Lancaster Bomber Turret

The FN 150 Turret was used on Sterling and Lancaster Bombers during WW2 , making it one of the most numerous British gun turrets.

[@markmorgan6179]

My Dad was a Mid Upper Gunner in 106 Squadron. Fascinating to see his 'office!'

[@notoriousminimort841]

big 🧢 lil bro lol

[@cybermyst1c]

@@notoriousminimort841 look at his profile picture. It’s looks like his dad would’ve been in a war with one of these. I hardly think he’s lying

[@barriewilliams7612]

My father Sargent Gwyn Williams was a Lancaster rear gunner a member of 9 squad bomber command he was on the Dresden raid that became a fire storm luckily he servived .He is and always will be my hero. R I P.

[@flipwhale5494]

May His brave would Rest In Peace.

[@tottenhamhotspurish]

True story - My Grandad Beric James Callingham was flight a sergeant in a Lancaster bomber and a rear gunner. He and his crew was coming back from a bombing run in Germany, they approached to land and crash landed, the tail of the plane snapped off with my Grandad in, in which he survived, the rest of his crew died. He met my Nan while based up in Scotland who was an usherette at a cinema.

[@nicholasroberts6954]

And no armour plate protection by the look of it. Just imagine, 2-3 times a week, at night, doing a 5 - hour return trip, on oxygen most of the way, with the 250 mph, -20 Centrigrade aircraft slipstream whipping into the turret (They weren't perfectly sealed or pressurised) and being vibrated to hell by the 4 engines and having to maintain a static position, sitting, crouched-up, on a piece of suspended canvass (Smaller than the average camping stool) peering into the pitch dark, looking for enemy night fighters. And then, more than occasionally, having to engage the enemy night fighters as the aircraft performed violent defensive manoeuvres such as the "Corkscrew", knowing that any second you personally could be blown to bits by being hit by an explosive cannon shell or machine gun round. Terrifying and stress inducing doesn't describe it. Then rinse and repeat 25 - 30 times to complete a "Tour". Then after the War, if you survived, no-decompression, no PTSD counselling, . .straight back into Civvy Street as if nothing had happened. And to top-it off, no national memorial until most of the survivors had passed-on naturally, because, it was made out, some of the then ruling hierarchy, including its reported Churchill, were embarrassed by the fact that the UK had in fact won the war in major part by adopting the aerial "Area Bombing" policy of Harris - who was then scapegoated so that the upper echeleons weren't tarred with the same brush.

[@jackallison7540]

That's a nice save on the turret. The gunner looked like he was wearing some authentic kit also. Well done.

[@ridds777]

My grandfather flew 36 consecutive missions as a tailgunner in a Handley-Page Halifax bomber.

[@d53101]

A friend of mine’s father was a tail gunner with the RCAF in Halifax’s and Lancaster’s. He did 35 trips over the Third Reich. He only shot at the enemy three times in 35 missions. He was lucky, he survived the war.

[@roybennett6330]

A underrated bomber as the Lancaster always gets the medals, a bit slower,but still punched the gun on the nose,blessing to your dad to help win the war

[@roybennett6330]

Sorry grand father,rear gunner what a bastard of a position, they took more perpex panel s out for better sightings,four rifled machine guns verses 20/30cannon.....I hope the frozen sandwiches,chocolate, and coffee,gave him comfort, crazy times,once again thanks for your grandfather did much to help win the war

[@ridds777]

@@roybennett6330 he was always afraid of the spotlights aiming on. He survived the war. Very hard to get him to talk about it

[@roybennett6330]

@@ridds777 my dad was a blitz kid,worked at pompy docks,served as a CPO submarine's 1946/1958...hugging the top end of Stalin Russia(he made only a brief mentioned in kid last years),one two day patrol with the Welch in Malay conflict,and one mission in a bomber over guerilla occupied Malaya, (it seem that if you had nothing on and the beer had done its magic, you could have a army sponsored Thomas cook tour),discharge in Australia, worker and a copper smelter,ERS,then passed away in no pain Wollongong hospital may 2018,cancer...its men like this that when people complain about staying in a government sponsored hotel,and say gee the champagne was flat,that I get the shits

[@Dios67]

That's a high profile bubble.

[@josephking6515]

I read an article that said getting rid of that upper turret would have added 50mph to the Lancaster's speed. The article said that the extra weight would probably have been used to carry extra bombs so the speed increase would have then been lost. There is also a lot of drag caused by that unstreamlined turret. I have seen a later model Lancaster with a_shroud_ that gave a better airflow on the forward facing part of that Frazer Nash turret.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

The ‘safer’ long wing B-26s just had their fuel and bomb load increased. Making the plane handle better in an emergency was not valued.

[@IanLanc]

Good grief when you see the gunner in situ it sure makes one aware of how vulnerable they was to enemy fire, no protection at all.

[@superancientmariner1394]

And the roundal on the side, just below the turret was a good aiming point.

[@josephking6515]

The whole aircrew were in the same boat/aircraft with only about 1/8th inch aircraft aluminium (or aluminium for the Americans) between them and the outside world. Not any protection at all. The pilot, back of his seat, (and engines) did have some armour plate.

[@mnd1955]

Gunner's main job was as a lookout. He couldn't go toe-to-toe with a night fighter armed with 20mm cannon. That said, a German pilot who attacked from under and behind would always try to knock out both gunners in his first pass.

[@IanLanc]

@@josephking6515 Not many know this, but the two flat forward windows in the main canopy was armoured glass - also the FE seat had steel armour underneath - also a glass armour panel was located on the fuselage under the main canopy.

[@sztypettto]

No words can describe the experience of those young men thrust into a war unlike anything the world had ever seen, and hopefully will never see. Flying thousands of feet above, shrouded under utter darkness, the frigid cold of the altitude, and the constant droning of the engines. Lets also not forget, aircraft were still a new technology. How does one live through that experience. At a loss for words. Respect to everyone who lost their life, their loved one, whoever lost something on all sides.

[@MadMatt13]

I can't believe that we just dumped these old warbirds into a quarry and forgot about them!

[@maxace1078]

whiterthan hitler many, MANY liberator pistols, b 29’s...

[@christopherfisher6293]

Your target for tonight... Brave young men.

[@Nibby12]

At age 22, one was considered old! Much respect to these young heroes.

[@jimlassen9422]

Again, what a frightening insight into the crew of a WW2 aircraft (I have seen a few in the last few days) and how brave they were in there. I guess the rear gunner was very much in danger as well and also the underneath ball gunner on a USA B17. Very cold in this turret but can have the heating on! Had to turn the turret by a handle which I didn't know about until now and the cramped space of course. A World away from the war weapons of today with missles, drones etc and hardly any humans flying over the area of conflict. Huge respect to these people. My Uncle died in a Sunderland flying boat about 1941 when he was a 20 year old Captain and I have seen the inside of one of these aircraft at the RAF Museum in Hendon, North London to try to understand what it must have been like.

[@BigLisaFan]

The turret was hydraulic powered from #3 engine. The hand crank was a back up in case hydraulic power was lost.

[@katemoreland1688]

I think by Grandad was with the Lancaster as a rear gunner in WW2. His name was Dennis Beales and he was the best. ❤️

[@mikeyoung9810]

I was stationed at RAF Upper Heyford '75-'77 and I worked with a weather observer who happened to run into the crew of a lancaster during an airshow. The took him up for a ride that night for an experience I wish I had recieved. I'm not totally sure if the air show was at Heyford or Greenham Common because we had air shows at both places (we were based in GC while our runway was worked on)

[@ScotmanUK2000]

Thanks for sharing. Never seen inside a gunners turret

[@dirtyharry1844]

Great shot,kid! Don't get cocky!

[@brustar5152]

I had the pleasure of listening to my FIL and a fellow crew-mate named Fred Pearce relating how - in the far east while on strafing mission of a Japanese jungle installation in a Liberator, they managed to hit an ammunition stockpile and having an amazing explosion result. My FIL, the tailgunner, was of the mistaken belief that a fellow with last name of Robertson in the mid-upper gunner position had committed the deed while Pearce explained that "Robby" had been deathly ill from drinking whiskey the night before with some of Chenault's Flying Tigers who were flying out of the same airdrome in Kunming and was just hunched over his guns so Pearce had pulled his seat pin and dumped him into the belly of the aircraft and assumed his position for him so that no one was the wiser. He fired the lucky string.

[@rusyroadtogreasygold]

Stunning stuff. Collector my self and what a item to have. Wow . Thanks for showing this

[@mailmannb7970]

My Father was a mid upper gunner in a Lancaster. Station in East Moor, Yorkshire! Maybe that was the one he used?

[@IanLanc]

RAF East Moor I think only had Halifax Bombers.

[@d53101]

I had a second cousin stationed at East Moor, an RCAF base. He was a navigator in a Halifax, 432 Squadron. They were lost on their first combat OP April 1944.

[@mailmannb7970]

@@IanLanc They changed around a few times. The Halifax was there at times as well. Here's a link that explains things better.. www.415sqn.com/east-moor-stn.html

[@mailmannb7970]

@@d53101 I think about %50 of the bomber crews were killed. No doubt that Luck played a big part! My Father survived, I think, 30 or 33 sorties before completing his tour.

[@d53101]

@@mailmannb7970 Yes luck played a big part. I know an RCAF veteran navigator who did 33 ops in 431 squadron. Never suffered a scratch. He is 98 this year and still lives in the house he built after the war.

[@stevencleasby6722]

Is this gonna be available to see in 2022

[@maryjohnson2190]

Love you Guy Gibson x x x

[@Herbybandit]

Dumped into a quarry? Wheres that quarry? 🤯🤫

[@PaulSmith-pw1rw]

My late father was a rear gunner with 7SQN Pathfinder and flew 64 missions

[@kylewood8327]

Definitely not built for comfort!

[@concise707]

The FN 150 was the ROOMY one! Try the FN120 tail turret for 'snugness'.

[@keith2092]

Sorry in advance for not watching it all the way through, but at about 1:10, he says that the whole turret's powered by #3 engine. What happens to powering this turret if #3 gets hit?

[@keith2092]

well, watched it and no one commented, so forever mystified why this turret wasn't more redundantly powered in case the # 3 engine, starboard inner? goes wonky.

[@billygunn7180]

I think he said there was a hand crank if it lost power.

[@keith2092]

@@billygunn7180 Thanks. That'd seem pretty cumbersome, but probably better than no crank.

[@billygunn7180]

@@keith2092 your welcome. Crank pretty small, he said it takes a long time to go all the way around. I guess there were better jobs.

[@keith2092]

@@billygunn7180 like maybe six. :)

[@jeffsnowden5119]

Surely for traversing in a fast moving combat situation and whilst under fighter attack, the turret did not solely rely upon a small, slow turning handle ?

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Just for pointing the gun apertures downwind perhaps?

[@stephensmith4480]

The Crank handle was in case the Hydraulics failed.

[@arnoldsanders6878]

Never understood why they didn't fit these with 50 cals ??

[@philipmadhatter4006]

Weight

[@jeffwood126]

Arnold, this was my Father's post - he died only a few weeks ago. He told me he would have liked cannon, say 20mm or 30mm, and at the end of the war in Europe , he got them. His squadron (9 Sqdn, neighbours of 607 Sqdn, with whom Dad sometimes flew) were transferred to India to take part in the war against Japan. I think it was before they left that the Lanc crews swapped their machine guns for cannon. In India, they trained to come in low over Japanese strongpoints, bomb them, then turn, dip a wing, and strafe with the cannon on a reverse run. The idea was to hammer Jap and make it easier for the the infantry to advance in relatively close order. Flying gunships. Dad enjoyed the training, and his new guns. Of course, President Truman shot their fox, so the Squadron returned to Europe, the bomb bays converted to passenger compartments for soldiers no longer needed in the Far East and due for demob. It is a very tight compartment. Helpful that my father was about five foot eight. If anyone wonders how you fight this way without shooting yourself down or killing the tail gunner, the turret was mounted on a rail shaped so that if your muzzles threatened to cover the aircraft , the turret was tilted up so the guns aimed upwards. To put your sights back on the target, you called for the pilot to turn or tilt. Under attack, the gunners controlled the aircraft.

[@paoloviti6156]

It has nothing to do with weight, it had to do with economy because all the British fighters and and bombers with few exceptions was armed with the .303 in Browning machine guns but it lacked hitting power, the main criticism, so many fighters changed their guns to larger calibre but as they had enormous stock of .303 in ammo it was convenient to retain this calibre for the bombers....

[@arnoldsanders6878]

@@jeffwood126 + Sorry for your loss. Thanks for the info.

[@MarsFKA]

@@paoloviti6156 Your claim of "economy" is wrong on several levels. The British bombers operated mainly at night, when engagement ranges between aircraft that were shooting at each other were usually less that 200 metres. At those close ranges, the .303 machine gun was quite effective. However, just to keep you happy, later models of the Lancaster had tail and mid-upper turrets fitted with .5 Brownings. Compare the two only flying Lancasters: The Battle Of Britain Memorial Flight aircraft has a .303 mid-upper turret, while the Canadian aircraft has the .5 mid-upper turret. As for the "enormous stock" of .303 ammunition that the British had, don't forget the British and Empire and Commonwealth armies. They used quite a bit of that "enormous stock".

[@tonyhaynes9080]

So why couldn't it have 4 guns like the rear turret?

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

It mentioned how rushed rearmament was just before the war, France got almost nothing done except for its navy. That is what was ready. The turrets didn’t give much protection anyway so a bigger heavier unit could have just caused more casualties. Some Halifaxes got a 4 gun upper turret and dropped the useless (at night) front turret.

[@Jimboy1611]

What was the point in turrets in British bombers? It would be hard enough for an American gunner to hit a German fighter coming for his B-17 in broad daylight, but a Lanc or a Halifax in pitch darkness? Next time you fly out on holiday at night, imagine you have a .303 sticking from your window and a load of ME-110s are buzzing around outside. What chance do you have?

[@LeeRaldar]

After about 40 minutes in the dark your eyes adjust and have full night vision, with training it is possible to shoot stuff fairly accurately. The idea that eating carrots is good for your eyes originated from WW2 and night pilots.

[@12vibaba]

you can see for miles in the moonlight. especially up high.

[@graham2631]

The tactic at night was to attack from below with the bomber silhouetted in the night sky.

[@kenstevens5065]

A former Lancaster rear gunner told me that by 1943 when bombing raids reached their peak many of the Nazi aircrew on home defence were inexperienced as by then many of the more experienced pilots had been lost or moved to the Russian front. Even.303 tracer from a Lancaster at night was very scary and off-putting to very young inexperienced aircrew as were flack bursts from ground fire. I have heard that some armourers would load extra tracer rounds into ammo belts to increase the fear factor. They did this apparently on the Dams raid. Neither air or ground defence were as destructive as many people think. Indeed my late Dad spent the whole of WW2 on AA ground defence and said even with gun laying radar kills were few.

[@terrelmchenry9524]

LOTS OF ROOM TO DIE AND NO ROOM TO RUN.

[@kunwoobaek3433]

0:04 "mom I like stir fry"

[@johanamendoza1649]

Same

[@1442GlennLane]

Thought they were fitted with Vckers not Brownings ?

[@markfryer9880]

No, the Vickers were primarily used prior to WWII, the surplus stocks were then available in Egypt for the newly formed SAS to arm their jeeps with. Later on .50 Cal Brownings were added to boost destructive fire power when raiding German airfields.

[@lordsummerisle87]

@@markfryer9880 I think you may, understandably, be conflating two different Vickers .303 MGs: the older, water-cooled, belt fed Vickers HMG/MMG product-improved Maxim which was mainly an anti-infantry weapon modified for the aerial role in WW1 and the pan fed Vickers gas operated/model K, which was designed between the wars for use in flexible defensive mounts in aircraft. The Vickers K was designed with a very high cyclic rate (around 1200 rounds per minute) in order to get as many rounds on target as possible in very short engagement windows, but was very quickly made obsolescent as increasing aircraft speeds made it more and difficult for an air gunner to track a target, which is why power operated turrets became so common. They got chucked into other roles, including multi-gun mounts on boats. The army experimented with putting stocks and bipods on them for the light role (like a BREN) but the very high cyclic rate made it burn ammo far too quickly for the rest of the section to keep fed. This is the gun that the SAS mounted on their Jeeps (along with Browning .50s) -- it was readily available; designed for vehicle mounting; had a high cyclic rate so they could put a lot of lead on target on the move; and the pan magazines fitted perfectly into issue biscuit tins, keeping them clean. The Vickers MMG continued in British Army service throughout WW2 and Korea, mostly emplaced defensively, since it was so bloody heavy. A very reliable gun with predictable ballistics, so could be used safely for overhead and indirect fire out to 4500 yards. Only stopped being used in the late 1960s as the supply of .303 ammunition was drying up.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Why? Late Halifaxes had a single Vickers in the glazed nose.

[@1442GlennLane]

@@lordsummerisle87 Excellent explanation. Thank you

[@joe18425]

3.13 that's me outside neighbours house for blasting their shitty techno music

[@陳湘-j8t]

ww2許多盟軍的机組成員(7~10人），雖來自不同城市鄉鎮，但常同日亡。

[@finishedkekz4320]

Bubbles in American schools be like :

[@mickaeltamion6221]

Superbe

[@gianmarcoalberini5289]

3:47 uuuh

[@briankinnear1314]

Sitting target..50 50 chance of survival..

[@markfryer9880]

Depending upon the time you were flying with Bomber Command, the odds could be even worse than 50/50.

[@josephking6515]

How many B-17s were shot down by gunners who lacked trigger discipline or got over excited during the heat of battle and didn't watch where their rounds went. Just think about how close the formations were (which was for a very specific reason) and the chances of .50 cal rounds missing a fast moving German fighter and saying hi to a larger flying machine in close formation.

[@concise707]

The successful abandonment rate for the Lancaster was 11%; crew Emergency egress was the Achilles Heel of the design.

[@Thx1138sober]

.303 sounds awfully small for aircraft defense, even .50 BMG seems a little like hunting elk with 5.56

[@teller1290]

Twin .50s were a bitch.

[@markfryer9880]

They stayed with the .303 Browning because of the higher rate of fire over the .50 Cal Brownings. However they should have taken note of the post Battle of Britain studies into how many rounds of .303 were required to bring down German bombers versus .50 Cal or 20 mm cannon.

[@billygunn7180]

No, fifty cals were quite effective for planes. They had armour piercing, tracers, etc. They packed quite a wallop.

[@shadewalker9270]

@@billygunn7180 .50 cals were effective but .303 browning fired faster putting more rounds in the air making it easier to something.

[@billygunn7180]

@@shadewalker9270 I was responding to guy saying .303 were small rounds for airplanes. He said even 50 cals seemed small for them. I was just correcting him. Fifty cals are devastating bullets. They're as big as your thumb.

[@donbrashsux]

I’d rather be a tail gunner..

[@Руслан-м4к9п]

По сравнению с американскими турелями - слабенько, и защиты нет у стрелка, и калибр маловат. 7,7 ?

[@nasalimbu3078]

Gunner

[@mikejordan8259]

I'd rather be in a Ball Turret.

[@billygunn7180]

You had to be small, to get in there. I think B-24 ball was retractable, the B-17 fixed. If landing gear was damaged, and you were trapped in there, you would be crushed. P.S.: there was show called Suicide Missions on History Channel, years ago. Ball Turret Gunner was one of the episodes.

[@arnoldsanders6878]

Never understood why they didn't fit these with 50 cals ??

[@nicolasjewers5849]

raf didnt like the 50cal much heavier and slower rate of fire

[@arnoldsanders6878]

@@nicolasjewers5849 + Packed a hugh punch tho. American fighter pilots loved them. Their planes were bristling with them.

[@rickb1973]

That's what I've always thought, too....Trying to hit and destroy fighters with twin .303's, at night?!?....Good luck, mate.

[@rodgeyd6728]

There lucky they had .303's , Harris wanted no guns to save weight!

[@rickb1973]

@@rodgeyd6728 He may have been right, you know. It would have meant fewer crew members at risk, more payload, maybe some increased armor protection. I'm seriously wondering if the chances of hitting something vital on a Me-110 or -410 fighter at night with rifle caliber rounds is worthwhile, ya know? I wonder if there are any RAF statistics available, it'd be interesting to look at.