Best possible WW2 propellor fighter using existing components

Not a bad idea. I was thinking along the lines of using the 20mm for bombers or other tougher targets, MG alone for fighters. Same reason the Spits did (isn't it?;)).

The mixed armament in most Spits wasn't to use against different targets. One of the reasons was a difficulty in supplying enough hot air to stop the guns freezing at altitude. The Hispanos liked to be kept toasty warm the Brownings needed a lot less warm air.

Spits from the mkV onwards could carry a mix of guns and up to 6 cannons but that was only ever flown to see if it worked. 4 cannons were most often used in the Med region but even then weren't that common.
 
I wonder if a big, streamlined, fast, laminar flow wing fighter with a large motorkannone (a nippy 30mm, what’s out there besides mk103? or 37mm) and secondary .50 brownings (4? 5 maybe, one synchronized in fuselage?) would be good? Also with a big turbocharger and high-visibility cockpit...

A pressurized high-alt kleinzeroster (light bomber-destroyer) version would be cool.
 
I wonder if a big, streamlined, fast, laminar flow wing fighter with a large motorkannone (a nippy 30mm, what’s out there besides mk103? or 37mm)

Vickers had a 25.4mm cannon that fired an absolute beast of a round 25.4 x 189mm 250gram shell at a muzzle velocity of 3,000fps
Vickers%2024.5%20mm.jpg
V25.4HE.jpg
 
Now that is an awesome sounding gun. It also doesn't look too big for hub mounting. Where can I read more about it?
 
Last edited:
I wonder if a big, streamlined, fast, laminar flow wing fighter with a large motorkannone (a nippy 30mm, what’s out there besides mk103? or 37mm) and secondary .50 brownings (4? 5 maybe, one synchronized in fuselage?) would be good? Also with a big turbocharger and high-visibility cockpit...

A pressurized high-alt kleinzeroster (light bomber-destroyer) version would be cool.
Like this? Yeah, I think that's an excellent idea.:cool:
 
The troubling thing I found was that there is a 30 round drum only. Not very many rounds, the 262 had 360 rounds for quad MK108s. I'd say a larger drum fits my rules in the OP, and maybe a conversion to belt fed.

EDIT: and it's a bit lighter than a MK108 too, despite MUUUCH higher muzzle velocity, and I'm sure ammo will be lighter, since it's 25.4mm not 30mm
 
Last edited:
At work.

So, the heart of any machine is its engine.

Is there, or has there, been a nice and concise write up of engine progress/evolution?

I understand patents and different company/creators ideas/motivations as well as government/authoritarian influences have large effects.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is there a good 'History of...' kind of starting at the rotaries and explaining from there?

Cheers.
 
At work.
So, the heart of any machine is its engine.
Is there, or has there, been a nice and concise write up of engine progress/evolution?
I understand patents and different company/creators ideas/motivations as well as government/authoritarian influences have large effects.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is there a good 'History of...' kind of starting at the rotaries and explaining from there?
Cheers.

Perhaps it will not answer all of the questions, while opening up many more, but this is a very good start:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015002094285;view=1up;seq=7
(there is a tool for downloading Hathi trust docs in the 'net)
Also:
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.4831
 
The troubling thing I found was that there is a 30 round drum only. Not very many rounds, the 262 had 360 rounds for quad MK108s. I'd say a larger drum fits my rules in the OP, but not conversion to belt fed.

EDIT: and it's a bit lighter than a MK108 too, despite MUUUCH higher muzzle velocity, and I'm sure ammo will be lighter, since it's 25.4mm not 30mm

The MK108 was a much lighter shorter slower velocity gun 1,700fps but firing a heavier 350gram shell v 250gram for the Vickers.

I think the Vickers was only produced with a 15 round box magazine, the 30 round drum was a proposal to fit it into a Spitfire wing. If its fitted as a Motorcannon or in the nose of a twin engine plane a belt feed would be needed.
 
The MK108 was a much lighter shorter slower velocity gun 1,700fps but firing a heavier 350gram shell v 250gram for the Vickers.

I think the Vickers was only produced with a 15 round box magazine, the 30 round drum was a proposal to fit it into a Spitfire wing. If its fitted as a Motorcannon or in the nose of a twin engine plane a belt feed would be needed.

Had it been developed further then its almost a certainty that it, like other autocannon of the day, would have ended up as a belt fed weapon.
 
Had it been developed further then its almost a certainty that it, like other autocannon of the day, would have ended up as a belt fed weapon.

What about a three-cannon setup using only this gun? One belt-fed motorkannone and two drum fed wing guns.

I'm thinking that with an effective HE shell (mine shell) one 25.4mm hit could have a good chance of bringing down a fighter.
 
What about a three-cannon setup using only this gun? One belt-fed motorkannone and two drum fed wing guns.

I'm thinking that with an effective HE shell (mine shell) one 25.4mm hit could have a good chance of bringing down a fighter.

Quite possibly - although I think the proposed HS 23mm version of the HS 404 20mm would have been a better path, its development along with belt feeding ended with the occupation of France and only elements of the Belt feeding was passed on to the British. So it is not outside of the realms of possibility that the plans (such as they were) for the 23mm weapon also get passed along.

Although only slightly larger the round would be capable of carrying a significantly larger amount of explosives while still capable of a high velocity - so making it useful verses fighters and bombers
 
The VJa-23 was a powerful cannon - ~200 g shell fired at ~900 m/s, 550-650 rds/min, 68 kg - in series production from 1941 on. My guess is that 4 of those installed in a wing would've make quite an impression on anyone downrange.
 
Top