Snagging - The P.108A, beloved of War Thunder players was skipped on the reasonable basis I had never heard of but my world is better for having learnt about it. Sadly it didn't work and they only built one as a result. - Discussions of energy vs momentum...sure ok, I mean Ihaven't a clue really but glad you do. Please direct discussions of the difference between momentum, recoil, energy, force etc towards someone who cares. Big gun go bang but not back is the extent of my knowlege. - The missing AC130 was on the list but then I decided to cut it because I am a heartless bastard ;) - The HS-129 is not here because it had the same issues as the Ju-88P and, contrary to what War Thunder might have taught you - it also didn't work, but there are better sources that I could find on the Ju88P than the HS-129 so Iused that. If you want to imagine I included HS-129 just swap the words out in your head, but bear in mind that they only made 20 odd and they never saw serious action as they basically disintegrated on firing *and* only had half the ammunition of a JU88P version
What follows is a second-hand repeat of an unverified/unverifiable story that came from one of the now-deceased perpetrators! Apparently the yanks up in the islands north of Australia were rather amused by the way the somewhat inadequately-supplied Australian military would cannibalise absolutely _everything_ in order to better fight the Japanese. Unlike the Australians, the yanks were well-supplied with things like planes, trucks and guns, and tended to have to do other things than fix those planes, trucks and guns that had some sort of failure. Being amused by them, and finding that it was good to have Australians on their side in the war; they even left some quite fixable things by the road etc for the Australians to quickly press back into use in some way. Said Australians were beyond just taking anything that would move, they would take a lot of things that were not really supposed to be moved; and earned the name "The Hydraulics". The point of this was one of the "adaptations" performed by these creative people was to take a RAAF Lancaster, take a 17pdr anti-tank gun, and concoct some sort of fitting to mount the gun to the main wing spar. Pointing it out through what had been the bomb aimer's station. The pilot was provided with some aiming marks on his windshield. A couple of gunners were posted at the breech of the gun, and fired it under command from the pilot. This system was reported as working - the shells that hit the Japanese ships were reported as blowing holes right through the bottom of the hull.
question: do you mean the base version of the HS129 or the one with the extra gun bolted onto it due to the standard armament being a on the inefective side? also did you drop the hs129 due to being underpowered? if yes then thats the magic of the gnome rhone radial: i dont know any planes that had these engines and that wherent under powered.
As an aerospace engineer, I've came up with an idea for an A-10 replacement without it being the F-35 or 16. And its gun with a 57mm auto cannon that shoots explosive rounds. To keep up with technology, the pilot would have the ability to heavily lead the shots, like if the plane was a flying artillery piece.
“I am United States… and this [grabs boats] is my weapon. [lays both hands covetously on navy] [Checks the port of his navy] “Oh my God, who touched Bill? Alright…Who touched my boats!?” “Some people think they can outsmart me. Maybe, [sniff] maybe. I’ve yet to meet one that can outsmart guns.”
They opened for Paul Revere and the Raiders during an ill fated tour of England during which Paul became obsessed with announcing "the British are coming" while observing the venue filling up with music fans. The band decided to leave England and never return
British 19th/ 20th C Culture at home and Public School was based on discipline of Caning/Corporal Punishment a two faced English mp is called Andrew"Thrasher" Mitchell.
@@stephenandersen4625 Sounds like a death metal band that's trying too hard to make sure you really know they're a death metal band. "Lord Hardthrasher & The Colonials" on the other hand... I'd probably buy that album. :)
The Republican Guard after being completely obliterated by the Buccaneer: That's got to be the best subsonic attack aircraft I have ever seen. So it would seem...
Given how many of them got shot down in Vietnam, and how useless they'd be if the US ever faced an enemy with MANPADs and/or an airforce, I did nearly include them, but they were a bit obvious
I don't know if they'd have any utility, but I can imagine a few "recoiless" designs that might work. Who says the tube needs to be attached to the plane? Give it some fins, let the plan drop a bundle of recoiless tubes and detonate--I mean fire them remotely. Or the tubes could be mounted on a similarly disposable drone, or a less disposable drone that orbits the battlefield--or swarms it. Though, at that point, you could just use glide bombs.
My takeaway from this video confirms to me that the De Havilland Mosquito is a beacon of enduring perfection that was able to anything it bloody well felt like, with the highlight being middle-fingering Goering for a laugh. but also being able to mount literally every type of weapon including an anti-tank gun.
@Turnipstalk wooden aircraft aren't stealthy, the majority of a plane's radar cross section comes from the spinning props, and both had significant amounts of metal in their construction anyway. Late war Swordfish had metal wings for the lower pair, to protect them when firing rockets.
@Turnipstalk the problem with first hand accounts is that they're not very "clean", they're riddled with context they might not be aware of, generally quite small in scope, and just generally full of all sorts of biases and get jumbled with time. Plus, this is an area we don't need to rely on first hand accounts, we have plenty of actual data. And we can see that aircraft like mosquito were not materially any 'stealthier' to radar than their contemporaries. I have no doubt, however, that German radar operators struggled to track Mossies on radar. Mossies flew low and fast. Accounts of them flying *beneath* phone lines and even trees as not hard to find. Compared a typical fighter roving for a Circus or Ramrod patrol or whatever, yeah a Mossie is gonna be hard to see. But not because it's made partly of wood. Wooden aircraft weren't that novel, half the Soviet airforce was wooden.
To be fair the B-25G's M4 cannon wasn't a straight up tank gun, it was highly lightened and modified to fit in the nose of the B-25. So it was actually designed specifically for aircraft use. What's hilarious is this modification was then installed in the M24 light tank. So the Americans actually designed an aircraft gun and then stuck it in a tank.
Thought the Gs gun was an tank gun that basically buggered up the airframe and the one in the H was the lightened redesigned version ? . Neither were particular good or liked by the crews. . Preferred the J solid nose version. . So I've been reading anyway.
I'm rewatching, and am at the explanation of recoilless guns. On to the story: some madlad strapped some bazookas (recoiless infantry portable anti-tank weapons) to a Piper Cub, and shooting at tanks. WW2 was crazy.
@@dongiovanni4331 That it is. US and UK did develop recoilless guns in WWII, 75 and 105mm ones in the US entered service, while the UK developed the shoulder fired 3.45 inch Burnley and 7.2 inch trailer mounted weapon. The British had the 120mm Wombat gun as its primary infantry anti tank recoilless gun until the advent of guided anti tank missiles. One mad cap idea was a recoilless Aircraft gun for the Gloster Javelin. It got 30mm Aden cannons instead.
@Turnipstalk The Bazooka is a Rocket fired out of a smooth bore tube!!! A recoilless gun fires a shell down a barrel which is normally rifled and leaves the cartridge casing behind. They are not the same thing!!!
@@FifingFossil Quite aside from it being disgraceful behaviour, one runs the risk of performing a brief impersonation of a rocket engine's combustion chamber undergoing what is known in the business as a "hard start". Which would generally be regarded as a non-optimal outcome for such an experiment.
@@sixstringedthing Burton's Tailors, a High-Street suit retailer. When you were demobbed at the end of WW2, you were paid off & given a voucher for a new suit (to make the job search easier), said voucher being usable only at Burton's. Hence, someone who disappeared from their unit had "Gone for a Burton", aka been discharged from service.
to be fair the gun in the A-10 hasn't proved all that useful either: basically the engineers were ordered to make an airplane with that gun in it and told to prioritize making it relatively economical and easy to repair. a little bit of napkin math later and someone had realized that they could probably produce a respectable aircraft that could be serviced and repaired in your average tractor shed using off the shelf parts for somewhere in the ballpark of $15-25k a pop (ended up at ~$17k) but the cost of the *_pilot_* was at minimum going to be somewhere around $250k, so their best-results interpretation of the non-negotiable parts of their orders ended up being to use the gun as additional armor for the pilot and design every aspect of the aircraft that they could around the goal of recovering the pilot alive because 1 retained pilot was roughly 5 times the resource value of the total loss of aircraft + weapons loadout + assorted logistics costs _and_ the longer a pilot remained alive the more valuable and effective they became as opposed to the constantly depreciating value of any aging materiel. to be clear the aircraft _can_ fire the gun reliably and accurately, it's just not all that terribly useful compared to the plethora of other ordinance strapped to the thing and does not, in fact, actually do the one job that the idiots insisting on the aircraft's design and production intended it for (the "anti-tank" gun does not actually kill tanks worth a dam because diving on them to hit top-down hasn't been a viable thing since WELL before the aircraft was proposed, though it does do pretty well against anything else)
My favorite big gun plane project is probably the german attempt at mounting a recoilles, autoloading flak 43 to a ju-88. It was called the "duesenkanone duka 88". Never flew, but the modification was made to 1 ju-88.
The section about the Tupolev I-12 missed the best part - the Kurchevsky recoilless 76mm guns were MUZZLE LOADED autocannons They had a tubular magazine that ran parallel to the gun barrel, and was situated above the barrel. In front of the gun barrel, there was an extension that kind of looked like a catcher's mitt. To load - a push bar would push the entire stack of rounds inside the magazine forward, until the front round literally fell out of the tube under its own weight, and would (theoretically) fall into the catcher's mitt. Then, there was a little spring-loaded push rod with a plate, that would chuck the round down the barrel - kind of like an infantry mortar - and then rotate the little plate out of the way so when the round hits the pin at the base of the gun, and is fired out the front, it doesn't take the plate with it. Needless to say - allowing your rounds to free-fall into the catcher's mitt with zero mechanical constraints - WHILE FLYING - meant that most of the rounds fell straight down to the ground, and never even made it into the barrel in the first place. This article here has some good photos of the Kurchevsky recoilless muzzle-loaded autocannon in a current museum display, with close-up views of the catcher's mitt: yuripasholok.livejournal.com/12093507.html
@@HardThrasher some of Kurchevsky's other hits included a 152mm non-autoloaded recoilless rifle mounted on the Russian equivalent of the Ford Model T, a 305mm recoilless rifle mounted on a tiny WW1 destroyer, a 100mm autoloaded recoilless rifle on the Tupolev DIP "heavy fighter", a 152mm autoloaded recoilless rifle on a G-5 torpedo boat - and the proposed plan for a battleship-caliber recoilless rifle to be mounted on a heavy bomber (which is where the fake illustrations of the Kalinin K-7 with the Iowa battleship turrets comes from)
So it was an airborne and "automatic" version of some poorly trained young conscript constantly risking blowing his hand off with each reload. But it worked so poorly that most rounds just fell harmlessly out of the sky, so the Probability of Kill for this weapon was mostly dependent on whether one of those dropped rounds happened to hit someone in the head when they fell. You have revealed one of The Most Soviet Things Ever. Fantastic.
@@sixstringedthing The engineer who designed the gun was sent to gulag. His patron was shot in the head after a trial on another case (it was the famous “genius” Tukhachevsky). The young poorly trained conscripts were in safe (until the next day).
The P-39 Aircobra is always neglected. Single engine fighter, built around a 37mm through the propeller hub. They had to put the engine behind the pilot and run a drive shaft through their legs to accommodate the gun and armor and had the fuel tanks in the wings.
The Lord Hardthrasher Guide to Nazi's would be an excellent video. Bring in Roman from Regular Car Reviews and go to town on the whole of the Reich. Hermann Goering: The official nazi of spamming the call flight attendant button for more sandwiches.
I’ve always had a soft spot for the modification tried on the ME163 Komet. Because of its speed it was difficult to line up on target and fire a sufficient amount of ammunition to complete the job. The solution was to mount 8 cannons along the top of the wings, 4 each side. There was a photo sensitive cell in each cannon. The idea was that the ME163 would fly beneath a target and each cannon would fire when it sensed movement above it. Because of its speed, the first trial of the system resulted in all 8 cannons firing with in less than 1 second and blew the wings off. Back to the drawing board.😊 ( source Mani Ziegler’s book, ME163 Rocket Fighter)
I've got a silly gun for you old boy! Your cousins in the antipodes (The civilised ones not the aussies), designed the officially fastest firing single-barreled machine gun in history in WW2 known as the Mitchell Light Machine Gun with a firing rate of 110 rounds a second (please ignore the 30-round magazine). The idea was that because the RNZAF only had pathetic lawnmowers with wings strapped on, we needed a cheap domestically produced machinegun that could tear enemy aircraft to pieces. The recoil from the Mitchell LMG is so horrific however, that tests showed that if an aircraft such as the ones being used were to have four fitted, the recoil would slow them down to the point they would stall. As a result, the only surviving example is now on display in the National Army Museum of New Zealand
I WISH we had the 14 inch cannon do217 in War thunder. I can think of nothing more hilarious than flying straight at someones tank barely above stall speed and eviscerating them with a naval cannon before watching my entire plane get ripped apart by the force of the gun or smashing straight into the ground.
Some chat in comments about the A10. I once had the pleasure of taking coffee in S. Kensington with a retired Warthog pilot, who pointed out that the thing evolved from its earlier marques, in which the pilot was sitting directly above the massive rotary cannon to one in which the gun was more nose mounted, and pointing down a bit, obviating somewhat the necessity for the inertial lurch which made recovery to airspeed and therefore not crashing at least possible. Great channel you have here my lord! 🌟👍
I was going to call out Paper Skies' video on the MiG-9 but I saw at the end that you directly referenced that video. Love to see he's getting more attention!
32 pounder never fitted to the Mosquito. A trial like the German one was done in 1945 with pressure sensors where parts of the airframe were going to be. That's as close as a 32 Pounder got to be fitted to the aircraft.
Gonna be honest, I'd never heard of your channel before until a friend linked this video to me. I'm glad I took the time to watch it! I enjoyed the laughs I got out of it, and it was fun learning about aircraft I hadn't know about before. I'm definitely subscribing.
Much as I would love to assume I am a household name alongside Obama and Messi, it appears I have some way to go yet 😉 Welcome aboard, glad you enjoyed it
You said there would be some swearing and so I should have been prepared, but I was utterly shocked when you said "Blackburn". Steady on M'Lud, that was a bit strong.
As an ex-RAF Engine basher and general player-about-with-aircraft for more than half a century, I have to ask myself the oblivious question - "Why have I not seen this splendidly tongue-in-cheek channel before..?" Needless to say, said Subscribe button has been pressed and - though now retired in warmer climes - one will monitor similarly scathing productions with delight and anticipation. Keep doing what you're doing..!
And just like that I found another channel to feed my addiction to englishmen, aussies, and maybe a scot or two explaining funny things about aircrafts and aircraft accessories
I dropped history at school (a very long time ago) due to it being absolutely effingly mind numbingly boring. Many decades later thanks to some very good authors & with extra special thanks to the likes of you Sir, I am gaining an ever increasing knowledge of the past with added wit. Excellent work!
In 1943 the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm tried to fit a M1940 4.5" AA GUN to Short Stirling Bomber to take out U Boats a Pneumatic/Hydro Recoil System was developed and the weapon was mounted in the Bomb Bay in a housing.Come the first Ground Firing the Ventral Blister was ripped from the fuselage after the overstressed recoil system failed.The biggest fitted was a M1897 75MM Cannon as its MV was only 535 MPS giving a lower recoil as you state B25 and Mosquito were fitted with this plus the 57MM A/T gun was also fitted though its MV was 864 MPS but by this time the recoil system was much improved finally the Short Sunderland was fitted with twin 20mm Oerlikon's which was successful.
The cannon in the Sherman was derived from the M1897 so presumably the M1897 would be similar to the M4 but on a bigger aircraft. I'd like to have seen them mounted in the weapons room, trundling out to a position under the wings when needed...
@@wbertie2604 As stated the 75MM fitted to the B25 and Mosquito was the M1897 adopted by the US as was 155MM in 1917 the 75MM having a MV of 534MPS and really unsuitable as an A/T Gun hence having to get close to a Panther/Tiger at 500Yds to take them from the side, the supreme Allied A/T Gun being the 3" 17Pdr brew up these German Tanks at 1200M
@@geoffhunter7704 they used the M1897 earlier in the war on the M3 GMC. And the M3 75mm was derived from it. The Germans put captured French ones on PAK 38 carriages, IIRC, and used them as AT guns. It wasn't totally useless, if a bit lacking by mid-1943.
@@wbertie2604 There was also the US M5 a concoction of 3" AA Barrel and Breech +the 105MM A1 Carriage Assembly MV was 792MPS and developed in 1940/41 but the ever so conservative USB of Ord stopped work on it to concentrate on the 75MM however complaints from Europe forced the Board to begin work on the M5 and it was fitted to the M10 Achilles its performance was not quite as good as the 17Pdr but it was very useful.It was replaced by the 90MM at 823 FPS but the board fucked up the AT Round and it was taking 2/3 strikes to brew up Panthers and Tigers see M26 V Panther Cologne 1945 on YT.
2:59 NOOOOOOOO!!!!! 😭 The energy of recoil is nowhere near the projectile energy, as in several orders of magnitude different! What's the same (but in opposite directions, and taking into account the contribution of the muzzle blast) is momentum. If we take an example from Hatcher's Notebook, p. 255, we have a 1903 Springfield slinging a 150gn projectile at 2700 fps, which gives a muzzle energy of a nice round 2428 ft.lb in old money. The energy of free recoil, however, is 14.98 ft.lb, a mere six thousandths that of the projectile. Plus kinetic energy doesn't have a direction, it's a scalar quantity, but that's a minor nerdy point....
Don't worry you're the first person to say this....oh, wait, no.....good lord...I do these pinned comments for a reason and no one reads them *wanders off mumbling to self like a nutter*
Absolutely spiffing old boy ,made me spill my port " Jenkins more LBV ,chop chop my good man" looking forward to your next moving picture old man , tallyho
Lord HardThrasher, you edited my dad out of the B 25G video! Now that I have properly vented (etiquette requires me to not speak too harshly of their homeland by the maternal British side of my family...), I was amused by the mention of windows being blown off during test firing of the "G" prototype. This, indeed happened to my dad when he was given the honor of firing the 75mm cannon for the first time during a test flight. The plexiglass nose bubble (the cannon prototype was a previous-generation airframe) blew off pinning my dad against the bulkhead behind the bombardier position. He survived the event relatively undamaged with the exception of his pride. Thus, the G model and successive iterations of the B25 sported an all-metal nose piece I would like to put forth the unconfirmed theory that some Knob had supplied 75mm artillery rounds - instead of rounds with a more sensible powder charge - from the local armory for the experiment. Having chatted with actual B25G pilots in my relative youth, I can verify that one of the reasons why there are possibly only two B25Gs in existence is the fact that operating the cannon caused the airframe to slowly disassemble itself. They were great for shooting at locomotives - especially when emerging from a railroad tunnel - in the Italian/North Africa theatre. The Japanese were not terribly fond of the B25G, either. For the curious reader, here is the full B25G video complete with my dad appearing at :25 into the presentation: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-alGQNwLc-LM.htmlsi=ufLDrGdmW45IvEBa
A note from the Antipodes, never ask for a "shrimp" on a barby. A shrimp is the size that only gets included in a salad. Prawns are what we eat starting with those the size of a middle finger going through to Tiger and King Prawns that are size of a banana. Besides, too many of the prawnetttes have probably been harvested from a cess pool in Vietnam while the real prawns fought to the end in the open waters of the Gulf of Carpentaria. Apart from that a brilliant video. I learnt a lot but probably coming from a low base. Thanks. (Careful with images of "The Rock" as some people get a bit precious about using images of their sacred sites.)
Big improvement with the background music. The tracks fit so much better than the generic track I heard in an earlier vid. The whole doc, including the guest segments, comes together really well. And I learned something new about attempts to strap large caliber ordinance on planes not designed to handle such. In terms of planes with unusual weaponry, another that comes to mind was mounted in one of the more iconic aircraft of WWII, the Bf 109, with its propeller-shaft cannon.
Speaking of conglomerations (what a nice word to describe the abominations), was the nationalization of aircraft companies as bad of a result as what happened with British Leyland?
Thank you History with a laugh Cannot swear back because of RU-vid algorithm There is nothing better than hearing an Englishman swear like a trooper And I enjoyed the video
I shall point to the Quad ADEN 30mm Revolver Cannon. Mounted on many fine British jets. At 4 × 1,700rpm you got yourself 6,800rpm and, what, 25kg? of exploding lead every second. Which we bolted on to everything we could.
@sugarnads Revolver cannon. Many years ago as a 16 year old I did my work experience on an RAF base. I had the good fortune to be taken to the ground firing of an ADEN that the armourers had just finished maintenance work on. Impressive stuff.
Sorry! Basically the first half of the video got weirdly cut up when I edited it to put in Red's section, and I didn't know until it went live in the Premier so as fast as I could, I recut it pulled the old one and put this up. My sincere apologies
Due to holidays and lack of internet I have been unable to access Your Lordship for the past three weeks. Now back home and internet restored, one feels a great stirring in the undercarraige as your honey soaked voice once again imparts knowledge, wit and wisdom in no small measure. An excellent video as ever, thsnks for posting. As a boy, my favourite plane with a big gun was the Henschel 129. I am sated
No mention of the Airacobra where they had to move the engine behind the pilot to accommodate the cannon (and IIRC if the pilot was unlucky, it could stall backwards because of that)?
I feel like a part 2 could be done. Because U'm surprised you didn't mention the Italian P.108 bomber, which had a variant armed with a 102mm gun for anti-shipping duties.
JEEZUSHAROLDCHRISTONRUBBERCRUTCHESTHAT’SFUNNYSH!TRIGHTTHERE. And that’s coming from a Yank who understood every word from a Mach .9 speedspeaking Brit. So rare. Hilarious and informative…a masterpiece. 👊😎
I believe the B25 75mm was ripped out and placed in the Chaffee tank? That's what I think I heard in a UK Tank Museum video (i.e., not come 'colonial' museum). And, and, no "Big Gun Go BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!"?? You know, a plane actually designed with the gun in mind? Or, a cargo plane with a 105mm howitzer and 40mm cannon???
Subscribed - from the Land of the Big Red Rock. Being a military Rug Rat, I had to follow my father's postings to various Air Force bases, including Boscombe Down, where he did his Test Pilot course in the late 50's. Having cut his teeth firing his P-51's guns & rockets over Korea, he went on to fly all 3 of the V Bombers in the UK, then more cannon & rocket fire from the F-86's during the Malaysian Conflict . He went on to test fly the F-111 over Texas before the RAAF purchased the Pig. I wonder if someone thought of putting a bloody big canon on that.?
Sorry! Basically the first half of the video got weirdly cut up when I edited it to put in Red's section, and I didn't know until it went live in the Premier so as fast as I could, I recut it pulled the old one and put this up. My sincere apologies
11:32 the 75 used on that American plane only became a tank gun AFTER it was a plane gun first. It was a lightweight version of the m4s gun specifically meant to be put on the plane which was then mounted on the m24 light tank after
Some of this is a bit hilarious. Thanks. Love the Mossy, with its 2 Merlins and made out of good furniture wood. Nice segment on it. Bad assed little plane, though I know it's not that little.
This could be where Winston Churchill learned about that soft underbelly of Europe -- a phenomenon which, other than the Dardanelles, consisted mainly of Alps, Appenines, and maybe the odd mine field or so.
This was my first video ive watched from your channel! And i gotta say your content is really entertaining and informative while being really funny at the same time! well done, you;ve earned a subscriber!
Part of me wants to set this video to loop overnight and see how many playthroughs i can sleep-absorb I'll have a third watch before bedtime I'm sure Tickle the all going rhythm for our Lord HT
This is the first video ive come across of yours, and you got me as a subscriber at the first, but the but about not touching Yanks boats, and the B-25 with the tank cannon mounted, absolutely folded me. Because im a Yank, mainly. I have quite a few other new to me presenters to find and subscribe to as well. TA! xx
Another splendid offering! And an amazing accent, getting the patois down pat. I almost thought I was down under and could hear the Sheila's and boguns larking and gamboling abouts.
I cannot believe you didn't include the designing, installing, test flying and test firing of a *32* *Pounder* in a Mosquito. Though I don't think they fired it from the air, just on the ground. It used a special muzzle break to stop the recoil tearing the mostly wooden(!) plane apart, and test fired it to see if it worked.
The US using a 75mm Sherman cannon on a B25 is awesome. The B25 with the 14 50 cal machine guns is amazing. There is one at the Air Zoo in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
The AC-130U "Spooky" gunship is the primary weapon of Air Force Special Operations Command. Its primary missions are close air support, air interdiction and armed reconnaissance. The U model is an upgraded version of the H and is equipped with side firing, trainable 25 mm, 40 mm, and 105 mm guns.
The Hawker Hurricane produced a version with 2 -40mm-2 pounder cannons it reported to be used in small numbers in North Africa, the Stuka also carred 2-37 mm cannons used in the battle of Kursk.
@@HardThrasher Oh boy. Although it has almost all of them in turrets, as compared to the B25J-NC, which can boast 18 forward facing guns and 6 more in turrets, technically beating out the YB-29 (albeit a lot less practical) :)
I should correct myself, after some more researching it is only 4 extra in turrets, as I have found no evidence of a bottom turret and the top turret is counted as forward facing, since it can fire straight ahead.
Been wanting a decent video like this for awhile with big gun and planes. Definitely a new follower / fan / fanboy , war thunder has made a ton of us goin to RU-vid for a vid like this for years 🙏
The 75mm gun on the b25 was actually designed purpose built for the airframe, when it didn't pan out they put the gun in the m24 Chaffee light tank, I hope this clarifies some things and helps you out!
Coastal command took them off in the end. I think that's just because they were so short of mossies that they needed in other roles. It seems such the perfect weapon to put a hole in a rapidly submerging U-boat. They kept the brownings so you could rattle the hull before unloading
