Best dogfight gun?

On 5 Dec 2003 07:42:43 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in message om...
In article ,
(robert arndt) wrote:

The M61 is a poor substitute for this bad baby:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/c.../mauser21.html

...if you don't mind only firing 1,700 rounds per minute as opposed to
about 6,000...

...when the M61 doesn't jam, that is.

Carried an M61 in the F-105 and the F-4E for 250 combat missions.
Carried the SUU-16 and SUU-23 on F-4Cs for four years. Carried the
SUU-11 mini-gun on AT-38s and fired literally hundreds of thousands of
rounds over 23 years of tactical experience. Never experienced a
single M61 variant jamming. Never saw on jam in any flight that I was
on. Never heard anyone talk about one jamming in any squadron I was
in. Doesn't sound, based on a limited empirical sampling like a
problem.

I prefer Mauser's BK-27
jam-proof linkless and up-coming dual feed version.

Should we note that the drum-fed internally carried M-61 is linkless?

BTW, in close combat 6000 rpm bursts don't mean that much.

You're correct. "Close combat" is stupid. It means you screwed up at
several earlier decision points. But, if you reach that point, why
don't 6K RPM bursts mean much? Would a 1K RPM burst be more
meaningful? Or were you suggesting that more RPM would be desireable.

If the burst will be on the target for .2 seconds, would it be better
to have more rounds or fewer during that interval?

A
1,700-1,800 rpm burst of 27mm fire from the single-barrel BK-27 will
ruin your day, especially with frangible ammo.

How about HEI instead of "frangible"? I'm not worried about
frangibility, as I would be if discharging a .45 ACP at a burglar in a
mid-town apartment. I'm worried about damaging the airframe and that
means HEI or maybe HEI/API mix.

Now if only the Germans could fit the amazing 30mm RMK inside the
Typhoon... but I'm sure it will find its way onto the Tiger helo.

Going from .50 cal to 20mm to 25mm to 30mm, etc, always incurs a
weight penalty. There are trade-offs between weight, ballistics,
accuracy, burst density, etc. Consider that one round of 155mm would
surely result in a kill, do we than suggest mounting artillery in the
nose of fighters? Clearly hyperbole for argument's sake.

Consider further that a gun will be carried on every sorties for the
life of the aircraft and for most aircraft will never be fired at
another aircraft in anger.

"Hoser" said, "There's no kill like a gun kill...." but, that may be
because gun kills are so damn rare.



Rob

In article ,
Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 5 Dec 2003 07:42:43 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

...when the M61 doesn't jam, that is.

Never experienced a single M61 variant jamming. Never saw on jam in
any flight that I was on. Never heard anyone talk about one jamming
in any squadron I was in. Doesn't sound, based on a limited empirical
sampling like a problem.

Well, Ed, you have to remember you're talking to Arndt. As fas as he's
concerned, everything important ever invented for aviation was invented
in Germany, all German-made machinery is the best in the world at
everything, and all American equipment is simply terrible and unreliable.

Which is why he's touting a weapon with less than one-third the firing
rate, and claiming that it's immune to mechanical problems...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:58:36 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 5 Dec 2003 07:42:43 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

...when the M61 doesn't jam, that is.

Never experienced a single M61 variant jamming. Never saw on jam in
any flight that I was on. Never heard anyone talk about one jamming
in any squadron I was in. Doesn't sound, based on a limited empirical
sampling like a problem.

Well, Ed, you have to remember you're talking to Arndt. As fas as he's
concerned, everything important ever invented for aviation was invented
in Germany, all German-made machinery is the best in the world at
everything, and all American equipment is simply terrible and unreliable.

Which is why he's touting a weapon with less than one-third the firing
rate, and claiming that it's immune to mechanical problems...
dont forget that the gatling is designed for longterm use unlike a
single barrel cannon. each barrel is only shooting 1/6, 1/7 etc of the
time. what is the lifecyle of the single barrel cannons compared to
the m61/Gau-8/Gau-25

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:31:25 -0800, Lyle wrote:

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:58:36 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 5 Dec 2003 07:42:43 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

...when the M61 doesn't jam, that is.

Never experienced a single M61 variant jamming. Never saw on jam in
any flight that I was on. Never heard anyone talk about one jamming
in any squadron I was in. Doesn't sound, based on a limited empirical
sampling like a problem.

Well, Ed, you have to remember you're talking to Arndt. As fas as he's
concerned, everything important ever invented for aviation was invented
in Germany, all German-made machinery is the best in the world at
everything, and all American equipment is simply terrible and unreliable.

Which is why he's touting a weapon with less than one-third the firing
rate, and claiming that it's immune to mechanical problems...
dont forget that the gatling is designed for longterm use unlike a
single barrel cannon. each barrel is only shooting 1/6, 1/7 etc of the
time. what is the lifecyle of the single barrel cannons compared to
the m61/Gau-8/Gau-25

The weight penalty of the multi barrels is a major drawback, its not
like the cannon is the primary weapon anymore....
The BK-27 has a good reputation, same as the M61!, the question
remains which is the most accurate and is a better dispersal an
advantage or not???.
Which has the Higher PK?.

Cheers


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

Greg Hennessy wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 07:45:39 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:


Whats the avarage gun burst time in a dogfight...

Whatever it is, you're going to have to hold the trigger down for over
three times that to get the same amount of fire downrange.

Given the that the designer of the mig-29 is on record as saying that he
should have halved the number of rounds carried for its gsh-30L. Tony
Williams has a table on his website which details why a single barrelled
cannon will get there 1st with the mostest when compared to a gatling.

This is from 'Flying Guns: the Modern Era' by Emmanuel Gustin and
myself, due to be published in March next year:

"There are three competing philosophies when it comes to gun design
for fighter aircraft. One is the US rotary; fast-firing but (to date)
only 20 mm in calibre, and a very bulky system. The second is the West
European preference for a 27 – 30 mm revolver cannon; no lighter, but
slimmer and hard-hitting. The third is represented by the Russian GSh
301; a minimalist gun but with an equally hard-hitting performance.
The twin-barrel GSh-30 also deserves mention, even though it has not
been used in fighter aircraft. It weighs about the same as the western
guns at 105 kg, but fires powerful 30 mm ammunition at up to 3,000
rpm.

The merits of the 27 mm BK 27 revolver as opposed to the M61A1 can be
clearly demonstrated. In the first 0.5 seconds of firing, the M61
fires 18 rounds massing 1.8 kg in total weight of projectiles, the BK
27 fires 14 rounds weighing 3.7 kg. In the first full second, the M61
fires 68 rounds weighing 6.9 kg, the BK 27 fires 28 rounds weighing
7.4 kg. In weight of fire, as well as the destructiveness of the
individual projectiles, the Mauser clearly has an advantage, albeit
one that the faster-accelerating M61A2 reduces somewhat. This is
significant in that dogfights frequently permit only the briefest of
firing opportunities, and although a skilled pilot anticipating a
firing opportunity can 'spin up' a rotary in advance, such notice
cannot always be guaranteed.

The Mauser projectiles are also relatively heavier, resulting in a
sectional density (SD) of .507 compared to .363 for the 20 mm, which
means they will retain their initial velocity out to a greater range.
The 30 mm GSh-301 offers similar performance to the BK 27 with about
half the weight. On paper, this is an impressive fighter gun, although
its maintenance requirements have been criticised. The choice of a
heavy projectile (with an SD of .616) at a moderate velocity for the
Russian 30 mm guns implies that ground attack has a higher priority
than aerial combat in Russian thinking.

The ideal gun for aerial combat will of course combine the best of all
worlds: a high rate of fire, instantly achieved; a high muzzle
velocity to minimise flight time; and projectiles large enough to
inflict serious damage with each hit (requiring a calibre in the 25 –
30 mm range). The optimum weapon among those currently developed may
well be the new GIAT 30M791 revolver, although its weight means that
two GSh 301s (or a GSh-30) could be carried instead, with a higher
rate of fire. If the Russian guns' 30 x 165 ammunition were loaded
with lighter projectiles for a higher muzzle velocity, its aerial
combat capabilities would be improved, at the cost of some loss of
ground attack effectiveness."

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

In article ,
John Cook wrote:

The weight penalty of the multi barrels is a major drawback, its not
like the cannon is the primary weapon anymore....

The BK27 weighs about 100 kilograms, the lightweight version of the M61
(used in the Raptor) weighs about 100 kilograms. Kinda hard to call
that much of a penalty.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

Cover all the bases and use a GAU-8 ;-) Takes a bit to wind up but
even those first rounds will count for something :-)

Amen brother! The API round will go in one end of an aircraft and out the
other without slowing down.

A lot of people are forgetting about range and bullet dispersion. The GAU-8
can reach out and touch someone at twice the range of most cannon, without
the huge loss in bullet density.

If you actually ever get into the dreaded knife-fight in a phone booth, the
other guy is going to have second thoughts about screwing with an A-10 when
the nose erupts in a huge cloud of smoke well beyond the range he can employ
his gun.

"Tony Williams" wrote

The merits of the 27 mm BK 27 revolver as opposed to the M61A1 can be
clearly demonstrated. In the first 0.5 seconds of firing, the M61
fires 18 rounds massing 1.8 kg in total weight of projectiles, the BK
27 fires 14 rounds weighing 3.7 kg. In the first full second, the M61
fires 68 rounds weighing 6.9 kg, the BK 27 fires 28 rounds weighing
7.4 kg. In weight of fire, as well as the destructiveness of the
individual projectiles, the Mauser clearly has an advantage, albeit
one that the faster-accelerating M61A2 reduces somewhat. This is
significant in that dogfights frequently permit only the briefest of
firing opportunities, and although a skilled pilot anticipating a
firing opportunity can 'spin up' a rotary in advance, such notice
cannot always be guaranteed.

Tony, why have none of the Gatling guns been designed to be "armed" and spun
up with the ammunition feed disengaged and "fired" at full rate by engaging
the ammunition feed? It seems obvious enough. There are some obvious issues
in inertial loads in the ammunition train but a "burst's worth" of rounds
could be decoupled from the main ammo tank.

uk (Tony Williams)

snip

The merits of the 27 mm BK 27 revolver as opposed to the M61A1 can be
clearly demonstrated. In the first 0.5 seconds of firing, the M61
fires 18 rounds massing 1.8 kg in total weight of projectiles, the BK
27 fires 14 rounds weighing 3.7 kg. In the first full second, the M61
fires 68 rounds weighing 6.9 kg, the BK 27 fires 28 rounds weighing
7.4 kg. In weight of fire, as well as the destructiveness of the
individual projectiles, the Mauser clearly has an advantage, albeit
one that the faster-accelerating M61A2 reduces somewhat.

You shoot your own argument down. The BK27's projectile weight has no effect if
you don't actually strike the target. A 27 mm projectile that misses is not as
efective a 20 mm projectile that hits. In your example above the M61 has more
projectiles in the air at any given time than the BK27 giving a greater
probable hit with the M61.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

In article ,
(Tony Williams) wrote:

The merits of the 27 mm BK 27 revolver as opposed to the M61A1 can be
clearly demonstrated. In the first 0.5 seconds of firing, the M61
fires 18 rounds massing 1.8 kg in total weight of projectiles, the BK
27 fires 14 rounds weighing 3.7 kg. In the first full second, the M61
fires 68 rounds weighing 6.9 kg, the BK 27 fires 28 rounds weighing
7.4 kg. In weight of fire, as well as the destructiveness of the
individual projectiles, the Mauser clearly has an advantage, albeit
one that the faster-accelerating M61A2 reduces somewhat. This is
significant in that dogfights frequently permit only the briefest of
firing opportunities, and although a skilled pilot anticipating a
firing opportunity can 'spin up' a rotary in advance, such notice
cannot always be guaranteed.

This skips one of the big advantages of a faster-firing gun.

When your target is crossing your sights, having twice the "cycle time"
puts bullets into the other plane twice as often. Skeet shooters use
shotguns instead of rifles. Weight of fire is nice, but heavier bullets
don't help much if the other plane gets missed altogether due to not
having enough of them on target.

Note also that the Mauser install in the Typhoon holds about 1/3 of the
ammo that the M61A2 in the Raptor will, so things come out pretty even
as far as throw weight and firing time, with a small advantage for the
Mauser in promptness, and a small one the other way for the M61A2 in
overall bullet weight in the aircraft (eight one-second bursts versus
five for the Mauser).

Now, if you're shooting at tanks and other ground vehicles, that Mauser
sure has an advantage, but the F-22 probably won't be spending a lot of
time at that...

(The British Typhoons aren't even going to have guns in them after the
first tranche, BTW. Bad idea.)

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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