Author Topic: 13mm vs. .50cal  (Read 4166 times)

Offline Animal

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5027
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2001, 11:33:00 PM »
i love to travel

ohhh the atmosphere, ooohhhhh

Offline Hooligan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #16 on: August 06, 2001, 01:04:00 AM »
Minus:

I believe that you just set a new BBS record for incoherence.

Hooligan

Offline Eaglecz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #17 on: August 06, 2001, 07:04:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by batdog:

 I DO know the YAKS .50 equivelents are nasty.

xBAT[/QB]

hehe i never saw .50 cal in my Yak9U
but i have to say that Yaks MG arent bad. I fireing them both with cannon.

but .50 is nasty homeing missile directer to my engine .. allways .. my enginego to hell after 3-4 ping from .50 to my tail from 700 feets.. damm those.50

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2001, 07:10:00 AM »
and after all that Minus still insists there's a problem with the LW guns versus the USAAF .50 caliber.
-SW

Offline lazs1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2001, 07:59:00 AM »
I belive what the LW guys want is "selective realism".

Think of it this way.   At 1,000 yards a Browning fifty has twice the energy of a .303 at the muzzle.  It has allmost 20 times the energy of a 9mm luger or, 4.5 times the energy of a 44 magnum does at the muzzle.  There are stories out there of U.S. pilots downing planes at 1,000+ yards.  
lazs

[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: lazs1 ]

Offline Fatty

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3885
      • http://www.fatdrunkbastards.com
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2001, 10:42:00 AM »
Minus, the .50 isn't lighter, it's heavier.  That's one of the reasons it holds trajectory better.

The rest I can't understand  :)

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2001, 04:20:00 PM »
When you are shooting from a moving target to another moving target, the situation gets even worse for slower, lighter, quicker decelerating bullets.
Suppose both aircraft are going 300MPH and the shooter is at a dead 6 position 900 yards behind the target (The ballistics computer wouldn't calculate the 131 round beyond 1525 yards... read on). {Each velocity will be increased by 440 FPS.} [300 MPH = 440 FPS = 146.66 YPS]

At 3.918 seconds, the 131 round has traveled  1474.6 yards.  It had to go this far because in 3.918 sec. x 146.66 yds. = 574.6 yards that the enemy AC travels during bullet flight time.  
574.6 yards (the AC moved) + 900 yards (originally from the target) = 1474.6 yards.
At this point it has a velocity of 702.9 fps.
But, the AC is going 440 fps, so the impact speed is only 258 fps (176 mph).
At 258 fps, its energy is only 13.6 ft./lbs.

The 50 Cal., on the other hand, only has to fly 1094 yards.  It does this in 1.324 seconds.
1.324 sec. x 146.66 yds. = 194.2 yards that the enemy AC travels during bullet flight time.  
194.2 yards (the AC moved) + 900 yards (originally from the target) = 1094.2 yards.
At this point it has a velocity of 1884.9 fps.
But, the AC is also going 440 fps, so the impact speed is 1444.9 fps (985 mph).
At 1444.9 fps, its energy is still a whopping 3277 ft./lbs.

So, the Mg 131 travels 1474 yards in 3.9 sec. and has 13.6 ft./lbs. of E.
The 50, however, has traveled 1094 yards in 1.3 sec. and has 3277 ft./lbs. of E.

eskimo

Offline Stegahorse

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 306
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2001, 05:41:00 PM »
Of the firepower available on the P-47, it is said.......
....to be able to lift the battleship Missiouri 6 feet out of the water AND one of her destroyer escorts, as well ....

This is from an exhibit at the Millville army Airfeild Museum, Millville, NJ.
Home of the Thunderbolt Pilots Association.
I thought I was important until I got Cancer and had to go to a cancer clinic.

Offline minus

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 595
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2001, 08:03:00 PM »
so 50 caliber bulets is more heavy like  13 ? hmmm
 relay geting confused on  marks like , GRAIN , yard ,feet   and so diferent  balist coeficient                                    / cc a litle detail

 i think many of u shot with prefect aerodinamic bulet < like m16 use > is a qute human wepon it go in and it go out  when no bone in way  ;)

and how many of u see a subcaliber 5.5  dmg ?  

that stupid german craftmans who modeled and build so useles MG maybe got some reason to use that shape

sory but no 1 superior  in my ex military carier  vas able shut up my mounth  so dont ask it in AH  :D

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #24 on: August 06, 2001, 08:17:00 PM »
Minus, I've shot down a few planes using the 7.92mm MGs in the 109F4/109G2/190A5. It just takes consistent hits on the plane, and a LOT of them.

The thing to remember is American planes have several .50calibre machine guns. The German aircraft only have two of the weapons, and somewhat limited ammunition on them. It means you have to shoot well, get a lot of hits concentrated on one piece of the aircraft and don't take shots that require a lot of lead.
-SW

[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: SWulfe ]

Offline minus

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 595
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #25 on: August 06, 2001, 08:17:00 PM »
and i give up completly   ;)  btw model them more acurately  nothing will change nobady use them so no reason to have overmodeled  guns when we not use them ,                                         damn when i will finaly learn english ?????????  :D

Offline mrfish

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2343
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #26 on: August 06, 2001, 08:48:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
I agree curly, its almost pointless to compare the effectivness of US .50cal to German 13mm as all USAAF planes have at leat 2x as many .50cal as does any LW have 13mm.

me too - i think the 13mm are fine for their only being 2 of them. they are a great supplement and help save cannon rds in deflection shots.

Offline Midnight

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1809
      • http://www.brauncomustangs.org
13mm vs. .50cal
« Reply #27 on: August 06, 2001, 09:21:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2:
When you are shooting from a moving target to another moving target, the situation gets even worse for slower, lighter, quicker decelerating bullets.
Suppose both aircraft are going 300MPH and the shooter is at a dead 6 position 900 yards behind the target (The ballistics computer wouldn't calculate the 131 round beyond 1525 yards... read on). {Each velocity will be increased by 440 FPS.} [300 MPH = 440 FPS = 146.66 YPS]

At 3.918 seconds, the 131 round has traveled  1474.6 yards.  It had to go this far because in 3.918 sec. x 146.66 yds. = 574.6 yards that the enemy AC travels during bullet flight time.  
574.6 yards (the AC moved) + 900 yards (originally from the target) = 1474.6 yards.
At this point it has a velocity of 702.9 fps.
But, the AC is going 440 fps, so the impact speed is only 258 fps (176 mph).
At 258 fps, its energy is only 13.6 ft./lbs.

The 50 Cal., on the other hand, only has to fly 1094 yards.  It does this in 1.324 seconds.
1.324 sec. x 146.66 yds. = 194.2 yards that the enemy AC travels during bullet flight time.  
194.2 yards (the AC moved) + 900 yards (originally from the target) = 1094.2 yards.
At this point it has a velocity of 1884.9 fps.
But, the AC is also going 440 fps, so the impact speed is 1444.9 fps (985 mph).
At 1444.9 fps, its energy is still a whopping 3277 ft./lbs.

So, the Mg 131 travels 1474 yards in 3.9 sec. and has 13.6 ft./lbs. of E.
The 50, however, has traveled 1094 yards in 1.3 sec. and has 3277 ft./lbs. of E.

eskimo

Thank you Eskimo! <SALUTE>

This is the exact explaination I would have liked to have written. Thank you for taking the time to explain the numbers and how this all works. Hopefully the rest of certain people will see it and understand also.