Yanks and their MG's

[bf-110]

.50 Cal rapid fire??

I like the 50 Cal,its very strong,probably the strongest non explosive shells.
They use that MG till today.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by bf-110

.50 Cal rapid fire??

I like the 50 Cal,its very strong,probably the strongest non explosive shells.
They use that MG till today.

Well 800 rounds per minute (ish) is fairly fast yes? The M3 .50cal that they used in Korea was over 1000 rpm I believe. Not that many other weapons used during World War II have a vastly higher rate of fire.

[baronWastelan]

If I had been a P-38 pilot in WWII, I would have asked to have the 20mm removed and replaced w/ 2 50 cal's.

[AKA_Tenn]

simplest way to explain... its easier to hit something with a spray of bullets than it is to hit something with a few big bullets that hit pinpoint... in other words your aim doesn't need to be as good with a bunch of small guns over one or two big guns.

In-game i prefer bigger bullets with a lower rate of fire, because they do more damage, usually i only have to hit once or twice to take out anything and my accuracy is good enough that i'll hit most of the time.

[KnightFandragon]

Originally Posted by baronWastelan

If I had been a P-38 pilot in WWII, I would have asked to have the 20mm removed and replaced w/ 2 50 cal's.

If I had a P38 id ditch all the 50cals and put in like 4 20mms and pack in as much ammo as possible...also make them so they fire alternate instead of all at once so I get better coverage of my rounds...in Il2 the cannons fire slow and the target plane flies between the volleys of cannon shells. The 50 cal is a nice weapon it has good punch and good RoF and all but hte 20mm is just better

[David603]

Originally Posted by KnightFandragon

If I had a P38 id ditch all the 50cals and put in like 4 20mms and pack in as much ammo as possible...also make them so they fire alternate instead of all at once so I get better coverage of my rounds...in Il2 the cannons fire slow and the target plane flies between the volleys of cannon shells. The 50 cal is a nice weapon it has good punch and good RoF and all but hte 20mm is just better

4 centreline mounted 20mm cannon would pack one hell of a punch, and the Hispano Mk.V is only marginally heavier and bulkier than an M2, so replacing 4 M2s with 3 Hispanos would actually result in a weight reduction, though the heavier 20mm ammunition would mean a slight overall increase in loaded weight. The size of the P38's nose would also allow for a lot of ammo, maybe even 250-300 rpg. The Hispano Mk.V has an almost identical rate of fire to an M2, but the alternating fire would still be useful.

Imagine a P38 with this armament and the same Merlin engines as the P51

[Friendly_flyer]

The wikipedia entry on the Hispano autocanon touches on the problem. The American showed interest in the British Hispano early on, but it appears the US manufacturers wanted to redesign the chamber somewhat. The result was that the weapon became prone to misfire. The USAF and particularly the USN had planned to phase out the .50 by mid war, but the American Hispano was delayed. Not until introduction of electrical firing post-war, did the US version become reliable enough for use in planes.

If the Americans had solved the design problems (or not redesigned the Hispano in the first place), Mustangs and Thunderbolts would have flown with 20mm Hispano canons rather than MGs. Luckily, the Americans could fall back on the .50, which gave adequate, but not great, firepower.

[whatnot]

Originally Posted by Friendly_flyer

The wikipedia entry on the Hispano autocanon touches on the problem. The American showed interest in the British Hispano early on, but it appears the US manufacturers wanted to redesign the chamber somewhat. The result was that the weapon became prone to misfire.

I wonder what drove them to 'improve' an already working design resulting US not having a cannon until 50's. But well, it worked out of ok concerning the outcome but would have been great to see / fly cannon packed late war fighters for US.

Anyone has any idea on the rate of failure the american models of Hispano's had?