If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:35:37 GMT, "Kevin Brooks" wrote:
"Alan Minyard" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:39:49 GMT, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ... In message , Chad Irby writes In article , Alan Minyard wrote: Are you familiar with the concept of guided missiles? If you get into gun range you have already screwed the pooch. The gun is a last ditch, desperation weapon in ACM, wasting airframe volume and weight on a honking great, slow, unreliable gun is not a wise trade off. Comments nearly identical to the one above were very popular in the early 1960s. And then we got into a real shooting war, and pilots suddenly needed guns again. It's an interesting area to actually analyse, particularly when comparing USAF and USN performance: in Linebacker the USAF shot down forty-eight MiGs for twenty-four air-to-air losses, while the USN lost four and scored 24 kills. More interesting yet, the Navy's fighters met MiGs twenty-six times, for a .92 probability of killing a MiG and a .15 chance of losing one of their own; the USAF had eighty-two engagements, for .58 kills per engagement but .29 losses.[1] Ugh! That all sounds dangerously like the "operations research", or systems analysis, kind of numeric mumbo-jumbo so characteristic of the McNamara era---PLEASSSE don't go there! It took us a generation to rid ourselves of the most of the "mantle of the number crunchers" (and we were only partially succesful--witness the continued use of the POM process in budgeting) as it was... Brooks snip OR has been in use since WWII, when it was used to determine such things as the parameters of an "ideal" depth charge attack. It was quite effective at the time, and still is. But it was taken waaay too far by the McNamara crowd, who felt that all things were quantifiable by numbers, and numbers were more important than actual results. I certainly have no love of McN, he did an amazing amount of damage to the US Military (the term "McNamara's Nightmare" was applied to *numerous* systems). Not to mention his micromanagement in Vietnam, and his later published fandango about his involvement in the decisionmaking that went into that conflict. Brooks Roger that!! Al Minyard |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
On or about Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:21:39 -0600, Alan Minyard
allegedly uttered: On 11 Dec 2003 05:45:39 -0800, (Tony Williams) wrote: "Thomas Schoene" wrote in message link.net... Tony Williams wrote: Now let's look at the opposition. The 'European standard' 27mm Mauser BK 27, selected over any US gun by the JSF contenders, weighs 100 kg and uses much less space (only one barrel). Of course, the BK27 was then abandoned by Lockheed Martin after the JSF source selection and replaced by a 25mm GAU-12/U Gatling gun. I understand that was at the initiative of GD, who happened to be given the contract for designing the JSF's BK 27 gun installation and also just happen to make the GAU-12/U (shouldn't they have declared an interest, or something?) .....their argument was on cost grounds, not quality (and I suspect they may have received a sympathetic hearing in favour of a US gun rather than a German one, especially post-Iraq). The BK 27 was originally selected purely on merit. 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/ You have no idea. The Mauser was an inferior weapon. Really, why? "Citing lower costs, greater lethality and improved supportability, The Boeing Company this week targeted the Advanced 27mm Aircraft Cannon for its next-generation Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) combat aircraft" "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 the competitors." Both from http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/...se_990428n.htm Yes they are the losers, but they seemed convinced. Or we could look at the specs BK27 100kg ROF 1770 rpm Muzzle Velocity 1025m/s GAU-12/U 123kg ROF 4200rpm Muzzle Velocity 1036m/s (API) Muzzle Velocity 1085m/s (TP, HEI) SO the major differences a BK has more muzzle energy BK is lighter BK has ballistically matched ammunition so a consistent aimpoint BK round is more destructive BK round will hold it's energy for a further distance GAU has a higher ROF. So tell us again why the Mauser is an inferior weapon? --- Peter Kemp Life is short - Drink Faster |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
|
#125
|
|||
|
|||
|
#126
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote: Or we could look at the specs BK27 100kg ROF 1770 rpm Muzzle Velocity 1025m/s GAU-12/U 123kg ROF 4200rpm Muzzle Velocity 1036m/s (API) Muzzle Velocity 1085m/s (TP, HEI) SO the major differences a BK has more muzzle energy BK is lighter BK has ballistically matched ammunition so a consistent aimpoint BK round is more destructive BK round will hold it's energy for a further distance GAU has a higher ROF. So tell us again why the Mauser is an inferior weapon? BK has higher specific recoil (28 versus 22 kN), so needs much more reinforcement of airframe, negating weight difference GAU has a *much* higher rate of fire, so much higher chance of actually hitting the target While a single BK round does slightly more damage, it doesn't do twice as much damage, so firing rate is too slow BK has about twice the barrel wear at full fire rate -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Brett" wrote: "Chad Irby" wrote: | That's the point, though. If the M61 could only get two or three | rounds on target, the slower-firing 30mm Mauser could only expect | to get one. If the Mauser gets two or three, the Gatling gets six | to ten. In the first second of operation the 27mm Mauser will discharge 28 260gm projectiles. The 25mm GAU-12/U in the AV8B in the same time will only discharge 35 180gm projectiles. ....and after four or five one-second shots, the Mauser will be out, while the GAU will have three or four left. Or, using half-second bursts, the Mauser will have about one-*quarter* the firing time... -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote:
| In article , | "Brett" wrote: | | "Chad Irby" wrote: | | | That's the point, though. If the M61 could only get two or three | | rounds on target, the slower-firing 30mm Mauser could only expect | | to get one. If the Mauser gets two or three, the Gatling gets six | | to ten. | | In the first second of operation the 27mm Mauser will discharge 28 260gm | projectiles. The 25mm GAU-12/U in the AV8B in the same time will only | discharge 35 180gm projectiles. | | ...and after four or five one-second shots, the Mauser will be out, | while the GAU will have three or four left. | | Or, using half-second bursts, the Mauser will have about one-*quarter* | the firing time... Your original claim was the advantage enjoyed by the gatling from the much larger the number of projectiles sent in the direction of the target when required, if it is actually sending less the advantage should belong to the Mauser. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote "Paul F Austin" wrote: Now, here's a question: for the 200Kg or so weight budget (I have no idea about volume) of an internal gun and ammo tank, would you rather have 1, 2 or 3 more AIM-9Xs/ASRAAMs? It's not a question of "just weight," or we'd just build C-5s with a big automated missile launcher in them. Nope, I just used weight as an example of the "cost" paid for a gun. And my question stands: At the initial design stage of an aircraft when you're making choices, is a gun worth more than a couple of SRAAMs? Or some of the other goods that you snipped. Those are real choices and a gun has to earn its place on the airframe just like every other piece of gear. You (the customer and systems designers) make choices that affect the aircraft thoughout its life. Yes, the "no-guns" fighter was 'way premature in 1955, the year the F4H configuration was frozen. It's_really_not clear that's still the case now. Minimum range engagement? ASRAAM claim 300m minimum range and with "looks can kill" helmet sights, it's really not clear that a gun brings much to the table.. Strafing? Having 6 SDBs tucked away seems more useful. It's not just weapons fit either. The vibration from gun firing costs significantly higher failure rates in electronics near the gun. Having a major electronics failure is a mission kill these days. |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
You have no idea. The Mauser was an inferior weapon. Sources for that statement, please. These quotes are from an official JSF press release: '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".' Inferior, yeah. In contrast, the press release from GD just mentioned that they were proposing the GAU-12/U instead because it was cheaper and the ammo was already in US service (you mean, that hadn't been realised before?). If indeed the 27mm had become too expensive in the meantime, there is only one likely explanation: the Americans spent too much time futzing about with it to 'Americanise' it instead of simply adopting it. It's been a reliable and effective weapon in European service for about two decades in the Tornado and Alpha Jet, is also in service in the Gripen and is about to enter service in the Eurofighter Typhoon. Tony Williams Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AIM-54 Phoenix missile | Sujay Vijayendra | Military Aviation | 89 | November 3rd 03 09:47 PM |
P-39's, zeros, etc. | old hoodoo | Military Aviation | 12 | July 23rd 03 05:48 AM |