Model Forum / General / Models / August 2007

Probably the problems with getting the feed system to operate reliably
at the high RPM needed for heavy fire.
They did hook an electric motor up to one around the turn of the century
IIRC; in fact that's why GE may have had the inside edge on developing it.

Pat

Because it tended to jam if the handle was jerked suddenly such as when an
enemy was attacking you. To avoid jams, the handle had to be turned at a
relatively slow, steady pace. It was also very heavy for the amount of
firepower it produced compared to single barrel weapons. Modern versions get
around both problems by using electric motors but are still very heavy. The
Hughes chain gun  - a relative of the Gattling as used in the Abrams MBT -
has a hand-cranked mode for emergencies but is limited to a very slow rate
of fire when used that way.

(kim)

the electronics are what make modern rotary barell weapons. quite possible in
the 1940's but not realized.

The electric version of the weapon was designed by Gatling himself
over a century ago, but it was just seen as a clever way to waste
ammunition. There were no targets that required that rate of fire, and
finding a source of electricity on a battlefield in 1890 would have
been an additional problem. The Maxim gun was perfectly adequate, and
was lighter and more reliable than Gatling guns.
The need for a 2,000+ round per minute weapon only reappeared in the
jet age.
Gerald Owens

Some AC-47 had (10) 30.cal Brownings, as there were not enough
miniguns for awhile, but the guns were old, as was the ammo.
Lots of jams, which had to be cleared manually, rather than the
minigun not caring if a round had a dud primer or not, the motor
would cycle it

http://www.ac-119gunships.com/ac47/gunshipac47.htm
has this
------

Mind you, the side-firing weapons concept has been with us for
many years. It is based on an airborne maneuver called the
pylon turn whereby the aircraft is placed in a left bank and
flies a circular pattern around a fixed reference point. The
term pylon turn is derived from the racing plane era and the
pylon they sped around. As early as 1927 an Army pilot
attempted to sell the side-firing concept to the Air Corps
by fixing a side-firing .30 calibre machine gun to the wing
of his DH-4 biplane. Tests were successful as he scored
several hits on a ground target. The concept was brought
up again in 1939, but as with earlier tests, the Army brass
did not buy it.

Lt. Col. MacDonald had submitted a similar proposal back
in 1942 (then a 1st Lt.) for mounting a .50 calibre machine
gun to fire laterally for use against enemy submarines.
Later, in 1945, he proposed mounting a bazooka in
observation aircraft which would fire laterally on tanks and
troops from a banked turn. He "proposed that a fixed
machine gun mounted transversely in an aircraft flying
a banked circle could keep (an enemy) under
continuous fire if necessary." Once again, the proposals
were shelved. In September 1961, MacDonald again sent
in his proposal for a side-firing weapons system mounted
in a light aircraft and "flying a banked circle, (could) keep
the gun pointed continuously at a target." For the third
time his proposal failed to arouse any interest from the brass.
____

So Browning equipped AC-47 could have been made, as soon
as the USAAC bought DC-2 from Douglas

**
mike
**

FWIW   The Gatling gun was still around as late as W.W.I in both ship
board and anti-aircraft applications. The U.S. Navy had a 1 pounder
Gatling in use on torpedo-boat destroyers (There is one sitting on a
plinth outside an American Legion hall in Westminster, Maryland). The
Germans had a 37 mm Gatling gun used for Naval use and as an anti-
aircraft weapon by the Army. Ever see references to "flaming onions"
when W.W. I pilots wrote about German Anti Aircraft fire??  That was
the German 37 mm Gatling's tracer in the dark.


Bill Shuey