Comparison To Other Anti-aircraft Guns
The Flak 18 was not as powerful as its Italian or Allied counterparts. As an anti-aircraft gun it fired a 9.2 kilogram (20 lb) shell at a muzzle velocity of 790 m/s (2,600 ft/s) to an effective ceiling of 7,900 meters (25,900 ft) (at maximum 10,600 meters (34,800 ft)). Although this was useful against U.S. daylight raids, which typically flew at 7,600 meters (24,900 ft), many aircraft could fly higher than its maximum effective ceiling. In comparison, the British 3.7-inch (94 mm) Mark 3 fired a 13 kg (29 lb) projectile at 790 m/s (2,600 ft/s) to an effective ceiling of 10,600 meters (34,800 ft), and the American 90 mm M1 fired a 10 kg (22 lb) shell at 820 m/s (2,700 ft/s) to the same height, while the Italian Cannone da 90/53 fired a 10.33 kg projectile at 830 m/s to an effective ceiling of 12,000 meters (39,000 ft). The Allied weapons' capabilities were augmented by the introduction of proximity fuses, which vastly increased their effectiveness, especially after the introduction of jet-engined aircraft. The Allies' and Italian weapons were heavier and less mobile, with the Allied weapons being almost useless for ground fire until numerous modifications were carried out. While the U.S. and Italian 90 mm would go on to serve as powerful anti-tank guns, they were by no means as universally deployed as tank-killers as was the German 88.
Read more about this topic: 8.8 Cm Flak 18/36/37/41
Famous quotes containing the words comparison to, comparison and/or guns:
“In comparison to the French Revolution, the American Revolution has come to seem a parochial and rather dull event. This, despite the fact that the American Revolution was successful—realizing the purposes of the revolutionaries and establishing a durable political regime—while the French Revolution was a resounding failure, devouring its own children and leading to an imperial despotism, followed by an eventual restoration of the monarchy.”
—Irving Kristol (b. 1920)
“The comparison between Coleridge and Johnson is obvious in so far as each held sway chiefly by the power of his tongue. The difference between their methods is so marked that it is tempting, but also unnecessary, to judge one to be inferior to the other. Johnson was robust, combative, and concrete; Coleridge was the opposite. The contrast was perhaps in his mind when he said of Johnson: “his bow-wow manner must have had a good deal to do with the effect produced.””
—Virginia Woolf (1882–1941)
“Again the guns disturbed the hour,
Roaring their readiness to avenge,
As far inland a Stourton Tower,
And Camelot, and starlit Stonehenge.”
—Thomas Hardy (1840–1928)