He-111 fixed rearward facing MGs/need more info

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

 

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Maschinen%20Gewehre/MG%2017/mg%2017%20%20maschinen%20gewehr.html

[F/JG300_Gruber]

These were belt fed MG17 mounted in the tail cone, for trying to deal with the dead zone caused by the vertical stabilizer.

It was remotely operated by the dorsal gunner (B-stand). I believe that they are fixed and tuned to shoot slightly above the plane's centerline.

 

It seems that these experiments started during the polish campaign (no exact reference on this). One He111 that crashed in britain in 1940 was also equiped with one of these.

They were sometimes used on He111-H6 and H10 variants, and probably dropped on later versions, with the introduction of heavier MG 131 and MG 81Z on the H11 variant

 

AFAIK, they never earned a reputation of being particularly effective though

[Y29.Layin_Scunion]

I've searched through a few different legitimate WW2 aircraft forums/sites to only find hearsay basically  He-111 H-3 variant and onward had them fitted.  Not an abundant amount but a few.

Nothing in black and white on the info I found so I won't even bother sharing it.  It's all just educated opinions.

What I gathered from all I read, it was for more of a psychological effect than anything else.  Fired by either the top gunner or bottom gunner who adjusted rounds off of tracers.  Not very effective but more to make the He-111 a look a little less vulnerable.

[Finkeren]

I find it interesting that people always seem to use 'mostly psychological effect' as a derogatory term when talking about weapons system.

 

The point of a contraption like this is purely psychological, but it could still be really effective for its intended purpose: Getting an attacker coming from a blind angle to break off his attack.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Finkeren

[Y29.Layin_Scunion]

I find it interesting that people always seem to use 'mostly psychological effect' as a derogatory term when talking about weapons system.

 

The point of a contraption like this is purely psychological, but it could still be really effective for its intended purpose: Getting an attacker coming from a blind angle to break off his attack.

At no point was "psychological effect" meant to be derogatory in any manner.

 

I don't see how calling something what it was, can come off as negative.  If something isn't combat effective but looks mean enough to make the enemy think twice....then it is psychological.  Which is exactly what my point was.

 

Nothing derogatory about it.

 

 

[Juri_JS]

I only know a report describing the use of the fixed gun in combat by a Hungarian recon He-111. In this case the fixed gun was used to make fighters evade when attacking directly from the rear and bring them into the fire zone of the flexibel guns. The crew claimed two Russian fighters using this methode.

[Gunsmith86]

They are fixed and tuned to shoot along the plane's centerline.

 

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/h/Heinkel/He%20111/He%20111%20H%20P%20D%20Bedienungsvorschrift%20Schusswaffe.pdf

[Finkeren]

At no point was "psychological effect" meant to be derogatory in any manner.

 

I don't see how calling something what it was, can come off as negative. If something isn't combat effective but looks mean enough to make the enemy think twice....then it is psychological. Which is exactly what my point was.

 

Nothing derogatory about it.

 

 

I get you don't mean it as derogatory, but in my book there is no dichotomy between psychological effect and 'combat effectiveness'.

 

If the psychological effect prevents the enemy from pressing through with his attack, then that is combat effectiveness, especially when we're talking defensive armament on a bomber.

 

Whether or not this particular contraption was very effective at getting fighters to break off an attack is a different matter.

[fergal69]

I raised the same question on the 1946 form back in 2010......

 

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16238

 

One answer that came back was that it was possibly the pilot who fired the MG.

Edited September 11, 2015 by fergal69

[Gunsmith86]

^^Thats wrong

 

 

Manuale:

It is fired by either the top gunner or bottom gunner or both of them at the same time. They had a button to push which fired the gun.

[III/JG2Gustav05]

I dont know if it is historical or not, Can we have an option in the furture to upgrade the gondla rear fire gun to MG81 or even MG81Z? because current MG15 with 1000rd/mins and 75 rounds drum is really insufficient and weak. He111 in game is really helpless under the VVS fighter's fire power.

[Y-29.Silky]

'mostly psychological effect' 

 

You never see it in flight simulators, but many fighters broke off their attacking run if they were being shot at, especially pilots who haven't seen much combat yet, this would probably give them a little scare at the very least. 

I just wish we could have the bombardier separated from the pilot :/

Edited September 11, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[LukeFF]

I dont know if it is historical or not, Can we have an option in the furture to upgrade the gondla rear fire gun to MG81 or even MG81Z? because current MG15 with 1000rd/mins and 75 rounds drum is really insufficient and weak. He111 in game is really helpless under the VVS fighter's fire power.

 

Unhistorical for the H-6.

[Finkeren]

You never see it in flight simulators, but many fighters broke off their attacking run if they were being shot at, especially pilots who haven't seen much combat yet, this would probably give them a little scare at the very least.

 

Yeah, that was pretty much my point...