EdStraker
Does anyone know what range the browning machine guns in the wings of Hurricanes and Spit's were zeroed at,150 yds,200 yds,more?I'm really interested to know.
Does anyone know what range the browning machine guns in the wings of Hurricanes and Spit's were zeroed at,150 yds,200 yds,more?I'm really interested to know.
''Never fly straight and level for more than 30 seconds in the combat area''
I believe they were initially harmonised at 400yds as standard for a while before it was realised that firing closer was more effective. I think the minimum for the Spitfire's guns was 250yds on account of the narrow gun bays, not sure about the Hurricane.
"And then your chances vary as the curves
Of your parabolas, your banks, your dives,
The scientific soundness of your choice
Of what to push or pull, and how, and when." Barry Conrad Amiel
Remember, rifle caliber machine guns in the early months. You must be close, and you want to kill the pilot.
Thanks guys good info given here,I also heard that although there was a standard yardage for the zeroing/harmonsing of these guns,that pilots often customised this yardage to there specific liking.
''Never fly straight and level for more than 30 seconds in the combat area''
Snuffy, while those 303's wouldn't go through 109 seat backs from 100 feet they are still capable of penetrating much of the rest of a 109 or bomber in 1940 and killing whoever got in the way from 1/4 mile and more. You don't have to be close but it helps and a lot of WWII fighter pilots were only out to shoot planes down even if others were there to make it personal. Judge by the attitudes towards shooting parachuting crew if you must. Besides, the engine is bigger and easier to hit.Originally posted by Snuffy Smith:
Remember, rifle caliber machine guns in the early months. You must be close, and you want to kill the pilot.
Add: two bigger reasons to get close:
1) the apparent target is bigger and harder to miss
2) bullet time of travel is shorter, a jinking target can get less out of the way before the shots reach him
Question. Didn't you play B-17II and didn't you know Maj. Worsley online?
RAF 1943 Gunnery Manual for Hurricane:
I've seen and like convergence at 150 to 200 meters for 303s. It's like looking the full length of a stadium at the people behind the other goal. With 303s, you really do need to be close and to kill the pilot or the engine to bring one down. Here's a link to an RAF Hurricane Gunnery manual on Darts' page for IL2 that I keep by me and have found invaluable. There is an almost identical one, Galland's Horrido for the 109 too. Both are excellant and very similar. The RAF one is of course British, and the German one is more European. I put them up for those beginning their flight school, who may not have seen them in the old forum.
RAF from Darts' page
http://www.darts-page.com/oth_files.htm
http://www.darts-page.com/files/gunnery01.htm
Galland's from Bakelit and Rafiger
http://www.rafiger.de/Homepage...es/Schiessfibel.html
PS: No, I'm afraid I did not get into B17II.
Good hunting everyone. It will only be 2 weeks, be sure.
.303 British 180 gr Power Point and Core Lock bullets. The powder, weight and shape are what matter as to speed and energy.
Range yards | Velocity ft/sec | Energy ft-pounds | % Energy
Muzzle | 2540 | 2580 | 100%
100... | 2300 | 2120 | 82%
200... | 2090 | 1750 | 68%
300... | 1900 | 1440 | 56%
A little perspective -- Remington .223, 3300 ft/sec at muzzle has 1330 ft-pounds energy and will wreck engines a good ways out.
Sure closer is more. Easy to see by comparing numbers to numbers. But what even the "small" numbers mean, 303 can bore holes through thin aluminum or perspex and still wound, kill or cut control lines, oil lines, fuel line or tank, crack castings, shatter stones, go through bricks and fun like that at 300 yards.
160-180 gr bullet around 2000 ft/sec describes very effective 20th century hunting round at muzzle.
It depends on what you have to go through to get to the pilot/engine. 109 seat back armor, point blank might not do. The fuselage of an He-111.. no problem. It's the armor and thick parts that block shots and if the thick part is the motor then the motor will probably get some damage unless the hit is glancing and the ricochet doesn't clip a vulnerable part like oil line, fuel line, vacuum line, carb. Radiators are more easily punched through. Instrument panel and engine controls also easily broken. The pilot, easiest of all!
It's the armor that stops the shots with no effect and the heavier structural parts that do so with little if any effect. My answer is to avoid the armor, shoot deflection. ALL of these bullets are effective PK at longer ranges from deflection if you can hit.
Try riding 300m directly behind a bomber with 30 cal rear gun. See how long that works.
exactly... And another thing people have to understand. CoD is going to have a MUCH more detailed and sophisticated Damage Modeling System than in the past... which will increase the effectiveness of the .303 ingame considerably..Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Sure closer is more. Easy to see by comparing numbers to numbers. But what even the "small" numbers mean, 303 can bore holes through thin aluminum or perspex and still wound, kill or cut control lines, oil lines, fuel line or tank, crack castings, shatter stones, go through bricks and fun like that at 300 yards.
160-180 gr bullet around 2000 ft/sec describes very effective 20th century hunting round at muzzle.
It depends on what you have to go through to get to the pilot/engine. 109 seat back armor, point blank might not do. The fuselage of an He-111.. no problem. It's the armor and thick parts that block shots and if the thick part is the motor then the motor will probably get some damage unless the hit is glancing and the ricochet doesn't clip a vulnerable part like oil line, fuel line, vacuum line, carb. Radiators are more easily punched through. Instrument panel and engine controls also easily broken. The pilot, easiest of all!
It's the armor that stops the shots with no effect and the heavier structural parts that do so with little if any effect. My answer is to avoid the armor, shoot deflection. ALL of these bullets are effective PK at longer ranges from deflection if you can hit.
like you said, fuel/oil/coolant lines and tanks, ammo stores, control lines/surfaces, individual parts of the engine itself...
I foresee a lot of people coming out to complain about how "over powered" the .303s are because their plane was set alight by a single good harmonized burst to the engine or fuel tank.
no the .303s didnt have any explosive capabilities like the cannon did and it isn't going to "saw" off anyone's wing, but eight high ROF machine guns are still, eight machine guns.
Salute
In fact, many analysts believe the Spitfire and Hurricane's .303's were better weapons versus enemy fighters than the 109's mix of 7.92mm and low velocity 20mm. The rifle calibre weapons were much more accurate. The MG/FF was an extremely low velocity weapon, not at all suitable for high G dogfighting with high deflection angles.
Initially RAF pilots were recommended to set their convergence to 400 yards, according to an anti-bomber doctrine which had fighters opening fire in flight groupings at longer ranges.
This was quickly discarded when results were disappointing, and most pilots set convergence to between 200-250 yards. Once convergence was changed, the .303's were capable of causing structural damage to any fighter or single engine attack aircraft and there were a number of instances of Stukas having their wings 'sawn off' by .303 equipped fighters.
Against bombers, the .303's also suffered initially from lack of results due to the too long convergence. Results improved with the change, but against the larger structures of the bombers, the .303 rounds were incapable of causing catastrophic damage. The weapons got their major success through setting engines on fire or killing crew members. Standard issue .303 ammunition was API, 'armour piercing inciendary', and any damage or leaks in areas where fuel or oil lines or tanks were located resulted in immediate fires.
.303's were incapable of penetrating rear seat pilot armour at ranges greater than 100 yards, below that and they were effective. Many 109 and bomber units were not equipped with armour in the initial stages of the battle.
during the BoB
the Luftwaffe had the better weapons to shoot down bombers.
the RAF had the better weapons to shoot down fighters.
what a world
.....................................
and before you have to ask:
Shift + F1 will center the sight.
Ctrl + D will remove the lenscap
F4F and I-16 has manual landing gear only
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Snuffy Smith
