why dont plane cockpits have all bulletproof glass canopy

[ARE_YOU_0K]

also why dont the front mgs on american tanks shoot

[Scheneighnay]

Cost probably. Not even every attacker has it.

Unlike in game, headons almost never happened IRL, so it would be pointless to have it anyway, unless you're in an attacker that's getting shot at from the ground, that they're flying towards.

[Katokevin]

It's not the cheapest, takes a bit more time to make, and is much heavier. Biggest part being weight. When you need the aircraft as light as possible, 20mm+ bulletproof glass all around will add quite a bit of weight. And the pilot has to open and close that cockpit so if you need to bail, you don't want to spend a lot of time trying to push it open.

[AttackerCat]

Think more in terms of practicality.
IRL all air vehicles were traveling at high rates of speed in a single direction. 99% of fire would be coming toward them from the front or from their direct rear.
Deflection shots on aircraft were not common like in WT, so there was no major reason to make entire canopy bulletproof. Cost and weight also did factor in here.

[Scheneighnay]

Originally posted by AttackerCat:

Think more in terms of practicality.
IRL all air vehicles were traveling at high rates of speed in a single direction. 99% of fire would be coming toward them from the front or from their direct rear.
Deflection shots on aircraft were not common like in WT, so there was no major reason to make entire canopy bulletproof. Cost and weight also did factor in here.

Shots wouldn't often come from the front unless maybe it's a bomber we're talking about- unlike in games, the planes probably wouldn't be approaching directly at each other.

It would most likely be a fighter patrol coming from whatever angle they happened to be at at the time that they noticed the enemy; and they would probably try creeping around from behind if they could.

[Katokevin]

Originally posted by Scheneighnay:

Originally posted by AttackerCat:

Think *snip*

Shots wouldn't often come from the front unless maybe it's a bomber we're talking about- unlike in games, the planes probably wouldn't be approaching directly at each other.

It would most likely be a fighter patrol coming from whatever angle they happened to be at at the time that they noticed the enemy; and they would probably try creeping around from behind if they could.

In a general dogfight, shots would most often be comming from the rear, which is why they sat in armored seats. Most often, they are going to be taking more small MG rounds which are what they are concerned about. Considering the mix of ammo, speeds they and the other are already moving at, and the power it looses by going through the airframe alone, it's going to have a harder time getting through the protected rear.

Of course it also depends on the aircraft, if that seat is actually a bit thick, if it has to get through glass first (bubble dome of a later P-47 for example), etc. Either way, they were often going to take rounds from fighters from or into the rear and it is common sence to give the pilot protection from the direct front window (to, at the minimal, prevent shattering glass flying into the face).

[AttackerCat]

Originally posted by Scheneighnay:

Originally posted by AttackerCat:

Think more in terms of practicality.
IRL all air vehicles were traveling at high rates of speed in a single direction. 99% of fire would be coming toward them from the front or from their direct rear.
Deflection shots on aircraft were not common like in WT, so there was no major reason to make entire canopy bulletproof. Cost and weight also did factor in here.

Shots wouldn't often come from the front unless maybe it's a bomber we're talking about- unlike in games, the planes probably wouldn't be approaching directly at each other.

It would most likely be a fighter patrol coming from whatever angle they happened to be at at the time that they noticed the enemy; and they would probably try creeping around from behind if they could.

There are innumerable cases of pilots going head-on with enemy aircraft, plus you had AA shooting towards any type of attacker or fighter that was nose-down on a strafing run/bomb run, so the solution to protect from small rounds and shrapnel was the bulletproof glass. It happened quite regularly.

[Scheneighnay]

Originally posted by AttackerCat:

Originally posted by Scheneighnay:

Shots wouldn't often come from the front unless maybe it's a bomber we're talking about- unlike in games, the planes probably wouldn't be approaching directly at each other.

It would most likely be a fighter patrol coming from whatever angle they happened to be at at the time that they noticed the enemy; and they would probably try creeping around from behind if they could.

There are innumerable cases of pilots going head-on with enemy aircraft, plus you had AA shooting towards any type of attacker or fighter that was nose-down on a strafing run/bomb run, so the solution to protect from small rounds and shrapnel was the bulletproof glass. It happened quite regularly.

Clearly that's not what happened if the planes didn't actually get bulletproof glass.

[Pellinore]

weight

[↯Zindy⛦]

Cost really, many countries still had many outdated planes from the interwar years and wouldnt be worth modifying. It is sort of mysterious on ww2 planes however since there is no bullet proof glass on the top of the cockpit though, because bullets just get dumped on the pilots head and legs when turning away from a pursuer; you would think bullet proof glass on the roof would help more in a fighter vs fighter scenario.