Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

What makes a cannon... a cannon?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> What makes a cannon... a cannon? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:07:54 PM   
d0mbo

 

Posts: 592
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline 		Ok guys, slightly (?!) off-topic, and it will probably make me look stupid, but:

What makes a cannon a cannon?

7,7 and 14,someting mm are both machine guns, however, from 20mm onwards it's called a cannon (e.g. on a Zero).

I am wondering: is it just the calibre that matters (e.g. from 20mm and up it's a cannon) or does it have a different way of operating compared to (machine)guns?

Anyone know?

Post #: 1
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:13:16 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		20mm was about the smallest projectile that could hold an explosive warhead. No difference in operation that I know of . . . other than larger the weapon the more the recoil we have to worry about.

(in reply to d0mbo)
Post #: 2
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:15:57 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		And I'm guessing that at this point, with technology that makes some .50 cal projectiles explosive, the difference in nomenclature is mostly historical.

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 3
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:30:16 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		Interesting question. Wern't many guns througout history large caliber guns that fired only solid shot called cannons? What about the early medieval hand cannons? Apparently sometime in the 20th century the naming conventions were changed?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 4
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:38:40 PM   
Ikazuchi0585

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2008
From: United States
Status: offline 		I thought anything above a .50 cal was considered a cannon.

_____________________________

the three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation are: "why is it doing that?", "where are we?" and "oh s--t!!!!"

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 5
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 3:57:57 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		That would be a reasonable assumption and I would also tend to agree. If you expand the original subject it gets more confusing. You have cannons, guns and howitzers. The 30mm mounted on A-10's. Is it a 30mm cannon or 30mm gun? I would guess it's officially a cannon, but most of the time it's called a gun. What about the 75mm mounted in b-25's most of the time I hear them referred to as guns.

I'm sure somewhere in the Dept. Of Standards and Measurements there is a set of documents that define the rules and naming conventions.

(in reply to Ikazuchi0585)
Post #: 6
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 4:33:33 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline 		I think the basic distinction in WW II was could it fire an explosive round.  Though the Germans had a 15mm "cannon" in some of their A/C..., and I'm not sure that it did.   Or that it didn't.  

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 7
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 5:43:21 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		The Japanese and Soviets had 14.5mm machine guns, so the over .50 caliber is a cannon theory is out the window. If the Germans had the 15mm cannon, but didn't use exploding shells then the exploding shell theory is out the window.

Looks like the naming was arbitary.

This all reminds me of the old tootsie pop comercial with the owl and the question " how many licks does it take to get to the chewy center?" Some say 100, some say 500 and some say 1....

(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 8
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 5:56:12 PM   
zace

 

Posts: 183
Joined: 3/22/2010
Status: offline 		Doesn't this stem from the army difference between a gun and a weapon.  That one isn't that hard to find exactly what it is. 

I do remember a Gun is what you would call arty, tank main armament, etc.  What you carry is a weapon....

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 9
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:19:43 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline 		A machine gun fires a bullet, a cannon a shell. The main difference , aside from the general one of size, is rate of fire. Until autocannon, a cannon was a single shot weapon. A auto cannon uses either a machine gun mechanism or a gatling gun type.  Also another major difference is amount of ammunition.

In early WW2 the USN used a 1.1cal.  machine gun. I haven't hearn of any larger US gun.

_____________________________


(in reply to zace)
Post #: 10
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:21:04 PM   
tc464

 

Posts: 126
Joined: 2/27/2004
From: Sodom on Potomac
Status: offline 		Howitzer, gun and mortar are all the same thing (ie they fire an explosive projectile) but they differ in trajectory, velocity, barrel length and distance. As for the sizes, most ammo guys I know (myself included) consider 20mm and larger as projectiles because they can carry explosive or incendiary payloads, while .50 cal (14.5mm) and smaller are considered small arms. Yes, there are exceptions, but I think there are no set definitions because there hasn't really been a need for any. Any treaty or policy document I worked with usually spelled out the definition explicitly so everyone was on the same page, but I've seen both definitions on different documents too. Its the kind of fuzziness that gives lawyers an excuse to charge hundreds of hours.

My .02 anyway.

(in reply to zace)
Post #: 11
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:24:29 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		I think its down to pure nomenclature. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Up to .50 its a machinegun.
Up to 14 inch its a cannon.
Over 14 inch its a CANNON.

_____________________________


(in reply to tc464)
Post #: 12
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:25:49 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline 		From the internet wikki:
quote:

A cannon is any piece of artillery that uses gunpowder or other usually explosive-based propellants to launch a projectile. Cannon vary in caliber, range, mobility, rate of fire, angle of fire, and firepower; different forms of cannon combine and balance these attributes in varying degrees, depending on their intended use on the battlefield. The word cannon is derived from several languages, in which the original definition can usually be translated as tube, cane, or reed. In modern times, cannon has fallen out of common usage, usually replaced by "guns" or "artillery", if not a more specific term, such as "mortar" or "howitzer".


The Browning .50 was originally called 'light cannon'

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 13
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:29:27 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline 		Let's see if I can hijack this thread:
What is the better aircraft armament. A large number of heavy caliber machine guns or smaller machine guns and cannons? Why did everybody else (Brit's , Japs, Germans and Russians) use the small machine gun cannon setup and the American's use the 4,6,8 x 50 cal setup?


_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 14
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:35:54 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Let's see if I can hijack this thread:
What is the better aircraft armament. A large number of heavy caliber machine guns or smaller machine guns and cannons? Why did everybody else (Brit's , Japs, Germans and Russians) use the small machine gun cannon setup and the American's use the 4,6,8 x 50 cal setup?




LOL yes these are epic discussions.
Must have already covered a couple of pages in every historical wargame/flightsim forum.

The best is when everybody starts to draw the different ROF/weight/muzzle velocity/... graphs.

Interesting. Like watching some good gunslinger movie...

_____________________________


(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 15
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:49:37 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline 		Here's what Wiki says on the subject, and I mention wiki because its usually only half right half the time:

quote:

When referring to cannon, the term gun is often used incorrectly. In military usage, a gun is a cannon with a high muzzle velocity and comparatively flat trajectory,[4] as opposed to other types of artillery, such as howitzers or mortars, which have lower muzzle velocities, and usually fire indirectly.[97][98]



(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 16
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 6:53:17 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		The Germans at least did have a 13mm machine gun on some of their planes; that's roughly equivalent to the .50 caliber MG the US used.  IIRC the Germans went with cannon because they were more often attacking bombers, and it takes a lot of MG bullets to bring down a multi-engine plane.  The RAF did the same thing since their planes were attacking German bombers, although there were some proponents of the "hail of lead" that lots of lightweight MG's could produce.  A pilot didn't need to aim accurately to hit a target when you're firing 12 .303 MG's, after all.  Note that they quickly went to cannon and ditched the light MG's, though.  Ground attack is more effective with cannon as well, compared to light MG's.

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 17
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:05:37 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		So by this wiki definition the 30mm cannon on the A-10 is a gun because it fires a high velocity shell at a flat trajectory.

I've seen somewhere else in wiki that anything over 16mm is a cannon.

Ok so cannons are better for bringing down bombers and strafing. However is your strafing a massive troop concentration in the open is it better to have a slower firing cannon with a limited amount of shells or more machine guns with a higher rate of fire and significantly more bullet supply.

< Message edited by sfbaytf -- 4/7/2010 7:12:58 PM >

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 18
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:10:10 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Come on guys. Whos the first to point out that the SU aces had extreme succsess in A2A with the 37mm?

_____________________________


(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 19
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:12:41 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1864
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

So by this wiki definition the 30mm cannon on the A-10 is a gun because it fires a high velocity shell at a flat trajectory.

I've seen somewhere else in wiki that anything over 16cal is a cannon.

Ok so cannons are better for bringing down bombers and strafing. However is your strafing a massive troop concentration in the open is it better to have a slower firing cannon with a limited amount of shells or more machine guns with a higher rate of fire and significantly more bullet supply.


Incorrect, Military usage a gun is a cannon with a high muzzle velocity and flat trajectory, so the A10's 30mm would be an Auto Cannon by definition.

Although Wiki does states there are a dozen Genre's of "caliber" weapons, its possible that up to 14.8mm is a "rifle bullet" 14.9 and up is a "cannon" and such.

Like for example a 75mm howitzer is a "Howitzer cannon" where 88mm flak is probably something else.

If only wiki gave the different caliber's of genre it would clear up what each branch of weapons are.

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 20
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:18:57 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		But Ive never hear an A-10 pilot or ground crewman call the 30mm an autocannon. It's always referred to as "the gun".

Regarding the P-39s in Soviet use. I would imagine the 37mm was pretty useful against bombers and the fighter that got hit, but the 50 and 30 cals did most of the killing. The better gunsights must have also been appreciated.

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 21
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:31:24 PM   
V22 Osprey


Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline 		My idea of a cannon is this:
-Larger than .50 cal but smaller than an Artillery or Main gun of a tank.
-Fires a shell


_____________________________


Art by rogueusmc.

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 22
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:42:55 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

I think its down to pure nomenclature. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Up to .50 its a machinegun.
Up to 14 inch its a cannon.
Over 14 inch its a CANNON.


Unless it's a naval rifle?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 23
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:46:34 PM   
mariandavid

 

Posts: 297
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline 		Another method of defining varied by nationality: For example in the case of Germany any weapon with a calibre over 1.5cm was considered a 'machine-cannon', in British service any over 0.5 inch was no longer classified as an automatic machine-gun.

Zipping back to JohnDilworth (#14) : A standard 'cannon' (20mm firing HE or SAP) was much, much better than machine-guns of up to three times their number EXCEPT when the air target had no armour or no fuel fire-proofing - which really means everywhere except in the the first two years of the Pacific War and in Europe up to mid 1940.


(in reply to V22 Osprey)
Post #: 24
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:49:37 PM   
d0mbo

 

Posts: 592
Joined: 8/21/2009
From: Holland
Status: offline 		Oh guys, I am happy to have started this debate to settle the age old question: what is a cannon?!

And here i was thinking thre would be a simple answer

Carry on men!

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 25
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:50:57 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		What about a plasma cannon?

(in reply to mariandavid)
Post #: 26
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 7:57:53 PM   
sfbaytf

 

Posts: 1122
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline 		Yes plasma cannons will require a complete re write of the definition manual. They are no longer the stuff of science fiction. Rail guns and electro magnetically propelled guns/cannons will also muddy the waters. Other new technologies like the Metal Storm will also create confusion.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 27
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 9:36:41 PM   
Ikazuchi0585

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2008
From: United States
Status: offline 		here's a pretty neat website that deals with the subject http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/miltech.htm

_____________________________

the three most common expressions (or famous last words) in aviation are: "why is it doing that?", "where are we?" and "oh s--t!!!!"

(in reply to sfbaytf)
Post #: 28
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 10:11:19 PM   
minnowguy

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/12/2005
From: St Louis
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Let's see if I can hijack this thread:
What is the better aircraft armament. A large number of heavy caliber machine guns or smaller machine guns and cannons? Why did everybody else (Brit's , Japs, Germans and Russians) use the small machine gun cannon setup and the American's use the 4,6,8 x 50 cal setup?


I'll help. :)

Definitely a great discussion topic.

My opinion is that we Yanks stuck with the .50 because our fighters never had to deal with heavy bombers. The .50 is an excellent general-purpose round with good ballistics and gave good results against Axis fighters and light/medium bombers, especially when we started stacking 3 and 4 in each wing. Early in the war, the 4 x .50 armament was adequate to defeat opponents who didn't have armor or self-sealing tanks.


(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 29
RE: What makes a cannon... a cannon? - 4/7/2010 10:13:23 PM   
minnowguy

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/12/2005
From: St Louis
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dbfw190

here's a pretty neat website that deals with the subject http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/miltech.htm


Great site! Thanks for the link.

(in reply to Ikazuchi0585)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> What makes a cannon... a cannon? Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.673