Ares Games
Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Fonk and his Cannon?

  1. #1


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    ERIN
    Location
    Florida
    Sorties Flown
    208
    Join Date
    Apr 2010

    Default Fonk and his Cannon?

    OK, just read this on Wiki, I did not realize this was even possible at this point of aviation.

    Fonk had mounted a 37mm cannon on his Spad.

    "Fonck, like France's leading ace, Capt. Georges Guynemer, also flew a limited production SPAD XII fighter, distinguished by the presence of a hand-loaded 37mm Puteaux cannon firing through the propeller boss. "

    Wow, does that mean a range special rule?

  2. #2

    David Kuijt's Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Name
    David Kuijt
    Location
    Maryland
    Sorties Flown
    79
    Join Date
    May 2010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowy View Post
    Wow, does that mean a range special rule?
    Range in these crates doesn't have anything to do with the speed or accuracy of the projectile. Think of it this way.

    WWI pilots were in control in the same way that a skateboarder going down a steep hill is in control. They could turn, they could do some primitive things to speed up and slow down. And they had some weapons they could fire at each other at the same time.

    If you give a skateboarder going down a hill a submachinegun and teach him how to fire it while he's going, he'll be able to take out other skateboarders at fairly significant range. If he's good, maybe a hundred yards away. Maybe even a smidge more.

    If you give the same skateboarder a Barrett 50 caliber sniper rifle, single shot, will be be able to shoot other skateboarders at a thousand yards?

    Nope. Effective range of that weapon while skateboarding won't really be much different. Maybe even less, since it is a single-shot weapon rather than firing bursts. And reloading it on the skateboard is really difficult.

    Same thing holds true for the cannon mounted in some SPADs. And for the same reason.

  3. #3

    NeilCFord
    Guest


    Default

    I'd hate to experience the recoil on that! And I'm trying to figure out how you fire through the propeller boss, I can't see how the engineering would work.

    But yes, special range rules would be required.

    - Neil.

  4. #4

    Default

    You may be interested in this thread.

    http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/showthread.php?t=685

  5. #5


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    ERIN
    Location
    Florida
    Sorties Flown
    208
    Join Date
    Apr 2010

    Default

    Very interesting. Limited ammo, restricted movement for two moves in order to get an extended range and C damage.

    I can only immagine what it was like to use.

  6. #6

    NeilCFord
    Guest


    Default

    A hollow prop shaft! And firing through it! Just so many things that could wrong. Lunatics the lot of them

    - Neil.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NeilCFord View Post
    A hollow prop shaft! And firing through it! Just so many things that could wrong. Lunatics the lot of them :)
    Cannons only worked well against big, slow-moving targets -- for dogfighting, they didn't become effective until the 1960s, when Gatling-types became available, and pilots could stream cannon shells into a target he way folks using machine guns could. (One of my complaints with _DoW_ is that cannons are far too effective for fighter-on-fighter combat -- they hit hard, this is true; but only *if* they hit.)

    Note how short a time the SPAD XII was in service.... :)

  8. #8

    Default Mon Dieu, I 'ave ze cunning plan

    Alphonse, you go and find the biggest cannon that you can. Pierre you go and find the oldest, slowest, most fragile aircraft you can. We will then tie the cannon to the front of the aircraft and see if we can get it off the ground!

    The marriage of a 37mm gun to a Voisin Ca.4, circa 1916. At least it was designed for anti-submarine work, not dogfighting
    Run for your life - there are stupid people everywhere!

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guntruck View Post
    The marriage of a 37mm gun to a Voisin Ca.4, circa 1916. At least it was designed for anti-submarine work, not dogfighting
    And in the next war:

    "Hey, Jimbo, can we strap this-here tank gun to your airplane?"

    "What for?"

    "We're goin' Transport Huntin'."

    "Sure, go ahead."

    [ http://www.historyflight.com/aircraft_b25mitchell.htm ]

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    And in the next war:
    Fast forward to today:
    "Hey, can we borrow you C130 for a minute? See, we've got this Howitzer..

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    (One of my complaints with _DoW_ is that cannons are far too effective for fighter-on-fighter combat -- they hit hard, this is true; but only *if* they hit.)
    It didn't seem to be a problem for the likes of Adolf Galland or Jonnie Johnson - they managed to hit with cannons very well and very often. After all that's why we put them in our Spitifires and Hurricanes

    "He is wise who watches"

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flash View Post
    It didn't seem to be a problem for the likes of Adolf Galland or Jonnie Johnson - they managed to hit with cannons very well and very often.
    The Germans typically shot at large, slow, non-maneuverable targets (bombers, Russians -- the usual ;) ); the British kill rates are noticeably lower than American kill scores (the Germans are inflated due to not getting days off, and flying multiple sorties per day).

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    The Germans typically shot at large, slow, non-maneuverable targets (bombers, Russians -- the usual ); the British kill rates are noticeably lower than American kill scores (the Germans are inflated due to not getting days off, and flying multiple sorties per day).
    So what you saying is... The Germans had a greater work ethic.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    the British kill rates are noticeably lower than American kill scores
    Well of course they are - we spent over two years softening them up for you !

    "He is wise who watches"

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LGKR View Post
    So what you saying is... The Germans had a greater work ethic. :D
    No -- just that Dear Old Uncle Adi did get one fact right: "Defense" sounds too much like "defeat"....

    For you alternate-history fans, a search term: "Walther Wever".... :)

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    The Germans typically shot at large, slow, non-maneuverable targets (bombers, Russians -- the usual ); the British kill rates are noticeably lower than American kill scores (the Germans are inflated due to not getting days off, and flying multiple sorties per day).
    I'm not sure how I missed this thread,I just found it doing a search for something else
    One of my favorite books is "The Blond Knight of Germany" A biography of Erich Hartmann. He had the highest tally in the shortest time with 352kills, 260 were fighters, all in Me109's. He didn't start fighter school until mid 1942and flew his first combat mission in October of that year. His total includes P-38's, P-40's, P-47's and 6 USAAF P-51's, 2 in one fight and 4 in another, and many late war Russian fighters.
    In several interviews published over the years he stated that his favorite weapon were the cannons, because they would take out an aircraft with only one or two rounds fired. His ground crews reported that he rarely returned home empty of ammo. I'd say that makes the cannons effective enough in fighter combat

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie3 View Post
    I'd say that makes the cannons effective enough in fighter combat ;)
    Note his record: Mostly Russians, who were generally about as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house (dogfighting requires the capacity for independent thought -- guess why the Soviet Union failed on this score...). Also: How often was he flying?

    The WW1 game gets cannon right -- half the deck is misses; but half the hit cards will cripple a unit outright. Cannon are wonderful... *if* one can score a hit to start with.

  18. #18

    Default

    I played the Spad XII with a cannon in it recently at a convention game. It makes bomber pilots really nervous, but I think the threat of it is more dangerous than the actual cannon. The C deck has a lot of zero cards in it. On the other hand it has some serious damage as well, but due to reloading and limited ammo you have limited opportunities to actually shoot the cannon, even in longer games. Thus its impact is seriously reduced. Also my understanding is that the pilots lined up the shot for the cannon with a Lewis gun. Thus firing the cannon the consecutive turn following a hit by the B gun could possibly give the Spad XII pilot the "sniper" ability for that shot. This should never stack with the actual sniper ace ability. But this may make the cannon slightly more effective without overpowering it.

    Having an ace with the "Sniper" ability would likely make the cannon a much bigger threat. It would also make the Spad XII a much more sought after target by those defending the bombers, and dog fighting with the cannon is not ideal. All that being said, it would be fun to try the Spad XII with a "sniper" ace.

    Another thought would be to consider a Spad XII ace ability that shortens the reload time. That may however make it too powerful and unbalanced, such an ace ability would need some serious objective play testing. (so would the above idea concerning the shot after a B gun hit) I'd like to try a few more games with the Spad XII to see how well it works. Likely there is a reason the Spad XIII was not cannon armed and the production of Spad XII's was limited.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    Note his record: Mostly Russians, who were generally about as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house (dogfighting requires the capacity for independent thought -- guess why the Soviet Union failed on this score...). Also: How often was he flying?...Cannon are wonderful... *if* one can score a hit to start with.
    I concede the point that he had a high total because, "A" he flew up to 4 sorties a day depending on weather and equipment repair, and "B" because most of the Russian pilots he flew against were not well trained or very skilled.

    The original comment however was that the cannons were not very accurate and difficult to actually hit with.

    My point was that he started late in the war (oct 1942) he only flew an aircraft that was no longer considered a premium fighter by that time (even by many high scoring German pilots), they just had lots of them. He was able to rackup the highest tally ever in only 2 years with this disadvantage, which means multipul kills per sortie. He didn't hit 301 victories untill after he returned to Germany in late April of 1944. Most of the rest of his victories were USAAF late war fighter planes and pilots scored after May of 1944, not some slow flying outdated leftovers flown by unexperianced pilots. How do you do that with a weapon system that isn't effective? No matter how well you fly you still have to hit the target that is trying to avoid you to knock it out, and remember he rarely came home with empty magizines.

    Just my views

  20. #20

    Default

    In a nutshell, the use of the cannon is the same stick as the machine guns, and it doesn't get the short range bonus that the machine guns get. However, the explosion card does stay in the deck. The pilot has only six shots. When he fires, he is ingulfed in smoke, and his next card will be a stall. This will shift all his cards over one. (The penalty for a double stall is not counted, but a thought to this is that he will lose a climb chit if he did plot a stall, but this will have to be discussed with the group) it takes three consecutive cards of a straight, as he holds the plane steady as he puts the shell in. If he interupts, he has to start all over.

    So you going to try it tomorrow Steve?

  21. #21

    Default

    Hey Jim,

    Yes I plan to show up. Sorry I missed the last one but I was 10,000 miles away on the far side of the world.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie3 View Post
    Most of the rest of his victories were USAAF late war fighter planes and pilots scored after May of 1944, not some slow flying outdated leftovers flown by unexperianced pilots.
    He had 250 or so when he was transferred to the Romanian front. The "P-51s" he faced there were early-models (Bs, mainly). And he wasn't here that long.

    The only listing of his kills:

    http://www.luftwaffe.cz/hartmann.html

    shows exactly *one* P-51 kill (sometime in March '45); everything else is Russian, and most of those are the "Lakirovanny Garantirovanny Grob" (and what does it tell you about Russia that the only non-loanword in there is the one for "coffin"?).

    Bluntly: Assuming German pilots were somehow inherently superior based on their (*possibly* overinflated :) ) kill-scores is a bit like the jock-suckers I had to put up with when I lived in Omaha who would tell me how great the UNL Cornhuskers were, then act surprised when their boys were habitually humiliated the moment they stepped outside their own bailiwick -- it's easy to be great when your opposition is rubbish.

    As to the cannons themselves: The shells were, shall we say, not aerodynamically brilliant; they tended to tumble after a relatively-short flight. Also, given what sort of labor was being used to make the shells, Quality Control aws nto evyr doog iehtre. :) (There are many accounts of acft. coming back with unexploded German cannon shells stuffed into engines, frames, etc.)
    Last edited by csadn; 11-11-2010 at 23:21. Reason: add'l on-topic info

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by csadn View Post
    He had 250 or so when he was transferred to the Romanian front. The "P-51s" he faced there were early-models (Bs, mainly). And he wasn't here that long.

    The only listing of his kills:

    http://www.luftwaffe.cz/hartmann.html

    shows exactly *one* P-51 kill (sometime in March '45);...
    Actually this Luftwaffe record shows two Mustangs, the first one is #265 on June 24th 1944. The USAAF confirmed 4 downed by him in this battle from their pilot combat reports and gun camera footage. His wingmates only saw one go down so that was all he got credit for.

    Alas I no longer have a cherished reference book that detailed this particular battle, assembled from an interview with him, and using the USAAF combat reports. The book title was "Top Fighter Aces of the Second World War." It was published in the UK sometime in the mid 1960's, and had the bios of Douglas Bader, Glenn Eagleston, Eric Hartmann, and Saburo Saki. It included the USAAF file referances for this battle in the bibliography. Unfortunetly this book was ruined by a water pipe leak in my basement along with 8 other reference books and some favorite Avalon Hill jems a few years ago
    I have looked for it on rare book sites and other book search sites off and on, but have not found a replacement copy.

    Therefore with no way to backup my comments I must withdraw from this debate Thanks it was fun though!

    I will say however that I was one of two spectacular kills with LGKR's Spad Cannon...A lucky short range shot turned my plane into confetti...I was SURE I was out of the arc of fire

  24. #24

    reddsledd
    Guest


    Default

    sorry to have missed you guys tonight --traveling early tomorrow had to pack... let me know how that worked Steve...I remember last time you flew it I tried to stay clear of it until I realized how long you needed to line up a shot and reload -- then suddenly it wasn't scary anymore :]



Similar Missions

  1. SPAD Cannon
    By LGKR in forum Hobby Room
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-28-2017, 03:40

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •