JDK's Fiendish Quiz No.1

[Holedigger]

Would the Battle of Midway be considered a "Defensive" Air Battle? It was a major turning point, very historic in Naval History as a major turning point. Proved that air power was THE thing in coming battles. If you didn't control the air, you didn't control anything!

[bdk]

9mm, really ?

Same case can be made for .30 cal it was used by various factions on both sides in rifles, carbines, squad machine guns, medium machine guns, aircraft machine guns, some countries used it as a heavy machine gun. It too became the NATO standard and the Russian post war standard, 7.62. It is still being used today in squad automatic weapons ( SAW ).

My point was that 9mm was used throughout Europe prior to and during WW2. The US also manufactured 9mm weapons, but not primarily for US combat use.

7.62x51 became the NATO standard, but that was a post-war development of the .308 Winchester commercial cartridge AFAIK.

".30 cal" is a very generic statement since most of the combatants in WW2 had something in that size range. I'm just guessing that .30-06 was the most popular cartridge during the war based upon that manufacturing capability in the US.

8mm (7.92x57mm Mauser) was certainly a popular military round as well in Europe from the late 1800s through today and might also be a contender.

[rreis]

Would the Battle of Midway be considered a "Defensive" Air Battle? It was a major turning point, very historic in Naval History as a major turning point. Proved that air power was THE thing in coming battles. If you didn't control the air, you didn't control anything!

I think the Israelis controlled the air during their last Lebanon stint and it didn't help.... the US also controlled the air in Vietnam and it didn't solve their problem... I'm just meaning it depends on the conflict and each participant goals. Air Power can do IT... or not

[Holedigger]

Dat true!

[RickH]

The generic .30 cal is a broad term. I was working off of JDK's original question ;

what was the most common caliber, not cartridge

If you go with cartridge then I would also guess 30-06 due to the large numbers of US arms supplied to friendly countries across the globe.

[Pogmusic]

[quote="bdk"][quote="RickH"]
7.62x51 became the NATO standard, but that was a post-war development of the .308 Winchester commercial cartridge AFAIK.

Actually, 7.62x51 IS the .308 Winchester.

[RickH]

Winchester marketed the .308 Winchester 2 years before NATO adopted the 7.62X51. Apparently there are minor differences in the case design but not enough to keep them from being interchangeable.

[hercules130]

Not sure on the numbers of other weapons, but with over 2 million Browning M2s produced in WW2 .50 cal would be a strong candidate, if not run away winner for most common aircraft caliber/calibre.

[Jollygreenslugg]

I'll have a crack at two.

1. What was the most common calibre of gun in W.W.II?

I'm going to go with the US .50 cal round as used in the Browning .50 cal MG. I started to collate info by aircraft type, but it got way too difficult. I'll go with the .50 cal as the sheer number of bombers with 10+ of these weapons as defensive armament, along with the number of fighters with six or eight of these guns surely puts it in front. I've ruled out the .303 as it wasn't the only British/Commonwealth weapon, being supplanted with heavier calibre weapons later. Also the defensive .50s on 20000+ US bombers outnumber the smaller number of British/Commonwealth-produced bombers, which had fewer MGs per aircraft.

The spread of weapons among aircraft of Russian, German and Japanese manufacture would appear (famous ast word, appear) to rule them out also.

So with ten-odd .50 cal machine guns on upwards of fifty thousand bombers, I'll give it to the Yanks with the .50 cal.

5. How many types can you name that were in production on opposing sides in W.W.II?

Douglas DC-2/Nakajima Ki34
Douglas DC-3 (C-47 etc)/Lisunov Li-2/Showa L2D
NAA T-6 Texan/Harvard. This is a shakey one as the CAC Wirraway and Kyushu K10W1 were developments of early variants of the type but weren't the same. Related, yes, the same, no.
To stretch it further, the Douglas DC4E was sold to Japan and became the basis of the Nakajima G5n. Neither were successful.

Cheers,
Matt

[RickH]

As far as cartridge goes for aircraft guns, I'd give it to the .50BMG, also.

17000 B17s, 18000 B-24s, nearly 10,000 B-25s, 7000 A-20s, 16,800 P-40s, 15,500 P-51s, 9500 P-39s, 10,000 P-38s, 7700 F4F/FM-2, 12,200 F6F, 12,500 Corsairs, plus flexible guns for other types. I can't think of any other airborne weapon that was as universally used as the Browning .50.

[bdk]

7.62x51 became the NATO standard, but that was a post-war development of the .308 Winchester commercial cartridge AFAIK.

Actually, 7.62x51 IS the .308 Winchester.

7.62x51 NATO is different than .308 Winchester. Due to the larger tolerance for headspacing requirements of military machine guns, the 7.62x51 NATO chamber is different. A 7.62x51 NATO round will always be good in a commercial .308 Winchester chambered gun but the opposite is not true. The .308 Winchester cartridge, with its thinner shell casing, could actually split damaging the gun and/or injuring the shooter in a NATO chamber.

[gregv]

"2. Name the type that at least four national leaders (from Axis and Allied sides) flew in (note that some of the leaders weren't leaders at the time of their flight/s - extra points)."

Fiesler Storch maybe? I know Mussolini flew in one, not sure if old Adolph ever got a ride in one but you'd have to think maybe, as well as perhaps De Gaulle?. Did Ike ever fly in one? Churchill?

I'm with the other guys on the .50 BMG being the most common aircraft weapon, at least as far as total units produced.

greg v.

[JDK]

5. How many types can you name that were in production on opposing sides in W.W.II?

NOW...you know me...a bit dense at times...BUT: How many types of what?

Mudge the confused

Types of aircraft, Mudge.

[Walrus 7]

There were so many defensive air battles fought during WWII. Some more successful than others. My first reaction to the question was BoB, but some others suggested have merit as well. So what were the consequences of losing the battles?

Battle of Britain: RAF loses, Germans cross the channel almost unopposed. Would the USA have entered the war at this time? They were making plans to hit Germany from the US at that time, although that probably wasn't made public.

Malta: RAF loses, Malta is bombed into submission. German supply lines aren't as interrupted as they were. However, the British still held Gibraltar and Alexandra. Would a Luftwaffe air bridge to Benghazi been out of range of fighter interdiction? Would the desert army have been able to hold out against an Afrika Corps with no supply line problems.

Midway: USN loses, atoll falls into Japanese hands. It becomes the Malta of the Pacific. Pearl Harbour would have been under pressure, but the US couldn't have allowed that to happen constantly, so an assault to re-take Midway would have been likely. Who ever lost such a battle would probably go on to lose the Pacific war, given the losses that would have occurred on both sides.

And I'll add one.

Coral Sea: USN/RAN loses, Japan goes on to take Port Moresby. US can no longer fly aircraft un-molested to Australia. In 1942, Australia did not have the ability to re-take Moresby, and with the Japanese able to hit Townsville, Darwin and Cairns with force, all the RAAF bases in the north would have been neutralised. From where does the "island hopping" begin? It would have begun with a major US assault on Port Moresby. Ultimately, Moresby would have been retaken, but only with the sort of heavy losses that were later incurred during the island hopping.

To me it remains the BoB. Simply because the US would have had to enter the war at that time had the RAF lost and Britain fallen, and the forces that would later have been needed in the Pacific would have been committed to Europe. It is not so far-fetched to think that Japan would have attacked the US at that time whilst they were occupied with sorting Europe. The Pacific war would probably have started a full year earlier than it did.

Walrus

And btw JDK ... are you going Sunday?

[RyanShort1]

"2. Name the type that at least four national leaders (from Axis and Allied sides) flew in (note that some of the leaders weren't leaders at the time of their flight/s - extra points)."

Fiesler Storch maybe? I know Mussolini flew in one, not sure if old Adolph ever got a ride in one but you'd have to think maybe, as well as perhaps De Gaulle?. Did Ike ever fly in one? Churchill?

greg v.

I'd have to do some more research to be sure on this, but I think the Storch may indeed be able to claim that. The L-5 might have as well - but documenting it might be a problem at this point. I guess it also depends on whether or not the top generals counted as national leaders, or guys like Goering.

Ryan