They did a check about the 20 mm minegeshos vs 303 ammo from a Hurrycane after BOB and found the punch from a Hurrys 8 guns witch was very close mounted in right convers distance did equal as the 20 mm in terms of effectiveness, but they said the compare was not relevant. Since a ACE could put more 20 mm rounds than the test applied did. And the many guns in the hurry meant only 12 second of fire, when if I remember correctly 60 20 mm shots and over a minute burst of 7,6 mm mg in a 109
This was done since a earlier test showed the difference between 1 shot 303 and a 20 mm cannon shell.
This pretty much set the end of english comparing cannonshells to ordinary mg salvos. What you say Ice is eh not true. The effectiveness is where you hit and from what distance. and how many bullets do hit. There have been no research done in this manner, the research has always been what to arm the planes with, what mission and what to wear. Never ever have there been one for comparing cannons vs 50 cal. it is just too many parameters to consider
However, USAAF found that 6 50 cal guns would be sufficient and make things easier in terms of logistics. and then you are into a different manner and different discussion. It is the same like saying 90 % octane is as good as 100% octane since the planes operating in France after the invation used 90% octane. They did it because that was the octane used by the tank´s and logistics would be easier.
Author
Topic: The consequence of a MK 108 hit... (Read 24294 times)
