I had picked the Gloster twin because of its likeness to the rather effective Hs-129, which was underpowered, whereas the Gloster would not be. I picked the Molins gun because it would fit the airframe, and was effective, from a fairly great range. The Vickers "S" gun/ Hurricane IID combination had proven effective in attack/kill ratio against German tanks up to, but not including improved PzIV. It also suffered a high loss ratio due to the "in your face" nature of the gun's range limitations, having a vast projectile weight with low muzzle velocity. The conversion from Taurus to P&W engine should have been possible, since it was performed on Bristol Beaufort from MkI to MkII. It had been proposed at some time when there was a shortage of these engines, but did not remain such for long, since various auto engine factories converted to production. Also, the Gloster is a taildragger and wouldn't have a problem such as the Warthog possessed of having to shift the nosegear to one side to accommodate the weapon. I've been told that Gloster had far more production capacity than it had, several times, so manufacturing the beast shouldn't be an obstacle.
Alternative Allied Tank Busters
- Thread starter AdA
- Start date
- Status
You could probably fire 8x.50s all day into a hard surface in front of a tank and still do no more than knock the paint off. Have you ever seen what happens to a bullet when ricocheting it deforms, tumbles and loses a vast amount of energy. Then your hitting approx 25mm of armour at an angle so your trying to penetrate a much thicker plate. Then you have the fact that the P47 driver has at most a few seconds of firing time to hit a spot on the hard road about 6 foot by 18 inches and he is firing 1 in 3 AP rounds so the 2 out of 3 rounds he might as well be throwing a rock.
Plus that pesky tank is moving, sneaky Germans wont stay still.
Sior
Banned
They stuck a 32pdr in a mossy as a trial in 1945!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_32-pounder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_32-pounder
I'm generally reluctant to question the word of a veteran too quickly... but we have to ask that old question "How would he know?" It seems unlikely that he would be given access to detailed damage evaluation reports compiled on knocked-out German armor; and even if he was, it took a while to compile that data after each campaign. Certainly he couldn't tell that his rounds were ricocheting up through 25mm belly armor while he was flying over.
If I had to guess, I'd say that the idea of Tigers and Panthers being knocked out by belly-striking .50 cal ricochets was a cherished and honestly-believed myth among the pilots, stemming from a few reported knockouts of some less well armored vehicles by that means, plus the need to believe that one's efforts are meeting with powerful success, when one is having to risk one's life making those efforts.
I don't doubt that a stream of .50 cal rounds could do disabling (but non-penetrating) damage on many occasions, of course. Lots of important stuff located outside the main armor of a tank... tracks and road wheels and so forth.
Rubicon
Banned
Actually it has been questioned. It is believed that many kills were simultaneous reports from different observers (i.e. two or more observers reporting the same kill) and there us no way to determine if the hit enemy was killed or 'simply' wounded. Though even with the estimated reduction he still wins in kills.
And it's Häyhä, the umlauts aren't there just for show.
Last edited:
in OTL, P-47 pilots score some knockout success by ricocheting their 8x .50s into the undercarriage of Panthers and tigers, which penetrated and then killed the crew. The sheer weight of metal from 8 .50s at the merge point was enough to go through weak top/underside armor. at the merge point, the P-47 could chop down oak trees[/QUOTE]
I suspect a bit of an urban myth. Assume each gun is firing 10 rds /sec (600rpm) that's 80 rds per sec. Target engaged for 2 seconds from approx. 1000yds that's 160rds. now all guns have a beaten zone so whilst the guns are synchronised to converge in the horizontal plane at say 300-600 yds they still have a vertical variation which for the M2 is around 90yds. so at a target 1000yds away a burst of fire the first round will land at around 960 yds and the last at around 1040yrds. This is the natural tolerance and variation of the gun. That's why you will see rounds kicked up in front of and beyond a target from a fixed gun. Add to that the aircraft is moving and presumably the pilot is maintaining his point of aim in front of the target and most of the 160rds available are going to ping off short or hit the tank harmlessly. Assuming for the sake of argument the tank is crossing hard ground that lends itself to a Ricochette then again a number of the rounds will fly out sideways hitting the wheels whilst some will deflect in a range of angles underneath the 25mm plate armour. The sound will be like driving over a newly covered road when the chippings hit the underside of the car. To cut through a target such as a tree you need to concentrate the fire (I,ve done it). Relying on a Ricochette is not realistic to cut through 25mm plate armour
I suspect a bit of an urban myth. Assume each gun is firing 10 rds /sec (600rpm) that's 80 rds per sec. Target engaged for 2 seconds from approx. 1000yds that's 160rds. now all guns have a beaten zone so whilst the guns are synchronised to converge in the horizontal plane at say 300-600 yds they still have a vertical variation which for the M2 is around 90yds. so at a target 1000yds away a burst of fire the first round will land at around 960 yds and the last at around 1040yrds. This is the natural tolerance and variation of the gun. That's why you will see rounds kicked up in front of and beyond a target from a fixed gun. Add to that the aircraft is moving and presumably the pilot is maintaining his point of aim in front of the target and most of the 160rds available are going to ping off short or hit the tank harmlessly. Assuming for the sake of argument the tank is crossing hard ground that lends itself to a Ricochette then again a number of the rounds will fly out sideways hitting the wheels whilst some will deflect in a range of angles underneath the 25mm plate armour. The sound will be like driving over a newly covered road when the chippings hit the underside of the car. To cut through a target such as a tree you need to concentrate the fire (I,ve done it). Relying on a Ricochette is not realistic to cut through 25mm plate armour
Really cool designs. Great post, Leo
Cause of death for many panzers would be "poisoning from heavy metals, administrated from above"
Driftless
Donor
Is the Beardmore a historic design, or a recent creation? The Grizzly & the Gloster I've seen, but not the Beardmore. It's pretty neat!
Beardmore is an ATL company, deftly avoiding bankrupcy by buying Cosmos Engineering along with the Jupiter engine and Roy Fedden. The Bat was designed by Herbert Smith of Sopwith Camel fame, who never owned a hotel.
Tube alloys
Banned
personally i would use the Gloster Meteor as a fast tank buster at low level but seeing as the meteor is a fighter i would use the Hawker typhoon.
Tube alloys
Banned
One the FOUR 20mm in the nose makes it more or less perfect for tank busting plus if you escort them on tank busting with the Tempest it is good by ME262
Two fast at low level so it could take out there targets before the german flak 88s get a shot off.
Three only the ME262 could have caught it .
Two fast at low level so it could take out there targets before the german flak 88s get a shot off.
Three only the ME262 could have caught it .
This what a Gloster Reaper was based on (Gloster F.9/37). The pic posted above looks like a Warthog (!) that a remodeler re-badged and called a Reaper. Or the humor was just going over my head.
It was probably too small to be effective and polystyrene is so vulnerable to birdshot.
- Status