Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum - LUFTWAFFE CLAIM FOR WESTLAND WHIRLWIND P6989

Good morning to all.

While researching about the loss of a certain pilot, I came up through the information that several HISPANO 20mm guns (most particularly the first series - Mark I) had failures and/or stoppages.
http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/US404.htm

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=17075

In my particular case, it seems that the panels of the wing of a Hurricane were blown off, putting the aircraft on an inverted situation, at low level, from which the pilot did not recover (or had time to bail out). Some believe that the 20mm cartridge exploded into the chamber, due to a stoppage or malfunction.

I read somewhere else that the HISPANOS 20mm guns were "temperamental" and it depended on the kind and quality of maintenance, to keep them working properly.

I would like to veer the thread to another possibility: some kind of malfunction of the Hispano 20mm guns, of Whirlwind P6989; which may have resulted in the loss of the aircraft and pilot; considering the guns were placed on the nose of the aircraft, it may have resulted in disorientation, wounds to the pilot, etc..

Is there any kind of records on the ORB that suggests problems with the HISPANOS within 263 Squadron? (failures, etc..)

Quoting from the second site: "Tremendous skill and responsibility was required by squadron armourers. Considerable technical knowledge was essential, and very few stoppages were attributed to poor maintenance or servicing. Many modifications were introduced at squadron level. The recoil distance of the Hispano was critical for trouble-free firing. After one round was fired into the stop butts, the recoil distance had to be 20 mm (0.78 in) when cold. This proved to be very difficult to measure, until an armourer discovered that, if a piece of Plasticine was pressed on to the end of the piston so that it came into contact with the front face of the feed unit after firing, the recoil could be measured by using calipers on the resulting indentation."

This (or another kind of) MECHANICAL FAULT is another probability, that I would like to hilight. Of course, most of us do try to atribute RAF losses to LW claims and vice-versa, but sometimes it is a bit more complicated, being merely a mechanical loss, or disorientation of the pilot, G-LOC, etc...

Yours, must humble and sincerely,
Adriano Silva Baumgartner