Other helpful contributors of information for this page were C.C. Jordan,
Ruud Deurenberg, David McKay, Gorka L. Martinez Mezo, Yuji Sasaki, and Antonio
Maraziti.
The Question
One of the recurring questions about the fighter aircraft of the
Second World War concerns the choice of their armament. Although
armament is an essential part of a fighter aircraft, it has not been
studied very often. Many studies of WWII combat aircraft seem to ignore
it entirely. Other sources make wrong assumptions, and too often it has
been ignored that there was considerable change in fighter armament
during the war. There was an evolution both in the calibre of the guns
used, with options ranging from rifle-calibre machine guns to 30mm
cannon and heavier, and in the technical performance of these guns.
Some of the basic facts seem to be almost unknown. Even very respectable
authors who have done a lot of research on fighter aircraft, can still be
caught writing completely erronous statements such as [Page 375 in
Ref. 31]:
|
A recent British book claims that these Tempests outgunned and
could outspeed all contemporaries. It is a matter of record that eight
.50-cal machine guns or one 20-mm plus four .50s can throw a much
greater weight of lead in a given period than four 20-mm cannon
can.
|
(A comparison of the actual firepower of the Tempest, P-47 and P-38, as
well as some other WWII fighters, can be found in this table.) The choice of the .50 machine
gun as standard weapon for US fighter aircraft is one of the most
controversial armament issues, and many authors seem to seek
justification for its use by making highly exaggerated claims about its
effectiveness.
These pages try to describe the evolution of fixed fighter armament,
with emphasis on the armament of WWII fighters. To give an overview
of the texts:
- This page, the introduction,
also contains the acknowledgments and some addresses.
- There is a page about WWI fighter
armament, to provide an historical background.
- Gun performance tables
are given for aircraft guns used during WWII. These discuss
guns that saw actual combat service. Prototype guns are
ommitted here.
- Some generalities about ammunition
are also discussed.
- A related subject is discussed in a few notes about
ballistics and gunsights.
- An important section discusses the armament combinations
installed in some WWII fighters.
- There is also an analysis of the
evolution of fighter armament during the war.
- Upward-firing guns and Schräge Musik,
typical armament installations for nightfighters, have their own
page.
- I also added a page on big guns and
their use in WWII aircraft. Most of these were not used in fighters.
- A lengthy discussion of defensive gun
installations.
- There is a postscript discussing the armament of
post-war fighters.
- There is a Fighter Armament Table
listing fighters since 1934 and their armament.
- A graphical equivalent of these is provided in a number of
interactive Java graphs
of fighter armament, or a page with simpler
figures for those who don't have
browsers that support Java. There are some problems with the
applets on a number of browsers, I don't know why.
- There is a page with a number of open
questions and a reply form, and of course
a page with the answers received.
- As a conclusion, a list of sources. There is
also a page with various notes.
You can read these in almost any order you want.
Introduction
The subject of World War II fighter armament could be delineated by
the start and end dates of the war, but of course the aircraft did not
suddenly appear and disappear at these dates. However, there is a
suitable technical definition. During World War
I and most of the interbellum, the armament of a typical biplane
fighter consisted of two rifle-calibre machineguns, installed in the
upper decking of the front fuselage, with the breeches within reach of
the pilot so that he could clear stoppages. Although some fighters of
WWII still had this form of armament, it was quickly abandoned by most.
This occured almost simultaneously with the introduction of the
monoplane fighter: The higher combat speeds and the sturdier
construction of modern aircraft required more powerful armament. The
different construction of a cantilever monoplane also made it possible
to install guns within the wings.
The end of World War II armament is also established fairly clearly.
During the war fighters were armed with what are generally called linear
action guns. Such guns have a single barrel and a single chamber, so
that the actions of chambering the round, firing the gun, and ejecting
the case have to be performed sequentially. The WWII armament was still
used during the Korean War, but soon
thereafter revolver and rotary cannon entered service. They did not
replace the linear action guns completely: The latter were retained for
some years by fighters of the US Navy and the USSR. But rotary
and revolver cannon have dominated the field since the 1950s.
At the end of WWII the Germans had developed the MG 213C revolver cannon. Such a weapon has multiple
chambers in a rotating cylinder, so that rounds can be processed in
parallel. For example, at the same time when one round is fired, two or
three are being chambered and an empty case is being removed from
another chamber. Obviously, this significantly increases the possible
rate of fire. An alternative design is the rotary gun, often called "Gatling" gun, which not
only has multiple chambers but also multiple barrels. This eliminates
the need for a seal between the barrel and the rotating chambers, but
the gun is bulkier and heavier. Generally, rotary guns have a higher
rate of fire, but a relatively long spin-up time, so that if only a
short burst is fired, the revolver gun puts out about as many rounds as
the multi-barrel gun. Modern fighter guns are either revolver guns or
rotary guns, with the notable exception of the Russian GSh-30-1.
The specifics of gun action were
generally derived from a few basic designs. Especially the Browning and
Oerlikon designs were much copied. Refinement could substantially
increase the rate of fire of a gun, for example the Browning .50 was
boosted from 750rpm in the M2 version to 1200rpm in the post-war M3
version. But all other things being the same the rate of fire is lower
for a gun with a larger calibre, because the ammunition and the working
parts of the gun are heavier, and therefore larger forces are needed to
move them. For similar reasons, a gun with a high muzzle velocity fires
slower than one with a low muzzle velocity. Especially for 20mm and 30mm
cannon it was a challenge to increase the rate of fire, and substantial
improvements were achieved during the war.
It is not the purpose of these pages to explain gun action. However,
there is one that deserves comment and that is the Oerlikon design, a derivative of the WWI Becker
design. Nine cannon listed in the gun tables
are Oerlikon guns or copies of them, and the reader might grasp that
these guns were light and popular, but also that most of them were
slow-firing, and that although this design was popular in the early
years of the war, it later fell out of favour. (See Note 2.) The operating principle behind these
weapons is known as Advanced Primer Ignition
Blowback. Basically, this means that the rear end of the
chamber is not closed by a part that is locked in place, as in
more conventional designs. Instead, the chamber is extended to a greater
length than is required by the length of the round, and a sliding
bolt follows the cartridge into the chamber, driven by a powerful
spring. The propellant is ignited while the cartridge and bolt are still
moving forward into the chamber. The inertia of the heavy forward-moving
bolt guarantees that the sliding bolt is not expelled from the rear of
the chamber before the projectile has left the barrel and the gas
pressure has dropped again. Depending on the design, firing the gun
compresses or extends the spring, thus providing the energy for firing
the next round. The rate of fire of such a design is linked to the
resonance frequency of the bolt-and-spring assembly; and as the bolt
needs to be fairly heavy, the rate of fire is usually low. Another
consequence is that the cartridge cases invariably have rebated rims,
otherwise they could not be pulled from the extended chamber.
Acknowledgements and addresses
I started this page with optimism and a fair amount of naivity, but
fortunately I quickly received comments and help from two people who are
far more knowledgeable about guns than I am, Tony Williams and Ted
Bradstreet. Most of the gun data on this page have been contributed by
them. If you have specific information about WWII aircraft guns,
especially unpublished information that you would like to share, you can
also contact Tony Williams
T.Williams@mmu.ac.uk
or Ted Bradstreet
Ted.Bradstreet@state.me.us.
Other helpful contributors of information for this page were C.C.
Jordan, Ruud Deurenberg, David McKay, Gorka L. Martinez Mezo, Yuji
Sasaki, Antonio Maraziti, and Ron Lapp.
If you have any additional information for this page, you can
e-mail me at
gustin@uia.ua.ac.be.
Next: What preceded
© 1998-1999
Emmanuel Gustin
gustin@uia.ua.ac.be
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page