TriangleP wrote:
There was a discussion here how they adjusted the design of the barrel (the end?) to compensate for the lesser loads in the shells, so the recoil mechanism was able to work properly. Or maybe I read it on another forum (egad!). I guess firing using a full load stresses the aircraft structure too much? Or its just less expensive? Anyway, I may not remember this correctly but maybe someone can remind us how its done. I wish they'd load up the nose of the Rod Lewis' A-20J with these puppies and beat up Chino's runway during a PoF airshow while firing away!
I thought it was the other way around, that the [edit - M-2 series]
short recoil arrangement needed a choke and a lower charge to work - as there's no actual shell, the physics of the mechanism won't work with the same dynamics, unless other aspects are adjusted.
But there's better armourers here than me!
oscardeuce wrote:
How can firing a blank from the designed mount over stress an airframe? Especially blanks? If the airframe can't take that stress in the way it was designed, how would the wing itself take the stresses of flight?
In the case of the P-40 family, I agree it's unlikely. However there are certainly warbirds out there that have had structure removed that was designed in to take the stresses of the armament, and have dummy armament refitted; firing a swapped in working gun would be a problem. It's an unlikely sequence, but not impossible. (An example would be something like a turret structure removed from an A-26 Invader, later replaced with a 'working' dummy turret that is later given real guns, and the surrounding turret support not re-fitted in its entirety.)
As to the second question, there's no direct link between the designed load factoring for armament stresses and recoil and the effects of flight loads except that the former should, most likely, exceed the latter - an overdesign factor. However it would be foolish to rely on that
in general as aircraft structures are generally not best designed with that specific kind of excess shock load capability, which by definition of flight loads and armaments work in different directions and extremes to each other.
avenger2504 wrote:
Or how about P38! Or a P47 (50 cal. times EIGHT!!)
Shallow end. Beaufighter - six .303, four 20mm, and eight ship-busting rockets (and a gun for the observer so he doesn't feel left out...).
But I'll just settle for a flying Beau. Here's hoping!
Regards,
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
