PDA

View Full Version : Should Gun Pods be used on German A/C for dogfighting?



XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 02:38 AM
1) Does the use of gunpods effect flight performance enough to warrant not eqippping them when heading out for a dogfight?

2) Should gunpods only be used when going after bombers or other heavy A/C.

3) And what were they historically used/developed for?


I found whith the current DM they are pretty beneficial when B&Zing..../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 02:38 AM
1) Does the use of gunpods effect flight performance enough to warrant not eqippping them when heading out for a dogfight?

2) Should gunpods only be used when going after bombers or other heavy A/C.

3) And what were they historically used/developed for?


I found whith the current DM they are pretty beneficial when B&Zing..../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 02:47 AM
Depend of the a/c, for example i always use them on a 109 G2 (190 don't need them too much).
They affect performance mor ethan is modeled in FB, but in RL, IIRC, they were used foer dogfighting too.
I don't use the Mk 103 gunpods on G-10/14/K4, I prefer the Mg151/20 tehy fire much faster and have more ammo, and they are enough do down any fighter in the sky.

"The show must go on..."
<center>http://www.btinternet.com/~jj_b/vaw/images/iar81t.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:15 AM
1. Yes, although like Von Zero said, you can almost get away with it in the G-2. That is the only plane I ever put pods on, but I usually don't.

2. Yes (see above)

3. They were developed specifically to counter the bombers that started showing up on offensives over the channel and to address the 109's lack of firepower. They affected flight performance greatly, and "made the plane unsuitable for aerial combat." The gunpods appeared as early as 1941 and the 109F-4, so they were not developed to counter USAAF bombers. The heavier cannons and rockets, well, that may be a different story. When asked by Hitler whether he thought the 109 should have 1 cannon or two, Galland replied "better to have all three." Hitler agreed and the gunpods were further developed. Galland was in favor of putting the cannons in the wings like the Emil had, not putting gunpods on externally.



<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:27 AM
The better bet is to let the 190's do the heavy gunning while the 109's do the fighter engagements.

<center>
http://members.verizon.net/~vze2cb22/KosSig.gif

America: #1 military...#15 in literacy...
Because right wingers run our military
and leftists run our schools!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:43 AM
1) Does the use of gunpods effect flight performance enough to warrant not eqippping them when heading out for a dogfight?

Affect flight performance?... Absolutely. DO NOT dogfight an enemy a/c while sporting gun pods unless a good BnZ opportunity is available. With pods you're hunting bigger prey.

2) Should gunpods only be used when going after bombers or other heavy A/C.

Yes, bombers and ground targets depending on the mission

3) And what were they historically used/developed for?


IIRC just that, destroying bombers and ground forces.

S~ RCAF_Trout

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:43 AM
I stopped Using the Mk103 or any gunpods, they make your plane a Pig and the "one shot wonder" feature is vastly offset for the "easy target" one

Mk 103 Aircraft Cannon


Manufacturer: Rhienmetall Borsig
Caliber: 30mm
Weight: 146kg
Muzzle Velocity: 860mps


Rate Of Fire: 420 Rounds per minute
Round Types: High Explosive Incendiary and Armor Piercing
Round Weights: 330 gr. (11oz.)



‚ ‚ ‚ The MK103 was developed together with the MK 108: The MK103 was a high-velocity weapon to attack bombers from a distance, and for ground attack; the MK108 was a low-velocity weapon for single-seat fighters. The MK108 was much lighter (only 64kg) and cheaper (because it used many stamped parts).
‚ ‚ ‚ The MK103 (MK for "Maschinenkanone") was broadly based on the earlier MK101, but its operation was changed to partially gas-operated (a gas pistoon was used to unlock the breech block) and it used electrically-fired ammunition instead of percussion-fired ammunition.
‚ ‚ ‚ The MK103 weighed 146kg, against 178kg for the MK101, and fired at 420rpm (against 250rpm) with a similar muzzle velocity (860m/sec). It used 30 x 184B ammunition similar to that of the MK101. At the end the Germans seem to have used downloaded ammunition (with a lower muzzle velocity) to compensate for a shortage of strong alloys, and weaker guns.
‚ ‚ ‚ The ammunition types developed were "Hartkern", AP with a tungsten core, and "Minengeschoss", a thin drawn shell with a large HE/I load. The former for ground-attack aircraft, the latter for use against bombers.
‚ ‚ ‚ There was also a MK103M version for mounting on the engine, i.e. firing through the propeller hub. This had a different design for the gas duct (the standard gas duct did not fit in the tube running between the cylinder banks of German V-12 engines) and no muzzle brake (same reason). The MK103M seems to have been less reliable than the standard version.
‚ ‚ ‚ The MK103 was installed in a few Fw 190 ground-attack aircraft (wings), in an experimental Me 262 (nose), the prototypes for the Ta 152C-3 (engine), in some Do 335s (engine and wings), and possibly in a handful of Bf 109K fighters (engine).
Emmanuel Gustin
Additional information on aircraft guns:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun-in.html

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/kurbalaganda/Loco-S.gif

[B]Burning Avgas at alarming rates since 1990. [B]
<G>Visit http://www.aopa.org<G>
I love the Me 109 but... "Ich bin ein W√ľrgerwhiner"!! too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:49 AM
Salute

The 109's were not as successful in bomber interception versus the B17's, evne with the gunpods, for the reason that they were not as durable as the 190's.

Eventually the Germans began to make their bomber attacks in two echelons, the low one being the heavily armed 190 'Sturmbocks', the other higher echelon being 109G6AS, which were supposed to take on the American escorts and tie them up while the 190's attacked the bombers. This started to happen around June of 1944, after the 109G6AS came into more common service.

It was a failure, mainly for the reason that by then the quality of the majority of the ordinary pilots in the Jagdflieger, (the flight leaders and Squadron leaders remained very experienced) had deteriorated to the point that they couldn't compete with the better trained Americans.

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 05:55 AM
Well I really like 2 Mk108 gunpods on late 109s, and even in dogfight rooms.

Fly over the melee, find a nice prey, dive, aim, kaboom, climb away.

Nic


http://nicolas10.freeservers.com/images/et.jpg


OK I -->[]

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 06:26 AM
nicolas10 wrote:
- Well I really like 2 Mk108 gunpods on late 109s, and
- even in dogfight rooms.
-
- Fly over the melee, find a nice prey, dive, aim,
- kaboom, climb away.
-



True .. mk108 and mk103 are great for B&Z through a dogfight.

But they are not good to turn fight with.

As for the difference compare the mk108 and mk103 shells in the sig.

<center> http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SQDLAtUWiWZ3BKw19!aryp7v3C1h1DuNwpHOOuqhlraGSyMAY KiPEOZAA1OBgsLu*Sa0UQ2my0PiFyvNkJ5K7Clsoy7yNtEvOXY nHDuPNiotpZACY2oJxw/aircraftround.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 06:29 AM
No.


http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
08-08-2003, 06:35 AM
If you're flying a 109, only take those gunpods if you're going against very heavy targets, and you're a bad shot. If you're a good shot like me, the single Mk108 cannon is enough to down anything.


If you fly on the Ubi Game server with the ubin00bs, take your gunpods. Those boys are.. sad.




_______________________________
Hauptmann Jochen "Heidi" Heiden
Jagderband 44
www.JagdVerband44.com (http://www.JagdVerband44.com)