It can elevate to 85 degrees, and apparently had quite the rate of fire.
No idea how they squeezed a round out every 4.5 seconds though.
It can elevate to 85 degrees, and apparently had quite the rate of fire.
WOOOOW THERE.Could it also reload at 85 degrees ? Find more info and report back !ThatZenoGuy wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 02:50It can elevate to 85 degrees, and apparently had quite the rate of fire.
No idea how they squeezed a round out every 4.5 seconds though.
I have no clue if it could reload at 85 degrees but typically AA guns are designed to reload at any elevation because...Well they're kinda expected to be looking 'up' all the time.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 02:52WOOOOW THERE.Could it also reload at 85 degrees ? Find more info and report back !
Yea they hired Edie Hall and some of his cousins to reload the batteries xDThatZenoGuy wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 05:27I have no clue if it could reload at 85 degrees but typically AA guns are designed to reload at any elevation because...Well they're kinda expected to be looking 'up' all the time.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 02:52WOOOOW THERE.Could it also reload at 85 degrees ? Find more info and report back !
Not much is known about the 150mm AA gun, as I understand it.
They were a purely static mount and that gave them a lot of leeway with weights, thus it could've had a highly advanced reloading system...
Orrrrrr they just used like ten strong guys to strongman 150mm shells into the thing.
Only two were completed, and both were located in the Japanese home islands, specifically Kugayama.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 12:47Yea they hired Edie Hall and some of his cousins to reload the batteries xD
We can find more info if you find out were in the pacific they were stationed,i will do some research on my own but im really busy these days so youll save me some time
With just quick research i found this https://military-history.fandom.com/wik ... _cm_AA_GunThatZenoGuy wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 16:08Only two were completed, and both were located in the Japanese home islands, specifically Kugayama.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 12:47Yea they hired Edie Hall and some of his cousins to reload the batteries xD
We can find more info if you find out were in the pacific they were stationed,i will do some research on my own but im really busy these days so youll save me some time
They shot down 2 B29 in a single engagement, which is very impressive as the 29 was a state of the art bomber.
Just a slight problem with that...there was no raid on Tokyo on 1 August and no B-29 were recorded lost that date. B-29 44-86344 is the closest. It was lost on 2 August, but it was shot down by Captain Haruo Kawamura of the 18th Squadron, Imperial Japanese Army Air Force and crashed between Kisarazu and Sodegaura in Chiba Prefecture, so southeast of Tokyo rather than west of the city. Otherwise, three B-29 were lost on 27 July and four on 8 August. The 1 August 20th Bomber Command raid was an area attack on Nagaoka in Niigata Prefecture, 150 miles away from Kugayama and no aircraft were recorded lost in that raid.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 18:18With just quick research i found this https://military-history.fandom.com/wik ... _cm_AA_Gun
What does in a single engagment mean though ? How many engagements for example would there be in a bombing of a city ? Im also gonna search how many rounds they fired in that single engagment
In a conventional warfare scenario of the time you are going to get attacked by many bombers flying high.They target infastructure and unfortunately civilians.Missiles cannot be your only solution and if radar was jammed for ground flaks then what stops missile systems from not working ? Apart from that Germany could not afford to have a couple hundred thousands of missiles.I guess that in that air raid you mentioned both parties missed their shots by a great margin,especialy the flak-ers.Now hitting civilians is not something i would do and it doesnt require accuracy but i guess the American bombers mostly hit their targets ? If it was a specific important target like lets say a factory i doubt they would have hit anything with bad weather.T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑11 Jun 2022, 20:11Flak alone will not come close to stopping a WW 2-style bomber offensive of the sort the Allies did. A combination of good tactics against flak by maneuver, planes that increasing are flying faster and higher, and a crescendo of jamming--particularly at night and in cloudy conditions--means that no matter the size and rate-of-fire of the guns, the bombers will get through and few will be shot down.
As an example of this, on 10/25/44 the US sent 720 bombers to Hamburg, one of the heaviest defended cities in Germany by flak. There were 44 heavy gun batteries defending the city. Conditions were overcast and the US bombed using radar.
The defender's radar was blinded by a massive jamming and chaff barrage leaving the majority of the batteries without a means to accurately aim on the attackers. The Germans resorted to box barrages.
The German batteries fired 24,416 rounds (88, 105, and 128mm) during the bombing attack shooting down just one bomber. It was a rate of ammunition consumption the Germans couldn't afford or sustain.
Thus, by late 1944 the only realistic option forward was a SAM. Once jet bombers were the norm, these flying at 35,000 to 40,000 feet at around 500 knots became virtually immune to any sort practical of antiaircraft gun.
Just a slight problem with that...there was no raid on Tokyo on 1 August and no B-29 were recorded lost that date. B-29 44-86344 is the closest. It was lost on 2 August, but it was shot down by Captain Haruo Kawamura of the 18th Squadron, Imperial Japanese Army Air Force and crashed between Kisarazu and Sodegaura in Chiba Prefecture, so southeast of Tokyo rather than west of the city. Otherwise, three B-29 were lost on 27 July and four on 8 August. The 1 August 20th Bomber Command raid was an area attack on Nagaoka in Niigata Prefecture, 150 miles away from Kugayama and no aircraft were recorded lost in that raid.
Nice pictures man,is that mechanism there to help you lift the shell or what ? We have to find who made that claim and why.Could those bombers have indeed been taken down but the thing kept off record to not anger anyone above or to hide their mission or is it more like the Japanese wanting to claim some kills with their new toy ? I dont know which to accept since i have not searched the topic myself but id like a more informed opinion.In the American report Takao shared its said that the Japs did report wrongly many timesThatZenoGuy wrote: ↑12 Jun 2022, 03:49http://www.alternatewars.com/Archives/T ... 5cm_AA.htm
This website has some nice pictures inside the gun mount. It has loading tray and system.
I am curious where the claim of shooting down B29's comes from.
Some unknown person on a random website made the claim. They may base that on an actual claim made by the Japanese military, but then that is a wartime claim, which can be notoriously unreliable. They may have fired on an echo from the bomber stream directed at Nagaoka that night. They may have seen flares. They may have seen bursts of other antiaircraft fire. They may have seen nothing other than their own shell bursts and decided they had hit. There are numerous other reasons they may have made a claim. That does not mean the claim equals reality.
So now instead of Occam's Razor you would rather indulge in bizarre conspiracy theories?Could those bombers have indeed been taken down but the thing kept off record to not anger anyone above or to hide their mission or is it more like the Japanese wanting to claim some kills with their new toy ? I dont know which to accept since i have not searched the topic myself but id like a more informed opinion.In the American report Takao shared its said that the Japs did report wrongly many times
Actually, it is possible to build a missile system that is difficult to impossible to jam. For example, you use more than one acquisition radars on dispersed frequencies making it hard to jam all of them. Add in higher power for 'burn through' and the plane(s) can't carry powerful enough jammers. Then you can use radar systems that are difficult to jam by their operation such as a monopulse beam and using a beam riding missile. Many early SAMs used this sort of system (British Thunderbird, Swiss RBC, as two examples) for just that reason.Destroyer500 wrote: ↑13 Jun 2022, 15:25In a conventional warfare scenario of the time you are going to get attacked by many bombers flying high.They target infastructure and unfortunately civilians.Missiles cannot be your only solution and if radar was jammed for ground flaks then what stops missile systems from not working ? Apart from that Germany could not afford to have a couple hundred thousands of missiles.I guess that in that air raid you mentioned both parties missed their shots by a great margin,especialy the flak-ers.Now hitting civilians is not something i would do and it doesnt require accuracy but i guess the American bombers mostly hit their targets ? If it was a specific important target like lets say a factory i doubt they would have hit anything with bad weather...
So now instead of Occam's Razor you would rather indulge in bizarre conspiracy theories?
1. Why would anyone "above" be angered at wartime losses? Dozens of aircraft were being lost and the loss recorded.
2. Why would they "hide their mission"? Dozens of missions were being flown and recorded.
Why shouldn't I take it seriously, since you are the one who raised the notion that a conspiracy might explain why the Japanese report was incorrect?Destroyer500 wrote: ↑13 Jun 2022, 18:43Well dont take it that seriously since for the most part i was trying to find a reason in my head for the Japanese report to not be wrong.
Thinking out loud is fine, and we all do it, but don't get in a huff if someone reacts to it. I can only analyze what you write down, since I can't read minds.The reasons i found cant really stand on their own and are wrong but lets just say that i was being verbal about some thoughts.
What "missile theme"? The Germans never developed a practical antiaircraft missile system and neither did the Japanese, so whatever "missile theme" there might be is irrelevant to wartime antiaircraft defense.Any opinion on the missile theme ?