Flak

>>35175877
Gun makes hole in plane, plane falls down.

>>35175877
The shells they fire contain explosives that trigger at a preset height. The shrapnel resulting from said explosion is suppose to rip through the plane in hopes of hitting a critical component.

File: zenith-self-propelled-installation-zsu-37-mm-flak-18-37-mm-flugzeugabwehrkanone-18-on-the-basis-of-medium-heavy-tank-panzerkampfwagen-v-pzkpfw-v-sdkfz-171-ausfhrung-d-ausfd-flak-18.jpg (390KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 1920x1080px

>>35175889
So it requires a direct hit ? Seems hard to achieve on a fast-moving plane.

>>35175877
Proximity fuse, most understated invention of WWII.

Shell goes near airplane, shell explodes, shrapnel hits plane

>>35175920
No, it just requires the round to go off near the airplane and then hope that the shrapnel does its job.

>>35175923
how does proximity fuse work

>>35175917
>>35175923
An how is the moment of detonation set on the shell ?

>>35175920

Not really.

>You can see the plane
>You can work out how high it is
>What it's heading is
>Roughly what speed it it's going

You do some math and fire at where you think the plane will be at X time.

>>35175957
>>35175953
>>35175917

Altitude triggered shells were set about by clock springs essentially. Once a shell was fired if you know the approximate velocity you know the time it takes to reach a certain altitude. These could be wound probably similar to a wrist watch.

Proximity triggered were primitive radars in each shell. They call it "radio proximity" which is essentially radar. A continuous sine wave was transmitted from the head and as it approached a target it would reflect more and more power to an RF receiver head. Once the power reached a certain threshold the munition would explode.
Since these were all analog components their reliability/accuracy varied with temperature and humidity.

>>35175957
math
>shell traveling certain speed takes certain amount of time to reach height, that's the amount of time fuse is set
example shell takes 4 seconds to reach 2000 feet which is at the estimated height the aircraft is at so the fuse is set to 4 seconds
(idk how fast the shells travel or how high the airplanes fly when theyre shot at I'm just using these numbers as an example)

OP this video will teach you all you need to know.. highly informative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtkJHT_HUnA

File: Something is off about my glasses.jpg (26KB, 774x324px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 774x324px

>>35175920
Funny looking glasses there.

>>35176045
>Work experience kid keeps fucking up defense of the Reich
>Give him a kaleidoscope to keep him occupied

>>35176045
fritz come here! your panzerschreck is filthy!

>>35176031
Thank you. From what I understand, heavy guns were only useful for high altitudes. Also, I didn't know medium bombers could do straffing runs.

>>35176031
It's impressive, the fire control technology they already had at the time.

>>35176215
They had actually canister shots for battleships close in air defense. Basically giant fucking shotguns. I don't think they worked that well in practice. But those should be extremely lethal if you can train and load the gun in time.

>>35176215
>Also, I didn't know medium bombers could do straffing runs.
How about a B-17 Gunship?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_666

>nineteen .50s include the spare guns that Zeamer carried for replacing any .50s that jammed in combat. It was easier, faster, and therefore safer to dump a jammed gun than attempt to free the jam in the heat of battle
>Gun jams
>Literally throw the fucker out the window
>Grab another, mount it and keep firing

File: IMG_0185.jpg (18KB, 275x183px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 275x183px

>>35176248
>16inch canister shot
>tfw jap plane is making a beeline for you

>>35175877
Here you go op a detailed explanation by US war department.

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MsRNauv7rM

File: Aces High, Iron Maiden Eddie.jpg (68KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x640px

>>35176330
>Old 666
That's fucking Metal.

>>35176341
Actually it's the other way around. Japanese ships had the Type 3 round which is the canister round. Not sure about the allies having an equivalent though.

>>35176361
I love how the correct answer is always ignored in these threads and everyone proceeds pulling shit out of their ass.

>>35176361

Lmao I posted the same thing here

>>35176031

A fantastic video though

>>35176402


One thing about that vid, they showed a few devices connected to the radar and the flaks, did the device just tell the gunners where to aim or was this already auto-aimed? Seems pretty unlikely for WW2.

>>35175877

https://youtu.be/H8zPNMqVi2E?t=249

>>35176330
>old 666

holy shit, man, that's brutal

>>35176418
Analog electronics and computation were pretty hardcore even for the time. I believe a fire calculator just spits out azimuth and elevation. It would be hard to believe (but not impossible) a single unit controlling motorized flak guns. The motors would be driven by analog signals and would give feedback to the master computer for the control system to adjust accordingly. This would be extremely difficult with analog signals over distance as cable loss would be abhorrent.

>>35176418

Not sure, The US actually had a gyroscope device that aimed the gun for them based on data from a firing computer, all the crew had to do was load the guns. Extremely impressive technology for the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90_mm_Gun_M1/M2/M3

" In 1944, the system was upgraded with the addition of the SCR-584 microwave radar, which was accurate to about 0.06 degrees (1 mil) and also provided automatic tracking. With the SCR-584, direction and range information was sent directly to the Bell Labs M3 Gun Data Computer, and M9 Director, which could direct and lay the guns automatically, all the crews had to do was load the guns."

>>35176465
Not really if it is voltage error based azimuth/vertical motor control. Don't need to send precise radar data only zero error voltages to control the laying of the guns.

>>35176465
>>35176485

Dang that's seriously impressive for the time. Seems strange we can't successfully shoot down ICBMs with the tech we have today.

>>35176330
>"the last one to jam gets to stay on my aircraft"

>>35176574
>Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a gun, before throwing it out of a plane?

>>35176528
The brits had this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_Gun-Laying_Turret

Basically it gave a you, a tailgunner in a bomber plane, an extremely basic heads-up display in your sight that allowed you to fire accurately without seeing shit.

>>35176574
>>35176582
Thanks I have to go get my screen cleaner now

File: 1497872235189.jpg (60KB, 720x488px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 720x488px

>>35176101

>>35176582
>at least you can shoot

>>35176045
>a little to the left hans
>ja

>>35176528
>Seems strange we can't successfully shoot down ICBMs with the tech we have today.
ICBMs move orders of magnitude faster, higher, and further than any plane ever built. By comparison, it'd be easier to put a round through a particular dial in that plane's cockpit than to shoot down a warhead.

>>35176840
But an airplane can change its course. An ICBM's trajectory is more predictable. It's just a matter of detecting the ICBM in time.

>>35176883
>An ICBM's trajectory is more predictable
I have some bad news for you.

>>35176883
Predictability only goes so far. If I'm falling out of a plane somebody could plot my exact path and landing site but that doesn't mean they can do anything about it if there isn't some giant Hollywood stunt cushion handy.

Plus, most nuclear ICBMs have decoys loaded alongside the warhead.

>>35176045
That's a rangefinder. It uses parallax to calculate approximate range.

>Known distance between eye holes
>adjust focus until two images merge into one

And they say Maths are useless.

>>35176934
anyone that says that is a drooling retard

>>35176991
But it's hard, and boring, and I don't see how I'm ever going to use it in every day life

File: fuses n sheeit.png (2MB, 3792x1024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3792x1024px

>>35175957
>>35176021

ordnance fag here

there were several types, similarly to aircraft dropped bombs, there are several methods of initiating explosives, chemical and inertial fuses in adition to proximity fuses.

CHemical fuses used a chemical to burn at a rate corresponding to a flight time, like a grenade, where the primer ignites a secondary fuse which birns for say 3-5 seconds while the projectile rises then goes into the main explosive charge

similarly, the inertial and mechanical fises function on a principle of rotation, via centifugal force or air being pushed past a propellor, the later type of fuse being used in the german fliegerbomben

proximity fuses are super high tech, they use signals to ping and detect nearby targets and when a suitible target is detected by a sensor, the shell will detonate.

some types of artillery including past and modern use similar or the same types of fuses as those described

>>35178236
What's in use today? Not that flak is really used anymore, but what's the most advanced system look like?

File: 57+mm+3P+shell+(Pre-fragmented+Programmable+Proximity+fuzed+ammunition).jpg (67KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 960x720px

>>35178802

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wewaCdSW4yc

3P is pretty common, basically smart detonation

>>35178944
>>35178802

>Programed prior to firing
>programmed for optimum kill
>designed with sensor so sensitive that raindrops impacting the nose cone had to be accounted for

>>35178944
>>35178981
And are these actually used for shooting at planes? Surely modern planes are much too fast for this to be worth it.

File: mk110.png (172KB, 745x966px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 745x966px

>>35179027

with advanced radar tracking, its very effective for shooting planes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0oHvqIUEmY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z1ffdvLWXA

There are two main doctrines, lots of lead, or very accurate lead

3P fires in the vicinity (explosives) with high accuracy, whereas things like the CWIS/CRAM focus more on putting lots of rounds at the target (bullets)

File: file.png (176KB, 324x478px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 324x478px

>>35175920
WWII flak was more similar to the shrapnel shells of WWI, small fragments at rather low velocity. Doesn't take much.

Pic related are fragments each responsible for fatal injuries to bomber crewmen.

>>35179122

usage of WW2 flak was mostly for damaging equipment and injuring personell with crude vicinity effect, as demonstrated in

>>35176031

modern systems like KASHTAN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELgua-Slx2o

are based on being able to identify and selectively target individual aerial targets

but then again, modern attacks are precision strikes, since large scale bombings are not common practice any longer

I just love the aesthetic of weapon manufacturer promotional videos, I used to have some promotional CDs with videos for the THAAD and dillon aero minigun

>>35175877
bait

File: 1504739066068.jpg (204KB, 1242x925px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1242x925px

>>35175920

basically the opposite of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZe5J8SVCYQ

with this kind of speed (dry fire)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHqPuZs_nPk

File: file.png (201KB, 451x500px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 451x500px

>>35179183
>WW2 flak was mostly for damaging equipment and injuring personell with crude vicinity effect
Same idea be it personnel or lightly armored aircraft, low velocity shrapnel fragments did the damage rather than the blast effect of more modern HE shells. With the occasional direct hit.

File: 1496805310414.jpg (25KB, 641x530px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 641x530px

>>35179324

>i bet that hurt

>>35176883
Modern ICBM warheads can manouver and ICBM's carry a lot of penetration aids to confuse defense. Furthermore, warhead is coming from above at 6-7 km/s.
As someone said, it's like hitting a bullet in flight with another bullet from a mile away. It can be done and it was done but it's extremely expensive and thus useless.
Other methods are even more expensive.

File: 1458778030926.jpg (94KB, 1200x787px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1200x787px

>>35175962
>military
>doing math beyond simple addition and subtraction
>ever

>>35176418
>connected to the radar
Radar wasn't that great in WWII. Many instances in the pacific in which small formations of Japanese planes got the jump on US ships while completely unnoticed by both radar and the CAP.

Also difficult for naval AA to adjust aim so the Japanese used multicolor flak.

>>35179366
I bet it didn't.
At all.

>>35179452
>>military
>>doing math beyond simple
>>invent internet

File: 1486385793239.jpg (30KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 450x450px

>>35179324
I'm sorry, but what is purpose does that picture even serve? I mean, is it really necessary to provide an illustration of the effects of an unexploded 88mm shell to the head? Especially taking the time to hold the remains of the unexploded shell by the guy's head at whatever location they brought the guy to afterwards, unless they just had a photographer hop on the plane when it landed to take pictures?

>>35176384

IIRC the US had a 5 inch shell with a radio proximity fuse by mid-war. This made naval anti air far more effective.

>>35176582
breddy gud

>>35176655
>No one cared who I was until I shot down the Hans

>>35181044
Its a mockup/manikin to illustrate an effect.

>>35175920
if you shoot where plane is, plane will not be there when shell gets there so you shoot where plane is going to be
the french word "rendezvous" literally means "meet with bullet"

>>35181044
Thats the guys helmet held beside his head i think. Theres a recess for his ear, and the dent on the helmet corresponds with his pulverized head.

That aint no mannekin mock up

>>35183366
Yup, good ol' M1 steel pot. Hit the fuselage, tumbled into that poor bastard's head and it was goodnight Irene.

File: file.png (169KB, 435x500px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 435x500px

>>35181044
The Army medical dept conducted autopsies for wound ballistics studies, not for every casualty obviously but at different field hospitals in different theaters.

That picture was most likely part of the flak study re: body armor.

File: Malmedy Masscre - A dead US soldier with head wound, shot by the German Waffen-SS task force ‘Peiper’, 1st SS Panzer Division ‘Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler’.jpg (179KB, 916x728px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 916x728px

>>35184121
Also for shit like Malmedy, I assume for legal reasons.

>>35175923
German didn't use proximity fuse in ww2

>>35182882
>If I cleared your jam, would I die?!

>>35175944
it may have escaped you notice but the post he was replying to talked about the *other* kind of anti-air gun, the small caliber kind that *does* require a direct hit.

>>35175877
there are two kinds of flak; small caliber autocannons that rely on volume of fire & large-caliber guns that use explosive shells detonated in a preset altitude/equipped with proximity fuzes.

>>35184147
Malmedy was a godawful tragedy but at least it turned into a nice corner on the best racetrack in the world

>>35181044
surprisingly lot remained of the head i would never have thought.

>>35184470
Peiper didnt fair to well either.
Peiper sent his family back to Germany, but he remained in Traves. During the night of July 13/14, 1976, a gunfight took place at Peiper's house and his house was set on fire. Peiper's charred corpse was later found in the ruins with a bullet in his chest. The perpetrators were never identified, but were suspected to be former members of the World War II French Resistance or Communists. Peiper had just started writing a book about Malmedy and what followed.[19]