You do not get it. Do you. The plane would not crash if it got hit by just a few bullets from a 50 cal. You are making it sound like they would crash right when they were hit. So you might want to make yourself clear a little more.
a good hit like maybe getting shot at the prpeller rotater or just a good hit my guess the chances of an aircraft getting shot down by an 50 cal enplacement is a 70% chance by the plane going down because of a down engine.
not when it gets exactly hit maybe after getting hit by a brigade of maybe 30-50 shots in the engine blowing the engine up concluding in a crash
If you have not noticed there is more then 1 propeller on a plane. It can survive off of the rest of the propellers it has.
30-50 shots would take down the plane easily. I do not know why you posted 30-50 shots would blow up the engine? I am pretty sure alot of people already knew this. Come on RifleMan20, think about it!
Now please guys,
it’s pretty obvious that IF a 50 cal. machine gun bullet couldn’t bring down an airplane, they wouldn’t have 12 of those in a B-17 or a B-24.
(and on fighters also, may I point)
If it works on a plane, the same thing applies on the ground for defensive purpose.
As for the damage it would do, it depends on many things, but the facts ARE that 50 cal. WAS used in AA defense IN WW2, on all theaters of operations. (and in Korea too, same model and amo, war surplus, you know)
Dear German soldier,
What will it take to convince you?
or maybe you want to make general before the end of this thread?
You do not get it. Do you. The plane would not crash if it got hit by just a few bullets from a 50 cal. You are making it sound like they would crash right when they were hit. So you might want to make yourself clear a little more.[/quote](My bold)
:roll:
No mate, of course not…
Nor will a man die if he is hit by a few bullets from a .50 cal.
All effective shooting is due not to calibre, but to bullet placement.
(And to a lesser extent, bullet type)
If the 'plane is hit through the wingtip it is unlikely to cause any serious problems.
If the man is hit on the distal joint of his little finger he will be able to crack on.
Should the engineblock be cracked, the controls disabled or the fuel lines severed the a/c will not fly for long.
Similarly a man hit centre of chest with any .5 cal wpn will have his afternoon ruined.
If you are so sure that the 50 BMG is such an ineffective rd, how do you explain the Pucara shot down by small arms fire in '82 ?
(Ok, I’ll admit that the pilot could have suffered a coronary thrombosis, but let’s be sensible. 
)
I haven’t noticed more than one propellor on the main single engine fighter planes used by all sides in WWII.
As for it being supposedly impossible to bring a plane down with a .50 cal MG, I hate to rain on your parade but here are just two instances of a plane being brought down by a single .303 round. A .50 cal will do rather more damage.
http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/richt.htm
http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/nt39.htm
Both instances reinforce Cuts point about bullet placement being important
There are plenty of action reports of aircraft being brought down by infantry weapons, of lower than .50 cal, in all theatres.
From a report based on captured German documents on WWII German defensive fire tactics against low-flying ground-attack aircraft, from Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 30, July 29, 1943.
GERMAN GUN-FIRE DEFENSE AGAINST LOW-FLYING HOSTILE AIRCRAFT
In Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 14, p. 8, the question of putting up a defense against attacking enemy aircraft indicated how the use of every weapon capable of pointing skywards was found to be the best means of meeting such attacks.
According to a translated German document, reprinted below, emphasis is placed on the heavy losses occasioned in men and materiel by fire on low-flying aircraft by infantry weapons, including the rifle. The translated document reads as follows:
Attacks by low-flying hostile aircraft have repeatedly caused serious losses. Despite this, units often fail to take advantage of the opportunity to destroy hostile aircraft. Lack of a defense of any kind often facilitates the enemy’s accomplishing his mission.
Yet it has been proved that heavy losses in men and material are caused by fire from infantry weapons. Aircraft are very fragile and are grounded for a considerable time by hits in the motor, fuel tank, magazine, wiring etc. A considerable defensive effect is already accomplished when the pilot is impeded in directing his fire, or when his aircraft is damaged.
Hostile pursuit bombers frequently approach in low flight and start to gain altitude only shortly before their attack. Therefore, they cannot be picked up by our air raid warning sentries early enough to permit our own fighters to arrive on time. The fire of all available weapons, including the rifle, is at that time and in these cases, the most effective antiaircraft defense.
How is the attack by low-flying aircraft repulsed?
The coordinated fire of all weapons not being employed in the ground fight offers the greatest possibility of defense.
Officers of all grades are responsible for the immediate and energetic defense against attack by low-flying aircraft. They are the first to open fire on the flying target. Antiaircraft fire is best opened with a salvo. The defense is continued with rapid rifle fire. The attacking aircraft is thus met by a hail of steel. No aircraft is invulnerable! Therefore, here, also, attack is the best defense.
Rifle fire directed at aircraft flying above 2,000 feet is not effective and only serves to reveal your own position to the enemy.
Every soldier - no matter what arm of the service - must be indoctrinated with the firm will to shoot the attacker out of the sky.
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt/defense-aircraft.html
Many Allied MG’s in WWII had anti-aircraft mounts, precisely because they could be used as AA weapons and often were in static positions.
Lewis gun .303 http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/WH2Cret-fig-WH2CretP004b.html
Vickers gun .303 http://www.ima-usa.com/images/ON0020-11.jpg
Browning .50 cal http://www.ima-usa.com/images/thumbs/XU6300a-1.jpg
GermanSoldier ,
Any well placed round from a 50 cal will take down a plane .Please take a look at the photo and tell me what round is the 50 cal .
Oh and by the way the Coast Guard uses the Barrett M107 to stop boats dead in the water with one will placed round
Here some research material for you :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_BMG
Not quite sure what you mean by this, can you elucidate please ?
the one in the middle is a 30 cal right
It’s a variation on indirect fire.
It’s reflected fire, done with tactical mirrors, as set out in the issued training pams.
If the Mirrors, Mk VII, Distortion, Type 8/A*, are used tactically in accordance with the relevant field pam, a .50 projectile looks like an incoming 25 pounder shell, but seems to move slowly in flight.
The field pam says, in Ch. 4, para 19, that a correctly placed tactical mirror will focus the enemy’s attention on the incoming apparent 25 pdr shell while the .50 cal not fired direct from a .50 cal emplacement, assuming the firer uses .50, Ball, 180 deg, Mk II, does a 180 degree turn after passing the enemy and hits them in the arse while they’re looking at the tactical mirror.
who knos anything about the Easy company it’s my favourite american company in WW2 
anyone