B-25H Cannon's ROF
#1

First off, thanks very much to whoever it was that gave us the B-25G and H mod. ~S~

However, I have to ask, do you have some bit of information that states that the big gun's rate of fire is one round every twelve seconds? I'm aware that the gun was manually reloaded, but twelve seconds seems extremely slow. I was just watching WWII footage of soldiers firing and reloading an anti-tank gun. It took less than half the time. It takes less time to reload a Howitzer. Even if it took longer to reload the gun in the B-25, would it really take more than twice as long?

As it is now, I can't fire that thing more than once in a strafing pass. That just doesn't seem right at all. With it's 21 rounds it'll take about twenty minutes to expend all that ammunition with repeated passes.
Reply
#2

idonno Wrote:First off, thanks very much to whoever it was that gave us the B-25G and H mod. ~S~

However, I have to ask, do you have some bit of information that states that the big gun's rate of fire is one round every twelve seconds? I'm aware that the gun was manually reloaded, but twelve seconds seems extremely slow. I was just watching WWII footage of soldiers firing and reloading an anti-tank gun. It took less than half the time. It takes less time to reload a Howitzer. Even if it took longer to reload the gun in the B-25, would it really take more than twice as long?

As it is now, I can't fire that thing more than once in a strafing pass. That just doesn't seem right at all. With it's 21 rounds it'll take about twenty minutes to expend all that ammunition with repeated passes.

I.D.
Well one thing is that with a regular artillery piece you have a whole team of 4-5 soldiers who operate the gun and take care that fresh ammo is always at hand, passing it directly to the loader who then just have to open the breech, get the spent casing out and put a fresh shell in and close the breech again; also, the spent casings are immediately moved out of the way - everything is taken care of, and still it takes 4-5 seconds to get a shot off.

Now in a cramped nose of the plane first there's a lot less room to move about and to work in, second the gun is operated by just one guy - maybe two - who now has to do everything by himself, to both fetch the ammo and get rid of spent casings as well as to load and operate the gun. Suddenly the workload has doubled or even tripled, and have i mentioned the cramped conditions in the nose of the plane yet? I did? Well i believe it needs to be mentioned again.

All in all, given the circumstances, 5 shots a minute (which one shot every 12 seconds comes to) is not at all bad...
Reply
#3

"...approximately four rounds could be fired in a single strafing run..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Mitchell
____________________________________________________________________________

"Hancock explained that on the usual run he could throw six 75MM shells at a ground target--thanks to the speed of cannoneer Bohannon."

http://www.vmb-613.com/news/cannon_planes_440727.html
____________________________________________________________________________

"...the Cannoneer would then, as fast as he could, slam the next shell into the open breech causing the breech block to slide up to be instantly fired by the pilot who had his finger on the trigger all the time during the run.


http://forum.armyairforces.com/75mm-Can ... 95341.aspx
_____________________________________________________________________________


If it were only possible to fire one round per run, as it is with this mod, then why would the pilot "hold his finger on the trigger all the time during the run"?
Reply
#4

BUT!!! B-25-h and G's had a radar that allowed them to fire at targets starting at one+ miles out
Reply
#5

On the radar...

Late H navalized version models had them for sure. I'm not 100% sure the G had the radar. As for some/most of the 345th BG G models, they removed the 75mm mm gun and replaced them with 2 50's.
Reply
#6

Reply
#7

from what ive read from various sources it averaged about 1 round every 6 seconds on a strafing run. However, the cannons were pretty unwieldy and most were removed and replaced by twin .50's.
Reply
#8

I know the cannons were often replaced with 50's, but that is completely irrelevant to the point, and I would really like to stick to the point.

By the way, who is it that gave us the 25G/H mod? I'm most interested to know what he has to say about this.
Reply
#9

[quote="idonno"]
Reply
#10

As for rate of fire...

The gun used on the B-25's was a variation of the 75mm L/40 used on the earlier Sherman tanks. I found some references giving a "Shell weight" of about 15lbs for AP rounds. I don't know if that includes the case and powder or not, and I'm not really sure how much an HE warhead would weigh. So lets just say that the loader on the B-25's is dealing with a 20lbs complete round.

For comparison: The loader in an the Abrams or Leopard tanks has a 120mm round to load. AP rounds weigh in at about 40lbs for a 1980's vintage round and about 55lbs for a current AP round. HEAT, MPAT, and Cannister rounds all weigh in at about 50lbs.
A loader in an Abrams tank is expected to be able to pull a round from the ready rack, turn it through 180 degrees so it faces the proper way, shove it in the breech, get himself clear of the recoil path, and arm the weapon, in under 10 seconds. Most loaders do so faster.

I would say that your B-25 loader could probably have his gun reloaded in under 10 seconds rather easily. Maybe even half that time. He has a lighter round to work with, and as his shells would be brass cased rather than combustible, he might be able to skip the steps of having to pull one from a rack for the first reload and instead simply have it sitting on his lap or held in his hands. ('Lap-loading')
Reply
#11

Idea Very Very Cool Discussion here Folks!Idea

I love it!
Reply
#12

_Hans Wrote:So lets just say that the loader on the B-25's is dealing with a 20lbs complete round.

I would say that your B-25 loader could probably have his gun reloaded in under 10 seconds rather easily. Maybe even half that time. He has a lighter round to work with, and as his shells would be brass cased rather than combustible, he might be able to skip the steps of having to pull one from a rack for the first reload and instead simply have it sitting on his lap or held in his hands. ('Lap-loading')


"The 75mm ... cannon shells were 26 inches long and weighed 20 pounds each and were stored in a rack just above the breech of the big gun and back of the pilot. The rack contained 20 fused shells."



"This 75 mm had a upward sliding breech block that retracted down at full recoil, ejecting the used shell casing and the Cannoneer would then, as fast as he could, slam the next sell into the open breech causing the breech block to slide up to be instantly fired by the pilot..."

Looking at the illustration, it seems the loader merely had to cause a round to drop down into the loading tray. It sounds and looks like it would be a very quick process.
Reply
#13

Aircraft....

Tight confines not designed for this....

Bouncing up and down and side to side.....

Time to recoup after loading, pulling back (broken arms=bad), grabbing another shell from the rack, orientating it, driving it home......

Tension of combat.....

etc..

You guys are asking for "optimum" results......Optimum equals "uber", average equals correct, below average equals porked......Just because Bob could do this, or Tom that, or Jimmy could pick his nose while chewing gum as he hopped on one foot and slam shells into the breech at 6r/m doesn't mean "everyone could"......In fact, if it was not outrageously exceptional it would not of even been mentioned.

The ROF of the 75mm gun on these aircraft impressed me greatly. Leave it alone IMLTHO.

WHat we need more is a field modified D strafer, with the belly turret turned drop tank.

K2
Reply
#14

idonno - Basically, yes. The majority of the time is spent getting the nose of the round pointed the same direction as the muzzle. But once it's on the loading tray you just slap it in and get out of the way.

Billfish - I bet that the bouncing on an aircraft would probably be about the same as a tank moving cross country. And yes the aircraft is a cramped space, but tanks aren't usually too roomy, and the aircraft loader doesn't have ammo-bunker doors to deal with.

At 30 seconds in here you'll see the 105 crew load a few rounds. Now, this is a three man crew and the guy with the shell is sorta lap-loading so it's going quicker. However due to the angle of the mount here it looks like the spent case has to be pulled out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbP89YAVblg


Compare that to a single guy with 120mm rounds in a tank:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns5NJVa_XKo

A good view of the stowage racks in this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJeJYKeHD84
Reply
#15

Speaking as a pilot, airplanes don't generally bounce around enough to have a significant impact on the loading of the gun.

And cramped spaces are irrelevant if you don't have to move around. The guy loading the rounds would have both the gun and the ammo right in front of him.

The Soldier loading the tank round did so in about six seconds, and he had to turn around, open the door, swing the (120 mm) round 180 degrees while turning back around to load it. The B-25's cannoneer would simply have to reach forward to grab a shell and lay it down into the tray.

The more I look into it, the more inclined I am to accept the one-round-every-3.3-seconds figure that I was originally skeptical of. One round every twelve seconds is obviously too slow in the extreme.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)