PDA

View Full Version : Automatic Gun-Laying Turret



luftluuver
08-13-2008, 06:33 AM
The British Automatic Gun-Laying Turret (AGLT) was a radar-aimed FN50 turret fitted to some Lancaster bombers in 1944. The AGLT system was devised to allow a target to be tracked and fired-on in total darkness, the target's range being accurately computed as well as allowing for lead and bullet drop. The system was known under the codename Village Inn during development.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Village_Inn_AGLT_FN150_Turret.jpg

more info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Inn_(codename)

Daiichidoku
08-13-2008, 07:31 AM
nice

wish we got 'cam locks' for US turrets...shoooting off one;s own tail kinda sucks, esp when it was impossible IRL

arthursmedley
08-13-2008, 01:17 PM
Wow, never heard of this before.
Any records of it ever being used in action, ie, firing on a target in operational use?

Did this get used on post-war Lincolns and did the US ever mount anything like this on B29's or the B36?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm just really surprised we developed and put into operation something like this at these dates.

If it ever went into general operation with the bomber command mainforce I wonder how long it would have taken the Germans to fit something onto their nightfighters that homed in on the gun-laying radar emissions?

I still think the RAF would have been better off removing all the turrets from their heavies, reducing the crew and gaining altitude and speed benefits.
Or better still building an all Mosquito force.

lesterhawksby
08-13-2008, 01:21 PM
I can't help but feel that some days IL-2's AI has this fitted to every single turret!

arthursmedley
08-13-2008, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by lesterhawksby:
I can't help but feel that some days IL-2's AI has this fitted to every single turret!

+ about a million http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

stalkervision
08-13-2008, 01:56 PM
WW 2 night warfare electronics innovations is a really great topic to read up on.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

ytareh
08-13-2008, 02:55 PM
There were some unbelievably high tech weapons in place by the end of WW2 considering the horse was still a valuable part of many armies inventory at the start of the conflict (come to think of it I can recall an apocalyptic scene in a film about the development of nuclear weapons where there is a mass charge of Chinese horse mounted infantry ('cavalry'?)wearing gas masks on some kind of nuclear weapons exercise/propaganda film)
I was surprised to learn that the US Navy used 'proximity fused' large calibre aaa which relied on some kind of magnetic interference of a nearby plane to explode when it was in range of enemy aircraft .Of course the germans had it all ....surface to air missiles /radar guided flak /jet and rocket propelled aircraft etc etc ....maybe even Flying Saucers LOL!

julian265
08-14-2008, 03:23 AM
I'd bet that that turret was not very good for bombers flying in formation... It might shoot at another bomber!

Xiolablu3
08-14-2008, 04:42 AM
I think it still had a gunner in the turret, however it showed him exactly where to shoot?

Can anyone confirm this?

lesterhawksby
08-14-2008, 05:46 AM
Xiolablu3 - I believe there was still a gunner involved, the radar just told him where to aim. I dimly remember something about this at one of the air museums (Hendon or Duxford) but can't recall! Wikipedia seems to agree though, for what it's worth.

If this were the case, it would presumably be fine in formation - as the difference between a friendly bomber and hostile night fighter would surely not be so hard for the gunner to discern, whether from different radar return or different behaviour. On the other hand, I'd bet (assumption only atm) that they put planes with this equipment in the most vulnerable points rather than just anywhere, as I don't think there were enough sets around for every aircraft to have one.

Blutarski2004
08-14-2008, 06:08 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ytareh:
I was surprised to learn that the US Navy used 'proximity fused' large calibre aaa which relied on some kind of magnetic interference of a nearby plane to explode when it was in range of enemy aircraft. [QUOTE]


..... I think you must be referring to the Mark 32 "VT" (variable time) fuze. It actually operated as a radio transmitter/receiver, detonating when the signal return bouncing off a target a/c reached a certain strength. It reached the fleet in 1943 and absolutely transformed the effectiveness of the fleet's long-range anti-aircraft defense. By the war's end, VT fuzed 5-in/38 ammunition was considered to be approximately 3x as effective in the anti-aircraft role as conventional rounds with mechanical time-fuzes.

How science, within two years, managed to produce a miniaturized radio transceiver capable of reliably withstanding something like 50,000 G's acceleration out of the gun is a terrific story. The book "The Deadly Fuze" gives a good account of the development program.

luftluuver
08-14-2008, 06:14 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think it still had a gunner in the turret, however it showed him exactly where to shoot?

Can anyone confirm this?

Xio, did you read the link?

Initially, ranging information was provided only at the transmitter situated in the navigator's compartment and was read-off to the gunner over the intercom, the gunner using foot pedals to set the target range on the sight. In production equipment the process was made automatic, the range information being fed electronically directly into the gunsight, with the navigator's "running commentary" only being retained for the benefit of the rest of the crew. The gunner simply maneuvered his guns to place the "blip" in the center of the gunsight's reticle, and opened fire when the range was appropriate. Windage, bullet drop and other factors were already calculated by the gunsight.

Xiolablu3
08-14-2008, 07:21 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
Xio, did you read the link?




Yeah I did, I was replying to Julians commetns that it might shoot down another bomber on its own.

It still needed a gunner to point and shoot.

idonno
08-14-2008, 11:03 AM
Here's one that surprised me considering it's from a 1945 aircraft manual.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/TailWarningRadarSmall.jpg (http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/TailWarningRadar.jpg)

And I always thought the idea of a biplane equipped with ASV radar and rocket projectiles for anti-submarine operations a little amusing.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/SwordfishwithASVRadarandRocketRails.jpg

ImMoreBetter
08-14-2008, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
Here's one that surprised me considering it's from a 1945 aircraft manual.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/TailWarningRadarSmall.jpg (http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/TailWarningRadar.jpg)

And I always thought the idea of a biplane equipped with ASV radar and rocket projectiles for anti-submarine operations a little amusing.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/SwordfishwithASVRadarandRocketRails.jpg

I've heard about this. It was not very popular amongst pilots. They had to turn it down to almost useless levels in order to keep their wingman from setting it off.

I_KG100_Prien
08-14-2008, 12:26 PM
It's amazing over all how RADAR technology has advanced overall since it's start.

I thought I was impressed by the SPQ-9 RADAR system (60's tech really, when I was learning to work on it.

Then I saw what SPY-1 is capable of.. Can pick up a 5 inch BL&P round bouncing off the water.

idonno
08-14-2008, 12:27 PM
Yeah, I was figuring the only way to use it would be for just the planes at the back of the formation to have it on.

Of course if you found yourself all alone it would sure be a nice thing to have.

Aaron_GT
08-14-2008, 03:11 PM
surface to air missiles /radar guided flak /jet and rocket propelled aircraft etc etc

The British, during WW2 devloped the ramjet, turbofan, and reheat. Surface to air rocket systems, triggered by radar, were used against V1s and AAA around London was almost fully automated and radar controlled by this time. Three different surface to air missile systems (one for each of army, airforce, and navy, each with different guidance systems) were in heavy development.

Xiolablu3
08-14-2008, 03:40 PM
DOnt forget the worlds first digital, electronic, computing programmable computer which was developed in WW2.

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

Gibbage1
08-14-2008, 03:50 PM
tail warning radar was standard in late model P-38's, but it was typically turned off by the pilots. The problem is, it would go off in close formation if your wingman got too close! Giving the pilot one hell of a spook!

Also, lets not forget the ASM-N-2 BAT Glide Bomb. The US developed, produced, and used the only RADAR GUIDED BOMB in WWII.

http://www.ausairpower.net/BAT-PB4Y-2.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_(guided_bomb)

It was a little late, and there was not many Japanese ships big enough to use it, but it worked.

Gibbage1
08-14-2008, 03:57 PM
oops. Double post.

Kettenhunde
08-15-2008, 07:11 AM
RAF Bomber command compensated for the German lateness to adopt this form of armament by reacting slowly to it. Reports of bomber crews gave no indication, because the German nightfighters managed to stalk their preys without being perceived. Only an analysis of the damage done to returning bombers demonstrated that the Germans were firing from below. This seems to have been understood fairly quick, for the problem was already reported in April 1943. However, it took considerable time to implement a satisfactory solution. Initially, a downward observation window was provided, and Canadian bombers again received belly turrets. But the effectiveness of these measures was small, because the attackers were very hard to see. Radar was a better solution, but the Monica tail-warning radar provided warning only if the attacker approached from astern, not from below. Anyway, in July 1944 the British discovered FuG 227 Flensburg in a captured German aircraft, a receiver that could be used to home in very accurately on the emissions of the Monica radar from a distance of 80km. The tail-warning radar then had to be deleted.

The H2S navigation radar, that had replaced the belly turret on many bombers, did look downwards; but it did not provide any warning of enemy aircraft approaching from below. The H2S display showed the radar image starting from the first ground return, so that a map could be drawn. Any echoes preceding this ground return were discarded -- The echoes of aircraft below the bomber.



In July 1943 the Fishpond modification of H2S was ready. A display screen was added, that indicated range and bearing of any aircraft below the bomber; an estimate of the relative height could be made by banking the bomber. But Bomber Command was large, and it took considerable time to install the new equipment. By the spring of 1944 most bombers carried Fishpond, and losses dropped sharply. However, there was considerable turmoil when it was discovered that German nightfighters carried the Naxos detector, that allowed them to determine the origin of H2S emissions. Only after the interrogation of prisoners made clear that Naxos was far too inaccurate to allow nightfighters to home in on an individual bomber, and at best gave an indication of the position of the bomber stream, was confidence in H2S and Fishpond restored.


http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-uf.html

Bremspropeller
08-15-2008, 07:42 AM
So what?

Germany had radar-controlled Blitzmädels. http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

Beats any other radar-controlled shizznit by ages. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif