a bigger punch,due to it`s fireing rate,more bullets in the air at the same time.It was lot easier to hit targets with,and ammo lasted lot longer too.
So all You whiners,get a life ,and not trying to make up for that small noodle with the big guns in AH. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Oleg's sim is going to be nothing like AW, WB's or AH. It's small fry when dealing with the online numbers. I'll believe the 32/64 multiplayer capacity promise when I see it. Still it wouldn't be enough folks for my likes.
-Westy
-
Hi
Plus the hispanos jammed like hell, tho i dont think gun jamming shud be modeled in AH, hoever we must have barrel wear and damage to stop the wild shooting we have with some MGs and cannon in here.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
Well, since everyone is going on and on about things they would like to see (and not JUST on the F6F)...
Why not model something that would be a TRUE first on online simming? This option would be fair to BOTH the dark side and American aircraft (not sure about Brit). I KNOW that the P51-D/K had the venerable (though not totally trustworthy) AN/APS-13 tail warning radar. I am sure it would be generally useless, but it MIGHT wake a few keyboard mongers up!
As to the details of the system...
German aircraft would have a slight advantage (I don't think any 109's ever saw this addition, but I know the 190's did) as their radar systems were more technologically advanced.
I believe the German systems detected aircraft as far as 10,000 m., and the American systems were about 85% of that.
Neither system was particularly dependable. Neither system worked well in the vertical (of course).
Neither system saw much repair in the field.
Okay, that's my contribution for the day.
Voss 13th T.A.S.
-
grun.. all i ever read about hispanos jamming was in the very first models and/or at alts over 20K from "freezing". These problems were all solved so far as i know and later hispanos were considered very reliable. Do you have other information?
lazs
-
thats what i was reffering to the case when they mounted them in early spits, i think some brits had them for a day or so then immediately changed back to 303s
-
Here you go lazs,
Originally posted by Nashwan in a different thread:
The British had a lot of early problems with unreliable firing with the Hispano, and solved them by shortening the chamber (by 2mm) to make sure that the firing pin would strike the primer with sufficient force, and urged the USA to do the same (the British wanted complete standardisation between both countries' production). The Americans, after testing the guns in April 1942, decided not to bother.
However, concern was expressed by US ammo manufacturers that the misfires which kept occurring were the gun's fault, not theirs, so further US tests were held between June 1942 and January 1943. The results of the tests
were...a recommendation to shorten the chamber! (but not as short as in the British guns). Various other detailed changes were made, following which some guns were sent over to the UK for testing in July and August 1943 and
showed themselves to be as good as British production. Only at this point were US guns accepted by the British as "acceptable for service use".
The problem was that the USA had already made 56,410 guns (no less). These guns effectively had to be remanufactured to the new standard. In February 1944 all AN-M2 production stopped. At that time there were still 35,955 long-chamber guns in store, classified as "unserviceable". Most were later converted to M3s.
Chinn goes on to give details of the operational performance of the AN-M2. The USN mounted some 90% of these guns, the USAAF making very little use of them. Incidentally, the M1 version was for engine mounting and not used in service, although several hundred were made (also incidentally, for some reason US production of the 60-round drum feed carried on into 1944 and nearly 30,000 were made).
First use by the USN was in the SB-2C when a test batch was sent out in 1943 and evaluated in combat, the first action being in March 1944. Factory representatives accompanied the cannon to the front. To quote Chinn; "These expert technicians sent back voluminous reports that explained the
malfunctions that did occur were due to one of three things; failure of the feeder, bad ammunition and improper maintenance. Their zeal in clearing the gun itself in every instance casts doubt upon the validity of the reports."
Some 5,800 USN planes were fitted with 11,600 guns. The SB-2C and SB-W aircraft were the principal planes carrying this weapon into combat, along with a very limited number of F4U-1Cs. It was therefore hardly ever used by fighters and shot down very few aircraft.
Chinn says; "With the mounting of the 20mm cannon in Navy planes a series of malfunctions began that could not be properly corrected at the time as manufacture was at the peak of production...the most serious problem was the
oversize chamber. There still remained considerable variance in dimensions between the chambers of the British and US cannon...". A curious explanation for the poor standards of manufacture which plagued the AN-M2 was that, being over .60" (15mm) calibre, it was considered to be an
artillery weapon rather than a small arm. It was therefore built to artillery manufacturing tolerances, which were not tight enough for this weapon. As a "quick fix", the USN liberally coated the ammunition with a heavy lubricant (which the British specifically banned from their Hispanos).
Some 32,000 M3s had also been delivered by the end of the war and these suffered the same problems as the AN-M2.
After the end of the war, all of the problems were analysed and a development programme was put in hand to correct them, work being successfully carried out over the next few years. In conclusion, Chinn says; "Nothing was basically wrong with the weapon. Its wartime performance, good or bad, was the result of having being bought in desperation, put into mass production without first having been adequately proved, and then modified regularly to meet a future commitment before the previous model had been made to function reliably."
Unfortunately Chinn, a USMC officer, did not comment on the gun in USAF service. It would be interesting to know how it fared in the P-38.
On a personal note, I am well aware that when the firing pin strike is only just good enough to fire the primer, such minor details as the characteristics of the metal forming the primer cap can be very significant. The fact that the guns performed well in the UK could have been simply due to a softer or thinner primer cap material, or even that the primer protruded slightly more, in the ammunition used in the tests. Alternatively, as
its problems partly resulted from excessive manufacturing tolerances, it would have been possible to produce satisfactory guns by carefully selecting and matching components. However I'm sure that the Americans would never
consider doing something so devious and underhand to their old ally, perish the thought
The other point concerns the need to oil the cartridges. This was never entirely dispensed with as even the Mk 16, in USN service in the 1980s as a deck gun, had a built-in cartridge oiler. Yet the British decided they didn't like this and, according to Wallace, changed the cartridge to avoid the need to oil it (this is supported by the official manual, which specifically bans oiling). The problem is, I have never been able to find out what changes were made,
and it begs all sorts of questions about the interchangeability of British v. other nations' ammunition etc.
The postwar USAF one would have been the M24, which was converted to electrical ignition. I don't have any information about problems with that.
Tony Williams
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/ (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/)
Military gun and ammunition website
To sum it up:
US Hispano cannon were significantly less reliable than UK Hispano cannon.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Karnak wrote:
US Hispano cannon were significantly less reliable than UK Hispano cannon.
I don't believe this is an accurate statement.
Quotes from Pages 588-589 in "The Machinegun", Vol 1, by Chinn.
There existed two distinct schools of thought on the reliability of the gun. One was that the 20mm Hispano-Suiza automatic cannon could not be considered satisfactory as an aircraft weapon as long as it was necessary for the ordnanceman to coat the cartridge case with a heavy lubricant or wax. The other was that this was unimportant as long as it bettered the performance of the gun.
.....
An unfortunate discovery was that chamber errors in the gun could be corrected for the moment by covering the ammunition case with a heavy lubricant. If the chamber was oversize, it served as a fluid fit to make up the deficiency and, if unsafe head space existed that would result in case rupture if ammunition was fired dry, then the lubricant allowed the cartridge to take up the slack between the breech lock and the breech lock key. Had this method of "quick fix" not been possible, the Navy would have long ago recognized the seriousness of the situation. In fact, this inexcusable method of correction was in use so long that it was becoming accepted as a satisfactory solution of a necessary nuisance.
From what I've read, early Hispano's had reliability problems (as early production model weapons tend to). The British fixed this by altering the design of the gun. The US fixed this by lubricating the ammunition. The US fix was a terrible kludge but it was a kludge that worked.
Hooligan
-
Also the first cannon armed Spitfires had the guns mounted sideways in the thin wing - the Hispano was designed to be mounted upright on an engine block, no small wonder they weren't reliable. They soon changed the wing mounting to upright I think.
-
Yup.. americans are all mighty and fixed it with some lubricant.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Naa.. from all sources I've seen it, they had less reliable hispano version than brits.
and already brits had poor reliability on hispano in the early stage.
Mk.I.. terrible.. Mk.II.. bit better...
-
Excessiver lubrication of the ammo or gun would be an acceptable solution on clean strips in the pacific heat. or from a carrier where dust is not a real issue. But on a jungle strip or in colder climes or high alt it would be a nightmare. It would make the gun far less reliable. That is why it would not be acceptable to the british and why the USAAF would probably be very negative about it.
A belt of ammo that was heavily lubricated and taken to 25000 feet over germany in feburary would be a solid block of junk.
Probably a problem with the tail gun on the B29 as well.
Im going to read up on the P61..see what they did there. I bet the ammo bay was heated.
[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 12-29-2000).]