PDA

View Full Version : HE .50cal



AlmightyTallest
02-25-2005, 01:36 PM
Hey guys, saw some interesting info about the MG151 in Oleg's Ready Room, and there was one reference to the ammo belts used for the .50cal in Pacific Fighters or FB/AEP. It seems to be saying that there were HE .50cal rounds used among the AP and Tracer.

I didn't think it was possible to have a HE warhead in a round like the .50cal in WW2. I thought the only loadouts for U.S. fighters with .50's were Armor Piercing, Armor Piercing Incindiary, Incindiary, and tracer by 1943 the standard Ball ammo wasn't used very much in favor of the specialized ammo.

So, is this loadout with HE .50's incorrect? Or were there actually High Explosive .50cal rounds?

Can anyone post any info about the ammo belt loadouts for U.S. aircraft that carried the .50cal?

Thanks for any help, it sounded pretty intersting to me because I didn't think the .50cal was big enough in WW2 for them to put an explosive charge on it.

AlmightyTallest
02-25-2005, 01:51 PM
Just wanted to mention I found Jurinko's post at Sim HQ with the following info about ammo loadouts.

T - Tracer bullet
AP - Armor-Piercing bullet
APT - Armor-Piercing with Tracer
API - Armor-Piercing Incendary
APIT - Armor-Piercing Incendary Tracer
HE - High-Explosive shell
HEI - High-Explosive Incendary shell
HET - High-Explosive with Tracer
HEIT - High-Explosive Incendary Tracer
MG - Minen-Geschoss, thin-wall shell High Explosive


--------------------------------------
Browning .303
// APIT - AP - AP - APIT - API - API

API/APIT
mass = 0.0107
speed = 835.0
power = 0.0018

AP
mass = 0.0107
speed = 835.0
power = 0

--------------------------------------
Browning .50
// APIT - AP - HE - AP

APIT
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.002

AP
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0

HE
mass = 0.0485
speed = 870.0
power = 0.00148

--------------------------------------
Hispano-Suiza Mk.I
// HET - AP - HE - AP

HE/HET
mass = 0.129
speed = 860.0
power = 0.012

AP
mass = 0.124
speed = 860.0
power = 0

--------------------------------------

If this is what is used in PF, I would have thought that there were more Incindiary and Armor Piercing Incindiary rounds used in U.S. fighters during the war, with no HE .50cal rounds used from what I've read.

Again I would appreciate any info or insight into this. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
02-25-2005, 02:27 PM
I think this is one of the gripes about the weapon that most of the strictly US flyers seem to have.

I guess the next time around the option of choosing your belt composition will make these problems a moot point - belt it up your way.

AlmightyTallest
02-25-2005, 02:54 PM
I can certainly see where BoB will stop a lot of gripes about ammo loadouts if you can choose your own. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

My only concern is that I can't really find any info that a HE .50 caliber round even existed during WW2 for aircraft use. If enough evidence could be gathered, perhaps Oleg could just replace that HE round in the belt with an Armor Piercing Incindiary or something more common that was used in WW2. I think this is why some people (myself included) have noticed the lack of .50's being able to cause fires against Zeroes. I can clip their wings and tails off more commonly at 300 meters than I can set their fuel tanks or engine on fire, this may be the reason, because there aren't enough Incindiary or Armor Piercing Incindiary rounds in the belt.

Here's what I found so far about .50 cal ammo

http://www.liberatorcrew.com/15_Gunnery/09_ammo.htm

http://www.olive-drab.com/od_firearms_ammo_50cal.php


Really interesting and detailed ballistic details and descriptive source of .50cal ammo types here, take a look :

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/50_ammo.html

But there's no mention of a HE round, hence my question about it.

AlmightyTallest
02-25-2005, 03:08 PM
Just browsing through from the link above:

Cartridge, Caliber .50, Armor Piercing Incendiary-Tracer, M20

Used by M2 and M85 machine guns, and the M107 Long Range Sniper Rifle. The cartridge combines the functions of the armor piercing and the incendiary bullet, and is used against flammable targets and light-armored or unarmored targets, concrete shelters, and similar bullet-resisting targets. This tracer is dim at near ranges, but increases to bright as it moves further from the gun.

Armor Penetration.
500 meters: 0.83 in (21 mm)
1,200 meters: 0.43 in (11 mm)

Incendiary composition: 27 grains (1.74 gm) IM 161
Trace range: 328 - 1,914 yards (300 - 1,750 m)
Tracer: R256

It penetrates armor 21mm at 500 meters? I think I can see why some tanks got damaged during WW2 if this round was being used by P-47's and the like while hitting them at a 300m convergence, pretty neat round http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But are there any links or sources of info that show the .50cal ammo belts and the rounds used for U.S. aircraft during WW2? And if proven could we get this fixed for the next patch if the current loadout is found to be incorrect?

Blutarski2004
02-25-2005, 04:19 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Armor Penetration.
500 meters: 0.83 in (21 mm)
1,200 meters: 0.43 in (11 mm)

It penetrates armor 21mm at 500 meters?
QUOTE]


..... Two additional pieces of information are needed to makes sense of those AP values -

(1) The nature of the armor against which the projectiles were tested.

(2) The angle of impact upon the surface of the plate.

Those values look like they were obtained against homogeneous armor plate at 90 degrees to the plate surface - i.e., maximum possible penetration. Under combat conditions, the typical angle of impact would be around 20 to 30 degrees, with the effective penetration probably around 2/3s of the published values.

My educated guess anyways.

Stackhouse25th
02-25-2005, 04:23 PM
Quite a few US fighters used API rounds, I was kinda curious why we dont have Incindiary going off around when we shoot the zeros

AlmightyTallest
02-25-2005, 06:57 PM
Good points Blutarski http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif It all depends on the angle the plane fires at the armor, and the standard penetration is usually rated against homogeneous armor plate at 90 degrees so it's not so far off to assume these values.

But I'm still having trouble finding out about the ammo belt loadouts used for U.S. aircraft during WW2. In addition I'm having trouble finding info about a HE .50cal round.

If this data Jurinko posted is accurate for what we currently have in the sim, it could be an error that hopefully could be fixed by the next patch, unless what we have now is correct. Just having an extra API round in the belt could make a big difference with the .50cal in the sim.

I think enemy aircraft would be more prone to fires or igniting fuel with more API or just Incindiary rounds.

At any rate, thanks for the assist guys, just need to find more concrete evidence of ammo loadouts and .50cal ammo types

VW-IceFire
02-25-2005, 08:06 PM
Yeah the HE round is an oddball. We need some more of the experience armorers around to explain that one for us.

johann_thor
02-26-2005, 02:29 AM
i read that USAAF experimented with HE rounds for .50 in the pacific .. but did notusethem alot. API is a pretty solid round for that gun.

AlmightyTallest
02-26-2005, 09:33 AM
johann_thor, any chance you can remember where you read that? That sounds pretty interesting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

From most of the books I have, I have a ammo belt composition for an F4U-1 Corsair listed in one of my books, if I find it I'll post it. The main thing I remember though is that it was mostly API, AP, and APIT lol. The links I posted about .50cal ammo above also mention that API was good for armored aircraft and caused fires after penetration. Incindiary was good at starting fires against unarmored targets and aircraft. Both would have probably caused Japanese planes to flame up like the guncam footage we've all probably seen.

Still looking for more info though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AlmightyTallest
02-26-2005, 01:03 PM
Okay, just found one of my books that gives a standard aircraft belted ratio for the Corsair.

From: "Corsair The F4U in WW2 and Korea"
by: Barrett Tillman

Page 20-21

"most aviation .50cal ammo was belted in the ratio of AP-I-AP-I-Tracer"

So at any rate since the .50cal ammo belt used in PF goes for all .50cal guns, I think if the HE load is incorrect the HE round should be replaced by either an Incindiary, or if you want to cover all bases, an Armor Piercing Incindiary round.

Perhaps Oleg or someone can help clear this up for us? The ammo belt currently used in PF 3.04 may already have been changed from what was listed, but I'm not getting the flaming zero effect I was expecting http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Diablo310th
02-27-2005, 08:20 AM
It really doesn't matter. Oleg has said he is not going to change any guns loadouts in this game. When BoB comes out we can choose our own load. A shame tho...since it would be nice to have another API round instead.

VW-IceFire
02-27-2005, 08:51 AM
Did the Russians use the HE round and the belt order that we have? Seeing as the first .50cals were in the original IL2 (the cowl guns on the P-39)...this belt composition may represent that.

Its another example, just like the MG151/20 (and therefore destroying any stupid bias arguments), of the belt composition being limited to a specific theater and not having grown with the game.

Both weapons are still effective and it doesn't slow me down a bit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AlmightyTallest
02-27-2005, 09:37 AM
Interesting point Icefire, you may be right that Oleg has the ammo set for an Eastern Front war like the MG151.

Well, at least I have a lead now, I'll see if I can find any Russian HE .50cal ammo info then.

No doubt the .50's are effective as is, I have no complaints about it really, but it just doesn't have the propensity to cause fires like I'm used to reading about, seeing in guncam footage, and pilots accounts. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And if HE is used in the belt then this may explain the reason why.

Atzebrueck
02-27-2005, 10:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Interesting point Icefire, you may be right that Oleg has the ammo set for an Eastern Front war like the MG151.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The current MG151/20 ammunition mixture wasn't used for Eastern Front fighter planes. In fact it wasn't used at all.
Oleg stated that it is meant to be a compromise to represent all different types of beltings. He just forgot to realize, that the current one doesn't contain Mine shells because of a bug, that first appeared with FB.
He still thinks, that it's the same ammo as in IL2. As he doesn't know there is a bug, he won't fix it.

Having all that in mind, I guess he used a compromise loadout for the M2, too.

AlmightyTallest
02-27-2005, 03:14 PM
I know how you feel Diablo, I figure it can't hurt to discuss it at any rate. If Oleg looks at this thread and decided to implement it then great! If he wants to ignore the idea or the change than we at least brought it up for discussion. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I did find this info about HE .50 cal but it seems to be a more modern round instead of the WW2 ammo I was hoping to find.

http://yarchive.net/gun/ammo/raufoss.html

Atzebrueck, thanks for clearing that up, I hope that the MG151 issue can be adressed as well. I think it was LEXX_Luthor that had a good idea by creating another ammo belt that could be selected for the plane before takeoff. Sounded like a good compromise to me, as well as allowing the belt to be more representative of what would have been used during the war.


BINGO!! Check this site out: http://www.big-ordnance.com/50cal/50browning.htm

The Explosive rounds have the "X" for eXperimental designation though for the U.S. Companies. Pommeroy looks interesting though, maybe it's what Russia used during the war?

As said before, I think the .50 belt in this sim if incorrect should carry another armor piercing incindiary or just a plain incindiary round in place of the HE for realism sake.

VW-IceFire
02-27-2005, 08:45 PM
Interesting information. Maybe it was something the Russians added to the mix...even when it was considered experimental.

gbollin
02-27-2005, 10:26 PM
I was on the 4th Fighter Group Assosiation
web site. Looking through the 4th FG tidbits
section, I came across an entry where the pilots
requested more He ammunition. The request was
made on June 6.1943. At that time the 4th was
flying the P-47.

Abbuzze
02-28-2005, 08:17 AM
About the 0.50 HE, the german MG151 15mm "cannon" also had HE rounds, but they where worthless against planes, I fear even with 6 or 8 times more bullets the destruction power will not be better than AP or incedary ammo.

Diablo310th
02-28-2005, 09:22 AM
hey Allmighty...I agree. It doesn't hurt to discuss this at all. I saw a post over at SimHq that Oleg may look into the MG/151 issue for teh LW. Maybe he will look into this too for us.

Vipez-
02-28-2005, 10:39 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:

My only concern is that I can't really find any info that a HE .50 caliber round even existed during WW2 for aircraft use. If enough evidence could be gathered, perhaps Oleg could just replace that HE round in the belt with an Armor Piercing Incindiary or something more common that was used in WW2. I think this is why some people (myself included) have noticed the lack of .50's being able to cause fires against Zeroes. I can clip their wings and tails off more commonly at 300 meters than I can set their fuel tanks or engine on fire, this may be the reason, because there aren't enough Incindiary or Armor Piercing Incindiary rounds in the belt.
[QUOTE]

perhaps we are playing the different game ? I seem to lit up zeros almost 80 % of the zeros i shoot down with .50s. They are zippos , no doubt about that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Blutarski2004
02-28-2005, 11:27 AM
For what it's worth, I took a look this weekend into my USAF Fighter Weapons docs (circa 1948) and they do not mention anything about a 50cal HE round for the M2 Browning. The service rounds which they identified are as follows -

Ball
AP
API
API, Improved - (late-war development intended for use against German jet a/c; ended up being very successfully employed against Japanese a/c in the Pacific.

All the official descriptions of the 50cal discussed its effect in terms of AP and kinetic energy. Not a peep about HE effect. nothing in VICTORY ROLL or MIGHTY EIGHTH WAR MANUAL either

Interestingly enough, I DID find one reference made to an Italian 12.7mm HE round being employed in service by Regia Aeronautica. Perhaps our Italian comrades can shed some light here.

AlmightyTallest
02-28-2005, 12:40 PM
Well, even if Oleg doesn't change the loadout for the .50cal I'm still enjoying looking into this matter. It got my curiosity going http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thanks for the info and input guys. So we have some mention of P-47's requesting HE .50cal courtesy of gbollin.

gbollin, would you have any link to that site? Perhaps we could E-mail someone there to further elaborate about that request, perhaps they know the ammo belt configuations as well for those guys? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I'd like to secure as much hard evidence as I can about this with your help guys http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Abbuzze, that's pretty intersting as well, and if the reports were saying that HE was not useful against aircraft, I'm wondering about the loadout that we're using in the sim, or is this in the sim your referring to? If you have a report from the war that mentions this, could you happen to point me in the right direction to find it?

Diablo310th, it never hurts to ask http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The worst anyone can say is "no" But I do hope Oleg will take a look at this, perhaps it is an issue, or perhaps we're the ones that are incorrect about it. Either way I'd like to find out.

Vipez, could you tell me what plane your using to shoot down the zeroes? And which model of zero are you shooting down? Is this offline or online as well?

I have 3 tracks I saved where I'm using an F4U-1D in an offline campaign and in one track I shoot down 7 A6M5c's Only ONE of the 7 actually cathes on fire lol. In the other tracks I shoot down 2 or so and none of them catch fire, their wings separate, their tails pop off, their engine seizes, but it's rare to get a fire started on these planes from what I'm seeing, which is the opposite of everything I heard or seen, an apparently it's the opposite of Vipez's findings.

I'm also using PF Standalone version 3.04

Blutarski, thanks for that info, it does help us to narrow down what's available to U.S. forces in regards to .50cal ammo. Apparently even in 1948 the U.S. still preferred the AP and API rounds. The Italian HE round would be interesting to look into, hope someone can add more info to look at.

I E-mailed the gentleman at the one website that had a large collection of .50cal ammo, I hope he could help shed some light on this as well.

I know that there are also some complaints about the visibility of the tracer rounds for the .50cal as well in this sim.. And from the links I found, I'm wondering if Oleg just decided to use the Green Tipped M20 APIT "Dim Tracer" round instead of the brighter Red and silver tipped M20APIT?

tttiger
02-28-2005, 10:26 PM
Okay, here is the entire list of U. S. Caliber .50 ammunition found in Frank Barnes' Cartridges of the World (one of my Bibles when I used to load my own ammo):

Tracer, M1; Test, High Pressure, M1; Incendiary, M1; Blank, M1; Armor Piercing, M2; Dummy, M2; Ball, M2; Armor Piercing Incendiary M8; Armor Piercing Incendiary M8 Steel Case; Tracer, M10; Tracer, M17; Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer M20; Armor Piercing Incendary Tracer M20, Steel Case; Tracer, Headlight, M21; Incendiary, M23; Ball, M33; Spotter-Tracer M48; Spotter-Tracer M48A1; Spotter-Tracer M48A2; Inert Loaded XM176; Practice, T249E2; Armor Piercing Incendiary, T49; Test, High Pressure T251.

There NEVER was a U.S. HE .50 caliber bullet.

What shall we discuss next? The Easter Bunny? Santa Claus? The Tooth Fairy? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ttt

AlmightyTallest
03-01-2005, 09:56 AM
lol, thanks for that list tttiger http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'm guessing the U.S. had to have experimented with an HE .50cal from the photo in one of my links, Winchester made the HE round the site claims. But every other source makes no mention of this round in use during WW2, aside from gbollin's site. That unit may have used the experimental round for testing, would be interesting to find out.

AlmightyTallest
03-01-2005, 09:39 PM
Found this site from James Hilburn 41st Fighter Squadron Armorer in the Pacific during WW2.

http://www.pacificwrecks.com/people/veterans/hilburn.html

A quote from him that was interesting concering the .50 cal ammo loadouts for the P-47 in the Pacific.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> What we used was called two-two and one. That meant two armor piercing one tracer and two incendiary. I do not remember us using ball except when firing guns for converging purposes, and they were not belted but put in one at a time. The 50 cal. fires at 15 rounds per second. This meant that when the trigger was depressed, you were firing 120 rounds per second. Twenty tracer, 50 incendiary and 50 armor piercing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hopefully we'll get the apparently rare .50cal HE round replaced with pure Incindiary at least. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Diablo310th
03-02-2005, 06:51 AM
Almighty..... can you gather up all this information and documents and e-mail to Oleg? If he is willing to look at the MG 151 loadout maybe he will look at this too.

JG53Frankyboy
03-02-2005, 07:35 AM
in Osprey "Corsair Aces " volume they are talking about changing their belts from the standart incendary-tracer-armourpiercing to a more effectiv (in the south pacific http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) five ore six incendary - one tracer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AlmightyTallest
03-02-2005, 09:23 AM
That's exactly what I was hoping to do Diablo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If you like, could you or anyone else for that matter E-mail Oleg and at least point him to this thread? I won't get a chance to gather everything up or E-mail Oleg until Friday. The sooner he knows about this though the better, so if anyone would have the time please feel free to let him know about this thread and the info. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Frankyboy, thanks for that info http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Oleg and others mentioned that compromises had to be made for ammo belts. And although I'm sure an almost all incindiary belt was pretty effective against Japanese aircraft, I think Oleg should stick with the more "all round" combination of API, AP, and I rounds if he can.

We have to remember that Corsairs and other aircraft from Pacific Fighters are going to go up against German aircraft and other more well protected aircraft online and offline. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If Oleg could, I'd say to just make the .50cal belt APIT-API-API-API or APIT-AP-I-AP just to cover all bases and make the round effective against all aircraft for all purposes. But even if he just replaced the HE round with either API or I I'd be happy.

Diablo310th
03-02-2005, 09:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
That's exactly what I was hoping to do Diablo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If you like, could you or anyone else for that matter E-mail Oleg and at least point him to this thread? I won't get a chance to gather everything up or E-mail Oleg until Friday. The sooner he knows about this though the better, so if anyone would have the time please feel free to let him know about this thread and the info. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Frankyboy, thanks for that info http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Oleg and others mentioned that compromises had to be made for ammo belts. And although I'm sure an almost all incindiary belt was pretty effective against Japanese aircraft, I think Oleg should stick with the more "all round" combination of API, AP, and I rounds if he can.

We have to remember that Corsairs and other aircraft from Pacific Fighters are going to go up against German aircraft and other more well protected aircraft online and offline. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If Oleg could, I'd say to just make the .50cal belt APIT-API-API-API or APIT-AP-I-AP just to cover all bases and make the round effective against all aircraft for all purposes. But even if he just replaced the HE round with either API or I I'd be happy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Almighty...I would be more than happy to do that but..........Oleg is not going to listen untill we can present hard evidence and documents that undisputely contradict his documents. You sending evrything you can Friday will be fine. We need to dig up as much evidence in writing as we can. I have feelers out on this myself but haven't heard anything back yet. I'm still trying. Even after all this it may not matter depending on Oleg.

bigchump
03-02-2005, 10:14 AM
This was my 50 in Vietnam.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/bigchump/50.jpg
I did have some HE boxes.
The date on them was 1944.
Never used them.
Had lots of jams with old ammo.

AlmightyTallest
03-02-2005, 12:37 PM
It's no problem, and good going Diablo, I've sent out a few E-mails to vets and historians of ammunition as well. Haven't heard anything yet though. I'm looking for that hard evidence as well to present to Oleg. I know he likes official documents used as much as possible, but I personally can't discount the multiple veterans that mention the ammo types they used in their aircraft.

Does anyone know where you can find official USAAF or even USN documents that show the ammo belt loadings or the recommended .50cal loadings for aircraft? I'd like to get this all together as soon as possible before the next patch comes out if a change is going to be made or not.

bigchump, I just wanted to say I really salute your sevice to our country. Would you happen to know any more about the HE .50cal rounds you guys had on hand in Vietnam? It's interesting that they were dated 1944, pretty late in the war but that just may be when that particular batch you guys were using was made.

Your .50 cal in that picture is loaded with 4 Ball M-33's and 1 M-17 Tracer in a batch of 105 rounds total. Any other info about what rounds were recommended for what purposes? Did you ever use the HE .50 cal rounds and see what effect they had? As well, would you have any documents that describe the HE .50cal round and perhaps others you used for your M2?

Again, many thanks guys for the info, I'll try to get as much together as I can by Friday and send it to Oleg. I just have the impression that the HE rounds were prety rare going by the official Browning M2 ammo types listed, and veteran accounts during the war.

AlmightyTallest
03-02-2005, 01:28 PM
Just doing a quick search and posting here to keep my links together http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Found this site on the Doolittle Raid:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/misc-42/doolt-p.htm

This section is what interested me:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Photo #: NH 53424

Doolittle Raid on Japan, 18 April 1942

USAAF aircrewmen preparing .50 caliber machine gun ammunition on the flight deck of USS Hornet (CV-8), while the carrier was steaming toward the mission's launching point.
Ammunition box in center is marked "A.P. M2, Incndy. M1, Trcr. M1", indicating the ammunition types inside: armor piercing, incendiary and tracer.
Note wooden flight deck planking, with metal aircraft tiedown strips in place of every eighth plank.

U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/p700_3_2.pdf

U.S. DARCOM-P-700-3-2 document in html form for .50cal ammo:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:dfy2kFD-VqsJ:www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/p700_3_2.pdf+USN+.50+caliber+Incendiary&hl=en#26



http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/USN-CN-Solomons/USN-CN-Solomons-8.html

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/USN-CN-Raids/USN-CN-Raids-3.html

M8 API .50cal round info here:
http://www.rvow.com/m8_api.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The M8 API (armor piercing incendiary) was put into service in 1943 to replace the M1 Incendiary, and is still in service today. The M8 is built nearly identical to the M2 Armor Piercing except the M8 has 12 grains of incendiary mix (IM#11) in the nose instead of a lead filler, and a lead caulking disc in the base acting as a seal. Having the same hardened steel core as the M2, the M8 matches the armor piercing capability of the M2 with the added advantage of incendiary effect. While it has considerably less incendiary mix than the M1, the performance of the M8 was greatly superior to the M1 because of it's ability to penetrate the target and ignite the material inside rather than just flash on the surface like the M1 often did, making for a greater first shot effect. Bullet weight is about 649 grains, and identified by silver tip paint.

Pyrotechnic performance of these projectiles is only slightly less than the M1 Incendiary. The flash varies exponentially with the amount of fuel, so while the M1 contains 3 times the incendiary mix of the M8, the flash is only about 30% larger. These M8 are also safer ( we have fired 20,000 plus rounds and not yet had a muzzle flash,) but they are less sensitive. When shooting through steel drums, they flash on the second surface creating a flash inside the drum. Similarly, when shooting vehicles, the projectile generally penetrates the skin and detonates inside on another sheet metal surface. High speed photos show the tip breaking off with the first penetration, exposing the incendiary mix which then detonates on the second impact. Plywood targets are merely penetrated with no flash. They will flash on a dirt backstop, but unless they strike a rock the projectile will more than likely penetrate about 6" into the surface before flashing, making only a small visible flash. But if your target is rocks, concrete, or heavy steel, these bullets provide a spectacular show!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> that the planes should carry armaments of six 50-caliber guns with a full load including incendiary <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

M20 APIT "Dim Trace" rounds summary: http://www.rvow.com/m20%20API-T.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 50 Caliber Armor Piercing Incendiary with a tracer element. Came to life early in W.W.II, for decades this was the ultimate in versatility and performance. The hardened steel core is only slightly lighter than the M8 API because of the cavity necessary for the tracer element. The Incendiary mix is 18 grains if IM#11, so the incendiary effect is slightly greater than the M8 API. The tracer element, however, is tiny compared to the M17 so to get the desired length of trace a more efficient tracer material is used. This new tracing material gives a dim trace for the first 300 yards, then full bright for the remainder of the 1750 yards. Projectiles are lighter than other comparable service rounds, weighing on about 620 grains. Tips are painted red and silver.

We shoot these out of the M2 machine gun. Of the several thousand we have fired, only about 10% have traced! The greatly reduced tracer cavity in these projectiles requires a different tracer material and igniter element than the standard M17 Tracer. Also, this is a boattail design rather than flat base like the M17, so the surface area of the igniter exposed to the burning propellant gasses is considerably smaller. Over the years, this new igniter element has gone flat (inert) and no longer reliably ignites the tracer. We use ball powder for our loading, and admittedly using IMR-5010 does help increase the percentage of tracers that light properly, but with the bullets we were using the small increase in performance did not merit the higher cost and inconvenience of using the IMR powder. The Government is pulling these down, and they are mixing the old stale tracer bullets along with the new ammunition that may be pulled apart just because it lost it's lot number. So sometimes you get lucky and get a batch of late date projectiles that trace and other times you get old projectiles that won't trace. We have had customers that tell us these things work fine for them, but we have shot up at least 5000 of these and only one out of every ten traced. They all flash on impact <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



M2 .50 cal info: http://www.hk94.com/purple.html

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The preferred combat ammunition mix for the M2 HB machine gun is four (API-M8) and one (API-T-M20). Maximum effective range is 1,830 meters.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

.50 cal and other ammo chart here:
http://www.fortliberty.org/military-library/ballistics-chart.shtml

No mention of an HE round though.

Diablo310th
03-03-2005, 07:01 AM
Almighty...wow that is good reading. Keep it up. Now if we could just get the documents we need to convince Oleg to give us a loadout of 4 API and 1 API-T would be great. That may tend to even up the score if he changes the MG 151 and will help lighting up Zekes and the Ki 61.

AlmightyTallest
03-03-2005, 09:10 AM
Exactly Diablo. I'll be doing more searches tonight for more info.

It's not like this specialized ammo like the AP and Incindiary ammo was scarce, the Doolittle Raid was using it in 1942 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And fighters were using API and APIT as noted in some of the links above as well, and there's much mention that these guys were allowed to make the mix of rounds they wanted for any occasion.

I think the best all round ammo load for the Browning .50 cals in the sim would be the 4 API and 1 APIT or at least change the HE to an API. I can purchase cases of .50cal ammunition for the M2 legally that comes with 4 API and 1 M20 APIT round, so it seems to have been quite a favorite.

Looking at that list of guns Oleg used, I don't think he modelled a pure Incindiary round, so the compromise would be to use the API round, just replace the HE with it, or replace all pure AP rounds and HE with the API.

I think they would have a more realistic effect on enemy aircraft, by having a chance to start fuel fires, and from all I've read, all allies had these API and I rounds to use in the Browning .50cal. Not everyone used the HE round making the listed loadout for .50cal incorrect for many occasions.

Those MG151 guys as far as I'm concerned proved their point. I think Oleg should take a look at that as well and create an ammo belt that will work better for them. But I belive the .50cal needs looked at as well because it's ammo belt seems to be modelling something either pretty rare, or an ammo type that wasn't used historically in some cases.


EDIT:

Don't know what this site is:
http://free-st.htnet.hr/dvd/Weapons.html

But it has the exact same listing of .50cal ammo that was listed for what is supposedly being used for FB and PF.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Browning M2 .50
- 12,7 x 99
- 600-850 RPM
- 870 m/s
- 46 gm - AP
- 29 kg
- red
- APIT - AP - HE - AP
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Another site, use the links at the bottom of the page though for more info about various gun related WW2 aircraft subjects:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-am.html



http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:A40_m8_PibcJ:www.pendleton.usmc.mil/base/safety/PltCmdrHdbk.pdf+.50+cal+M2+Aircraft+API+&hl=en

PDF version: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:A40_m8_PibcJ:www.pendleton.usmc.mil/base/safety/PltCmdrHdbk.pdf+.50+cal+M2+Aircraft+API+&hl=en

Browning M2 Platoon Commander's Tactical Handbook links above.


http://www.ptfnasty.com/weapons1.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The .50 BMG was the standard AN-M2 Heavy Barrel gun so common on tanks and combat vehicles. The .50 fired at 450-550 rounds per minute or single-shot (semi-automatic). Ammunition was contained in a 100-round box attached to the side of the Mk2 Mod 1 gun mount (although some users fabricated ammunition boxes with a larger supply to avoid having to change the box in a firefight). The .50 BMG was the standard AN-M2 Heavy Barrel gun so common on tanks and combat vehicles. The .50 fired at 450-550 rounds per minute or single-shot (semi-automatic). Ammunition was contained in a 100-round box attached to the side of the Mk2 Mod 1 gun mount (although some users fabricated ammunition boxes with a larger supply to avoid having to change the box in a firefight). The most common ammunition load was linked 2 incendiary (INC), 2 armor-piercing incendiary (API), and 1 API-T. (I called this the "fruit salad" load; lots of bad stuff for any occasion.) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

JG53Frankyboy
03-03-2005, 09:26 AM
go for it !
crossing fingers , actually one, the other is needed for the MG151 stuff http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (hope you understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif )

bigchump
03-03-2005, 09:35 AM
Almighty:
Thanks, it's nice not to be called "baby-killer" anymore.
I never used the HE rounds.
I can only verify that they did exist.
I had one wood case with four boxes in it.

I don't have the foggiest idea whether this stuff was ever used on A/C, but it WAS used by quad-fifty's to beat back ground attacks. The tracers would ricochet off the ground, but the HE rounds gave off a small orange flash when they hit anything.

If I can find a picture of the case I will post it here. It was definately from WWII, 1944. I took 1000's of pictures and it may show up in one of them.

AlmightyTallest
03-03-2005, 10:09 AM
lol Frankyboy, I understand the fustration you guys have with an ammo loadout that isn't working the way it actually did during the war. I would like the see the MG151 fixed to more realistic levels as well, but I got to keep my other finger crossed to fix our .50's to more historic levels as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

hey bigchump, thanks for that info, we have with your help then established that HE .50 cal rounds did exist, the only problem is that there aren't many reports of them being used in aircraft .50's aside from the one report gbollin has, and your actual account that you had them on hand and that they were dated for WW2. Perhaps this loadout was meant for ground use against troops rather than aircraft?

If you find the time and can get a picture please post it here. I'd like to see the round if possible.

Diablo310th
03-03-2005, 10:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
go for it !
crossing fingers , actually one, the other is needed for the MG151 stuff http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (hope you understand http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand and agree with you LW guys. I would like to see both fixed or changed. i can say however I don't want to feel their sting.

JG53Frankyboy
03-03-2005, 01:20 PM
hell, after flying a VOW2 mission in a Cr42 vs Gladiators i realy want these incendaris in the .50cal http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

still beliving that the SAFAT is same modeled like .50cal Browning http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

bolillo_loco
03-03-2005, 04:10 PM
I have "flying guns WW II" by tony williams.

I breezed through it just now and I could not find any reference for "HE" rounds being used in ww II. doesnt mean that its not in there somewhere.

there is an ammunition table in the back of the book for every warbird from WWII.

12.7x99 (aka 50 BMG)
I(M1) weight grams 41 900 m/s
AP(M2) 46 grams 870 m/s
API (M8) 43 grams 890 m/s
I (M23) 33 grams 1,036 m/s

something I found interesting when I first read the book a year and a half ago was they actually usedstellite lined and chromium plated barrels from January 1944 on up. I have read about pilots shooting out their barrels early in the war. the 50 BMG with a regular barrel could fire 75 round bursts when the barrel was cold, but after that it was resticted to 25 round bursts or the barrel would wear out and you would lose accuracy.

I will try and look through the book to find any reference to "HE" 50 BMG rounds. Just because the table does not list them does not mean that they did not exist, for example the table in the back does not list any tracer rounds for the 50 cal and we know that they were used quite a bit.

AlmightyTallest
03-03-2005, 04:43 PM
bolillo_loco, thanks for taking a look, let me know if you find any more info out about ammo loadouts for the planes in the book as well.

I'm wondering if there's any mention of the M-20 API and APIT rounds and when they became introduced. From that gun list for the sim there is a .50cal APIT round which is the tracer we see. But if you go by all the charts and links I posted the only round that is listed as APIT is the M20. I don't want Oleg modeling a round that is rare or that was only introduced late in the war for the early aircraft. If he changes the .50cal it's most likely going to affect every plane in the sim that has a .50cal gun, but we at least know that Incindiary and API rounds were used early in the war, and by all the allied countries that used Browning .50 caliber guns.

http://www.uh.edu/rotc/pages/equipcrewserv.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>]Standard .50-caliber ammunition types used in the M2 machine gun are the M33 ball, M17 tracer, M8 armor-piercing incendiary (API) and the M20 API tracer. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:-w-fwEmrNjwJ:www.atk.com/ammo_PDFs/smallcaliber.pdf+Browning+M20+API&hl=en

From above site I got the accuracy ratings of these specialized .50cal rounds.

.50 Caliber M8 API
Accuracy . . . . . .AMR = 12 in at 600 yd

Action Time (max) . . .4ms

Penetration ...Core min penetrates 87.5%armor at 100yd

Accuracy . . . ..AMR = 12 in at 600 yd

The .50 cal M8 has an aluminum color bullet tip. The cartridgehas a manganese molybdenum steel core, a point filler ofincendiary composition, and a lead-antimony base seal. The.50 cal M8 is used against armored personnel vehicles and isused in machine guns M2, M3, and M85.


.50 Caliber M20 APIT
Accuracy . . . . .Mean Radius = 12 in. at600 yd

Trace . . .85% min, visible from 100 ydto 1600 yd

Penetration . . .min 87,5% penetrate 7/8 in armor at 100 yd

The .50 cal M20 API-T has a red bullet tip with an aluminum color annulus. The bullet has a hardened steel core that pro-duces a great deal of damage upon impact. The .50 cal M20 isused in machine guns M2, M3, and M85


The HE round is a question mark, I think bigchump should have saved them as collecter items http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif He'd probably make a fortune selling them to collectors they seem so hard to find with the ammo dealer sites I'm looking at. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif They still sound interesting though, I'd like to get more info or pictures of the HE rounds if possible.

AlmightyTallest
03-03-2005, 09:56 PM
More info:

http://www.taphilo.com/history/WWII/jacobson.shtml

P-47 Pilot Lt. Col. Jacobson Combat report Dec. 5 1944

Although it's nothing really spectacular, he claims two kills, but what's interesting is that he mentions what type and how many rounds he expended. They appear to be entirely Armor Piercing Incindiary, either M-8 and/or M-20 rounds.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> "I claim two Fw 190s destroyed. "Ammunition expended: 632 rounds 50- caliber API [Armor Piercing Incendiary]." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://www.american-apex.com/americanapex/comparisons.asp

Above site shows superelevation in mils for the APIT M20 round, and it's tracer burnout range.

A Korean war pilot relates why .50cal API worked so well for them in WW2, but not in Korea.

http://www.afakansas.org/bleckley/jabara.html

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> No, the .50-caliber wasn't heavy enough," said General Meyer. "It just wasn't good enough for a jet airplane.

"It made a particularly acute impression on our guys because most all of those fellows had shot down airplanes in World War II. You had gasoline engines and highly volatile aviation fuel in those airplanes so, in effect, the API (armor-piercing, incendiary) ammunition became a fuse for the bomb, which was the target airplane itself. So a couple of shots that hit in the right place on the Me-109 or Focke-Wulf would...ignite the fuel and explode the airplane.

"Here, they'd clobber the hell out of the target and it kept on going....Now that was a rather unpleasant surprise! But we were shooting at an airplane that had two uniquely different characteristics. The first was the jet engine itself. With those turbos behind, it provided some protection for the vital parts. The second was that the fuel, especially at high altitudes, would not tend to explode. And then, the whole thing was faster so the shooting problem was a lot more difficult."

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Various compiled guncam footage from another forum of .50 cal striking targets, you'll notice that there aren't any explosive .50 cal rounds, but when an API round gets into the fuel and ignites, the wing tanks ignite causing severe damage.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4205


Another video, this one of P-51's strafing a German airfield including parked ME262's.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4168


There is info about the TM43 Manual having data about the special .50cal rounds, I'll see if I can locate it for viewing.

Another poster in an ammunition forum posted this about .50cal API ammo.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is interesting to note that performance figures are almost always for the BALL round, which was a few grams heavier than the Incendiary or API rounds and had a little less initial velocity, but overall the BMG rounds are all very close in weight (~45 to ~49 grams), except the M23 "jet killer" incendiary which was down around 35 grams (of even more potent IM28). The M1 incendiary round carried 2.2 grams of IM11, the M8 API round carried between 1 and 1.5 grams of IM11 depending on the year (late war M8's used moly-steel penetrators to save tungston and thus had less room for IM11).

IM11 incendiary metal alloy was and is a very nasty substance (it is still used today). When the round strikes the target, usually on the next contact after passing through typical aluminum skinning, the alloy achieves sufficient heat through compression to ignite. Because the Barium Nitrate in the alloy is a very strong oxidizer, there is no need for external oxygen and the IM will all fire up at once, creating a low-order explosion (more like confined gunpowder than high explosives). Between this low-order explosion and the force of the penetrator (or "slug") comming in behind the round, the buring incendiary metal is spewed to the sides, perpendicular to the axis of flight, mostly on the near side as it passes through the structure.

IM11 burns at over 4000 degrees F, hot enough to liquify aluminum on contact. Furthermore, this heat plus the excess O2 from the degenerating Barium Nitrate will cause the target aluminum to burn. It is not necessary for the round to completely breach the target structure though impact damage. When the round strikes the spar of a FW wing for instance, which is aluminum, it will create a .5 inch hole from impact. It will also create a considerable region around the hole which is very hot from the impact/penetration and the IM11 incendiary, and this in turn is ripe to burn, and the spar will become soft for a good radius around that. The spar can easily collapse as a result of .50 API hits.

.50 rounds were not technically "high explosive", but the incendiary metal did "burst" and imparted significant additional damage even to metal structures. The high quality of .50 ammunition was one of the reasons the USA felt it was sufficent to the task and did not focus on replacing it with a larger gun during WWII. No other country was able to mass produce such an incendiary metal alloy. Britain did manage to produce a similar alloy for their DeWilde .303 rounds, but in much smaller amounts, and the DeWilde rounds were always in short supply.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A book sample:

Wolf, William. American Fighter-Bombers in World War II: USAAF Jabos in the MTO and ETO. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 2003
ISBN 0-7643-1878-0
391 pages

http://stonebooks.com/archives/031123.shtml

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> In December 1944 the Ordnance Section of the 12th Air Force. using 57"' Fighter Group fighter-bombers, conducted a study of attacks on a static Italian steam locomotive. Strafing damage was found to stall a locomotive and cause repairs ranging from one to 35 days, and that strafing was much more likely to achieve hits than bombing or rockets. It was suggested that strafing using a .50 belting of four armor piercing incendiary (API) rounds to one tracer was ideal (as opposed to the previous API-lncendiary-APl-Incendiary-Tracer belting). Strafing from 90-degree beam was suggested over an attack from a shallower angle, as these perpendicular strikes were more likely to perforate the locomotive's boiler and less likely to ricochet.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I'm out of any more sources http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Anyone else have anything to contribute please be my guest. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Diablo310th
03-04-2005, 06:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
More info:

http://www.taphilo.com/history/WWII/jacobson.shtml

P-47 Pilot Lt. Col. Jacobson Combat report Dec. 5 1944

Although it's nothing really spectacular, he claims two kills, but what's interesting is that he mentions what type and how many rounds he expended. They appear to be entirely Armor Piercing Incindiary, either M-8 and/or M-20 rounds.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> "I claim two Fw 190s destroyed. "Ammunition expended: 632 rounds 50- caliber API [Armor Piercing Incendiary]." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://www.american-apex.com/americanapex/comparisons.asp

Above site shows superelevation in mils for the APIT M20 round, and it's tracer burnout range.

A Korean war pilot relates why .50cal API worked so well for them in WW2, but not in Korea.

http://www.afakansas.org/bleckley/jabara.html

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> No, the .50-caliber wasn't heavy enough," said General Meyer. "It just wasn't good enough for a jet airplane.

"It made a particularly acute impression on our guys because most all of those fellows had shot down airplanes in World War II. You had gasoline engines and highly volatile aviation fuel in those airplanes so, in effect, the API (armor-piercing, incendiary) ammunition became a fuse for the bomb, which was the target airplane itself. So a couple of shots that hit in the right place on the Me-109 or Focke-Wulf would...ignite the fuel and explode the airplane.

"Here, they'd clobber the hell out of the target and it kept on going....Now that was a rather unpleasant surprise! But we were shooting at an airplane that had two uniquely different characteristics. The first was the jet engine itself. With those turbos behind, it provided some protection for the vital parts. The second was that the fuel, especially at high altitudes, would not tend to explode. And then, the whole thing was faster so the shooting problem was a lot more difficult."

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Various compiled guncam footage from another forum of .50 cal striking targets, you'll notice that there aren't any explosive .50 cal rounds, but when an API round gets into the fuel and ignites, the wing tanks ignite causing severe damage.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4205


Another video, this one of P-51's strafing a German airfield including parked ME262's.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/download.php?id=4168


There is info about the TM43 Manual having data about the special .50cal rounds, I'll see if I can locate it for viewing.

Another poster in an ammunition forum posted this about .50cal API ammo.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is interesting to note that performance figures are almost always for the BALL round, which was a few grams heavier than the Incendiary or API rounds and had a little less initial velocity, but overall the BMG rounds are all very close in weight (~45 to ~49 grams), except the M23 "jet killer" incendiary which was down around 35 grams (of even more potent IM28). The M1 incendiary round carried 2.2 grams of IM11, the M8 API round carried between 1 and 1.5 grams of IM11 depending on the year (late war M8's used moly-steel penetrators to save tungston and thus had less room for IM11).

IM11 incendiary metal alloy was and is a very nasty substance (it is still used today). When the round strikes the target, usually on the next contact after passing through typical aluminum skinning, the alloy achieves sufficient heat through compression to ignite. Because the Barium Nitrate in the alloy is a very strong oxidizer, there is no need for external oxygen and the IM will all fire up at once, creating a low-order explosion (more like confined gunpowder than high explosives). Between this low-order explosion and the force of the penetrator (or "slug") comming in behind the round, the buring incendiary metal is spewed to the sides, perpendicular to the axis of flight, mostly on the near side as it passes through the structure.

IM11 burns at over 4000 degrees F, hot enough to liquify aluminum on contact. Furthermore, this heat plus the excess O2 from the degenerating Barium Nitrate will cause the target aluminum to burn. It is not necessary for the round to completely breach the target structure though impact damage. When the round strikes the spar of a FW wing for instance, which is aluminum, it will create a .5 inch hole from impact. It will also create a considerable region around the hole which is very hot from the impact/penetration and the IM11 incendiary, and this in turn is ripe to burn, and the spar will become soft for a good radius around that. The spar can easily collapse as a result of .50 API hits.

.50 rounds were not technically "high explosive", but the incendiary metal did "burst" and imparted significant additional damage even to metal structures. The high quality of .50 ammunition was one of the reasons the USA felt it was sufficent to the task and did not focus on replacing it with a larger gun during WWII. No other country was able to mass produce such an incendiary metal alloy. Britain did manage to produce a similar alloy for their DeWilde .303 rounds, but in much smaller amounts, and the DeWilde rounds were always in short supply.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A book sample:

Wolf, William. American Fighter-Bombers in World War II: USAAF Jabos in the MTO and ETO. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 2003
ISBN 0-7643-1878-0
391 pages

http://stonebooks.com/archives/031123.shtml

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> In December 1944 the Ordnance Section of the 12th Air Force. using 57"' Fighter Group fighter-bombers, conducted a study of attacks on a static Italian steam locomotive. Strafing damage was found to stall a locomotive and cause repairs ranging from one to 35 days, and that strafing was much more likely to achieve hits than bombing or rockets. _It was suggested that strafing using a .50 belting of four armor piercing incendiary (API) rounds to one tracer was ideal (as opposed to the previous API-lncendiary-APl-Incendiary-Tracer belting). _ Strafing from 90-degree beam was suggested over an attack from a shallower angle, as these perpendicular strikes were more likely to perforate the locomotive's boiler and less likely to ricochet.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I'm out of any more sources http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Anyone else have anything to contribute please be my guest. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow!!! great read and find Almighty. Good job. I hope your'e collecting all this and sending to Oleg. I can jsut see my Jug loaded out with 4 API and 1 APIT now. Can you say crispy critters??? Give the LW their MG rounds....I'll take these in my 8 .50's.

Cajun76
03-04-2005, 08:23 AM
IIRC, one of the patrols out before Battle of Midway went out with some .50cal HE, looking for targets. They were so eager to try them, they stayed out longer and found part of the J Task Force. Have to look agian, it was "Wings of Gold" I was reading.

Blutarski2004
03-04-2005, 08:38 AM
Almighty,

Kudos to you re your interest in exploring the 50cal - a fascinating weapon IMO.

However, be careful about data which pertains to the ground mount 50cal. It does not always apply to its a/c mounted brother. For example, you mention a mean accuracy value of 12 inches radius at 600 yards. This means, I believe, that 50 pct of hits will fall within a one foot radius of the aim point. This will make the disc of 100 pct hits (excluding wild shots) as four feet in radius, which represents a cone of dispersion of about 4 mils. Post-WW2 USAF documents describe the dispersion of an a/c wing mount M2 50cal as being 8 mils, which makes the hitting density (bullets per unit of area within the dispersion disc about one fourth that of a ground mounted 50cal.

Back in tha archives, one of our fellow forumites was kind enough to post about 28 scanned pages of original US govt data from a USAF 1952 Fighter Gunnery manual (dispersion, harmonization, 50cal bullet drop data) and a 1948 Ballistics - Performance of Ammunition (50cal AP performance data). You might find it useful and/or interesting to dig back there and find it.

EDIT ALERT - Where I stated: "This will make the disc of 100 pct hits (excluding wild shots) as four feet in radius, ..." Read: "eight feet".
Eight feet at 1800 feet range is 4.4 mils.

AlmightyTallest
03-04-2005, 09:14 AM
Cajun76, thanks for that info. Take a look at that book and see if it has any more info about the HE .50cal If their mentioning it at the battle of Midway then we know they were testing it in 1942. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Blutarski, thanks for your input, I do respect your posts regarding this issue. I realise now that there is a difference in the Aircraft mounted M2 vs. the ground version of the M2 .50 cal. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I would rather trust the Post-WW2 documents that give the aircraft .50 cal an 8 mil accuracy, one of the reasons I posted some of the ground M2 data was because they were using the same 4 API and 1 APIT round belts. The bullet listing just gave data I found interesting so I did a copy/paste.

I'll go digging for that document as well Blutarski, that's just the kind of info I'd like to have.

Diablo, I played PF again last night and got a second mission where I shot down 7 more Zeroes. Only one of them caught fire lol, so I sent in 2 tracks to Oleg for review that show 14 Zeroes being shot down by a player aircraft of which only 2 of those 14 actually catch fire. One track had my plane with a convergence of 305.7 meters, the other track has convergence set at an unhistoric 400 meters. In both cases planes are being hit outside, within, and well under the convergence settings.

I also pointed Oleg to this thread and tonight I'll compile all the sources here and present them for his review. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


I'm still looking for more info about this HE .50 though, so if you guys find any more info on it, or any other info regarding .50 aircraft ammo belt loadouts please post them here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Diablo310th
03-04-2005, 10:06 AM
Almighty...super job. Lets's hope Oleg considers everything and does make changes in both the MG 151 and the .50 cal.

AlmightyTallest
03-04-2005, 10:32 AM
Indeed Diablo, I just sent him another E-mail with the cliff's notes version of this thread, in case he doesn't have the time to read all our posts.

Things will be pretty nice for all sides if the MG151 gets corrected along with the .50 caliber, these changes will affect almost all the aircraft in the sim for the better I think.

Blutarski2004
03-04-2005, 11:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Cajun76, thanks for that info. Take a look at that book and see if it has any more info about the HE .50cal If their mentioning it at the battle of Midway then we know they were testing it in 1942. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Blutarski, thanks for your input, I do respect your posts regarding this issue. I realise now that there is a difference in the Aircraft mounted M2 vs. the ground version of the M2 .50 cal. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I would rather trust the Post-WW2 documents that give the aircraft .50 cal an 8 mil accuracy, one of the reasons I posted some of the ground M2 data was because they were using the same 4 API and 1 APIT round belts. The bullet listing just gave data I found interesting so I did a copy/paste.

I'll go digging for that document as well Blutarski, that's just the kind of info I'd like to have.

Diablo, I played PF again last night and got a second mission where I shot down 7 more Zeroes. Only one of them caught fire lol, so I sent in 2 tracks to Oleg for review that show 14 Zeroes being shot down by a player aircraft of which only 2 of those 14 actually catch fire. One track had my plane with a convergence of 305.7 meters, the other track has convergence set at an unhistoric 400 meters. In both cases planes are being hit outside, within, and well under the convergence settings.

I also pointed Oleg to this thread and tonight I'll compile all the sources here and present them for his review. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


I'm still looking for more info about this HE .50 though, so if you guys find any more info on it, or any other info regarding .50 aircraft ammo belt loadouts please post them here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Almighty,

Actually I'm glad that you DID post the disperion data on the ground-mount 50cal. I had been looking for it at the time of the original Ubi Forum 50cal melodrama and mini-series in order to compare it to the USAF dispersion value, but was never able to find it.

AlmightyTallest
03-04-2005, 12:32 PM
lol, no problem Blutarski, I just stumbled on that little site with the accuracy info and didn't think much of it except for the reaction time of the incindiary material being 4ms.

Would you happen to know if Oleg is currently modelling the aircraft .50cal in game as having an 8 mil accuracy?

Blutarski2004
03-04-2005, 01:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Would you happen to know if Oleg is currently modelling the aircraft .50cal in game as having an 8 mil accuracy? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... I could not specifically verify that 8 mils dispersion is now the game standard. What I can tell you is that the original 50cal dispersion was quite extreme, almost like a giant shotgun pattern. It was the only HMG in FB to exhibit such behavior, which of course caused a considerable excitement and unhappiness on the part of the allied afficionados. Gibbage sort of led the charge to change it.

Ultimately, we were able to assemble about 30 pages of official USAF documents (circa 1948 and 1952) showing M2 50cal aircraft gun dispersion data, bullet drop versus range data, armor penetration versus range and inclination data (M2AP), and projectile velocity versus range data.

Scans of all this material went off to Oleg's big 1C flight sim think tank. In a subsequent patch, the 50cal dispersion was narrowed down a great deal. Some folks believe that striking power was also increased, but I suspect it equally as likely that the improved effect on target was just a function of better hitting density.

This did not end the debate. Because of an unfortunately worded forum post from Oleg, a faction now believes that Oleg over-improved the 50cal to an unrealistic degree in order to placate all the "Ameri-whiners".

From my point of view, it is quite easy to judge the historical validity of the 50cal performance in the game. I statistically reviewed a large number of published USAAC action reports and IIRC (it was a while ago) the statistically average single-engine fighter kill required +/- 20 x 50cal hits at 200-300 yds range. The nature of the damage inflicted was: pieces of skin and airframe knocked loose; smoke and fire; loss of engine power; and departure from controlled flight (control damage or pilot injury). Destructive explosions were rare and typically occurred under very short range fire. Loss of major airframe components (wing, tailplane, etc) was also very rare. This was also posted to the Ubi Forum. Try searching under "Blutarski 50cal" and similar such phrases.

AlmightyTallest
03-04-2005, 03:07 PM
Wow! Thanks again for the info Blutarski. I had heard that there were many debates about the .50cal in this sim, I've only known PF for a few months and am very new to Oleg Maddox sims so I guess I missed the really heated debates http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've tried searching these forums for your post, but the search function seems to be broken. I'll give it a try later this evening, I'd like to read the old debate you guys had with the .50 cal for FB http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Blutarski2004
03-04-2005, 04:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
, I'd like to read the old debate you guys had with the .50 cal for FB http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Almighty,

If you plan to read them all, make sure you first get comfortable and have a 6-pack and some No-Doze nearby. There were multiple x multiple threads and some of them went to 300 posts.

AlmightyTallest
03-04-2005, 09:04 PM
Ahhh, so that explains why you forum veterans sigh and roll your eyes every time the words ".50 cal" is brought up lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
03-05-2005, 09:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Ahhh, so that explains why you forum veterans sigh and roll your eyes every time the words ".50 cal" is brought up lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah it was a nasty period on the forums. Much much worse than the MG151/20 debate currently going on which is much more peaceful.

tttiger
03-05-2005, 10:53 AM
Almighty, as has been pointed out, this topic was beaten to death some time ago and became so passionate it caused some lasting wounds in this community. Oleg even leaped into the fray and publicly lashed out at some people who had been his strong supporters.

While there's some great info in this thread, personally I would let sleeping dogs lie. It really is a very touchy subject here.

ttt

AlmightyTallest
03-05-2005, 01:21 PM
I can understand your position tttiger, it seems there were some nasty debates in the past regarding .50 caliber weapons as modeled in the sim and I can see why some of you guys get uneasy when a newbie like me posts about some issues that were discussed before I got here.

I'm not complaining about the .50cal's power, or their accuracy though. I find them to be very effective in this sim as is. I only wanted to bring up something that I found rather interesting, the HE .50 cal round that is listed in the ammo belt. In that search I have found some good info, some of it firsthand thanks to the help of other forum members here, as well I and others here found some great info about what appear to be more common loadouts for the .50cal guns as used in WW2 aircraft.

My only suggestion to Oleg was to take a look at the ammo belt as he has it modeled for the .50cal in game and compare with the info presented to him and to make the decision or compromise he thought would be best.

I presented my case to him, sent him the links that supported my claim that HE .50 were more rare compared to the API and Incindiary round, and I sent in multiple .trk files from PF that may help explain why I and others here have found it difficult to start fires against the Zero using the .50 cal in this sim.

There really isn't much of a debate or arguement going on here, just a pooling of facts and figures from various sites and books with the help of others who took the time to post in this thread.

The info is there for all to read, and to form their own opinions of. I'm still interested in this HE .50 cal round and the ammo loadouts of actual WW2 fighter aircraft and will continue to post in this thread if and when any new info becomes available. I would encourage anyone else with any info about this subject to feel free to add to this discussion.

I would like Oleg's sim to be as realistic as he can model it given the limitations, this is an issue that could affect many planes in the sim, just like the MG151 ammo belt issue.

Blutarski2004
03-07-2005, 12:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
I can understand your position tttiger, it seems there were some nasty debates in the past regarding .50 caliber weapons as modeled in the sim and I can see why some of you guys get uneasy when a newbie like me posts about some issues that were discussed before I got here.

I'm not complaining about the .50cal's power, or their accuracy though. I find them to be very effective in this sim as is. I only wanted to bring up something that I found rather interesting, the HE .50 cal round that is listed in the ammo belt. In that search I have found some good info, some of it firsthand thanks to the help of other forum members here, as well I and others here found some great info about what appear to be more common loadouts for the .50cal guns as used in WW2 aircraft.

My only suggestion to Oleg was to take a look at the ammo belt as he has it modeled for the .50cal in game and compare with the info presented to him and to make the decision or compromise he thought would be best.

I presented my case to him, sent him the links that supported my claim that HE .50 were more rare compared to the API and Incindiary round, and I sent in multiple .trk files from PF that may help explain why I and others here have found it difficult to start fires against the Zero using the .50 cal in this sim.

There really isn't much of a debate or arguement going on here, just a pooling of facts and figures from various sites and books with the help of others who took the time to post in this thread.

The info is there for all to read, and to form their own opinions of. I'm still interested in this HE .50 cal round and the ammo loadouts of actual WW2 fighter aircraft and will continue to post in this thread if and when any new info becomes available. I would encourage anyone else with any info about this subject to feel free to add to this discussion.

I would like Oleg's sim to be as realistic as he can model it given the limitations, this is an issue that could affect many planes in the sim, just like the MG151 ammo belt issue. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... TT's comment is worth considering. We seem to have a reasonably correct model for the gun, so, all in all, I'd be just as happy if the 50cal nightmare remains peacefully in its grave. We've had some real donnybrooks on the Ubi Forum - try searching "Flettner tabs", or "Erla Haube" in the archives sometime. You'll laugh your a@@ off reading some of that stuff.

OTOH, good on you for pursuing something that you feel is important. As Lord Fisher was wont to say -

Fiat justitia; ruat coelum.

AlmightyTallest
03-07-2005, 01:32 PM
I understand Blutarski, like I said I'm not complaining about the damage the .50cal does, because I'm able to get up to 6 or 7 zeroes if I'm careful with my ammo and use convergence properly. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

This thread was just about something that seemed a little "off" in the sim in regards to the relatively unflammable Zero variants that contradicted the accounts I've read and the footage seen, coupled with the HE .50 cal ammo belt listing for Oleg's sim. My only intent was wanting to see things represented more accurately if it was possible to do so with this sim.


I'm glad this thread has stayed very civil and for that I thank you gentlemen.

lol, I can see some of the old donnybrooks when I look at the ancient Sim HQ IL2 archives http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif They certainly are interesting reads. No wonder you guys are burned out about this issue http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


At any rate, I haven't been able to find any more info about the HE .50cal round and I've done all that I could to properly report the issue to Oleg and his team for them to decide if it's an issue or not. There's simply not much else to say on the matter apparently so I'll just let this one go unless others want to pick up and go with it.

In that regard I'll be considering TT's comment and your wishes that this matter be discussed by me no further http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
03-07-2005, 02:47 PM
Well done anyways. This was an interesting thread and I learned alot and we stayed civil. Thats how its done.

Blutarski2004
03-07-2005, 03:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
In that regard I'll be considering TT's comment and your wishes that this matter be discussed by me no further http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


..... No need to stop your work on my account. I did not mean to convey that idea. Was just trying to outline for you how crazy it might get.

AlmightyTallest
03-07-2005, 05:45 PM
Well, thanks for the warnings guys. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I understood what you were saying. I'm very glad this stayed very civil for 4 pages though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I just can't find any more info to contribute, but I'd be willing to hear from others about the matter if they had info to share.

This has been a learning experience http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cajun76
03-08-2005, 01:06 AM
Wha? Huh? Somebody mention Flettner tabs and the Erla Haube? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Sorry it took so long, had a baby. My wife did, not me personally..... Where was I? Oh yeah...

"The pilot from VP-44 who picked up the landing force was Ensign Jack Reid. In letters to Gordon Prange after the war, Reid reported that he and his crew had awakened at 0300 on the morning of June 3. (1942) After a breakfast of bacon, eggs, toast, and coffee and a briefing for the twenty-two-plane (PBY) reconnaissance mission that stressed the possibility of an invasion of Midway, Reid took off for the daily twelve-hour surveillance. Some six hours out of Midway, as he prepared to turn in to the dogleg route that would bring him back to Midway, Reid acceded to requests from Cheif Radioman Francis Musser and Navigator Ensign Robert Swan to extend the flight another ten minutes. The crewmen, apparently, were not thinking in terms of finding the Japanese ships so much as hoping for an encounter with an enemy plane. They had borrowed from the Army Air Corps some new explosive bullets that the B-17 gunners swore would destroy anything they hit."

"Wings of Gold" Chapter 5, pg. 85, by Gerold Astor

They found the task force just as they turned for home, but the amazing thing to me is that they wanted to find another plane, to try out the new rounds.

As you know, .50 cal mounts are standard defensive armament for both the B-17 and PBY. Hope this helps!

AlmightyTallest
03-08-2005, 08:40 AM
Very cool http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Thanks for that Cajun, oh and congratulations on the new addition to your family http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Boy or girl?

Diablo310th
03-08-2005, 10:14 AM
Congrats Cajun.

Cajun76
03-09-2005, 01:54 AM
Thank you. He's a strong little boy. Born 7 lbs. 14oz a little over 2 weeks ago and almost 8 lbs. now.

There's a pic in this insightful, thought-provoking thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=7071026582

Blutarski2004
03-09-2005, 09:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
Thank you. He's a strong little boy. Born 7 lbs. 14oz a little over 2 weeks ago and almost 8 lbs. now.

There's a pic in this insightful, thought-provoking thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=7071026582 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



..... Congrats on the happy event Cajun.