Muzzle-Brakes

[Librarian]

Being a complete ***** when it comes to guns I'm fascinated to know why you see guns of the 30-37mm caliber on Luftwaffle aircraft with elaborate muzzle-brakes, yet on Allied aircraft (P-39, IL-2, Hurricane etc you see 30-40mm weapons without. Is there a valid reason for this....do the brakes have a positive effect on accuracy etc? Just love to know .

[Librarian]

Well there's a word everyone's using here and not knowing the meaning . Lost in translation or whatever. Duly changed.

[perttime]

Usually, the main function of a muzzle brake is to reduce recoil. It redirects the fast moving gases to the sides, or even back. Reduced recoil can improve accuracy, or allow lighter structures in the gun and gun platform. All this reduced recoil comes at a cost, though: it can severely increase blast (and noise) towards the shooter or aircraft. And that can again make accuracy and crew comfort worse.

[Librarian]

That makes sense. The JU88P-1 and B-25G/H both carried 75mm weapons. The Junkers had a long barrel and an elaborate muzzle yet had problems with damage to propellers etc. The Mitchell had a short barrel with no muzzle and the effect was to loosen a few rivets.

Is muzzle-brake correct or is it a blast-suppressor?

[perttime]

Muzzle Brake and blast suppressor are different things. I suppose a blast suppressor should reduce blast. A muzzle brake generally increases blast, at last towards the sides and back.

A sniper who has a muzzle brake on his rifle will need to take some extra measures to stay hidden. Otherwise, the blast from the muzzle brake will create a cloud of debris right in front of him when he fires his shot. Good target for everybody, including artillery or any close air support you might have...

[jcf]

That makes sense. The JU88P-1 and B-25G/H both carried 75mm weapons. The Junkers had a long barrel and an elaborate muzzle yet had problems with damage to propellers etc. The Mitchell had a short barrel with no muzzle and the effect was to loosen a few rivets.

And in that you have your answer, high muzzle-velocity vs. low muzzle-velocity.  The former used a weapon based
on an anti-tank gun, the latter a weapon based on a howitzer.

The German 3 to 7.5 cm high-velocity weapons had muzzlebrakes, low-velocity weapons like the 3 cm Mk 108, and
its direct development the 5.5 cm Mk 112, did not.

[Go4fun]

In some modern sniper weapons the holes to deflect the muzzle flash or "Blast" out of the barrel are on the bottom and travel around to slots on the top of the 'brake' itself so as to let the flame die before exiting the weapon while helping to prevent 'rise' of the muzzle allowing the weapon to be re-targeted faster.

[zenrat]

I know what nonce means.  Seems a childhood spent watching Minder, The Professionals and The Sweeny wasn't wasted.
Didn't learn me about muzzle brakes though.



Guv!

[Librarian]

I know what nonce means.  Seems a childhood spent watching Minder, The Professionals and The Sweeny wasn't wasted.
Didn't learn me about muzzle brakes though.



Guv!

....and I've got the T-Shirt "Get your trousers on...You're nicked".  it.

[KJ_Lesnick]

Wouldn't it be accurate to say that a muzzle-brake is similar to a thrust reverser?

[pyro-manic]

Not really. Unless you have a thrust reverser which is always deployed. Which would be a strange thing to want. I suppose if you had a very complicated weapon which fired projectiles at vastly different velocities you could have a variable muzzle brake, but I can't think of a situation where that would actually be necessary. Perhaps some sort of combination gun where it could function as both a mortar and an antitank gun? Bit of a weird concept...

[KJ_Lesnick]

Not really. Unless you have a thrust reverser which is always deployed.

I meant when it's deployed -- they act similarly

[pyro-manic]

I see what you mean, yes.