Shadow Master
Banned
I saved some small amount of effort here by making a single reply to two posts. Hope this does not offend/
Ah, so the rate of fire might be twice what I posited, while the weight of the rounds was only 40%?
So this means take my posited 100 rounds/cannon and up it to 250, and for no increase in weight? And double the rate of fire as well?
For any weapons system, you need a reliable, well tested weapon, AND a well-trained, experienced operator, there simply is no substitute.
As posited above, a trained gunner will not fire at the ship above the waterline, but rather, form 1,000 feet above the surface, down into the water right next to the ship, thus any 40mm hits will be below the waterline, not above. For a merchantmen, 30 40mm (not even counting the explosive rounds making a much bigger hole) holes in their hull, below the waterline?
Can anyone with some physics step in here? How much water will enter a single 40mm hole in a ship’s hull per second?
I keep hearing talk here about bombs, rockets, and torpedoes, being used against small warships? The bigger the weapon used to kill them, the fewer of them you will be able to bring to bear, and thus the fewer you will sink.
Also, a pilot aiming his plane at the target has the problems listed up thread, while a dedicated turret reduces losses by not requiring the aircraft to overfly the target, and such a gunner is going to be able to concentrate his attention solely on the task at hand, not have to divide it between flying the plane and shooting accurately at the target.
You'll never achieve anything like the accuracy that a turret gunner (well trained and experienced) will achieve with unguided munitions, so more hits from the airborne 40mm, than from rockets, bombs, and torpedoes, while carrying far more ammo for such a weapon, meaning you can engage multiple targets on a single sortie, rather than one.
From Navweps Bofors 40 mm/60 (1.57") Model 1936 used a 1.960 lbs. (0.889 kg) AP M81A1 shell (so no to 5lb) that goes through 1.20" (30 mm) at 2,000 yards (1,829 m)(and at 0 yards you get 2.70" (69 mm)) but you do get 2 per second (if you can keep it feed)
Ah, so the rate of fire might be twice what I posited, while the weight of the rounds was only 40%?
So this means take my posited 100 rounds/cannon and up it to 250, and for no increase in weight? And double the rate of fire as well?
Range could/would be a problem, if we are limited to OTL Luftwaffe aircraft, but not so much for an ATL Germany that correctly identifies killing British merchantmen with long range naval aviation air fleets as THE most cost effective way to dispose of them.Apart from the fact that the ships are to the west of the UK and you have to fly from the east (so only a few very large Condors can really do it)
My understanding here is that the UK did indeed arm her merchant ships, right off the bat (in violation of international law), but the armament was IIRC 1 or more deck guns intended for engaging surfaced U-boats. I also understood that they did not supply the merchantmen with expert, naval gunners (they had non due to lack of combat up to this point), and so you end up with a few obsolete guns, operated by someone with no useful training in using them at all, let alone against aircraft/and the merchant ships are not unarmed they have gun on them .5/20mm/3'/4' all later than on warships but still you are a fragile target compared to a ship and a long way from home are you really going to walk .5 fire onto a ship with its own .5s (and bigger stuff)
(I'm also not sure that 30x40mm hits will sink most merchant ships (unless you hit the right parts most of yours will hit the top and grouped together from each burst)
For any weapons system, you need a reliable, well tested weapon, AND a well-trained, experienced operator, there simply is no substitute.
As posited above, a trained gunner will not fire at the ship above the waterline, but rather, form 1,000 feet above the surface, down into the water right next to the ship, thus any 40mm hits will be below the waterline, not above. For a merchantmen, 30 40mm (not even counting the explosive rounds making a much bigger hole) holes in their hull, below the waterline?
Can anyone with some physics step in here? How much water will enter a single 40mm hole in a ship’s hull per second?
I keep hearing talk here about bombs, rockets, and torpedoes, being used against small warships? The bigger the weapon used to kill them, the fewer of them you will be able to bring to bear, and thus the fewer you will sink.
Also, a pilot aiming his plane at the target has the problems listed up thread, while a dedicated turret reduces losses by not requiring the aircraft to overfly the target, and such a gunner is going to be able to concentrate his attention solely on the task at hand, not have to divide it between flying the plane and shooting accurately at the target.
You'll never achieve anything like the accuracy that a turret gunner (well trained and experienced) will achieve with unguided munitions, so more hits from the airborne 40mm, than from rockets, bombs, and torpedoes, while carrying far more ammo for such a weapon, meaning you can engage multiple targets on a single sortie, rather than one.
Last edited: