Defensive machineguns in luftwaffe bombers

[Jon]

I have two questions if anyone can help?

1) What was the normal ammount of MG15 saddle drums carried in a 1940 HE111H or JU88A-4?

2) I have always thought that by 1942 the Luftwaffe had stopped using the 7.92 round for bomber defense and started to favour the 13mm as the lowest calibre to be used. However I know that on some late war Luftwaffe aircraft crashes in the UK...1943/44/45.... MG15's and ammunition drums have been found or at least 7.92 ammunition.
Would these have been factory fitted or field fitted to desperatley try and increase the bombers defense ?

[Juha]

Hello Jon
2)Germans used 7,9mm mgs to the end, even He 177s had them, in A1 Stand (MG 81) and often in C-Stand (MG 81Z), He 111s had them to the end as beam weapons and usually also in C-Stand (MG 81Z) even if the late versions had heavier weapons in A- and B-Stands. Also Ju 188s had usually MG 81Z in C-Stand.

1)to my understanding there were no or only a few A-4s flying in 1940, most were A-1s and A-5s.
Ju 88 A-5 had A-Stand (forward firing) MG 15 with 450 rounds (means 6 saddle-drums)
B-Stand (upper backwards) 2 MG 15 with 1125 rounds (means 15 saddle-drums)
C-Stand (under backwards) MG 15 with 600 rounds (means 8 saddle-drums).
A-4 (early) probably had the same armament than A-5, but at least later A-4s had MG 81s, which were belt-fed.

I have not time to look at He-111H, and I think that I don't even have that info anywhere.

HTH
Juha

[Jon]

Hi Juha

Thanks for the very informative answer.

It is odd that while the US settled on turret mounted .50's and Britain although stuck with a calibre almost identical to the German round at least mounted it in two's or four's in a turret.

However reading books such as "Twelve Days in May" or looking at the reasons for RAF losses in the excellent Blitz and Battle of Britain Then and Now series you can soon see that the Luftwaffe gunners not only forced many attacking fighters to leave the combat early with damage but also shot a good number down.

The role of the Airgunner has always fascinated me and i find it a shame that no "ace" lists are complied for gunners ??

[Tony Williams]

Originally Posted by Jon

The role of the Airgunner has always fascinated me and i find it a shame that no "ace" lists are complied for gunners ??

Kill claims for air gunners are very hard to confirm, especially if they were operating in formations which means that several gunners were probably firing at each plane which went down, so they would all claim it. IOs tried to allow for this, but overclaiming was still rife.

One of the outcomes of the 1940 fighting is that the value of increased protection in the form of armour and self-sealing fuel tanks was rapidly appreciated, so the planes toughened up during the course of the BoB, with (AIUI) extra armour even being added in the field. This made rifle-calibre guns like the 7.92mm and .303 much less effective than they had been, although liquid-cooled engines remained vulnerable to a bullet through the cooling system.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum