Sdkfz 234/1 And M8 Greyhound ?

[DougRichards]

 

Yes, A relative handful of 20mm armed ex-RAF P-51 went to the USAAF. These initially had two nose mounted .50cal also, but which were deleted, but P-51 aircraft made to US account were armed with 4 .50cal initially and later with 6.

 

Which is why I included the word 'major' when describing which USAAF types used the 20mm.

 

If you want to list every USAAF aircraft armed with 20mm then you can add 100 Beaufighters, a small number of DH Mosquitos.

 

All of these were originally British aircraft that were supplied to the USAAF and really demonstrate that the USAAF, even after using some 20mm armed aircraft, was firmly of the belief that the .50 cal was the best weapon for most air to air and air to ground applications. The exception being the P-61 whose 20mm armament was intended to shoot down medium and heavy bombers rather than fighters and light bombers / attack aircraft.

 

When it came to arming an anti-ship aircraft the USAAF went all the way to 75mm for the B-25 G and H variants, and this was at a time when the RAF was successfully using 20mm as the main armament of the Beaufighter.

Umm. P38 Lightning?

 

 

see my post http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41474&p=1226216

 

I mentioned the three major USAAF types armed with a 20mm cannon: P-38, B-29 and P-61

 

All other 20mm armed aircraft in USAAF service were British sourced, including, in effect, the 20mm armed P-51except a very small number of P-70 Havoc used a pack of 4 X 20mm but these were usually replaced by six 50cal.

 

The other 20mm armed types were the USN Curtiss SB2C Helldiver and some late war Hellcats, however the USN was a serious user of 20mm guns shipboard so was used to using them and had ammunition and spares in the supply chain.

[CaptLuke]

 

 

The other 20mm armed types were the USN Curtiss SB2C Helldiver and some late war Hellcats, however the USN was a serious user of 20mm guns shipboard so was used to using them and had ammunition and spares in the supply chain.

 

 

Completely agree with your points about US 20mm usage, but IIRC you can add the F4U-1C to your short list of USN, 20mm armed, aircraft during WWII. More Corsair variants after the war, but believe the F4U-1C was in service at Okinawa.

[DougRichards]

 

 

 

The other 20mm armed types were the USN Curtiss SB2C Helldiver and some late war Hellcats, however the USN was a serious user of 20mm guns shipboard so was used to using them and had ammunition and spares in the supply chain.

 

 

Completely agree with your points about US 20mm usage, but IIRC you can add the F4U-1C to your short list of USN, 20mm armed, aircraft during WWII. More Corsair variants after the war, but believe the F4U-1C was in service at Okinawa.

 

 

Thanks for that comment

[DougRichards]

Even the Brits didn't use 20mm very often for armoured vehicles. In the 1940 -1950 time period: the Crusader AA had two Oerlikons, and the early Centurion had a 20mm coax, but I cannot think of many more.................

 

The other Brit vehicle with a 20mm was the Oerlikon or Polsten armed LVT4.

 

 

The Brits were more likely to use the 15mm Besa as the automatic gun as in the Humber armoured car and the Vickers lights, and the 2pdr as a heavier weapon, later the 6pdr and the 75mm of course for some heavier armoured cars.

[rmgill]

15mm BESA being very compact but not very accurate under sustained fire (what you could sustain with the size of the magazine, 15 rounds iirc).

37mm and 40mm worked out great for recce as it's likely to punch through most of what you're going to be fighting and if you're rubbing noses with tanks you really need to pop smoke and beat feet.

Heavier recce either involved 6 pounder or 75mm AEC armored cars which was due to some tit for tat in North Africa. Or Heavy recce with cruiser tanks.

[glappkaeft]

The other 20mm armed types were the USN Curtiss SB2C Helldiver and some late war Hellcats, however the USN was a serious user of 20mm guns shipboard so was used to using them and had ammunition and spares in the supply chain.

The USN shipboard 20 mm guns where Oerlikons, completely different guns and ammo compared to the Hispanos used by the aircrafts.

[DougRichards]

 

The other 20mm armed types were the USN Curtiss SB2C Helldiver and some late war Hellcats, however the USN was a serious user of 20mm guns shipboard so was used to using them and had ammunition and spares in the supply chain.

The USN shipboard 20 mm guns where Oerlikons, completely different guns and ammo compared to the Hispanos used by the aircrafts.

 

 

Yes, you are right, thank you.

 

It may be that the USN, having seen the destructive power of a 20mm round in defending ships against air attack, and the effect of Japanese 20mm rounds against its own ships from Dec 1941 (flak suppression and the like), in comparison to the .50cal, was more accepting that the 20mm would be a good round for air to air and anti-ship use as well.

 

The first experience of the US Army being on the receiving end of 20mm rounds in the ground war was Torch, Nov 1942, just 19 months before D-Day and by which time US AFV had come off the drawing board, and not enough time for adapting 20mm guns for ground use by the army, especially when the .50 cal was available, and really, the .50 cal was and is a very good gun.

Edited February 17, 2016 by DougRichards

[Colin]

15mm BESA being very compact but not very accurate under sustained fire (what you could sustain with the size of the magazine, 15 rounds iirc).

 

37mm and 40mm worked out great for recce as it's likely to punch through most of what you're going to be fighting and if you're rubbing noses with tanks you really need to pop smoke and beat feet.

Heavier recce either involved 6 pounder or 75mm AEC armored cars which was due to some tit for tat in North Africa. Or Heavy recce with cruiser tanks.

I wonder how much the 15mm Besa influenced the RADEN cannon design concept

[richard g]

Back to the OP, the 231 was an obsolete 30's design so it should be disadvantaged when being compared with something designed in the 40's at a time when the design of combat vehicles was progressing significantly. Like a lot of US vehicles the Greyhound was about a decade behind, particularly in regard to high speed offroad capability.

[DougRichards]

The Daimler Dingo was another '30's design', but was in no way disadvantaged in comparison to anything in the 1940s.

 

Which raises an interesting point about armoured car armament. On the surface the Dingo was armed with a Bren Gun and the commander's pistol. Not particularly heavy at all.

 

But its real armament was the Daimler Armoured Cars in its own troop. or the tank troop that they were scouting for, or the artillery fire that the crew could call down.

[Rich]

Back to the OP, the 231 was an obsolete 30's design so it should be disadvantaged when being compared with something designed in the 40's at a time when the design of combat vehicles was progressing significantly. Like a lot of US vehicles the Greyhound was about a decade behind, particularly in regard to high speed offroad capability.

 

For good reason. Up to 1934, ten different armored car designs were trialed by Ordnance and only one was standardized (the M1 from the T4). Only two additional were trialed before 1941 and neither was accepted. It was possibly worse than the situation with tanks and combat cars.

[Colin]

and the dingo served on till the 60's in some places

[shep854]

According to Tony W., the USN realized that the 50 cal wasn't lethal enough against the kamikaze threat, hence the wholesale changeover to 20mm.

[sunday]

20mm nor 40mm neither, so the development of the auto 76mm, the lower calibre able to effectively mount a VT fuze.

Edited February 22, 2016 by sunday

[rmgill]

and the dingo served on till the 60's in some places

The form of the 2 man scout car served all the way through the Gulf War with Ferrets in the MK1/2 versions being used by Royal Engineers for route recce iirc. The Dingo and the Ferret are very similar with the major difference being about a ton more weight and a different layout on the Ferret than the dingo (crew sit inline vs side by side). Driveline and engine being very similar with the largest structural difference being an armored hull on the ferrets and a frame on the Dingo with an armored body sitting atop. Ferrets are really refined and 50s modernized Dingos.

 

[DougRichards]

According to Tony W., the USN realized that the 50 cal wasn't lethal enough against the kamikaze threat, hence the wholesale changeover to 20mm.

 

Except the USN had a larger weapon than the 50cal in the early 1930s, in the 1.1in 75 calibre gun. It seems that the 20mm took over the role of the .50cal, whilst the 40mm took over from the 1.1in.

 

The 1.1in being unreliable.

 

It does show that a weapon between the .50cal and the 37mm was available in the US for consideration as an AFV weapon before the 20mm was adopted by the USN.

 

Meanwhile, the Japanese produced a 20mm weapon based on the 1921 Browning Aircraft Machine gun, the Ho-5 and even grew it to 30mm with the Ho/155, so a weapon that was an enlarged .50cal would have been possible also.

Edited February 23, 2016 by DougRichards

[CaptLuke]

Back to the OP, the 231 was an obsolete 30's design so it should be disadvantaged when being compared with something designed in the 40's at a time when the design of combat vehicles was progressing significantly. Like a lot of US vehicles the Greyhound was about a decade behind, particularly in regard to high speed offroad capability.

 

The US developed and trialed the 6x6 T19, with 6 large evenly spaced wheels, the front four wheels steered, and independent suspension all the way around, at roughly the same time as the M8. so the US was well aware of, and able to produce, more advanced designs.

 

The T19 was thought to be too large, heavy, and expensive. Meanwhile the M8 specification specifically called for a vehicle adaptable for low cost mass production.

 

Based off this, you can make the argument that the US chose to have more, cheaper, armored cars faster, rather than fewer, more advanced vehicles later.

 

Good set of pics (including the 75mm armed version that was trialed later) are here on Avi Armor.

[Colin]

 

and the dingo served on till the 60's in some places

The form of the 2 man scout car served all the way through the Gulf War with Ferrets in the MK1/2 versions being used by Royal Engineers for route recce iirc. The Dingo and the Ferret are very similar with the major difference being about a ton more weight and a different layout on the Ferret than the dingo (crew sit inline vs side by side). Driveline and engine being very similar with the largest structural difference being an armored hull on the ferrets and a frame on the Dingo with an armored body sitting atop. Ferrets are really refined and 50s modernized Dingos.

 

of course there was the family less talked about cousins, the Damlynx

 

 

Edited February 23, 2016 by Colin

[Simon Tan]

Heh.....

[shep854]

Aircraft mounted It's kinda hard to carry 4 76mm with accessories in a fighter...;0

Edited February 23, 2016 by shep854

[shep854]

 

According to Tony W., the USN realized that the 50 cal wasn't lethal enough against the kamikaze threat, hence the wholesale changeover to 20mm.

 

Except the USN had a larger weapon than the 50cal in the early 1930s, in the 1.1in 75 calibre gun. It seems that the 20mm took over the role of the .50cal, whilst the 40mm took over from the 1.1in.

 

The 1.1in being unreliable.

 

It does show that a weapon between the .50cal and the 37mm was available in the US for consideration as an AFV weapon before the 20mm was adopted by the USN.

 

Meanwhile, the Japanese produced a 20mm weapon based on the 1921 Browning Aircraft Machine gun, the Ho-5 and even grew it to 30mm with the Ho/155, so a weapon that was an enlarged .50cal would have been possible also.

 

True for ship-board weapons. One neat feature of the 1.1 mount was the ability to 'slew' the gun side to side to get some dispersion at high elevations:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_1-1-75_mk1.htm

An interesting view that shows the gearing that allowed the guns to be slewed from side to side. This allowed this mounting to track a dive bomber even at very high gun elevations, where the normal train axis would have little effect.

[sunday]

Aircraft mounted It's kinda hard to carry 4 76mm with accessories in a fighter...;0

 

Oopsie!