PDA

View Full Version : a question to those who know



jbunn
04-04-2004, 08:38 AM
can somebody out there please enlighten me as to the distintion between cannon and machine guns. I've read some ww11 history but i've never seen this info. by the way, forgotten battles is the best flight sim ever produced in my opinion and if pacific war is mearly as good,I will be ecstatic.

jbunn
04-04-2004, 08:38 AM
can somebody out there please enlighten me as to the distintion between cannon and machine guns. I've read some ww11 history but i've never seen this info. by the way, forgotten battles is the best flight sim ever produced in my opinion and if pacific war is mearly as good,I will be ecstatic.

Aztek_Eagle
04-04-2004, 08:44 AM
well what my brain understend afther what i have seen in military aviation, the diference is that machine gun has fire rate, and cannon has fire power... muhahahhaa, do u undertend my point?.... is like boxing, a boxer trows u combination of realy fast pounches, (machine gun) and then he trows u his heavy right hand in a single pounch to finish you off, he takes all yours teeth out, send ur nose back to the back of your head, and you fall unconcious to the ground, (his cannon)

Thunderball807
04-04-2004, 10:26 AM
AFAIK, the difference is that MG bullets are simply lead slugs, where cannon shells actually contain explosives that detonate upon impact.

Chuck_Older
04-04-2004, 10:55 AM
There is confusion over this. I have friends who are ex-US Army who maintain that anything 20mm and over is a cannon. i do not know id that is just Army classification or not, but just because the US Army considers something to be one thing or another, it doesn't mean that the definition has changed around the world http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I beleive the line between the two has been blurrred, but there must be a difference in cyclic rates, recoils, barrel design, etc.

To the best of my understanding, a cannon uses shells, an mg uses rounds. That doesn't mean an mg round can't be explosive, or a shell can't be solid, though.

*****************************
Punk Rockers in the UK, they won't notice anyway. They're all too busy fighting for a good place under the lighting~ Clash

Sundowner.pl
04-04-2004, 11:32 AM
As Chuck_Older writed:
"the line between the two has been blurred"
and I'm agreed with that. But the cyclic rates, barrel designs etc. can be similar.

So please don't try to make new definitions what is a machinegun, and what is a cannon.

Hard fact is that during WW2 everything with a caliber 15mm or greater was called a Cannon. Everything less than that was a machinegun.

(Today 15mm is a machinegun, and the cannon's are starting from 20mm up.)

http://miasto.interia.pl/fm/sundowner/SundownerSig.jpg

DONB3397
04-04-2004, 08:12 PM
Canon projectiles explode, bullets don't.

http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/3fe77b7e_1812a/bc/Images/Sig---1.jpg?BC6hOaABCyZcLZQo
There is no 'way' of winning;
There is only Winning!

tenmmike
04-04-2004, 08:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sundowner.pl:
As Chuck_Older writed:
"the line between the two has been blurred"
and I'm agreed with that. But the cyclic rates, barrel designs etc. can be similar.

So please don't try to make new definitions what is a machinegun, and what is a cannon.

Hard fact is that during WW2 everything with a caliber 15mm or greater was called a Cannon. Everything less than that was a machinegun.

(Today 15mm is a machinegun, and the cannon's are starting from 20mm up.)

http://miasto.interia.pl/fm/sundowner/SundownerSig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>this is correct ,the fact that a projectile has a explosive content does not make it a cannon and it should be noted that armour piercing cannonn projectiles do not contain explosives

http://www.2-60inf.com/2-60_crest.gif U.S INFANTRY 1984-1991

[This message was edited by tenmmike on Sun April 04 2004 at 07:44 PM.]