Electric motors had been ,mated to rotary cannon prior to WW2 so why weren't such weapons developed and deployed during the conflict. Granted they would have to he vehicle-mounted and ate up lots of ammo but surely they could have been useful on Navy ships for defense against Kamekaze attacks, for example?
Rotary Cannon - Why not used earlier?
- Thread starter colay
- Start date
a) Lack of efficient range. Lack of accuracy at range. Lack of fire control during WW2 for small guns.
b) Ammunition. It's not like you have a single kamikaze coming at you, you'll have ten to twenty over a space of 15 minutes. No time to reload.
c) Lack of spare electrical power supply. Yes, including onboard ships.
d) Low mechanic reliability. Large maintenance footprint.
e) Lack of proximity fuses for small calibers.
f) Production Cost.
g) Development Time.
b) Ammunition. It's not like you have a single kamikaze coming at you, you'll have ten to twenty over a space of 15 minutes. No time to reload.
c) Lack of spare electrical power supply. Yes, including onboard ships.
d) Low mechanic reliability. Large maintenance footprint.
e) Lack of proximity fuses for small calibers.
f) Production Cost.
g) Development Time.
The rotary cannon's only advantage over normal guns is its rate of fire for which it compromises almost everything else. A high rate of fire is needed when you have the target in your sights for a very short period of time and you need to get as many shells into the target for that time. WW2 aircraft speeds were low enough that getting the gun aimed at the aircraft was not the problem. The actual issue was that accurate firing against a non-moving target was chancy at best even with lead-correcting gunsights of the day. It was much more effective to fire a fewer number of shells with proximity fuzes near the aircraft. But proximity fuzes are too bulky and heavy to fit into small-caliber cannon.Electric motors had been ,mated to rotary cannon prior to WW2 so why weren't such weapons developed and deployed during the conflict. Granted they would have to he vehicle-mounted and ate up lots of ammo but surely they could have been useful on Navy ships for defense against Kamekaze attacks, for example?
I'd also guess that for the weight and bulk of a single 20mm rotary cannon a ship would've been able to carry at least 2 twin-mount 40mm Bofors which would also provide greater coverage.