Rear firing machine gun.?

Question

Did anyone during WW2 ever think about fitting a rear facing machine gun on Spitfires,etc. Enemy fighters sneaking up behind a unwary Spitfire or Hurricane pilot might have had a nasty shock to be unepectedly sprayed with a short burst of lead.Even if no hits were scored enemy pilots would have treated a rear end attack with extra caution.I appreciate that extra ammunition carried would mean extra weight so the idea might not have got off the ground(no pun intended).

Thanks for your answers, I had already thought of the lack of aimability of the weapon.I understand that rear view mirrors were fitted inside the cockpits of Spitfires the pilot could have had a seperate firing button just to be able to give the attacking pilot reason to break of the attack.

Answer 1

It would have been a great idea most fighters carry a ballast weight at the tail so if they fitted a 20 cal It wouldn't have made much more weight and just have it firring tracers even if they didn't hit I think they would have scared the enemy enough to brake off the attack....Great Idea....Shame it's a bit late...

Answer 2

A control function is needed... just a simple backward firing gun would have been a waste, as your likely percentage of getting an actual hit would have been less then 5%. This being due to how aerial battles are fought, and the factors that very very few hits actually come from the back, but rather came from above, below or various angles off the sides. Even the heavy bombers that had gunner positions in the rear, did not have the greatest success rates in their shooting.

Answer 3

The Bristol Beaufighter did have rear firing machine gun but this aircraft had a two man crew and was considerably heavier than a Spitfire or Hurricane. If fitted to a single seated fighter, fire from a fixed mount gun would be easy to avoid and remote sighting and aiming would not have been practical.

Answer 4

Yes, the Bolton-Paul Defiant was a single-engine fighter which had rear-firing machine guns mounted in a turret behind the pilot's position. It took the Germans by surprise at first but as it had no forward-firing guns they were soon being shot down in embarrassingly large numbers.

Answer 5

Not sure about any spitfires with that option, but the first German jet bomber had 2 20mm cannons faced rearward and the pilot used a rearward periscope to aim and fire them. Here is a link to it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234

Answer 6

According to my resident expert; the Spitfire and the Hurricane were both single seater aircraft, (apart from the craft used for training which were two seaters) therefore there would have been no way of aiming it, or no one to shoot it.

Answer 7

maximum WW II fighter jets have been single pilot planes with basically a collection of forward dealing with weapons. there is too lots to the rear that would desire to get interior the way of firing that way, and it could have been impractical to mount weapons on the tail. combatants immediately have rockets which would be fired in many distinctive guidelines.

Answer 8

Whatever the other answer's say, I think it is a very good question and an interesting proposal, I also think the "shock" value of such an armament may have saved some aircraft and pilots. I repeat, very good question.

Answer 9

Useless without a way to aim it. Many shots were deflection shots, not shots directly from the rear.

Answer 10

Actually yes it was done.
Here is a classic example;
"Type 99" carrier based bomber
D3A1
http://fire.prohosting.com/hud607/uncommon/reference/japan/images/d3a_01.jpg

Rear facing gunner sat at the back of the canopy.