Cannon Armed Sabres in the Korean War
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- Most fans of military aviation know that F-86 Sabres in the Korean War were armed with machine guns, while their opponents, MiG-15s had cannons. But did you know that there was a cannon armed variant of the Sabre and that it flew hundreds of combat sorties in the Korean War? How well did it do and was it the reason why the USAF abandoned machine-guns immediately after the War? Find out in this video.
Main sources:
Kenneth P. Werrell - Sabres Over MiG Alley: The F-86 and the Battle for Air Superiority in Korea
amzn.to/3Sc4rZy
Colin Downes - By the Skin of My Teeth: The Memoirs of an RAF Mustang Pilot in World War II and of Flying Sabres with USAF in Korea
amzn.to/3Se3tfo
Thomas McKelvey Cleaver - MiG Alley: The US Air Force in Korea, 1950-53
amzn.to/3WszUZW
Support the channel on Patreon:
/ showtime112
Donate via Paypal:
www.paypal.com...
Join our Discord server:
/ discord
"I Can Feel it Coming" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons...
#militaryaviationhistory #f86
0:31 That's Thunderjets and not Thunderbolts, sorry about that.
Honest mistake. No worries!
Es un exelente trabajo recrear tan bien el F-86 Sabré.
Auque casi nunca operaba un avion solo.
Era la sección de dos aviones , líder y punto .
O se empleaban formaciones mas numerosa ( escuadrón)
Saludos cordiales amigo.
My neighbor Lt. Col. Bob Reed, USAAF, USAF; flew one of the F-86F's with the four 20mm cannons. Imagine Bob's surprise when he was over the Yalu with three of his 20's frozen solid and only one cannon in operation. Colonel Reed got half-credit for a MiG shoot down that day despite the malfunction. The Sabres would blow their tanks as soon as they saw hostile aircraft. Bob told us years later that the single working cannon actually was operationally better because the cockpit did not fill with smoke and the danger of drawing cannon smoke into the intake with a resultant compressor stall (and subsequent aerodynamic stall) was reduced by a substantial margin at altitude. On "Bingo Fuel" Bob and his wingman would kill their engines and glide a couple hundred miles before restarting the J-47's anticipating a possible go-around upon landing. AIR JAGRAF/X 🛩
Thank you for sharing, it's a very interesting story.
The North American F100 Super Sabre the supersonic fighter successor has four 20mm cannons. Its performance was based on everything learned from the F86 in Korea.
The great honor is that I met a pilot, a Canadian pilot, who asked me to dive to retrieve something that his wife dropped overboard. It was was a pleasure to be asked. He served in Korea and that was one tough battle field
In defense of the century series fighters, many had the gun port located some distance away from the air intakes to limit the gasses the engine could suck in. The F-100 mounted its 4 cannons way deep under the nose and the gasses couldn’t get near the intake. The F-102 I don’t believe even had a gun. The F-104 and 105 went to the single 6 barrel rotary cannon which is still in use today. And today if you look at cannon placement you’ll still see they’re trying to keep the gun gas away from the jet intake. The F-16 mounts its gun up and above the intake. The F-15 buries its gun in the wing root far above its intakes. The F/A-18 has it right in the front and even the F-22 mounts the gun and its stealth door above the intake. Even the Vietnam war experiments with gunpods on the F-4 centerline station kept the gun gas exhaust under abd away from the F-4s main engines. Lastly I know the F-106 never carried a gun relying on missiles and the F-107 flew as a prototype but never entered production. ( wouldn’t have mattered where they put a gun on the F-107 with it’s over the cockpit intake though sucking in birds might have been an issue)
The F-105 (104 maybe similar?) had another problem with it's gun. When firing the gun produced so much gas that the pressure built up in the gun bay and would blow the access door off, where it would be sucked into the jet intake, not a good day. To fix the problem vent slats were put on the access doors to vent the pressure.
The F-106 was retrofitted with a gun later in life. This occupied the midline position in the weapons bay and the barrels protruded in a bulge beneath the fuselage, well aft of the intakes.
The A-4 "Scooter" was equipped with a pair of 20 mm cannon. Between the gun muzzle and intake was a shield to keep gun gasses out of the intake. It also made a great step for when cleaning the canopy.
In Korea all the USN fighters were equped with cannon. MIG-15 was a very tough aircraft and hard to knock down with .50 cal. MIG-15 was armed with 23 mm and 37 mm cannon in a compact quick swap package. On the ground the MIG-15 could be rearmed in minutes.
I appreciated this technical video. I was also not aware of cannon armed Sabres. Great work, as usual. Thank you!
I appreciate your support!
Remember the P51 had M2 50 cal and the F86 had the M3. Which had double the rate of fire. 600 vs 1200 rpm...
Actually, the aviation version of the M2 50 cal (the AN/M2) had a rate of fire of 750-850 rounds/min. The 600 rounds/min version was the ground version of the M2.
That's not true.
@@timonsolus specifically, the 600 version was the water-cooled and the M2HB with the air cooled barrel had slightly less
I am an Aero Engineer and an A&P Mechanic, definition of technical terms is important. Volatile DOES NOT mean "flammable". When something is "volatile" it means it changes state easily think Freon, think blocks of Co2, think easily evaporated at normal temperatures. And yes gasoline, hexane, benzene are "volatile", BUT it is the vapors that are flammable NOT THE LIQUID.
The Australian air force used twin 30mm Avon canons as their armament, which I believe offered the best of worlds? Although to the best of my knowledge were never used in Korea.
ADEN Cannons, Avon was the engine.
I'm sure that R.A.A.F used 20mm & 30mm on different sabres from 75,76&77sqns.
Aden cannon. The engine was an Avon
@@Will_CH1 I named my son after that canon. 😃
@@fordprefect80 Aden has a good dad. he will not grow up to be a snowflake
82ND AIRBORNE
2 hours ago?? Ill take it!!
Amazing how they figured out the problem with the gasses.
Thanks again, hope you liked this one!
An excellent presentation. You got all the details spot-on correct. 👍
You really should do a video on Vermont Garrison. You could do one or two of his missions in each of the three wars in which he fought. I believe all the relevant aircraft are available in DCS.
Thanks for the positive comment! Yes, Garrison is certainly an interesting topic and 'one of each' is a pretty good approach. I'll see how much I can dig up on him.
They no doubt looked into the solution to the gas problem in the MiG-15 that was turned over by the North Korean defector. It was said by some who piloted MiG-15s in combat, that the 37mm cannon would rattle your eye teeth because of the heavy recoil. Chuck Yeager himself evaluated the MiG-15, who reported it's unforgiving flight characteristics in some maneuvers.
yes, Yes, YES on the garrison video
Thank you for the vote!
RE: Garrison, I recall reading a story about him from Robin Olds (I think...?); he said he and Garrison flew missions over "Route Pack Six" (the most dangerous part of North Vietnam) but due to Garrison's advanced age and declining eyesight (He was well over 50 years old by 1966-67; here's Olds' quote:
Olds observed that Garrison flew his "52nd combat mission on his 52nd birthday" while at Ubon.[31][n 10] Olds also noted that by 1967 Garrison was : ...so nearsighted he carried about four different pairs of glasses with him...but by God, if you wanted a target bombed, he would hit it. He would hit it when everybody else missed. ...He got furious with me because I wouldn't let him get up there among the MiGs. I told him, 'Pappy, every fighter pilot in the Air Force knows and loves you, and I am not going to be the guy that sends you up there to get your butt scragged.' He just could not see anymore.
@@nickmitsialis That is a fascinating story. I wonder how he was still allowed to fly by the medical officers.
@@showtime112 great question. I guess everybody loved Garrison so much, they didn't have the heart to ground him.
Nice! Maybe next you want to check project AshTray next.
Thanks for the suggestion! Recon is a bit hard to emulate with the current flight sims.
@@showtime112 Well in the case of the Sabres they didn't see anything inside the cockpit, so is a shoot and pray affair, lol
.60 cal Machine guns were considered as well, as the Volume of Bullets wouldn't be the huge Difference that the M-39 saw M-3 (or M-2). Fights, pre Sidewinder/Falcon were expected to be up-to 6-8 'passes' at each adversary, so the low Ammunition-carry rates of Cannons was still a big Concern. These variables got worked-out by 1954/55, and reliance upon 'missile kills' became perhaps too aggressive. Luckily, meanwhile, someone at GE Guns created the M-61 Vulcan....
Interestingly enough, Gatling himself lived long enough to see an electric motor put on one of his guns.
Really good reconstruction video. Though I wish I could find a feature length video of the Korean air war.
I love your videos man, could you do a video on the Canadian pilots on exchange during the Korea war
Thank you! I've done one such video: ruclips.net/video/mB4Btjer13k/видео.html Perhaps I'll cover others as well in the future.
Great video 👍
Hvala!
The last hurrah of the M3 .50 cal. In the end, cannons were better, but the fighter has to be built and optimized for them from the get-go. Adaptations are often unsuitable.
Lucky man to recover with the help of the Sabres benign handling. Instinct and airmanship does the rest.
Another fascinating video with skilled and tasteful use of sim "footage".
Glad you liked it, thank you!
Thank you for the video 😊
Thank you for appreciating it!
Another great video 👍
Thanks Chups!
Muy interesante. Cómo todos los vídeos que publicas.
Me encanta la temática de la guerra de Corea.
Gracias!
Thanks a lot! I agree Korea was a very fascinating topic.
I recall an F-86 pilot remarking that when he fired the four cannons it was the loudest sound he had ever heard.
great vid but question wats easier getting a gun kill in cold war jets or modern day jets(might be a dumb question) and like what other wars did the migs in cold war win or perform exellent (can only think of vietnam and india).thanks
I'd say, making a gun kill is harder than a missile kill as you really need to be very precise. Regarding the MiGs question, other than in India and Vietnam, they generally didn't do all that well. I mean, there could achieve some limited success but being superior seemed to elude them. It's due to various factors, not just the aircraft design.
@@showtime112 poor MiGs the first question i meant was what was harder a modern jet going for a gun kill or a cold war jet going for a gun kill. And for the second one would be who was better the Indians the Vietnamese or soviets in there performance with the MiGs?
The US NAVY went to 20MM before the USAF.. The F9F Panther had them in Korea and one pilot shot sown 4 MIGS in one fight. Kept secret until a few years ago.
This was a nice presentation.
Thank you very much!
Thank you! Another great video 👍
Well, USAAF love for 12,7 reminds me about RAF love for 7,62 machine guns in pre WWII years. Luckily they found the mistake and switched their planes to cannons in 1941-42. USAAF got to repeat RAF’s way after WWII through Korea. However, US Navy got wiser, and never used machine guns in Korea👍
tbf the Hispano cannons had several glaring issues that had to be ironed out, going with an all-MG setup was more of a "i have nothing else" thing
Thank you very much!
I enjoy your histories! Cheers, JP
Thank you very much!
Exactly named F86F-2
True!
A significant factor is the difference in range between 20mm cannon and 50 cal machineguns.
Four cannon are far too many, especially for a fighter aircraft target, and indeed today a single gatling is optimum.
The project Gunval. 10 F86F converted and send to Korea. But 2 stay in Japan. One lost following flame out, . Powder smoke go in air intake, and stall😢
Thanks for contributing!
The F-86H was supposed solve the problem. It redesigned the nose of the saber to add a chin mounted air intake. This made it impossible for the unburnt powder to affect the engine cause it couldn’t get sucked in
@@matthewcaughey8898 and for Fiat 🤣F86K ..the Guns were moved aft air intake and May be radar cône deflect airstream and push smoke back
Interesting that they put 2 former RAF pilots together. No accident I'm sure. I have to wonder why the F86 ingested all that cannon smoke and the Mig15 (with bigger cannons) didn't?
I think it had something to do with the jet engine type. To be honest, I don't understand the physics but the Rolce Royce Nene (which powered the MiG) wasn't bothered by that while the J47 was.
They put RAF pilots together so one could pour the tea and the other could say "jolly decent of you, old chap"
I think mig 15 Guns have some vent or deflector at top of muzzle.
Location of Guns are far from air intake and May be an aérodynamic Flow who keep away the smoke.
So invisible
@@dominiqueroudier9401the 37mm while being bigger and fires slower which may have to do with it as well as only having 2 23mms rather than 4x cannons with a very high fire rate?
@@wheneggsdrop1701 yes 12 7m have huge rate of fire so plenty of smoke. But also invisible aérodynamique flow
Very good video and information. I would have assumed that a cannon armed sabre would have been better but I would have been wrong.
Thanks! Yes, it should have provided an improvement but things rarely work as simply as that :)
A bit of interesting lore I came across was that the USAF looked into whether or not the occupied Japanese arsenal that produced cannons for the Zero could re-start production and then adapt the cannons to the Sabre. I think the war ended prior to any concrete decisions were made, but would have made for an interesting variant!
Showtime112 the US Navy have more success with there AN/M3 20mm cannon form World War 2 than the new US Air Force 20mm cannon on the Sabre, the US navy F9F Panther was armed with a M3 cannons down Seven MIG 15 fighters, one US Navy pilot Capt. Royce Williams down four U.S.S.R MIG 15 during the Korean war with the F9F fighter.
The USAAF-USAF proved long overdue to installing cannon armament on fighter aircraft, the exceptions being the P-38 Lightning which brandished one, Hispano 20mm cannon in its nose section and the P-39 Airacobra which mounted a 37mm cannon or a 20mm in the export version. The U.S. Navy began turning to cannon armament by the end of World War 2.
It took the new USAF the lessons of jet aerial combat against Soviet-built MiG-15s in the skies high over North Korea beginning in late 1950. U.S. Air Force F-86A Sabre jet fighters noted the distance between combat aircraft had opened up due to the higher jet speeds. The venerable Browning M2 0.50 heavy caliber machine gun proved wanting as the six guns lacked stopping power. Many of the 0.50 caliber bullets were striking the MiG-15 at a shallow or oblique angle and ricocheting off.
Give the USAF due credit for responding quickly this time. In 1952 North American duly responded with a cannon-armed F-86F Sabre. This Sabre employed four, Hispano short-barreled 20mm cannon. There were initial problems. Firing all four 20mm cannon poured exhaust smoke into the turbojet, causing it to cut-out and stall. The quick remedy was to stagger the firing sequence of the four cannon.
The penultimate F-86H Sabre mounted four Hispano short-barrel cannon as part of its design features. The F-86H, however, was actually an interim Sabre fighter while the F-100 Super Sabre fighter entered mass production, operational service and training, all of which took years.
The F-86 actually used the M3 Browning 0.50 inch machine gun. This has roughly double the rate of fire of the M2 version.
The F-86 H also featured a redesigned nose obviously intended to solve the cannon gas ingestion problem
@@matthewcaughey8898 The nose opening seemed larger.
At the 51st Fighter Wing at Osan AFB, all the Korean war aces has their picture there and a narrative of their exploits.
The MIG-15 was equiped with 2 cannons of 23mm and one of 37mm, all was used during the second world war.
But in the corean war it was for destroying the big bombers like B-29 at high altitude, roughfly 9000 meters around 30.000 feets because the MIG-15 is an excellent climber, better than the F-86.
Concerning the USA, that is important is the quantity of ammunitions and the rate of the cannon and its caliber does not overtake 20mm.
The F-8 CRUSADER, called the last gunfighters had four cannons of 20mm. Not in the A-10 THUNDERBOLT II which is equiped with a special cannon of two tons for destroying tanks.
You have the same problem with the Phantom II during the Vietnam war, at the beginning it had no cannon. In the USA, they used a rotative cannon like a Gatling system of 20mm.
The russian and the french have cannon of 30mm for destroying the big bombers and you can use them for strafing wuth special shells.
The germans used the 27mm like the MAUSER. Each country has her own choice in fact, the British used the cannon ADEN of 30mm.
Both NR-23 and N-37 were post-war
Exactly! Thank you for the overview!
@@TyrannoJoris_Rex
Sorry, I spoke about the calibers, not the model of the cannons.
But if you look at location you’ll see they’re all mounted in a way to minimize gun combustion gas getting pulled into the engine or they’ve got some kind of porting to vent the spent gasses away from the engines
ME-262 had four 20mm, not 27mm, correct? Thx.
Thank you for this very interesting story! I have seen photos of the cannon modified Sabres but did not know the story behind their limited use in Korea. Also, please do the Vermont Garrison story! A three war fighter pilot! That has to be interesting!
Thank you for the comment! Garrison could be a future topic.
The Aussie version of the F86 had a more powerful Rolls Royce engine and twin 30mm cannon. Took a while to solve the gas ingestion issue though.
P-47 Thunderbolt never served in the Korean War. Every major air force, except the USAAF transitioned to the cannon by the end of WW2. The lessons learned from Korea meant that no new American fighter was equipped with MG’s after Korea.
True, that was a slip of the tongue. It was supposed to say 'Thunderjet' (as the photo suggests)
9:43 the F86H sabre..Hog was bigger and air intake redesigned.
Mainly used like fighter bomber
It killed the big ace, McConnell
@@migmadmarine yes ,it was in Edwards AFB. Hé didnt want to eject to save the plane and land in dry lakeBut at last moment décision to eject but too low to déploy full parachute
EXCELLENT video, as usual. Very rich in historical facts. Thanks very much. I woul recomend to read the "Statiscal Summary of the Eight Air Force Operations" (European Theater), to see how effective is the cannon vs. the .50 cal.MG against an airplane.
Glad you are around, thank you!
It seems even with .50 cals the Sabers did 'OK' against MiGs and I don't quite know why: better 'mix' of ammo? Improved gunsight? More experience made for better firing decision? I mean, 15 seconds is a lot of firing time.
If you look at the gas venting system on fighters designed around the M39 cannon, it's much bigger than that of the F-86. The gas venting system on the MiG-15 had to be big just to accommodate the two NR-23 and one N-37 cannons.
Capt. Sam Smutz. 82nd FIS.
The Navy switched to 20 mm cannons soon after World War II. The only Navy jet armed with 50 caliber, was the Phantom 1. The F9F Panther, F2H Banshee, and the prop AD Skyraider, all were equipped with 20 mm canon when they entered service. The F9F while inferior to MIG 15 in flight characteristics, gave a good account of itself in battle against MiGs , do to the training of its pilots, and they’re being armed with 20 mm canon.
17 hours late.... But I'm still here
The video doesn't go away :) Thanks for another comment!
DCS does a good job with the Sabres and Mig15
Very interesting video, as usual. I must however share here my skepticism about the matter of the gun gas of the 20 mm cannons causing compressor failure and the subsequent flame out of the Sabre's engine. The NR-37 and NS-23 cannons of the MiG-15bis were positioned even forward and caused even bigger balls of gas than the M39 of the F-86F-2 GUNVALs, but there was never a single case reported by the Soviet side of a flame out or engine failure because of "gas ingestion". NONE. Furthermore, the loss of the two GUNVAL Sabres that you mentioned, which took place on 25 January and 30 April 1953 (involving the pilots Murray Winslow and future ace Lonnie Moore respectively), match perfectly with the Sabre kills claimed by two MiG-15bis fliers - Piotr Blinov (535 IAP of the 32 IAD, three Sabre kills under his belt) on 25 January 1953, and the ace Vasiliy Lepikov (415 IAP, 133 IAD) on 30 April 1953 respectively. IMHO the "gun gas" is a very cute explanation to do not credit those losses to the actual cause: MiG-15 fire.
If you look at the mounting location that will tell you more. The MiG-15s guns are mounted low and sit under the engine intake. Some gasses might have gotten sucked in but the slipstream most likely generated enough pressure to vent the majority of the combustion gasses away. Secondly the MiG cannons had fairly long barrels which assist in clearing out gas from a fired projectile. The design of the gun is another factor. The cannons used by the F-86 were equipped with a revolving chamber. This leaves an area like a revolver where gas can escape and possibly build up near the forcing cone ( hence why a revolver can’t be held by the cylinder when fired) the MiG cannons used a conventional breech configuration which keeps the gas coming out of the barrel. Lastly is the rate of fire, the revolver cannon had a much higher ROF then the MiGs guns. Later F-86 models featured a revised nose design which changed it to a chin mounted air intake ( F-86H) this fixed the problem on the F-86. Later variants of the MiG-15 ( The MiG-17) completely eliminated the 37mm and moved the NS-23 barrels back. The MiG-19 had the 23mm guns in the wing roots where they were so far from the intake they couldn’t stall the engine
@@matthewcaughey8898 Certainly part of your arguments are probably right. I make however a correction about the armament of the MiG-17 and MiG-19: the MiG-17F kept the 37 mm cannon (that is the way she fought in Vietnam, I read the accounts of some Vietnamese aces using it to achieve their victories), and the MiG-19 inicial variants had indeed 23 mm cannons, but those were later replaced by 30 mm ones, and that is the weaponry they used in combat in the Taiwan straits, Vietnam and the Indian subcontinent.
An Australian Version? Our Sabre Jets had cannon and Rolls Royce Jet engine.
interesting and eye-opening video!! A shame War Thunder failed to get many gages to function!?
Thanks! WT is way too wide-range to have all these details sorted out but then again, no other sim offers so many types.
The Australian F 86 had 30mm cannon
Yes, some of those late versions switched to cannons.
They were built by CAC (Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation) knowing as as CA27 Sabre. 5 Australian squadron had CA27 Sabre with 30mm canon and powered the Avon engine
Those MIG. 15s were something else! They were better in most ways!
Kill ratio say's, "Hold my beer."
@@Johnnycdrumsyeah but is it because the F-86 is a better plane or is it because USAF pilots were better trained than the North Koreans (against Soviet pilots the kill ratio was a lot more even)
@@harveyknguyen ; Better gunsight in a bigger more rugged platform.
@@Johnnycdrums sure but again
did the F-86 get more kills because it's a better plane or is it because its pilots were better trained
same question can be said for the pilots fighting the A6M Zero, did the kill ratio eventually get better because the planes got better or was it because the pilots got better
@@harveyknguyen; A gymnasium full of hunter killers that survived WWII, but with about seven years more in maturity?
Yeah, I'd say we had better pilots.
But it's not as if they were flying your granny's washing machine with wings attached, either.
Yes, .50 cal on the Sabre was a mistake overall.
As far as aircraft weapons are concered what exactly is the difference between a "Machine gun" and a "Cannon"?......genuinly curious to learn........great video as always btw.👍👍👍
Cannons are 15mm+. Machine Guns are less, for example 50cal
So basically just the caliber
It's primarily the caliber although to some extent it's also the type of ammo. Cannons often fire explosive rounds while machine guns usually rely on 'solid' ammo.
Different countries have different ideas about it but generally speaking an aerial cannon fires a projectile which has an explosive warhead, and a machine gun fires solid lead projectiles. Where it becomes confusing is at which calibre a projectile is capable of carrying an explosive warhead and at which calibre is it capable of carrying a meaningful explosive charge. Heavy machineguns of 12.7mm or .50" calibre have a large enough projectile to carry a small amount of explosive, the Italians and Japanese used explosive HMG rounds in their aircraft magazines however the rounds were described in the field of being not particularly different to an incendiary round because it couldn't carry enough explosive filler. Most countries didn't bother making explosive rounds for heavy machine guns. Most countries also loosely decided that enough explosive filler to be meaningful could be packed into a 20mm/2cm projectile, particularly as strong, thin case casting technology was developed by WW2, so generally a 20mm aerial gun was regarded as a cannon as an explosive round this size has devastating effect upon other fighters.
Germany was the exception here because they measured meaningful effect upon bomber aircraft and not other fighter aircraft, so they only referred to aerial guns as cannon only when they were larger than, not equal to 2cm/20mm, despite being the leaders of thin case projectiles and packing a good charge in calibres as small as 15mm. A nice example of why they draw this line is actually with Russian weapons, who generally fitted 20mm guns to fighters and 23mm guns to fighter-bombers for ground attack, and the 23mm which is unquestionably a cannon has twice the amount of explosive filler than a 20mm is capable of carrying. So that's basically the German reasoning, that a 20mm still carries so little explosive despite having great effect on small targets, it is still a glorified HMG and you need something like the Soviet 23mm or a 3cm motorkanone to really have a strong effect on bombers, like a cannon should.
Another perspective then, is that MG are designed for shooting down fighters, and cannon are designed for shooting down bombers. But again the ideas about it vary between countries.
@jasonmorahan7450 thank you for that...an excellent explanation...thank you,sir.👍👍👍👍
Australia’s Avon Sabres were cannon armed.
Gas injestion was a comon problem with new jets. For that reason gun location had to be considered at the design stage.
Nice video. For context, the higher muzzle velocity of the 50 caliber setup was a tactical advantage in high g maneuvering against the MiG-15. What it lacked in hitting power, it gained in range and g envelope. This, combined with the g-suit available to UN forces, helped gain and maintain air superiority over Korea during the conflict. It's a well established fact, regardless of kill ratio arguments. This is attested to by Maj. Gen. "Boots" Blesse, the author of _No guts, No Glory_ and in at least one interview. In a turn over 4 gs, with no g-suit, the MiG-15 could not pull enough lead to strike hits on a Sabre. This fact was exploited by UN forces and integrated into air tactics. The cannon would still be limited as engagements happened further away and at higher speeds and missiles became necessary, albeit not very reliable throughout the Vietnam era.
Thank you for contributing details!
I'm sure you meant, "Thunderjets," and not "Thunderbolts." No P-47's in Korea. Unfortunately.
You are right, lapsus linguae as Romans would say. Sorry about that!.
By 1953, U. N. Forces gained a better grip in the Korean War. The PROK and CCF had suffered bitter defeats. Time to simmer down and stop all that fighting.
Interesting video regarding this development. Thanks for all you do! ♠️🎩🎯🎱🇺🇸🏁🇮🇱🇺🇦🔱🌻🏵️💮🌸🌼🏴☠️🏹
Much obliged :)
Cannons are great if you're going up against bombers, but other fighters, I would prefer six 50 cal's and the added ammunition capacity. The Jerry's didn't have a problem with their 30mm cannons on the Me-262, but those engines were slung under the wigs far away from the cannon gas.
In WW2, many aircraft relied on a combination of both. I guess it seemed like a good balance. Or just an over-complication 😁
@@showtime112 The US Air Force for the most part relied on the 50 cal for their fighters, I think the P-38 might have had a 20mm variant, but just about everything else carried either six, or eight 50 cals. But then the only bombers they ever faced were medium twin engine German & Japanese bombers which they didn't have too many issues taking on with high rates of fire 50's.
I mean the US was the only major fighting force to go the HMG as the sole air to air armament route - I suspect a lot of that was simply due to the fact their Machine gun was more reliable than the cannons they could build whereas in Britain and Germany and Japan the cannon was the more reliable weapon. Even then by the end of the Pacific campaign the Navy was keenly eager to move to the 20mm for the enhanced lethality
Could you do a video on the South African Air Force in the Korean War?
It is on my 'to do' list. I just need to get an inspiration :)
There’s a book written by Dean Wingrin ( I unfortunately cannot remember the name…) which goes into a lot of detail regarding both the Mustang and Sabre air to air kills for the SAAF in Korea…
Not many people know we took part in the conflict in Korea…
FL450 ? That meant those MiG's were at FL550 & above. The MiG-15 handed terribly at altitudes above FL350-the aircraft tending to skid anytime evasive maneuvers were initiated. It would go up to some 60,000 ft-but the aircraft was basically uncontrollable at that height.
That original German design that spawned this Sabre 20mm cannon but also the British 30mm ADEN cannon fitted to the Australian F-86 Sabre CA-27..........this weapon was a reliable heavy hitter.
Korea was where air-to-air combat was flown the highest compared to any other war right? Because no SAMs yet and the opposing sides' most cutting-edge aircraft had significantly different service ceilings?
Yes, I believe that it was the war with the highest fighter vs fighter duels.
Canada made best performing, Australia the most heavily armed Sabre. And USA the strangest... F-86D Sabre Dog.
Sabre Dog was quite strange 😁
Very interesting video, always loved the look of the Sabre, it echoed the designs of American cars of the period I always thought.
The U.S. Navy F9F Panthers Had Four 20mm Cannons with No Problems and Got a Few Mig -15 Victories.
Cannon are very powerful weapons. Even the WW2 German Me 262 designed as a fighter to combat Allied heavy bombers with had 4 x 30MM cannon that made it devastating againt anything .
On gunfight, the Migs decimated the poor Sabres, just ONE shot from Mig would explode the Sabre to pieces, but the muricans needed dozens and dozens of MG hits and even then the Mig could take the beat and return home... many US ex pilots testified that.
Shows the performance advantage of the MIG over the Saber.
I wonder if they tried any different formulations of propellent that might reduce the Compressor stall problem?
The .50 Caliber Brownings on the First Sabres still had a Higher Velocity and Rate of Fire than the Migs Cannon.
The .50 BMG as fighter aircraft armament was obsolete by the end of WW2, Korea just proved it. Cannons beat MG’s.
The Sabre was a gorgeous, bitchin' little plane ❤
Vermont Garrison looks like David Niven.
12.7mm (0.50) i M2 je jednostavno savršen kalibar i strojnica, danas na zemlji. Nekad i u zraku...
Neke stvari jednostavno funkcioniraju :)
the RAAF operated the Cannon armed Australian built CAC F-86
Nice! 👌
I wonder if those sabres have more powerful engines like what the British have put on their Sabres, those Avon engines. It has more thrust and could avoid the compressor stall.
wonder how this affected the navies j2 /3 furies?
those were basically cannon armed f-86 built for the navy
I was wondering when the Navy FJ would be brought up. It had 4 20mm guns. Maybe never used in Korea, but I'm sure the muzzle gas issue was a consideration in its design. It looks like it had a narrower and taller intake than the F86. Otherwise, very similar.
Russian pilots flew migs
Altho they were told not to stray too far away in case
Of capture!
How about the American pilot who got a kill with his side pistol?
Will you do that story?
😊
Thank you for the comment!
Please make garrison video my friend
Thanks for the suggestion!
👍👍👍
Thank you for the comment!
The developments of early jet era are the staple of FA&FO... without CAD and simulation software there is so much that can blindside an engineer well into the prototyping phase...
👌
Thank you for the comment!
They flew at 50,000 ft in the 50s? Damn.
The thing that made the saber cannon really good. It's because it could hit ground targets and air targets.
What? The cannon you're not gonna shoot individual building so easily. At 600 miles of hour, you could control the spread pattern of the machine guns, 6 Browning machine guns. You can control the pattern of the fire, so you could hit air target shrin. And you could hit Grandma. The Canon is exclusively as far as I am concerned. What's the weather Houston at air target? We have a less possibility of hearing
Is this the modern version of the old IL2 Sturmovik flight sim?
No, it's War Thunder. But IL-2 is developing a new installment which will cover the Korean War. Looking forward to it.
❤
Hvala!
Australian Sabres had 2 x 40mm cannon as standard …. and an Avon turbojet, same as on the Canberra bomber.
I might be wrong on the Aden cannon being 40mm or 30mm, but that was my memory. Cheers
1:35 "Based on a German WW2 design".
What wasn't?
Aircraft carriers, for example 😁
Spitfire, P51 etc etc.
The guns in nose arrangement of the F86 was problematic fir the integration of 20mm Cannon. Simply replacing 3 .50s on each side with 2 20mm was only ever foong to get fun-wash sucked-into the Engine intake.
I'd rather have the 50 cal. then the 20-mm because of load out capabilities. Believe me don't under estimate the 50 cal.!
It seems to have plenty of fans.