Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Sikboy on May 05, 2004, 10:22:04 AM
-
Someone tell me a story about the MG-151/15
It looks like an intriguing cannon, and something that I'd think would be very usefull. What kind of action did it see? What type of results did it achieve? It seems like a badass gun.
-Sik
-
MG151/15 was a "super .50 cal" so to speak. 42 kg, 900 rpm, 960 m/sec at the muzzle, 15mm 57 gram projectile with 4.9% HE content.
The MG151/15 was about twice as destructive as the .50 cal, and had a higher muzzle velocity. In AH it would be a laser weapon, but not a heavy hitter like the Hispano.
(http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/HMG1.jpg)
The MG151/15 round is the second one from the right. For comparison, the second one from the left is a .50 cal BMG round.
-
IIRC it was the originally installed in early 109F's (IL2's 109F2 has one) as the hub cannon. For later versions (F4 and after) it was scaled up for the familiar MG151/20.
Do-335 carried them as well, I believe.
There's some controvorsey over whether the 109K had them as cowl guns - you can probably do a BB search and find a big old thread debating it. IIRC they had standard 13mm guns.
I think Adolf Galland had a 109F modified to carry 2x MG151/15's in the wings, as well.
Tony Williams can probably fill us in on quite a bit on these.
-
The 109K never carried two MG151/15s in the cowl (they couldn't possibly fit), it was an editorial mistake by Green in his 109 book that has been used as a reference for many other publications.
I'd love to have Galland's 109F then! :D
-
whats the M2 0.5cal RoF and muzzle velocity?
-
Thanks Gunthr,
It caught my eye while looking at the Data on Tony Williams's site. It would appear to be perfect for taking down fighters, but I would suppose a lot of that would depend on the configuration. I mean if you had 3 of em on say, a 109, that would be devastating against other fighters.
[edit], ooops lots of replies while I was away!
It would be great to have pods like that, but I imagine for the single hub cannon, you'd really need to have the 151/20. Thinking of it in that sense (as a single cannon) really helps me understand why the LW moved away from it. However, you'd think that it could have been crammed into the 190A5.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Flyboy
whats the M2 0.5cal RoF and muzzle velocity?
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm
The answer to all your questions (and more!)
That article is so awesome, I should put it in my sig.
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Flyboy
whats the M2 0.5cal RoF and muzzle velocity?
CARTRIDGE: 12.7x99 (.50 BMG, rof 13 rps)
TYPE: API
ROUND WEIGHT: 112
MV M/SEC: 890
PROJECTILE WEIGHT GM: 43
HEI CONTENT: 2%
CARTRIDGE: 15x96 (MG151/15, rof 12 rps (according to Mr. Williams, other sources state 900 rpm which is a bit more)
TYPE: HE
ROUND WEIGHT: 151
MV M/SEC: 960
PROJECTILE WEIGHT GM: 57
HEI CONTENT: 4.9%
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Thanks Gunthr,
It caught my eye while looking at the Data on Tony Williams's site. It would appear to be perfect for taking down fighters, but I would suppose a lot of that would depend on the configuration. I mean if you had 3 of em on say, a 109, that would be devastating against other fighters.
[edit], ooops lots of replies while I was away!
It would be great to have pods like that, but I imagine for the single hub cannon, you'd really need to have the 151/20. Thinking of it in that sense (as a single cannon) really helps me understand why the LW moved away from it. However, you'd think that it could have been crammed into the 190A5.
-Sik
Yes the 151/20 is a much better "dual purpose" weapon for a fighter expected to engage both bombers and fighters. The single 151/15 would be adequate for fighting fighters alone, but even the single 151/20 was just barely adequate for engaging bombers. It is a general trend in German WWII aircraft armament from when they were on the offensive to the end where they were completely defensive. From high velocity weapons to low velocity, but bigger calibre and more HE content. From engaging fighters as the primary mission to engaging bombers as the primary mission.
If you're asking if the MG151/15 could replace the MG151/20s in the 190A5, then yes. The /15 and /20 were virtually the same weapon, just chambered for different calibres. If you're asking if they could mount MG151/15s in the cowl, then no.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
It would be great to have pods like that
Do ya one better... they weren't pods. :D
First thing I thought when you mentioned the MG-151/15 in a 190A5 was getting rid of those damn MG-FF's. That'd be the way to go. :)
Wotan/Batz originally found this photo, so he might know more about it than I. You can see them poking out of the wing, with a little blister on the underside. Looks like they poke out from the area right between the wheel well and the leading edge slat.
(http://members.aol.com/geobat66/galland/gal109.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Thanks Gunthr,
It caught my eye while looking at the Data on Tony Williams's site. It would appear to be perfect for taking down fighters, but I would suppose a lot of that would depend on the configuration. I mean if you had 3 of em on say, a 109, that would be devastating against other fighters.
[edit], ooops lots of replies while I was away!
It would be great to have pods like that, but I imagine for the single hub cannon, you'd really need to have the 151/20. Thinking of it in that sense (as a single cannon) really helps me understand why the LW moved away from it. However, you'd think that it could have been crammed into the 190A5.
-Sik
One reason why they moved away from it, the higher ups wanted the 20mm for heavier hitting power against the bombers. In essence I would take 6 of these in the wings of let's say the 190 A-8 over its current armament. It would be a lot easier to make snapshots and would disintegrate Runstangs.
I think it is a truly bad bellybutton weapon, and it puzzled me as well why this wasn't used more. It was also used in bombers singly for defense, and ground units had them for base defense. Also can't remember offhand the SDKFZ that had 3 of them installed. Would be nice to be able to outfit your plane with the guns that are currently available.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
CARTRIDGE: 12.7x99 (.50 BMG, rof 13 rps)
TYPE: API
ROUND WEIGHT: 112
MV M/SEC: 890
PROJECTILE WEIGHT GM: 43
HEI CONTENT: 2%
CARTRIDGE: 15x96 (MG151/15, rof 12 rps (according to Mr. Williams, other sources state 900 rpm which is a bit more)
TYPE: HE
ROUND WEIGHT: 151
MV M/SEC: 960
PROJECTILE WEIGHT GM: 57
HEI CONTENT: 4.9%
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
GIVE US THE 109F2!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I think it is a truly bad bellybutton weapon, and it puzzled me as well why this wasn't used more.
Because by that time of the war, most of the major airforces pretty much concluded that the most efficient way to bring down a plane was to use explosive rounds to completely tear away the whole surface of the plane which holds it together - rather than hope for a clandestine kinetic penetration to damage a vital, inner part.
Such differences between AP rounds and HE rounds are not adequately portrayed in AH, but in FB/AEP I would absolutley prefer the F-4 over the F-2. The MG151/15 has a pretty good chance of cutting control links, puncturing fuel tanks, and wounding the pilot.. but in most cases, while severely damaged, the enemy plane can still hold together for a considerable amount of time unless something really important is hit(like causing fires, killing the engine, killing the pilot or etc etc..). Also, unless a continuous volley of AP rounds connect at an important spot like the spars or supports, it is very hard to snap wings off with a MG151/15.
On the contrary, while a bit poorer in ballistics, the MG151/20 mounted on the F-4 really shows a difference - the HE rounds are much more efficient in overall effect compared to the 15mm AP rounds.
-
but in AH you can take out the complete tail section of a plane with a short burst of 0.5cals from 700yards.
what dammage moddel? ;)
-
AFAIK Galland had an early F model with MG/FFs in the wings. Dunno if the other was a standard version or not.
-C+
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
On the contrary, while a bit poorer in ballistics, the MG151/20 mounted on the F-4 really shows a difference - the HE rounds are much more efficient in overall effect compared to the 15mm AP rounds.
Yeah, I can totally understand and agree with this (which is why most US fighters has 6 .50s, instead of 2-4). However, I was under the impression that the MG151/15 fired HE rounds, which while not as explosive as the 20mm version, still packed a chemical charge offering a greater effect than a single 12.7 AP round.
With this in mind, given the muzzle velocity and ROF, the 151/15 sure looked like it could reach out and touch someone much better than the 151/20 which was a slower and heavery round.
For taking out bombers, where they are large targets that were not maneuvering, I'll take a 20-30mm cannon every time (actually, I'll take the NS-37 but that's just me :D ), but for engaging fighters, imagining a 15mm HE shell with that ROF and MV is pretty tantilizing. However, if it didn't see widespread service in a 3-4 gun configureation then there's really no point in my getting all coozy about it lol.
-Sik
-
Yes those must be MG-FFs. No way could they fit MG151s in the wing without having some major bulges. They could barely shoehorn the little MG-FF in the 109's thin wing.
... still, I'd take a couple of MG-FFs in the 109F if I could. By that time they had Minengeschoss ammo. :D
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
However, I was under the impression that the MG151/15 fired HE rounds, which while not as explosive as the 20mm version, still packed a chemical charge offering a greater effect than a single 12.7 AP round.
Yes the MG151/15 could fire both AP and HE rounds. The data I posted is for the HE round.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Yes the MG151/15 could fire both AP and HE rounds. The data I posted is for the HE round.
Now see, that's what I'm talking about :)
-Sik
-
Yes, the Germans were Nazis in WW2.
-
Germans were Nazis back then ... you're a moron now ... what else is new?