Re: Interesting question

[ Reply ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Michaelson from on October 29, 1998 at 14:02:35:

In Reply to: Re: Cut scenes in Crusade? posted by Jeff on October 29, 1998 at 12:59:09:

: : This was a fairly common thing in the 30's. The US had their own version with the biplane hung beneath too during that time period. Regards. Michaelson

: Okay SMART-GUY, why did it have the machine gun turret attached?
: chow,
: Jeff

Not sure what your SMART-GUY reference is to, but I'll be happy to reply to your question. Light armament was allowed on some small planes in Germany according to the Versalle (sp?) treaty at the end of WWI, though a standing air force was not. Since this was at the height of the Nazi political reign, 1938, why not the machine gun mounts? It was a Nazi marked zepplein and no one would have even questioned the existance of the mounted weapon. The US biplanes carried the same configuration with machine gun mounts as well, even though no one was at war at the time. This bi-plane/zeppelin arrangement was actually used in the Navy's first official South Pole exploration in support of Adm. Byrd in the early 30's, with the successful in air drop of the plane (as seen in Last Crusade) as well as the hair raising pick up in the air of the plane as well. You can actually see this in an OLD OLD movie seen sometimes on American Movie Classics called "Navy Airships", which shows the actual airship and biplanes practicing this manuver in California that went on that exhibition. They, too, sported mounted machine guns in turrets. Not sure who THEY expected to have to take on at the South Pole, but it was the military practice of the time period. Does that help? Regards. Michaelson

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:



Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:  

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]