Some of my bits

[Kyt]

I forgot to put the link for the above drum-Bren:

Bren Gun - www.canadiansoldiers.com

It certainly makes more sense to use the drum for the AA role, with it's higher capacity.

[penance]

Yes, but i think in practice the Bren was a victim of it's own success. To accurate for AA fire.
Interestingly, with the drum mag fitted the sights can't be used. The drum mag had a tracer every fourth round, this was to show line of fire and help get on target.

[Kyt]

The standard mag also used tracer though the only picture I could find was on the IWM site in it's standard configuration:

Tracer ammunition being fired from Bren guns over the heads of troops crossing a lake in collapsible boats, during a night exercise at Llanberis in Wales, 7 May 1942.

As for the accuracy issue, I can understand why that was a problem for infantry role (not enough spread to inflict wide damage) but I'd have thought accuracy was good for AA roles.

[penance]

I think in theory you are right, but that leaves less margin so the gunner would have to be very good.
Hvae you seen the images taken from Spitfire gun cams, you can see the rounds spiralling towards the target, giving a greater chance of hitting (if that makes sense?).

[Kyt]

Yes, aircraft guns did have a spread but they number of counter-factors meant that accuracy had to be built in as much as possible. The convergance point of fighter guns had to be shortened at the beginning of the war, especially on the Spit/Hurri .303s because the spread was too great and didn't inflict enough damage. Added to that was the necessity of accuracy to compensate for aircraft vibration, speed and deflection.

On the other hand, the MG42 seemed to suffer from the opposite of the Bren - so much vibration and such a high rate of fire, that there was a lot of spread

[Antipodean Andy]

Nice bits, Penance. I hope no one mistakes your AA Bren for a hat rack!