Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Quoted
Of course, the Italian 65mm suffered from similar problems, eventually reverting to hand loading and a rate of fire of around 20 rpm.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
Of course, the Italian 65mm suffered from similar problems, eventually reverting to hand loading and a rate of fire of around 20 rpm.
The 65/64 reverted to automatic loading postwar and served as the test piece for OTO's new 76/62 automatic. The change in calibre seems to have been to include proximity fuses and improve commonality with the rest of NATO. They aimed for a fair bit less than the 55mm G58 at around 60-70rpm sustained. The UK did a lot with automatic weapons in the immediate postwar period gettting up to 80-90rpm for various 3.7" and 4" weapons but these aren't sustained rates.
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
About the only "Intermediate AA gun" that worked mechanically during the period was the 50mm Flak 41, and it was so crippled by a bad mount (unstable in transit, too tall, and too slow in traverse) and bad sights (inadequate prediction, inaccurate) that only 200 or less were built.
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Kaiser Kirk" (Jan 7th 2009, 4:27am)
Quoted
Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
About the only "Intermediate AA gun" that worked mechanically during the period was the 50mm Flak 41, and it was so crippled by a bad mount (unstable in transit, too tall, and too slow in traverse) and bad sights (inadequate prediction, inaccurate) that only 200 or less were built.
You mention inaccuracy and attribute it to sights, my little Hogg book claims it 'vibrated badly when firing' and attributes the inaccuracy to that. It does say the sight was to complicated and a source of further errors. Don't know if Hogg is correct, but that would be a reasonable problem for higher ROF autocannons
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH