PDA

View Full Version : MG FF on Bf110C4...



TinyTim
07-16-2008, 07:36 AM
... had 180 rounds per gun. Now standard drum magazine for this cannon had a 60 shell capacity. Anyone knows what was a solution on a Bf110C4? Larger drums? Any kind of "drum changing device"? Or did prehaps a gunner had to change drums during f(l)ight?

TinyTim
07-16-2008, 07:36 AM
... had 180 rounds per gun. Now standard drum magazine for this cannon had a 60 shell capacity. Anyone knows what was a solution on a Bf110C4? Larger drums? Any kind of "drum changing device"? Or did prehaps a gunner had to change drums during f(l)ight?

Schwarz.13
07-16-2008, 08:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
... had 180 rounds per gun. Now standard drum magazine for this cannon had a 60 shell capacity. Anyone knows what was a solution on a Bf110C4? Larger drums? Any kind of "drum changing device"? Or did prehaps a gunner had to change drums during f(l)ight? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sure a larger capacity drum of 90 shells was developed but i can't corroborate that ATM.

However for 180 rounds per gun, that would still require changing of drums (manual or otherwise) and i'm afraid i don't know how this was done for main armament in the Bf110...

Kurfurst__
07-16-2008, 08:45 AM
They were changed by the rear gunner/radio operator.

I believe they were 60 round mags (as in the 109), 90 rounders would be probably too big and heavy.

The 110C-4 also had MG FF/M (capable of firing Mine-shells as opposed to the earlier FF version).

Xiolablu3
07-16-2008, 01:08 PM
Yep, I am sure they were 60 round drums changed by the gunner. An awkward job in combat.

The early Hispano's in the nose of aircraft like the Beaufighter, used the same idea.

'The bomb-bay was dispensed with, and a forward-firing armament of four Hispano 20 mm cannons was mounted in the lower fuselage area. These initially were fed from 60-round drums, necessitating the radar operator having to manually change the ammunition drums " an arduous and unpopular task, especially at night and in the midst of a chase with a bomber target. As a result, they were soon replaced by a belt-feed system.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Beaufighter

berg417448
07-16-2008, 01:22 PM
Check out the book "Night Fighter " by C. F Rawnsley. It contains a description of what it was like to try to change the ammo drums in the Beaufighter at night during an interception.

Jaws2002
07-16-2008, 01:42 PM
In the FW-190A5 they were loading 90 rounds in the standard 60 round drum.

Xiolablu3
07-16-2008, 02:07 PM
One interesting fact I read about the early Hispano, is that apparantly it wasnt inherently unreliable in its original 1940 form.

What made it unreliable was when it was installed in the wings of aircraft which bend and move, especially aircraft with very thin wings such as the SPitfire. However they were still quite unreliable even in thick wings like those of the Hurricane.

When installed in nose installations they were fine, and thats why we see Hispanos installed early war in planes such as the Whirlwind in 1940. Thats also apparantly the reason why the P38's 20mm had less issues than other USAAF/USN 20mm's.

Mostly caused by installing it in the wings I read, and it took the alterations made in the British MkII Hispano (fitted to the SPit mkV and Hurricane IIC) to fix these issues.

NOTE: The Hispano Mk1 was not super reliable, however it was usually reliable enouigh in nose installations to get through its ammunition (Around 60-100rounds) without a jam or mis-feed. In wing installations it more often than not jammed in the first few shots.

TinyTim
07-16-2008, 04:16 PM
Thnx guys. So it was a poor soul at the back who had to change mags... This leads me to another question: was radio operator / gunner in later Mg151/20 equipped versions able to try to unjam a jammed cannon?

BTW, Jaws, what do you mean by "they were loading 90 rounds in the standard 60 round drum"? How did they squeeze another 30 (!) 20mm rounds into a 60-round drum? Quite some sources are mentioning 90 rpg for MgFF on Antons (I even mailed them and reported it to Oleg once for a correction, to no avail), but I'd assume the drum was a later 90 round version...

Jaws2002
07-16-2008, 05:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
BTW, Jaws, what do you mean by "they were loading 90 rounds in the standard 60 round drum"? How did they squeeze another 30 (!) 20mm rounds into a 60-round drum? Quite some sources are mentioning 90 rpg for MgFF on Antons (I even mailed them and reported it to Oleg once for a correction, to no avail), but I'd assume the drum was a later 90 round version... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think is the same drum with minor modifications.

Crumpp could shed some light on this. I think I read that in one of his posts on Targetware forum.

KrashanTopolova
07-16-2008, 08:16 PM
If ever there was an unrealisitic model in il-2 its the 110. in RL they were so bad in the fighter escort role that the Luftwaffe had to assign BF 109's to escort THEM as they were 'escorting' the bombers!

Poor design all over. Poor gun defence around the aircraft. Poor guns. Flying coffins. The RAF slaughtered them.

enjoy!

VW-IceFire
07-16-2008, 09:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KrashanTopolova:
If ever there was an unrealisitic model in il-2 its the 110. in RL they were so bad in the fighter escort role that the Luftwaffe had to assign BF 109's to escort THEM as they were 'escorting' the bombers!

Poor design all over. Poor gun defence around the aircraft. Poor guns. Flying coffins. The RAF slaughtered them.

enjoy! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You do realize that the 110 had a useful career in the Luftwaffe and was actually more successful than the planes that tried to replace it? Yes the early models failed as long range escort heavy fighters like they were envisioned as but the G-2 model (which is a very different plane than the one used in the Battle of Britain two years earlier) which is the only model flyable in IL-2 was quite successful on the Eastern Front.

csThor
07-16-2008, 09:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KrashanTopolova:
If ever there was an unrealisitic model in il-2 its the 110. in RL they were so bad in the fighter escort role that the Luftwaffe had to assign BF 109's to escort THEM as they were 'escorting' the bombers!

Poor design all over. Poor gun defence around the aircraft. Poor guns. Flying coffins. The RAF slaughtered them.

enjoy! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is one of the myths created post-BoB. The truth is Bf 109s were never assigned as escorts to Bf 110s in the BoB. And the 110s were slaughtered because they were always tasked with close escort instead of a fighter-sweep utilizing their strenghts (speed, firepower) to minimize risks and avoid the horrendous losses they suffered.

WTE_Galway
07-16-2008, 10:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
And the 110s were slaughtered because they were always tasked with close escort instead of a fighter-sweep utilizing their strenghts (speed, firepower) to minimize risks and avoid the horrendous losses they suffered. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 109's suffered from close escort duties as well. It is ironic that the lessons learnt in the Spanish Civil War .. the great advantage of a finger four staffel in "Freie Jagd" over more rigid tactics like the VIC was negated by the political necessity of close escorting what were basically close ground support middle altitude medium bombers unsuited to strategic bombing. Basically to avoid what appears to have almost been a potential mutiny amongst bomber crews.

MM-Zorin
07-16-2008, 10:17 PM
To get back on topic:

http://www.spurensuchesh.de/1Me110B+C.jpg

3x 60rounds = 180rounds

Jaws2002
07-17-2008, 12:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KrashanTopolova:


... Poor guns.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Vike
07-17-2008, 01:02 AM
Nice image Zorin!http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Quite interesting! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

@+

Control_Damage
07-17-2008, 01:19 AM
I wonder how the 20mm reload time will be handled for the 110 in BOB:SOW?

TinyTim
07-17-2008, 01:31 PM
Tx for the pic Zorin! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I see rear gunner also has quite a few 7,9mm ammo mags back there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Control_Damage:
I wonder how the 20mm reload time will be handled for the 110 in BOB:SOW? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Making the cannon disabled for an estimated time period (say, 10 seconds) after each 60 rounds are expended would be the easiest and quite elegant solution IMO. Then they could throw in some more IF lines: if gunner/radio operator is heavily wounded/dead or if the plane maneouvers too hard then no go...

Bremspropeller
07-17-2008, 01:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Poor design all over. Poor gun defence around the aircraft. Poor guns. Flying coffins. The RAF slaughtered them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Poor nancy! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Xiolablu3
07-17-2008, 02:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
Tx for the pic Zorin! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I see rear gunner also has quite a few 7,9mm ammo mags back there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Control_Damage:
I wonder how the 20mm reload time will be handled for the 110 in BOB:SOW? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Making the cannon disabled for an estimated time period (say, 10 seconds) after each 60 rounds are expended would be the easiest and quite elegant solution IMO. Then they could throw in some more IF lines: if gunner/radio operator is heavily wounded/dead or if the plane maneouvers too hard then no go... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That would be pretty awesome...


The constant whines about how long it took to change a 60round mag would be endless....

Red side - It takes 10 secs to change a 60 round 20mm drum - ridiculous!

Blue Side - It takes 10 secs to change a 60 round 20mm drum - ridiculous!

Kettenhunde
07-17-2008, 03:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I think is the same drum with minor modifications.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was the same size drum with a different spring and keeper design to allow more capacity.

All the best,

Crumpp