PT Boat Forum


Moderated by: Dick, Jeff D

The PT Boat Forum ª PT Boats of WWII ª  PT Boats - General

Next Page » | Page: 1 of 3

« Back to Topic Index Page 177 | Replies: 20 | Pages: [1] 2 3

 Author  Topic: Loading Ammo Belts for .50-cal
Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jul 24, 2009 - 7:42pm
Can anyone tell me the sequence for the loading of the different rounds into the .50-cal. machinegun ammo belts? I can remember my father running through the sequence as if he was doing it in his sleep but I do not remember the sequence. I'm somewhat certain that the fourth round was tracer, so: armor piercing, incendiary, ball, tracer seems to me to be his sequence. Did it really matter, as long as each type of round duplicated itself every fourth cartrdge? -- Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

BobPic

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 7:09am
On our boat, PT 167, it was optional and depended on the situation. Usually there was a default sequence approved by the skipper, but we changed patterns at times. One rule was that you couldn't insert tracers more often than every four bullets because it would overheat the barrel. We often did it anyway since we loaded our own belts. Sometimes not all types were available and we adjusted the pattern. No one felt there was an inviolate rule. It was sort of shooters choice.


Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered | IP Logged

Frank J Andruss Sr

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Frank J Andruss Sr   Send Email To Frank J Andruss Sr Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 7:10am
Hello Allen

I think the sequence for loading the 50 caliber rounds were:

1. Ball
2. Armor Piercing
3. Tracer
4. Incendiary

Also, the 50 caliber gun was the M2 Aircraft type that had the shorter barrel and perforated jacket. This was a lighter gun and actually had a higher rate of fire. I think that was the sequence, but maybe I am wrong...........


Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am | IP Logged

CJ Willis

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of CJ Willis  Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 9:21am
We tried to get all our 50 cal. ammo already belted from the base armory. We had clips and a squeezer to belt it aboard but that was a slow process with the equipment we had. It took a while to belt up 250 rounds. Every fourth round was a tracer.

C. J. Willis

Total Posts: 464 | Joined: Nov 5, 2006 - 5:02pm | IP Logged

Jeff D

Moderator
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Jeff D   Send Email To Jeff D Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 11:51am
Here's the "official" specs early in the war. Curiously, different type boats have different specs.

Judging by what BobPic said, some recommended loads would overheat the barrels so I'd bet later doctrine manuals had different specs. I'd also bet that most crews figured out what was best and didn't always follow doctrine, again like BobPic said.

Motor Torpedo Boats, Tactical Orders and Doctrine, July 1942
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/pt/doctrine/part1.htm

MILITARY CHARACTERISTICS

1107
(1) PT 20 type-PTs 20-68 (Elco Boatworks). Length 77 feet; beam 20 feet; maximum draft 5 feet; displacement 95,000 pounds.
.50-caliber:
Allowance-10,000 rounds per gun.
Carried on board-1,000 rounds per gun belted (ratio one Tr. to two A. P.) in four 250-round magazines per gun.

(2) PT 71 type-PTs 71-94 (Higgins Industries). Length 78 feet; beam ____ feet; maximum draft _____; displacement _____ pounds.
.50-caliber:
Allowance-10,000 rounds per gun.
Carried on board-1,000 rounds per gun belted (ratio one Tr. to two A. P.) in four 250-round magazines per gun.

(3) PT 95 type-PTs 95-102 (Huckins Yacht Corp.) length 80 feet; beam ____ feet; maximum draft ____ feet; displacement ____ pounds.
.50-caliber:
Allowance-10,000 rounds per gun.
Carried on board-1,000 rounds per gun belted (ratio one Tr. to one A. P.) in four 250-round magazines per gun.

(4) PT 103 type-PTs 103-196 (Elco Boat Works). Length 80 feet 3 inches; beam 20 feet 10 3/4 inches; max. draft 5 feet 3/4 inch; displacement 100,000 pounds.
.50-caliber:
Allowance-10,000 rounds per gun.
Carried on board-1,000 rounds per gun belted (ratio one Tr. to one A. P.) in four 250-round magazines per gun.



Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am | IP Logged

CJ Willis

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of CJ Willis  Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 1:57pm
On my gun I never thought the tracers made any difference in the barrels overheating. You had to fire in bursts of about 5 seconds and then let off. If you fired continuous the barrels would get red hot. I have seen them actually sag in the middle between the supports. We had one bow gunner who we could never train to fire in bursts. He would just lay down on the triggers until he shot the whole 250 round belts. He ruined the barrels every time he fired. I will admit it is hard to lay off when the tracers are coming back your way.
C. J. Willis

Total Posts: 464 | Joined: Nov 5, 2006 - 5:02pm | IP Logged

Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jul 25, 2009 - 9:35pm
Thanks Guys- very interesting and very helpful. Apparently the Division 17 boats did not have access to ammo belts pre-loaded and had to accept the reloading of the belts as part of the daily work of getting the boats ready for the coming night's patorl. As if they didn't have enough to do. Just fueling the boats through a chamois into a three-gallon pail and then dumping that into the tank took most of the day for a couple of fellows. In that neck-of-the-woods in early 1943 they really didn't have much of anything. -- Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

Jeff D

Moderator
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Jeff D   Send Email To Jeff D Posted on: Jul 26, 2009 - 2:08pm
Dayum CJ, that's hot. Sounds like they weren't too far from having a bullet go through their sides. The aircraft versions of the M2 used on PT boats were really meant to be moving through the air a lot faster I guess.

Allen, that sounds like a bummer job, spending all day with open containers of high octane gas and sucking down the fumes. I bet they kept the smokers far away.



Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am | IP Logged

Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jul 27, 2009 - 7:37pm
Jeff D.:

Fueling was such a problem that Lt. Comdr. Frank Munroe, captain of the tender Hilo, complained to his command about the rediculously dangerous and labor-intensive procedures that put everyone at risk. Two PTs and a couple of Australian vessels were lost at Advance Base Tufi due to poor fueling procedures that resulted in a major fire. Also lost in that fire was most of the gasoline storage, depth charges, etc. The fire burned for two days because there was no means of extinguishing it. Just more of what Div 17 boats had to contend with- and at that point things were actually improving !! But spending your day after a night of patrolling and strafing shorelines in search of return fire reloading ammo belts and refueling the boats while suffering from the pounding headaches of malaria and dysentary while eating only a poor vitamin deficient diet of Spam and hard buiscuts or tinned Australian meat of some unidentified kind in the 90 plus degrees and wanting more than anything else just a little sleep. They had it a bit rough. Getting shot at was the least of their worries, it seems.

Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

BobPic

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Jul 28, 2009 - 5:28am
Allan: You hit the fueling fiasco directly on the head. We feared fire more than Japs. Crew who were not necessary at the feuling dock generally tried to find an excuse to be absent. Other work demanded that some stay through the long refeuling. Your description of the chow situation was also as though you were there. But most of us kids didn't know better, we just thought it was a war and that was the way war was. I am proud that I was part of it, but do not plan to go back.


Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered | IP Logged

Next Page »

Pages: [1] 2 3


Lock Topic

 

Forum Legend

New Member

Reply to topic

More than 25 posts | Full Member

Reply to topic with quoted message

More than 50 posts | Advanced Member

Edit Message

More than 150 posts | MASTER

View profile

More than 300 posts | TOP BOSS

Email member