The Italian aircraft armament.

[Panzerknacker]

Hello Panzerknacker, it is an excellent post that you made here, but I would like to bring a supplementary information has those that will read it, it is that all this beautiful weapons had a big default, them n' were not particularly efficient, because most suffered overheating and a lack cruel from rate of shooting, besides they were sensitive to their environment and stopped themselves easily. Yet their munitions were effective, but most these weapons endured old conception and especially of uselessly complicated breech mechanism. There is what I could bring you like information while hoping that it helps you a few more.
Fred regards

Wich weapons in particular you are talking about ? the 50 caliber breda is quated as a reliable machinegun in most sources.

[fredl109]

Hello Panzerknacker, yes indeed it was relatively a good weapon, but its main default was that its munition was a lot less fast than one 12.7mm American and that the performance of its munition was also least, if the shell made well 12.7mm of diameter, on the other hand its length was least that the American munition and by lighter consequence. What caused less damages to the impacte.
Fred regards

[Panzerknacker]

Less damage because the lower muzzle velocity ?, yes that is correct, but in my opinion it was not so important, M2 had 850 mps, and Breda ( and scotti) 12,7mm had 775 mps. The problem for the italian was they had only a pair of heavy machineguns of their fighters (sometimes complemented by 2 light machinegun), simply wasnt enough, remember the USAAF used at list 4 or 6 even 8 heavy machineguns and without synchronization in order not to dimish the rate of fire.

[fredl109]

Effectively my dear Panzerknacker, there is also this problem, but he doesn't remain less that the lack of punch of the Italian weapons put them a lot of worries, there were only the German and after the English in Europe, that had consisted of the utility of a big power of fire, there is only has watch the arming of their two main hunters, that is to say the Messerschmidt and the Focke Wulf. The Japanese had also understood quickly the whole profit that they could pull a heavy arming. There is not that the Italian that had this problem, the French planes were they also equipped with weak caliber weapons. It is necessary to remember that in aerial fight the time of contact with the enemie is short and more the impacte of the weapons of sides is violent and devastating, more the luck to see his destroyed enemie or greatly damaged has the first pass is big, besides it also increases luck of have not have get back in position to finish work, especially with regard to the bombardiers.
Fred regards

[burp]

Italian airplanes are well-know for using only narrow number of heavy machine gun and no cannons. Look at the Fiat CR.42, Fiat G.50 or Macchi MC.200, these 3 models form the backbone of fighter units. They have only 2 x 12.7 mm machine guns. The US P-47 have 8 x 12.7 mm machine guns. Spitfire and BF-109 use at least 2 x 20mm cannons plus machine guns. The problem of slower ammunitions it's a "minor" defect. The real problem was the difference in numbers of guns. The Allies airplanes can simply send in the same time a greater number bullet of same and bigger caliber. The effect of multiple hits by 20 mm on light armored Italian airplanes are devastating.
Only with 5 series (Fiat G.55/G.56, Macchi MC.205 and Reggiane Re.205) the Italian airplanes use a mix of 20 mm cannons and 12.7 machine guns.

[stano666]

Superb thread from colonel Panzerknacker (another very interesting read from you once more), ich bin sie vielen dank verschuldigt (i owe you many thanks.., (my germen isn't perfect )
@ burp (chears btw) the Bf 109 F series had 1X 20mm and 2X 8mm (i know it's 7.9, but 8 is nice round number) and this was criticised by the likes of A.Galland (and probably many german fighter pilots) for 'lacking punch' yet the Bf got ('only') 2x 13mm (rounded up number again) and 1X 20mm from G-5 series(*) onwards (*= besides underwing gunpods (wich hampered performance) and i'm using my 'punch lacking'memory here, so excuse me if i'm wrong) The upgraded (2X 13mm)109 got nicknamed: 'beule' wich can be translated as 'hunchback' (i'm not sure if it was meant affectionately or negatively, but thats an different story)
Now i wonder: with the Japanese philosophy of keeping planes as light as possible (for better range and agility, and for the cost of armour a.o.) weren't many of the axis fighter planes 'lightly' armed ??? I'd guess they did their jobs non the less, atleast the german fighters (mostly Bf 109 F and G series) did well on the easterfront, against russian planes of whom (so i've been told) the guns had considerable firepower. But i'm sure Panzerknacker's knowledge of these matters (and in this case the italian gun effectiveness of WWII against rivals) is far greater than mine (and many with me).
So i wish you well in 2012 and keep those writings coming this ways, for they are wel reading for me (and many others), and even though i might not make many (written) contributions, i'm still reading your articles with joy and gratitude..., thanks.
Greetings stano666 (btw i don't have a pc, i use a PS3 wich does things slower (even gaming LOL) so that you know why it takes so much time when i write replys

[fredl109]

I am entirely okay with you Burp, except that the weak speed and the weight of the munition are also a factor determining for the aerial fight, a heavier munition is in general a steadier munition. Besides the weight delivered every second makes the difference indeed, for info the 4 cannons of 30 mm of the Me 262 were the taken away most devastating weapons by a hunter, the only impact of 4 of these obuts was sufficient to destroy any hunters ally. The war of Korea proportion a revelation for the American that utilaient massively of the 12.7, indeed the reports of fights indicated that a consequent number of munitions was necessary of 12.7mm to knock a MiG 15 down, whereas in the same time, a plane equipped with cannon of 20 had a lot more luck to knock his/her/its target quickly down. For the Italian the hold of concience that their arming was too weak in relation to the allies was too belated and appeared too late in the course of the war, Trusted it G55 was equipped well of cannon MGde 20mm but it only appeared too late and in too small quantity to change whatever it is. Yet if one looks at his/her/its performances he/it was far from being handicapped face has his/her/its adversaries of the moment and at the time of the test that he/it undergoes here with the allemend those fure surprised because he/it was in many respects superior in the Messerschmidt 109K.
Fred regards

[Panzerknacker]

Superb thread from colonel Panzerknacker (another very interesting read from you once more), ich bin sie vielen dank verschuldigt (i owe you many thanks.., (my germen isn't perfect )
@ burp (chears btw) the Bf 109 F series had 1X 20mm and 2X 8mm (i know it's 7.9, but 8 is nice round number) and this was criticised by the likes of A.Galland (and probably many german fighter pilots) for 'lacking punch' yet the Bf got ('only') 2x 13mm (rounded up number again) and 1X 20mm from G-5 series(*) onwards (*= besides underwing gunpods (wich hampered performance) and i'm using my 'punch lacking'memory here, so excuse me if i'm wrong) The upgraded (2X 13mm)109 got nicknamed: 'beule' wich can be translated as 'hunchback' (i'm not sure if it was meant affectionately or negatively, but thats an different story)
Now i wonder: with the Japanese philosophy of keeping planes as light as possible (for better range and agility, and for the cost of armour a.o.) weren't many of the axis fighter planes 'lightly' armed ??? I'd guess they did their jobs non the less, atleast the german fighters (mostly Bf 109 F and G series) did well on the easterfront, against russian planes of whom (so i've been told) the guns had considerable firepower. But i'm sure Panzerknacker's knowledge of these matters (and in this case the italian gun effectiveness of WWII against rivals) is far greater than mine (and many with me).
So i wish you well in 2012 and keep those writings coming this ways, for they are wel reading for me (and many others), and even though i might not make many (written) contributions, i'm still reading your articles with joy and gratitude..., thanks.
Greetings stano666 (btw i don't have a pc, i use a PS3 wich does things slower (even gaming LOL) so that you know why it takes so much time when i write replys

Thanks, the japanese view on aerial combat was more like a thing of designers...not so on pilot who from 1942 onwards clearly were inclined to have more powerful armament on their fighters. The italians were limited more by some heavier construction of their airframes, with a profusion of steel tubing inside wich made sturdier aircraft but left less mass available for armament with the usual 800-1000hp italian engines available in 1938-41.

For the Italian the hold of concience that their arming was too weak in relation to the allies was too belated and appeared too late in the course of the war, Trusted it G55 was equipped well of cannon MGde 20mm but it only appeared too late and in too small quantity to change whatever it is. Yet if one looks at his/her/its performances he/it was far from being handicapped face has his/her/its adversaries of the moment and at the time of the test that he/it undergoes here with the allemend those fure surprised because he/it was in many respects superior in the Messerschmidt 109K.
Fred regards

A very little know experiment to bolster the firepower of the Fiat G55 was in the earlier pre-series, it had 4 Bredas 12.7mm, two above and 2 below the engine, after sometime the lower machineguns were seen as unpractical and removed in favour of 2 wings mounted Mausers.

[fredl109]

Hello to all, it is indeed a beautiful post my dear Panzerknacker, very interesting and documented very well. Since you put us a G55 Argentinian is what you would not have luck some more information on them. For information, in my other forum or me post Italy 1935 45, we made a post on the aviation Italian under other colors. And we have been surprised to see that a lot of countries of America of the South these are interested to the Italian aviation, it is surprising to see the number of sold devices in America of the South.
Fred Regards

[stano666]

Btw, my eyes are quite pleased to see those italian designed plane's. If they fly as well as they look....., i guess you catch my drift.
Greeting stano666.

[Panzerknacker]

Hello to all, it is indeed a beautiful post my dear Panzerknacker, very interesting and documented very well. Since you put us a G55 Argentinian is what you would not have luck some more information on them. For information, in my other forum or me post Italy 1935 45, we made a post on the aviation Italian under other colors. And we have been surprised to see that a lot of countries of America of the South these are interested to the Italian aviation, it is surprising to see the number of sold devices in America of the South.
Fred Regards

There is a book on the argentine G55, ill send you the link.

Btw, my eyes are quite pleased to see those italian designed plane's. If they fly as well as they look....., i guess you catch my drift.
Greeting stano666.

The Reggianes were the nicest and fastest.

[Panzerknacker]

Effectiveness of Breda 12.7mm machinegun ammunition:

Here is an account written by a British pilot based in Malta, that describes the effect of these guns on his plane. It's interesting to read what the (famous but underrated) HE esplosive round was capable of doing in real life.
So many people still think these rounds were "useless" or just "tore fabric or metal skins off".

The action describes one of the first actions of the Macchi C.202s over Malta.
The aerial combat took place on the 22th of October 1941.
One of the Hurricanes was shot down, another one landed heavily damaged withouth Italian losses.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2845

[fredl109]

Hello Panzerknacker, the article is effectively very interesting to read, my subjects preceding were not the to deny the qualities of the Italian weapons, they had the power and a shell of 12.7 remain a shell of 12.7, he/it is not better to receive one of it. What I wanted to make comprerndre that is that, whereas the allemends and the English passed to the cannon of 20 or 30, the arming of the Italian planes remained when to it relatively poor. The example of your G55 in watch the proof, because of the the departure he was only equipped of 12.7 that didn't give really satisfaction. Now it is necessary to know that the Italian munitions were contrary to what one thinks, of good qualities.
For information on what a simple weapon can make, I am going to take like example an AK47, certainly you will tell to me that it is not a fantastic aerial weapon and you will be right in part, only in part, bus at the time of the war of Vietnam, the Vietnamese pulled in air every time that a plane passed them over to the of the head, and well; represent yourselves that this small bullet of nothing at all, face has a F4 Phantom, provoked them some rips on the fuselage of more than iun measured of long, because the speed of the bullet added to the speed of the plane with an angle of 90 degree, it provokes seriousness damages, this example I pulled it from a narration of an American pilot in Vietnam, to say that even the things that appear petty can have big effects on a plane that displacing to big speed.
Friendly Fred