Best dogfight gun?

On 12 Dec 2003 12:51:59 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

We know the Mauser works, too - it's been in service in large numbers
for two decades. The initial assessments by the JSF team concluded
that the Mauser was the most cost-effective choice, and they knew all
about the GAU-12/U then.

Part of that "cost effectiveness" appeared to be a lowball pricing
structure that fell through on closer examination.

Do you have a source to support that? You may be right, but I like to
work on hard info rather than forum gossip.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The Mouser was to be a completely new system, using linkless ammunition.
It has never been demonstrated, much less placed in service.

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 12 Dec 2003 12:51:59 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

We know the Mauser works, too - it's been in service in large numbers
for two decades. The initial assessments by the JSF team concluded
that the Mauser was the most cost-effective choice, and they knew all
about the GAU-12/U then.

Part of that "cost effectiveness" appeared to be a lowball pricing
structure that fell through on closer examination.

Do you have a source to support that? You may be right, but I like to
work on hard info rather than forum gossip.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The Mouser was to be a completely new system, using linkless ammunition.
It has never been demonstrated, much less placed in service.

The linkless feed was developed years ago and is used in the
Eurofighter Typhoon installation, so is just about to enter service.

So what have we determined?

1. The German Mauser BK 27 was selected by both Boeing and
Lockheed-Martin over the GAU-12/U as the best and most cost-effective
gun for the JSF (documented fact).

2. The cost of the gun rose well over budget (documented fact)
probably because Mauser's US partners spent far too much on adapting
it to US use (reasonable assumption).

3. GD, in their position of gun armament integrator, took advantage of
the situation to slip in a lower bid for the GAU-12/U, which was
accepted by L-M (clear conclusion from press statement).

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

Incidentally, you seem to equate preferring a non-US gun with an
'anti-American bias'. You should have words with the US armed forces.
The US Army's standard 5.56mm MG is the (Belgian) FN Minimi, its
standard 7.62mm GPMG is the (Belgian) FN MAG, and its standard 9mm
pistol is the (Italian) Beretta. The M16 rifle family is expected to
be replaced soon by the XM8, based on the (German) Heckler & Koch G36.
The advanced XM29 5.56+20mm weapon is also having its hardware
developed by HK. The M1A2 Abrams tank is armed with a (German) 120mm
gun, replacing the (British) 105mm in the M1A1. The USN has made
extensive use of the (Italian) 76mm OTO, and the US Coastguard has
selected the (Swedish) 57mm Bofors as the main gun for its new class
of ships. The USMC has selected the (British) RO 155mm as its next
howitzer. Of course, the USMC also operates the AV-8B aircraft, based
on the (British) BAe Harrier, and the USN uses the T-45 Goshawk
trainer, a version of the (British) BAe Hawk.

Evidently these services are riven with anti-American bias. Or perhaps
they're just sensible enough to buy the best weapons available from
the western world?

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

The linkless feed was developed years ago and is used in the
Eurofighter Typhoon installation, so is just about to enter service.

So what have we determined?

1. The German Mauser BK 27 was selected by both Boeing and
Lockheed-Martin over the GAU-12/U as the best and most cost-effective
gun for the JSF (documented fact).

You misspelled "cheaper." The Mauser was "good enough," for the
original price, which they didn't stick with.

2. The cost of the gun rose well over budget (documented fact)
probably because Mauser's US partners spent far too much on adapting
it to US use (reasonable assumption).

Unreasonable assumption.

More reasonable? They low-balled the bid, and didn't get the price
increase they wanted. Integrating the gun into the airframe? If they
had to spend *that* much doing it, they screwed something up in the
original design.

3. GD, in their position of gun armament integrator, took advantage of
the situation to slip in a lower bid for the GAU-12/U, which was
accepted by L-M (clear conclusion from press statement).

....or they came back in after the Mauser folks didn't get the price
increase they wanted - the actual comment *in* the press statement.

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

This from the Boeing press release in 1999:

'Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability,
The Boeing Company has selected the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for
its next generation JSF combat aircraft.....The gun is also a
candidate for the Lockheed Martin version of the JSF...."It's the
lightest, most accurate and reliable gun based on our initial studies"
said Dennis Muilenburg, JSF weapon system director for Boeing. "Our
comparative assessment found the 27mm cannon to be more affordable,
more lethal and more supportable than any of its competitors".'

Note that cost is only one of the factors mentioned. Words like 'more
lethal', 'lightest', 'most accurate and reliable' are in there too.
That provides no evidence for claiming that the GAU-12/U is 'at least
as good'.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

On 14 Dec 2003 12:48:02 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

This from the Boeing press release in 1999:

'Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability,
The Boeing Company has selected the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for
its next generation JSF combat aircraft.....The gun is also a
candidate for the Lockheed Martin version of the JSF...."It's the
lightest, most accurate and reliable gun based on our initial studies"
said Dennis Muilenburg, JSF weapon system director for Boeing. "Our
comparative assessment found the 27mm cannon to be more affordable,
more lethal and more supportable than any of its competitors".'

Note that cost is only one of the factors mentioned. Words like 'more
lethal', 'lightest', 'most accurate and reliable' are in there too.
That provides no evidence for claiming that the GAU-12/U is 'at least
as good'.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The only thing being evaluated at that time were Mauser's press releases.
When they started comparing real numbers the Mauser was toast.

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 14 Dec 2003 12:48:02 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

This from the Boeing press release in 1999:

'Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability,
The Boeing Company has selected the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for
its next generation JSF combat aircraft.....The gun is also a
candidate for the Lockheed Martin version of the JSF...."It's the
lightest, most accurate and reliable gun based on our initial studies"
said Dennis Muilenburg, JSF weapon system director for Boeing. "Our
comparative assessment found the 27mm cannon to be more affordable,
more lethal and more supportable than any of its competitors".'

Note that cost is only one of the factors mentioned. Words like 'more
lethal', 'lightest', 'most accurate and reliable' are in there too.
That provides no evidence for claiming that the GAU-12/U is 'at least
as good'.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The only thing being evaluated at that time were Mauser's press releases.
When they started comparing real numbers the Mauser was toast.

If you believe that the US companies involved would have made such a
decision based on press releases, your opinion of them is far lower
than mine.

Incidentally, in contrast to the above, I recall that the recent
statement switching the choice to the GAU-12/U made no mention at all
of it being 'better'. Only cheaper.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

On 14 Dec 2003 23:44:51 -0800, Tony Williams wrote:
Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 14 Dec 2003 12:48:02 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

This from the Boeing press release in 1999:

'Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability,
The Boeing Company has selected the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for
its next generation JSF combat aircraft.....The gun is also a
candidate for the Lockheed Martin version of the JSF...."It's the
lightest, most accurate and reliable gun based on our initial studies"
said Dennis Muilenburg, JSF weapon system director for Boeing. "Our
comparative assessment found the 27mm cannon to be more affordable,
more lethal and more supportable than any of its competitors".'

Note that cost is only one of the factors mentioned. Words like 'more
lethal', 'lightest', 'most accurate and reliable' are in there too.
That provides no evidence for claiming that the GAU-12/U is 'at least
as good'.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The only thing being evaluated at that time were Mauser's press releases.
When they started comparing real numbers the Mauser was toast.

If you believe that the US companies involved would have made such a
decision based on press releases, your opinion of them is far lower
than mine.

Incidentally, in contrast to the above, I recall that the recent
statement switching the choice to the GAU-12/U made no mention at all
of it being 'better'. Only cheaper.

Do we have figures for the cost of either gun?

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

On 14 Dec 2003 23:44:51 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 14 Dec 2003 12:48:02 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message . com...
In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

So to sum up, the F-35 will be getting the second-best gun because
Mauser's US partners couldn't keep their costs down.

No, the F-35 will be getting a gun that's at least as good, because the
"cheap" gun wasn't nearly as cheap as we'd been led to believe.

This from the Boeing press release in 1999:

'Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability,
The Boeing Company has selected the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for
its next generation JSF combat aircraft.....The gun is also a
candidate for the Lockheed Martin version of the JSF...."It's the
lightest, most accurate and reliable gun based on our initial studies"
said Dennis Muilenburg, JSF weapon system director for Boeing. "Our
comparative assessment found the 27mm cannon to be more affordable,
more lethal and more supportable than any of its competitors".'

Note that cost is only one of the factors mentioned. Words like 'more
lethal', 'lightest', 'most accurate and reliable' are in there too.
That provides no evidence for claiming that the GAU-12/U is 'at least
as good'.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

The only thing being evaluated at that time were Mauser's press releases.
When they started comparing real numbers the Mauser was toast.

If you believe that the US companies involved would have made such a
decision based on press releases, your opinion of them is far lower
than mine.

The point is that there WAS no decision. They were at the "concept" phase
of the project, and it was well understood by all concerned that nothing was
set in stone at that point.

Al Minyard

"Tony Williams" wrote:
| Alan Minyard wrote in message
. ..
| On 12 Dec 2003 12:51:59 -0800,
(Tony Williams) wrote:
|
| Chad Irby wrote in message
. com...
| In article ,
| (Tony Williams) wrote:
|
| We know the Mauser works, too - it's been in service in large
numbers
| for two decades. The initial assessments by the JSF team
concluded
| that the Mauser was the most cost-effective choice, and they
knew all
| about the GAU-12/U then.
|
| Part of that "cost effectiveness" appeared to be a lowball
pricing
| structure that fell through on closer examination.
|
| Do you have a source to support that? You may be right, but I like
to
| work on hard info rather than forum gossip.
|
| Tony Williams
| Military gun and ammunition website:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
| Discussion forum at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/
|
| The Mouser was to be a completely new system, using linkless
ammunition.
| It has never been demonstrated, much less placed in service.
|
| The linkless feed was developed years ago and is used in the
| Eurofighter Typhoon installation, so is just about to enter service.
|
| So what have we determined?
|
| 1. The German Mauser BK 27 was selected by both Boeing and
| Lockheed-Martin over the GAU-12/U as the best and most cost-effective
| gun for the JSF (documented fact).

That isn't a documented fact. The documented fact is that the GAU-12/U
has just been selected as the best and most cost-effective gun for the
JSF in open competition with the BK 27 (the original selection of the BK
27 in 2000 was not an open competition) by LMT.

"Brett" wrote in message ...
"Tony Williams" wrote:
|
| 1. The German Mauser BK 27 was selected by both Boeing and
| Lockheed-Martin over the GAU-12/U as the best and most cost-effective
| gun for the JSF (documented fact).

That isn't a documented fact. The documented fact is that the GAU-12/U
has just been selected as the best and most cost-effective gun for the
JSF in open competition with the BK 27 (the original selection of the BK
27 in 2000 was not an open competition) by LMT.

It's as well documented as the decision to use the GAU-12/U: the
source for both being official press statements, placed on the web.
You seem to be very selective in the press statements you're prepared
to credit.

What makes you say that the original decision in favour of the BK 27
wasn't 'in open competition'? It was clear that when Boeing decided in
favour of the BK 27 in 1999, the GAU-12/U WAS in the frame, because GD
withdrew it from the JSF competition in 2000, just before L-M selected
the BK 27 as well (which looks very much like a case of 'resign before
you're sacked').

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/