Me 262 missing a cannon shell ejection port?

[JonOlsen88]

Hello everybody,

While I was examining a photo of an Me 262 A-2a, I noticed that it appears to be missing a cannon shell ejection port on the left side of the aircraft. Me 262s should typically have 4 shell ejection ports: two on either side of the forward fuselage, under the cannon bay.

I've attached to this thread a photo with an arrow pointing at the one shell ejection port that's visible. But Where's the other one? Could it have been plugged in? I believe it should be seen from the angle at which the photo was taken. While I'm aware that many Me 262 A-2a's--including this one- were only armed with the two lower cannons, and had their two upper cannon troughs plugged in, I've never heard of the shell ejection ports being plugged in on any A-2a.

I've had a look at the original training video from which this shot was taken, but the other shell ejection port is nowhere to be seen.

Check it out starting from the 15:30 minute mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBH0ULVmsow

What do you think?

Best regards,
Jon

[PMoz99]

If I'm not mistaken, 262's used as bombers often had one pair of cannon deleted ..... Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Looking at the photo, it appears like the upper guns have been removed.
Peter

[JonOlsen88]

Yes, the upper guns have indeed been removed on this Me 262. The upper gun troughs have been likewise faired over. However, I was actually referring to the spent shell ejection ports, which are the dark rectangular, slanted things just outboard of the bomb pylons.

There are lots of photos that show the upper gun troughs faired over on Me 262 A-2a's (thought not on all). I'm just a bit surprised to see spent shell ejection ports plugged in, as I've never heard of this happening, nor have I noticed it in photos before. But I suppose it would stand to reason that if the upper cannons are removed, then the shell ejection ports, whose cartridge ejector chutes are connected with those cannons, can likewise be faired over since they would no longer be needed.

I've attached below a photo of another Me 262 A-2a, 9k+YH. On this machine, the upper cannon troughs are faired over, but the shell ejector ports are untouched. This seems to have been more typical. http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...psujcv6qi1.jpg

Thoughts?

[Karoband]

Nice catch, Jon.

The only other photo I could find was a 'still' from a film of a line-up of 1./KG 51 aircraft:

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/pictur...&pictureid=560

[You will need to log in to view.]

I presume the top MK 108 cannon were removed because of restricted lift-off weight until more powerful Jumo 004's came along.

best regards,
Jim Geens

[Roger Gaemperle]

Jim, as far as I remember from wartime Mtt documents, the lift-off weight restriction was mainly due to the weak landing gear, not because if the power plants. Regards, Roger

[PMoz99]

Jon, I would just like to point out that if you edit a post that other members have already posted comments on, it changes the whole context of those comments.
Might I suggest you explain your edit clearly or alternatively expand on your question in a subsequent post.
Thanks
Peter

[Karoband]

Aha! Thanks, Roger.

[JonOlsen88]

Thanks for the responses everyone. I did make some edits in my previous posts, but from what I can remember those edits involved fixing typos--nothing substantive. But then again, there's such a thing as the butterfly effect.

So, I was actually curious about the spent shell ejection ports. My intention all along was to inquire about those, rather than the gun ports. I've seen plenty of photos of Me 262A-2a's with the upper cannon ports faired over, but I haven't seen any photos of the spent shell ejector ports being plugged in. Does the Me 262 in the first photo I posted have two of its spent shell ejector ports covered up? This is my question.

The Me 262 in that first photo is popularly identified as WNr. 170068 (9K+BN). A typical Me 262 has 4 spent shell ejection ports located on the bottom part of the forward fuselage, underneath the gun bay. This is the only Me 262 I've seen that apparently had two of the shell ejector ports covered up. We can only see the left side, but let's assume the starboard side looks the same, with only one ejector port visible on each side.

I'm just trying to make sure my eyes aren't playing tricks on me, because I was not expecting to see a spent shell ejector port covered up. I am curious, especially for modelling purposes.

[Graham Boak]

I suspect that the cannon were removed for cg reasons, given the weight of the bombs and racks so far forward. This would of course also assist in reducing the maximum take-off weight.

This would result in the cg being well aft after the bombs were released. Are there any comments in the literature about any effects of this? For example, nose lifting after release, or handling difficulties on the return to base?

[Trexx2017]

Great topic. Thanks for sharing all this information gent's.

Regards,

Troy