Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on December 01, 2004, 09:35:56 AM
-
Hello,
I'm glad to hear this will be added soon. I thought it would be good idea to duble check that the 109s get the correct shell ejection schemes because they were kind of complicated as to which models had it or not.
Here is the list:
1) Bf109E-4
Not 100% sure if the wing mounted 20mm MG-FF have it but I think they do because there are holes on the underside by the guns (can somebody confirm this?), definitely none for the cowl guns.
2) Bf109F-4 and Bf109G-2
Only from add-on gunpods, none for the cowl guns and engine mounted MG151 20mm.
3) Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-10
Add-on Gunpods, 2 for MG131 in cowl, none for engine mounted MG151 20mm or MK108 30mm*.
* The Bf109K-4 introduced shell ejection for the MK108 30mm but this was not featured on the Bf109G models with this cannon.
Hope this helps.
Maybe other guys can add in info for planes they know about that migh have complicated shell case ejection differences too?
-
Are you sure there was no ejector for the engine guns on the 109s? I am pretty sure there are.
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/new%20pics%201%20080.jpg)
-
Pongo, there were no ejectors for the engine cannon until K4 added one for its MK108 30mm.
Some of the G series had the engine mounted MK108 30mm, but they did not have shell ejectors for it.
The engine MG151/20 always dropped its spent cases into a box across all 109 models so armed.
The ejector in the picture above is one of two for the cowl MG131 13mm guns, the other one is on the same panel but just hidden from view here by the DT.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
...The engine MG151/20 always dropped its spent cases into a box across all 109 models so armed...
Do you know what the logic was behind this? For recycling? If so, it's good to see a right wing goverment throwing a bone across to the other side of the aisle ( LOL, J/K )
-
Originally posted by bunch
Do you know what the logic was behind this? For recycling? If so, it's good to see a right wing goverment throwing a bone across to the other side of the aisle ( LOL, J/K )
I wonder if it had to do with center of gravity issues? Seems like the P39 collected it's shells too with that as a reason.
Dan/Slack
Not positive on that, but seem to recall seeing it in print somewhere
-
I seem to recall that the Mossie didn't have ejector chutes for the spent .303 cartridges.
It certainly had them for the 20mm cannons though.
-
So where did they go? Rattle around in some container near the gun?
-
Originally posted by bunch
Do you know what the logic was behind this? For recycling? If so, it's good to see a right wing goverment throwing a bone across to the other side of the aisle ( LOL, J/K )
ah... Hitler...the first ecologist!
-
He was a vegetarian too.
As if we need any more reason to dislike shitler & now we find out he was a hippie
-
A hippy racist?
Not supprising he went nuts later in the war
-
Good topic. I'll actually have to be digging this stuff up on various planes. On many planes, it's pretty brain-dead(i.e. .50 cal wing guns, etc) but there are some where it's not so obvious and will require some research. I definitely appreciate any info on the subject.
-
Great to hear Pyro!
BTW regarding the first post, I just confirmed that Bf109E-4 did have shell ejection from the wing cannon.
-
Here is what I have for FW190A and D.
All cowl guns had spent shell ejection.
All wing root mounted guns and cannon had ejection.
All outer wing mounted MG151/20 had shell ejection.
All outer wing mounted MK108 30mm had shell ejection.
Outer wing mounted MG-FF 20mm did not have shell ejection.
Ta152 and Fw190D12/13 had ejection for all three guns.
-
So did the 109F/G/K eject spent cases for the guns or not? I am sure the 20mm wing gondolas did (designed that way). Not sure about the centerline weapons, what was the case with them?
-
Read the first post, it explains everyting about 109 spent case ejection.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
BTW regarding the first post, I just confirmed that Bf109E-4 did have shell ejection from the wing cannon.
I've been looking for a visual reference and can't find one. I can't seem to find my Aero Detail on the 109E. I have a found a couple of conflicting pieces of writing regarding whether the cannon cases were ejected or not. Do you have a photo or visual reference of this?
-
109e wings
(http://img58.exs.cx/img58/3460/ad01p223pc.th.jpg) (http://img58.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img58&image=ad01p223pc.jpg)
-
Many thanks Ring. I figured the Aero Detail would show it.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
Many thanks Ring. I figured the Aero Detail would show it.
Yep, thats where I confirmed it too. :)
-
HUH !!!
That's not the MG-FF shell ejection port !
The big bulge contained the ammo drum, next to it toward the wing tip lay the MG-FF itself, which ejected the shells toward... the wing tip !!
The expanded cases were collected in an ammo box placed between ribs R3b and R4. The shells were not released in flight.
-
Originally posted by butch2k
HUH !!!
That's not the MG-FF shell ejection port !
The big bulge contained the ammo drum, next to it toward the wing tip lay the MG-FF itself, which ejected the shells toward... the wing tip !!
The expanded cases were collected in an ammo box placed between ribs R3b and R4. The shells were not released in flight.
look at photo 60 and read the text for it.
-
hummm i have been studying the 109 design for a few years ;) so i know what i'm talking about when it comes to this particular bird
:D
The MGFF wing installation was similar on the C-3, D-3 and E-3 and exactly as i describe it. The shell were removed on the ground through an access hatch.
The acces hatch is barely visible on picture 57 of the same book ;)
-
bah, what does Butch know ;)
-
I heard that 1 min after his birth Butch felt in the 109 book collection of his father and learn to read German during the 2nd minute :D
Bonne Année au passage :)
-
109 G2
(http://kotinetti.suomi.net/olli.korhonen/mersu/109G2-8a1-04.gif)
(http://kotinetti.suomi.net/olli.korhonen/mersu/109G2-8a1-04_.gif)
-
You know I would tend to agree with butch on this. I knew there was a hole down there but it always bothered me because it seemed to be on the wrong side and so far back but I went with a shell ejection port when I saw the aero detail book's explaination in a store. But I think butch's idea is much more likely and it does ssem more logical considering the way the gun is setup.
Pyro, lets leave Bf109E4 without shell ejection for the MG-FF. :)
-
I thnik you made the right choice ;)
From the 109E armament manual :
(http://butch2k4.free.fr/bf109e-mgff.jpg)
-
Ok, so no shell ejection on the 109E. Just curious, but do you have any idea what that port is for Butch?
-
AFAIK it was used for cooling rear parts of the MG-17s mounted on the E-1/E-8s, in some cases you'll even notice some powder stains.
AFAIR it does not appear on the C-1s or early D-1s.
-
That is a really unusual design element. Even if you postulate that not all E models used the storage box it is physically in the wrong place to be an ejection port (it would have to be located somewhere in parallel with the magazine buldge and not immediately to its rear.
Butch's diagram shows that it is located underneath the firing solenoid so it may have something to do with cooling that mechanism, or just a coincidental location for general cooling or perhaps a means to reduce carbon fouling in the compartment for some functional reason.
You would assume that you don't just add something like that unless you really need to.
Charon
-
From the Armament manual it is quite clear that this intake is used for cooling the solenoid. Exhaust is supposed to take place at the top of the wing at the aileron junction. Yet i have seen severe case of powder stains on hte underside so i suspect the airflow inside was not that simple...
-
Originally posted by Octavius
So where did they go? Rattle around in some container near the gun?
In the case of the one Mosquito Mk VI cut away drawing that I have there is a compartment at the bottom of the nose cone that holds the spent .303 cartridges. The numbered label on the circular hatch on the bottom is labled "Cover to used cartridge-case chamber".
In the case of the Mosquito's nose guns it makes sense really. If there were ejection slots on the nose cone that would be a greatly disproportionate ammount of drage given the shape. Such ports would have been obliquely open to high air pressure from the Mosquito's forward movement. Maybe even enough to prevent the spent cartridges from falling out.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
In the case of the Mosquito's nose guns it makes sense really. If there were ejection slots on the nose cone that would be a greatly disproportionate ammount of drage given the shape. Such ports would have been obliquely open to high air pressure from the Mosquito's forward movement. Maybe even enough to prevent the spent cartridges from falling out.
I would suspect the primary difficulty of ejecting those cases would be interference with the cannon installation. If they just dumped them straight down, they'd pretty much pop out right in front of the cannon muzzles.
-
Texts and cut away views show that cannon shells and belt fragments were ducted away and ejected below the fuselage thru two tubes.
I struggle to identify the exact orifices however.
(http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/la7topbot2.GIF)
The two directly behind the wheel wells are "covered" and too far out board IMO.
The two slots either side of the centre tank access hatch are the most likely IMO but are not shown on a couple of other belly views I have.
The two covered circles behind the tank access hatch are the same as the two covers further out on the wings. I think these give access to aileron and flap actuators.
Will spent shells have any mass? could they cause damage to ac flying into them?
-
Originally posted by Pyro
I would suspect the primary difficulty of ejecting those cases would be interference with the cannon installation. If they just dumped them straight down, they'd pretty much pop out right in front of the cannon muzzles.
That's almost certainly it. I hadn't thought of that.
-
Those ejection shells ( E-3 ... ) were coming from original E-1 set up, mean MG17. IMHO.
greets
-
Hallo Orka...
How have you been? How is Supongo?
!S
Wotan
-
Anybody have ejection details on the 110G's 20mm's?
-
not sure if this help - or if you are able to discern anything about the 110s.
(http://www.dangreve.com/110arm.jpg)
-
For Bf110:
30mm eject out of lower sides of nose cone.
Fuselage 20mm eject from 2 holes in center of wing about 1 foot back from the wing leading edge.
20mm gunpod has shell ejection through 2 rectangular ports for its guns.
The pod covers the fusekage ejection holes so the gunpod has a third larger built in ejection port between its 2 ports to channel the spent cases from the fuselage cannon.
I[]I <--- Kind of like that, but the bigger port sits maybe 1/3 its length ahead of the 2 smaller ones.
-
Images below show what looks to be staggered ejection chutes, which follow the centerline of the blast chutes (openings in front)
(http://www.dangreve.com/a.jpg)
(http://www.dangreve.com/b.jpg)
(http://www.dangreve.com/d.jpg)
Image below show the side ejection chutes
(http://www.dangreve.com/c.jpg)
This shows possibly the chutes from the underside - side by side for the g model
(http://www.dangreve.com/110bottom.jpg)
-
My specific confusion is what happens when the ventral gun pack is carried. It appears to me that the gun pack would cover up the ejection ports of the standard 20mm's.
Edit- Woops I missed Grun's info. Thanks a bunch everybody for the pics and info.
-
Pyro - not sure if this is correct, but in the cutaway drawing of the different armaments (Picture 5, the gun pod) - on the left hand side of the left canon, through the pod skin cutaway - looks to be that you could possibly see a ejection chute - not sure though...lol