Is the Mk108 30mm Canon on the A8 Load out?

Most A8's have a 30mm canon load out option. Does the DCS version have it? Im thinking of getting this bird ;)

Thanks in advance

Most A8's have a 30mm canon load out option. Does the DCS version have it? Im thinking of getting this bird ;)

 

Thanks in advance

On some Fw-190 Rüstsatz mods ( R2 / R8 ) a pair of Mk108 guns replaced the outer wing MG151/20 cannons. I hope we will get them eventually, as well as other weapons already implemented in DCS as the W.Gr.21 rockets.

No, and the 190 doesn't have a nose cannon

The 190A8 has a radial engine, therefore it would not have a nose canon, just 2 mg's up front. Some A8's had wing or gondola mounted mk108's, but I guess not in the DCS version :(

MK108 in outer wing wing positions were relatively common for some units, IMO this modfication will be welcome in DCS W.

I do not think that 30mm cannons in gondolas were used by operational units apart from some unsuccessful tests.

But we need proper wing capable to carry 108s. If we get F-8, which was promised, we shold get it, it was common (or standard?) for F-8/9 variant.

This is the A-8, W.Nr 739136

Personally I'd prefer the 20s over the 30s. Better ballistics and more of the ammunition. The current armament is already heavy enough to vaporize fighters.

I can only see this being used in the ground attack or bomber interceptor (for a 190A though..?) role. Was it used in one of these roles during the war?

I can only see this being used in the ground attack or bomber interceptor (for a 190A though..?) role. Was it used in one of these roles during the war?

Yes, there were A-8 bomber destroyer versions. I don't think they'd be all that nice to fly - the 108's ballistics aren't great and the Sturmbock versions were very heavy & not something you'd want to dogfight in ( which is why they had 109 escorts ). If we want a heavy 190 let's go all the way with an F model - that's basically an A with some underside armour & a bit of strengthening, and a lot more A2G munitions.

However, the Fw 190 F8 has the outer wing MG 151/20 cannons removed to save weight. One planned modification of the F series had two much heavier MK 103 30 mm cannons installed in under wing gondolas, intended as anti tank weapon, but this wasn't used much operationally, if at all.

However, the Fw 190 F8 has the outer wing MG 151/20 cannons removed to save weight. One planned modification of the F series had two much heavier MK 103 30 mm cannons installed in under wing gondolas, intended as anti tank weapon, but this wasn't used much operationally, if at all.

The F8 had MG-131s in the cowling instead of the 17s, though. With all the extra stores racks too I think it'd be an interesting change. I guess a Sturmbock would be a pretty good ground strafing machine at least :)

Rüstsatz kits cause a huge headache when trying to work out what kit was used by which unit and when or at all. Then further add to the problem that some Rüstsatz kits became standard factory production fits , its easy for confusion to reign.

And that`s not even just a problem from historical perspective, Focke Wulf themselves in 1944 had to reorganise their production office to try an keep track of all the different modifications being applied by maintenance depots and the 10 or so licenced production companies and then all the companies involved with refurbishments.

I don`t think even the Luftwaffe high command had a handle on it. For example in Oct 1944 they ordered the firm Klemm to convert 20 planes a month (from new production and refurbishment) to conventional torpedo bombers (R14?) even though production of torpedo`s in Germany had ended in Sept 1944!

Personally I'd prefer the 20s over the 30s. Better ballistics and more of the ammunition. The current armament is already heavy enough to vaporize fighters.

 

I can only see this being used in the ground attack or bomber interceptor (for a 190A though..?) role. Was it used in one of these roles during the war?

are you sure ??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK_103_cannon

i would take mk103 over 20 every time

are you sure ??

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK_103_cannon

 

i would take mk103 over 20 every time

The Anton hits heavily already, without much difficulty aiming. A mk103 is unnecessary against fighters

Absolutely, 20mm can allow more ammunition and it's not as difficult to land a hit.

 

The Anton hits heavily already, without much difficulty aiming. A mk103 is unnecessary against fighters

I think we talking about A2G load out mk103 is excellent tank killer.

Anyway 20mm is substantial weaker in single hit knock out then 30mm

I havent looked into it so honest question. Isnt the 30mm just HE and Not AP. If thats the case the 20mm i know has a mix of HE and AP so that would be better at tank killing?

Ah just read your link on 103, was thinking 108 in my mind. Yes lets get some of that 103 please lol!!!

Whilst it remained listed in wartime handbooks as optional armament throughout the war the MK103 gondola project was cancelled and only four planes ever fitted with them, all subsequently removed before service entry. The trouble we have is they were placed into production before any testing or service trials so were only placed on a prototype and three serial aircraft and then was finally tested, during which time it was found that during repeated strafing passes their outboard weight, recoil and lack of any shock absorption system induced dangerous instability during low speed turns and was so inaccurate due to uneven firing and yaw that few rounds could be placed onto any target before inducing a stall situation and forcing the pilot to break off the attack. They can only be fired in such a glideslope and speed which makes accurate strafing impossible, or otherwise induce a stall if fired low and slow enough to actually hit anything. So they were cancelled and never operationally used, although some photos of the four fitted with them, effectively mockups do exist. Just not operationally, eg. you won't find a photo of one in the air with them, or in an operational squadron field. Just the mock ups. They did remain listed however in pilot handbooks as an armament option, it was just one which didn't exist if a flight commander actually asked for them.

Twin MG151/20 gondolas however were used operationally and replaced the outer integral guns. Baer used them on his A6, giving him 6x MG151/20 to attack bombers with. However a single pair of MK108 were more effective for bringing down bombers. More than a hundred MG151/20 rounds were required to eventually bring down a B17, it took four MK108 rounds to do the same. Luftwaffe pilots referred to it as a grenade launcher, due to the size of its HE filler and extremely curved trajectory, which had to be "lobbed" onto enemy aircraft rather than fired into them. Rounds passed upwards through the sight at 150m and downwards again through the sight at 450m and was way off target at any other range, way too high at 300m and way too low at 600m to hit anything, you had to use MG if you were being an aerial sniper and use the MK108 like a grenade launcher. Part of its effectiveness was due to its low muzzle velocity, it stuck in duralumin and exploded where more high powered ballistics tended to pass right through without exploding, so the MK108 was particularly deadly to bombers.

Even the Me110 which did operationally use MK103 didn't use it against bombers, only ground targets. They went directly to the BK3.7 FlaK modification for bombers. Downing them is all about a big charge and either fusing to explode inside a target like a field artillery shell, or such a low muzzle velocity that it explodes inside a target like the MK108.

The MK103 is an awesome weapon though. Try Tony Williams' aerial armaments website and compare the ballistics and penetration of a tungsten round to the GAU8 for a shock. It's capable of taking out a T55.

You know but by the time MK103 and MK108 were in production they were well on the way with the MG/MK213 revolver cannon so armaments thinking at RLM was headed along those lines, they were about to surprise us all with Aden/DEFA cannon (directly copied from MK213) in Luftwaffe birds by the end of 45. Check out what Israelis say about the DEFA, devastating against both ground and aerial targets of any kind, just talk to any ex Israeli Mirage pilot and say DEFA and watch him grin. Ask an RAF pilot about Aden and watch him raise his brows. USMC use Aden in the Harrier, I'll bet they've got glowing reviews too. Me262 was going to wind up with a couple of those in the nose.

The reality is they always found a problem with high velocity aerial guns in single engine fighters. Soviets used the Nudelman with some success in the Yak9T but only experienced pilots could handle it and reported the recoil almost stopped the plane mid dive, it was only used in very limited numbers. Attempts by Germany to mount the MK103 in both the 190 and 109 were abandoned, it shook the engine off its mounts in the 109 and yawed the 190 into a stall.