Help support TMP


" 88 Bomb Bay mounted PPSh-41 submachine guns in Tu-2SH" Topic


23 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Cold War (1946-1989) Message Board

Back to the WWII Aviation Discussion Message Board


2,270 hits since 1 Dec 2012
©1994-2014 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member01 Dec 2012 7:47 p.m. PST

I've never seen this before! Robert

"The Soviet Union also experimented with the PPSh-41 in a close air support anti-personnel role, mounting dozens of the submachine guns in forward fuselage racks on the Tu-2sh variant of the Tupolev Tu-2 bomber.[11]"
link

picture

link

"The most unusual variant (flown and tested in 1944) carried 88 infantry PPSh sub-machineguns in the bomb bay, bringing concept of weapon designer A.V.Nadashkevich (first realized on TSh-1) into it final shape. All guns were fired simultaneously, providing devastating fire… but for very short time. In-flight reloading of 88 machineguns was too non-practical, and this concept was abandoned. "
link

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian01 Dec 2012 7:53 p.m. PST

Bet the pilot felt that!

MAD MIKE01 Dec 2012 8:37 p.m. PST

Also done with the Thompson link
See image about 2/3 down page

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member01 Dec 2012 8:41 p.m. PST

I had heard of the Thompson one but not the PPSh-41 one by the Soviets. And certainly not 88 of them LOL. Robert

MAD MIKE01 Dec 2012 8:52 p.m. PST

Well if you can find the enemy in parade formation it could be useful. Pretty low powered round from either. 88 guns x71 round mag=6428 shots in about 6 seconds or so.

Personal logo Endless Grubs Supporting Member of TMP01 Dec 2012 9:09 p.m. PST

So the napalm was on order and hadn't made it to the delivery docks yet???

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member01 Dec 2012 10:35 p.m. PST

I wonder if they made the Tu-2 pull up to the left or right? wink LOL. Robert

Gaz004502 Dec 2012 4:58 a.m. PST

LOL-
"Aaah… Comrade you have been volunteered to change the magazines for a second pass ….."

kreoseus202 Dec 2012 5:09 a.m. PST

Impractical but my inner ork loves this. Hose.

Dogged Supporting Member of TMP02 Dec 2012 5:29 a.m. PST

Well if you get the trench straight…

It also makes for a specially rude execution method, lying the victim on the ground under that bomb bay.

And lastly it makes for a good scaring weapon. After the first pass it must be stressing to get under that thing when it passes again… At least for the first time.

skippy000102 Dec 2012 7:07 a.m. PST

Trains can't dodge, I'm sure that many smg's would ruin the engineers' day.

Great for scattering cavalry.

For the second pass just drop the smg's, PaPaSha's were cheap enough and if one hits your head from 199 feet….

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member02 Dec 2012 12:29 p.m. PST

Too bad there wasn't more ammunition that could be carried. And interesting idea though. Robert

picture

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member02 Dec 2012 3:01 p.m. PST

On one of the threads there was a suggestion of it being used for night fighting too. Robert

Tom Bryant Supporting Member of TMP02 Dec 2012 5:26 p.m. PST

MAD MIKE, it would be great in human wave assaults as well. I can imagine a bunch of guys in Korea who would have gleefully given their eye teeth and maybe a kneecap or two for some CAS loving like that to be given to the NORKs and Red Chinese!

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member02 Dec 2012 5:30 p.m. PST

I think I would rather have an A/B-26. Robert
TMP link

Uesugi Kenshin Supporting Member of TMP03 Dec 2012 11:30 a.m. PST

That is w/out a doubt the silliest combat aircraft design ive ever seen.

Matsuru Sami Kaze03 Dec 2012 12:31 p.m. PST

I believe this was some form of assisted take-off.

Personal logo jdginaz Supporting Member of TMP03 Dec 2012 12:48 p.m. PST

Definitely not at all practical. depending on the speed of the TU-2 at the time of the attack it would only cover a area of between 35 to 45 feet by the width of the mounting. Of course that area would be well saturated but the pilot would have to be perfectly on target to do any damage.

Fatman03 Dec 2012 1:22 p.m. PST

Who cares if it's practical? That is just too kewl for words! I want one! ;-p

Uesugi Kenshin Dude you have not been paying attention

Blackburn Roc, a turret fighter that was slower than the bombers it was supposed to intercept. Then they fitted it with floats!
link

Fiat Cr 25, a twin engined fighter with seats for seven passengers.
link

Bachem Natter, a design so bad that captured German test pilots who were told by the Americans "Fly it or we will hand you over to the Russians." went for the Russian option.
link

The Bell Airacuda….well just read the link! ;-p
link

And these are just from WW II and of the top of my head.
Fatman

Uesugi Kenshin Supporting Member of TMP04 Dec 2012 11:55 a.m. PST

Thanks Fatman. Indeed I was ignorant to those but I still think a sub-machinegun armed TU-2 takes the silly prize!

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member04 Dec 2012 12:05 p.m. PST

I think that even as a night fighter it would be impractical LOL. Robert

Fatman04 Dec 2012 12:47 p.m. PST

Uesugi Kenshin
No problem I've been an airhead for 30+ years and am a fan of the obscure ugly and useless, anybody who has met you will tell you why. ;-p

Fatman

Don't get me started on WW I or Post WW II cos some of those are really weird.

Kaoschallenged Inactive Member05 Dec 2012 2:18 p.m. PST

Another shot.
link
link

Sorry - only trusted members can post on the forums.