Hudson Side Guns

[30sqnatc]

IMG_3446 by tankienz, on Flickr

I have a pair of Vickers for 1/48 Hudson kit. The port one was mounted in the second from the rear window but I not sure about the starboard location. The Tempora Hudson appears to have the same window (third from rear) missing

yet there is discussion on another thread the mounts were not symmetrical across the fuselage to avoid the gunners interfering with each other.

rnzaf.proboards.com/thread/19558/48-ca-lockheed-hudson-rnzaf?page=3

Can anyone confirm the starboard gun location?

[denysjones]

The gun positions are distinguished by two vertical plates attached to the fuselage frames either side of the windows and to which the gun mount is attached as you see in the photo on the thread you refer to.

In 2035 these sets of plates appear on window 5 port side and window 4 starboard. Those window numbers are counting from the FORWARD bulkhead of the cabin, or if you are looking at the outside of the fuselage add 1 to those numbers to account for the radio op's ones.

cheers

[30sqnatc]

Brilliant thanks.

Paul

[30sqnatc]

I just purchased Close up in Guadalcanal published in July 1944 which describes the visit of two National Publicity Studio staff members to Guadalcanal. The page below describes their flight in to Henderson Field in a RNZAF Hudson. Note the description on the mounting and test firing of the side guns once at cruising altitude. I assume to reduce drag until the guns were needed.

IMG_3461 by tankienz, on Flickr

[davidd]

Remember that these gun mountings (Australian-manufactured and supplied to us very quickly on request) were described by the senior RNZAF armament specialists as rather "Heath Robinson" setups, with plenty of opportunities to shoot off chunks of your own tail surfaces, or wingtips for that matter. To obviate this particular problem, rather prominent "guard rails" were fitted, but complaints were soon made by users that these "restricted the cones of fire" from these weapons to an alarming degree. The senior officers who approved these modifications had to placate the complainers by informing them that this was exactly the intention. In the end, apparently, permission was granted that the "guard rails" be removed, but that all gunners were be sternly warned that there was every possibility that they could damage their own aircraft should they get involved in actual combat with enemy aircraft, so all due care should be exercised (or words to that effect!) So far as I know, there were no actual cases of Hudson beam gunners in combat actually hitting their own aircraft, although there there numerous cases in training as well as operations with Venturas and Hudsons, but these were caused by the turret guns, which all had interrupter gear which was supposed to make such things impossible. Shooting off aerials in such aircraft was also quite common, but supplies of replacement aerials were usually available. I think there were also a few cases of Dauntless (SBD) gunners hitting their own tail surfaces, probably in training, as they never met Japanese fighters on operations.
David D