75mm Anti-Tank Gun: The Luftwaffe was desperate

Since u have access to German archives. Is it possible for u to search about aerial tensions with Germany and neutral nations (Sweden, Ireland, Turkey). I know Germans had dogfight with Swiss but i wonder if something like that happened with other neutral nations. For example there is a photo of Turkish Do-17 despite that Turkey never used Do-17 officially so my best guess is it did a forced landing.

well don biz

Chris, have you done a video about the Tetsi Mosquito with the 17 pounder antitank gun? This was a success and was used not against tanks, but shipping and sank a good number of naval vessels. If you've not covered it it would be a great story about a big gun fitted o a wooden aircraft of all things that was a success.

I'm guessing the P.108's ridiculous 102mm was also primarily for shipping, especially as Italy was having to engage the very large US Navy in the Mediterranean by 1942. Although I do wonder if it also shook itself violently when it fired.

I thought that J made the Ya sound.
My German friend calls me Yaren

Please talk about the Düsenkanone Sondergerät 104 (DÜKA 280) supposed to be Installed on a DO 17

What about the BK 5cm gun? How did that fare?

There were 2 Royal italian AF models equipped to operate in the Mediterrean with a cannon on . Were the long range 4 engines Piaggio P108 A ( A letter identified the artillery) It had and Ansaldo 90 cm cannon . The other model was a Caproni , 2 engines, smaller cannon surfing in my memory but I have to look for the model and the datasheet

Saw this aircraft in pictures . But never knew the story behind it’s development or how it turned out in combat operations . Great video . Very informative.

Let's make some calculations. The 75 mm 39/42 had 7.2 kg, 935 m/sec muzzle velocity. The whole was 14.3 kg. The muzzle velocity is reached after 4.5 m.
The entire weight is 14.3 kg. Let's assume 2 kg is the cartridge, 12.3 kg leave the canon with 935 m/sec.
A rocket and a gun barrel are calculated in the same way. Something comes out and accelerates the rocket or the gun barrel in the opposite direction.
That's about 93,500 m/sec² acceleration times 12.3 kg. This gives 1,115,000 Newton thrust for 1/100 sec.
All the damping can do is to distribute the thrust for a longer time. Let's assume the gun barrel is 600 kg, 400 kg for the rest of the canon.
The gun barrel is accelerated by the thrust to 19 m/sec. The gun barrel has only 400 mm to 450 mm way back. In this short distance, the speed of the gun barrel has to be reduced from 19 m/sec to 0. 433 m/sec² deceleration for 0.044 sec can do this. So we have 600 kg * 433 m/sec² gives 260 kN for 0.044 sec force against the structure of the airplane.

Is this not just the A-10 thunderbolt idea but ~30 years earlier and with a much slower fire rate

Thanks for this 👍🇳🇿

Big deal. They put the very same gun on the Hs 129, which is almost half the size of a Ju 88.

How about the HS 129 ? Did also disintegrate ? Did they go back to the 30mm guns ?

FARK sent me, great vid.

I hope it was effective!

That's crazy that gun was great in a 27 ton tank, not a 9 ton aircraft, the recoil must have shocked the pilot

This thing was insane in battlefield V

So how did the Tsetse overcome this problem?

I bet rockets worked a lot better. Maybe put some Nebelwerfer's on it?

Italian Piaggio P108A with a 102mm fitted be like: hold my beer.

The fact that there are images from WWII that are still protected by copyright while most the veterans have long since passed on really shows how messed up the system is.

lol plane takes more damage from its gun than actual enemy xd

As usual Chris this is an excellent and informative video.

Would’ve been a bad little aircraft if it had worked. Just think of it being used against bombers 🙈

Surely the USAAF was more successful with the B25G,, also bcs the latter had other weapons, contrary to the JU88 that was stripped bare of every other ones, so it was less flexible. Moreover a CAS aircraft need to be not very cumbersome, as the Typhoon or the JU87, and the JU88 was way a bigger target.

You do waffle😢

1943 is pronounced: forty three not forty free!

Indeed "German Engineers" can be morons.

The concept of the “pylon turn” is not a new technique in aviation. Honestly I’m surprised that none of the powers during the 2nd world war discovered what we recognize today as a gunship. Like the AC specter 130. Why didn’t they try to use side firing cannons and machine guns? Certainly they had big enough cargo aircraft to convert to this task. The first gunships that I’m aware of was spooky in the Vietnam war. Americans took a C47 cargo plane ( ww2 era aircraft) and put 4 rotary cannons on it and used it to great effect, hosing down entire areas of jungle.

The Intro was from Warthunder?
(that's also why I watch this video.)

Yes it was effective I got footage of it in action,really powerful 👍

Not Junkers. Yunkers

So they were desperate, but America puts a howitzer on one, and they are geniuses? Lol. Arrogance at its best.

Great video

I reckon that the poms worked out the best airborne artillery solutions by mounting a special 57mm gun using AP rounds in a Mosquito, to make holes in ships’ engine blocks; and by attaching 6” HE cruiser shells to unguided rockets for use on Typhoons, Beaufighters, etcetera.

I assume they fitted some sort of autoloader to the 75mm cannon? Or was there actually a crewman in the gondola handling the loading tasks, as there would be in a tank?

England mounts a 75 mm on the mosquito and America did it with the J model B-25 Mitchell

Lies. It’s a thing of beauty. Always chase your dreams.

10 points for acting, I'm assuming the box is empty and the pedals are installed. :P

Great question, love flying it in WarThunder

The way they talk about the testing: 'Hey, let's just fly it to the front and see how well it shoots tanks!'

96mm 32 pound shell auto fired Cannon - Mosquito fighter/bomber ..Tested at the end of the war And later scraped

A good rebuttal to those who like to argue the Nazis were amazing engineers! Could not figure out beforehand that the guns (whose specs they were well aware of) would wear away at the planes (whose specs they were well aware of).

I have a feeling the damage isn't going to be to the tanks.

I’m confused as to your pronunciation of the word ‘Junkers’.

You say it in the English way, a hard J.

I asked a German friend how he would pronounce it in German and he agreed with my summation that, being a German name, it should be pronounced ‘Yunkers’.

You don't know that in the German language, when leading with the letter 'J', it is 'YOONK ers', not 'JUNK ers'.

Heck. These things are ridiculously hard to aim in video games. I can only imagine it would be even harder to properly disable AFVs with low-rof guns like these larger caliber guns.
I think these would be more viable to use against lightly armored ships, but the issue with recoil/vibration coming from the gun would still need to be considered for.

Among with other drawbacks from putting a gigantic gun infront of a plane.

Insanity with wings