interesting read on how to attack b17s

[whels]

http://freepages.military.rootsweb.com/~josephkennedy/German_Pilot_Perspective.htm

[mrfish]

"...[the b17 formations]could bring to bear 648 50 cal machine guns firing 14 rounds a second with an effective range of 600 yds..."

[Buzzbait]

S!

"...The Luftwaffe estimated that it took an average of 20 hits from the 20mm cannon to destroy a B-17. Analysis of gun camera film revealed that the average German pilot scored hits with only 2 percent of the rounds fired, thus on average, 1000 rounds were fired to score the 20 hits required."

[Fishu]

We're *bit* more accurate than they were..
step behind .50 cal 1.5k yards and you're toast..
Get some nut strafe your bomber and its done in 2 seconds.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by mrfish:
"...[the b17 formations]could bring to bear 648 50 cal machine guns firing 14 rounds a second with an effective range of 600 yds..."

The two-ounce bullets remained lethal against a human body at ranges up to 4 miles.

[ 07-04-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]

[mrfish]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM:


The two-ounce bullets remained lethal against a human body at ranges up to 4 miles.

[ 07-04-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]

hmmmmm....i dont usually fly an exposed human body against buffs. usually i am in an armored metal airplane. i think thats what they meant by effective range?

[Toad]

hmmmm...check the cockpit of most fighters.

You'll probably find some armor plate behind the seat, but not 100% rear coverage. You can hope the engine will stop most of the stuff coming from directly in front but it may not; alot of aluminum and magnesium there. But the entire cylinder between those two things offers a bit of thin steel tubing covered by a really thin aluminum sheeting to hide behind covered by a thin plexiglas roof.

[mrfish]

yeah, that's probably true toad, but i am not sure how we got on pilot armor and all that anyway since the article doesnt site the test it used to determine the lethal human range anyway.

it never says: "lethal to a human in an airplane 4 miles away" you assume it concerns a person in a plane, but it could have been a land test for all we know....they just dont give enough info to draw a conclusion. my original post only reflected on the fact that the article explicitely says:

"effective range of 600 yards".

this seems more specific in that it gives the precise distance at which the guns become inneffective.

granted, i'm no gun expert, but doesn't effective range mean the distance in which the gun is effective?

doesn't it mean that past 600yds the guns could be considered less than effective or even ineffective? these seem to be conclusions actually supported by the article.

i site this because 1/2 sec. bursts from 1,300 yards and beyond regularly remove my entire empanage/wing/etc. if it is that way for game play then so be it! - no problem there -  but it is interesting to keep in mind that it is tweaked by twice the actual effective range.

[Westy MOL]

"We're *bit* more accurate than they were.."

 Because we can do it over, and over, and over and over.. ad infinitum.

 We don't die. We do not get maimed. We get a brand new airplane every time we launch. Each time we fly and fight we get a little bit better with no penalty for failure.

 -Westy

[Toad]

Fish,

Solely in the interests of clarity, here's the DOD and NATO definition of "effective range" from this page:
 http://usmilitary.about.com/careers/usmilitary/library/glossary/m/bldef03869.htm


"maximum effective range  

Definition: (DOD, NATO) The maximum distance at which a weapon may be expected to be accurate and achieve the desired result."

From the US Army Study Guide:
 http://www.armystudyguide.com/m16.htm

"What is the definition of Maximum Effective Range?
 
The greatest distance at which the weapon may be expected to inflict casualties."

I found this niblet here, but it is unclear whether or not they are talking about a particular class of round (pisotl round).
 http://www.funfarm.demon.co.uk/war16.htm


"The "maximum effective range" using the NATO definition (the maximum range where a weapon's projectile will still deliver 85 joules on target)."

Lastly, there's this from Waxman's statement in the US House about .50 BMG rifles. (They're working themeselves into a frenzy about something they really don't understand again.   But they have some good data even if they don't know how to compare it or what it really means.)
 http://www.house.gov/waxman/doc/50cal.htm

"Fifty caliber rifles are "accurate" up to 2,000 yards, meaning they will strike the intended target within this range. These weapons are "effective" up to 7,500 yards, meaning that, although accuracy cannot be guaranteed, the round will cause its intended effect at this distance if it strikes the target. Their effective range of 7,500 yards is equivalent to 75 football fields lined up end to end--a distance of over four miles."

So, there you go; effective range. The 85 Joules one seems pretty light to me. Thats about 63 foot/lbs which just happens to be real close to the muzzle energy of a 22LR (68 ft/lbs). Yes, it will kill you if it hits you right. However, I don't think anyone considers the .22LR a leathal combat round, particulary at any real distance.

[Toad]

Fish,

Now some true facts about the .50 BMG from another thread:

Pyro posted this in another thread, Aircraft and Vehicles   » weapon comparison (velocities)

   

This is the "real McCoy" from the time period we are dealing with.

Using the nubmers off Pyro's chart and the ballistic calculator found here
 http://internet.cybermesa.com/~jbm/ballistics/calculations.html

we get the following data for the .50 BMG.
at 15000 feet altitude on a "standard day" (note that the 1300 yard velocity corresponds very well with the original chart):

Trajectory (Basic) Output

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Input Data
Muzzle Velocity: 2840.0 ft/sec
Ballistic Coefficient: 0.700  
Drag Function: G1  
Bullet Weight: 708 grains
Sight Height: 36.00 inches
Wind Cross Speed: 0 mph
LOS Angle: 0 degrees
Target Speed: 0 mph
Zero Range: 100 yards
Temperature: 59.6 °F
Barometric Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Relative Humidity: 0.0 %
Altitude: 15000 feet
Air Density: 100 % of Sea Level


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculated Table
Elevation: 36.531 moa
Azimuth: 0.000 moa

Range / Velocity / Energy / Drop
(yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs)  (inches)
 
0 2840.0 12679.2  -36.0  
100 2705.3 11505.2 -0.0  
200 2574.8 10421.9 31.2
300 2448.4 9423.3  57.2
400 2325.9 8503.9  77.4
500 2207.1 7657.6  91.2
600 2091.2 6874.5  97.8
700 1978.8 6155.4  96.4
800 1870.3 5498.8  86.2
900 1765.9 4902.3  66.0
1000 1665.9 4362.7 34.7
1100 1570.4 3876.6 -9.2
1200 1480.2 3444.1 -67.2
1300 1395.8 3062.5 -141.1
1400 1318.2 2731.6 -232.8
1500 1247.9 2448.0 -344.6
1600 1184.6 2206.1 -478.7
1700 1131.0 2010.8 -637.6
1800 1085.4 1852.1 -823.8
1900 1046.4 1721.2 -1039.5
2000 1012.6 1611.9 -1287.1


So, out at 1300 yards, the slugs are still packing a ton and a half of energy each. Drop, with a 350 yard zero is about 12 feet below point of aim. A lot, but not excessive on a target that's 30-40 feet long.

Remember the way the buff guns work. All the guns that can "see" you shoot. So in a 1 second burst 6 guns or more could be on you, about a total of 80 rounds. If half of those hit, 40 rounds with 1 1/2 tons of E each, it's going to really tear up a wing and/or wing spar. If you are pulling g's at the time and loading the wing spar... yeah, I can see where it would structurally fail.

Now, all that this post says is "yes, I can see where this is possible.

YMMV.  

[ 07-05-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

[Minotaur]

A little off topic with the latest comments.

Thanks whels, I enjoyed the read.

[bloom25]

When I was reading that article it sounded VERY familiar.  I found that much of the article, minus the quotes (which are from a book as well), are verbatum from Aircraft versus Aircraft.  (Norman Franks)

I bought this book for $12.98 about a year ago at Barnes and Noble.  It covers from WWI until the Gulf War and is very good overall.