Hawk 200 questions

Greg Hennessy wrote in message . ..

If TPTB were actually serious about providing the harrier with cannon and
commonality of ammunition. A license built GSH-30 or 301 firing what the
Rarden fires would be rather hard to argue against.

An interesting idea, although I expect there would be problems. Apart
from the fact that the 30x170 Rarden ammo is bigger than the 30x165
Russian, the Russian ammo is also very strongly made, with thick steel
cases and the projectiles heavily crimped in, because it gets a
violent battering in the fast-firing guns. The Rarden cartridge was
specifically modified (from the Oerlikon KCB original) for use on the
gentle, slow-firing, long-recoil gun, with soft brass cases...I think
that retaining the 27mm Mauser would have been the best bet. I mean,
they must have loads of them lying around doing nothing, now that the
Tornado GR.4 has lost one.

Quite. It was interesting to watch an interview with a Tornado pilot where
he detailed having do gun passes in close support of friendlies during the
recent Iraq conflict.

Interesting - I hadn't heard about that. Do you have any details?

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 29 Jul 2003 08:24:23 -0700, (Tony
Williams) wrote:


An interesting idea, although I expect there would be problems. Apart
from the fact that the 30x170 Rarden ammo is bigger than the 30x165
Russian,

True. From the pics on your site

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/30-2.jpg

I wouldn't have thought there was much difference between the two in
overall size though. A licensed gsh suitably modified would be firing a
equivalently powered round.

the Russian ammo is also very strongly made, with thick steel
cases and the projectiles heavily crimped in, because it gets a
violent battering in the fast-firing guns.

also makes it pretty soldier proof in its other applications.

The Rarden cartridge was
specifically modified (from the Oerlikon KCB original) for use on the
gentle, slow-firing, long-recoil gun, with soft brass cases.

How does the case steel KCB case compare to the soviet round. IIRC the RN
uses the KCB for hand trained AAA.

On a side note did you ever find out what fired the 35x173 ?

..I think
that retaining the 27mm Mauser would have been the best bet. I mean,
they must have loads of them lying around doing nothing, now that the
Tornado GR.4 has lost one.

Which makes the whole saga not just baffling but stinks to high heavens.
Surely its not beyond the whit of some smart type @ to provide harrier
compatible podded carriage for the BK-27. Like how hard is it to borrow
some alpha jet pods from the Luftwaffe and get some ideas.


Quite. It was interesting to watch an interview with a Tornado pilot where
he detailed having do gun passes in close support of friendlies during the
recent Iraq conflict.

Interesting - I hadn't heard about that. Do you have any details?

Interview with 'tornado pilot' on IIRC sky news. Wasnt taking much notice
until he said had to do strafing runs in support of troops somewhere round
Basra.

One wonders was he carpeted afterwards for politically inconvenient use of
his cannon. I could have sworn the brass claiming that sort of thing didn't
happen any more.


greg


--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
Alley Gator. With those hypnotic big green eyes
Alley Gator. She'll make you 'fraid 'em
She'll chew you up, ain't no lie

Greg Hennessy wrote in message . ..
On 29 Jul 2003 08:24:23 -0700, (Tony
Williams) wrote:

The Rarden cartridge was
specifically modified (from the Oerlikon KCB original) for use on the
gentle, slow-firing, long-recoil gun, with soft brass cases.

How does the case steel KCB case compare to the soviet round. IIRC the RN
uses the KCB for hand trained AAA.

Yes, the RN still uses the KCB. The case is stronger than the brass
one but the projectile isn't as well crimped-in as the Russian job.

On a side note did you ever find out what fired the 35x173 ?

Sadly, not. I like that cartridge and it could be an interesting offer
in a suitably modified KCA. However, you have prompted me to send an
enquiry to a gentleman in the USA who who has a 35mm and under
research collection which I can only dream of...

Quite. It was interesting to watch an interview with a Tornado pilot where
he detailed having do gun passes in close support of friendlies during the
recent Iraq conflict.

Interesting - I hadn't heard about that. Do you have any details?

Interview with 'tornado pilot' on IIRC sky news. Wasnt taking much notice
until he said had to do strafing runs in support of troops somewhere round
Basra.

One wonders was he carpeted afterwards for politically inconvenient use of
his cannon. I could have sworn the brass claiming that sort of thing didn't
happen any more.

Well, I know the US planes did some strafing but I hadn't heard that
Tornados had. Interesting...

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition
website and Discussion
forum

(Tony Williams) wrote:
Revolver cannon are very tricky to get working properly, with precise
ignition timing being essential. The 25x137 ammo is of course
percussion-primed, whereas the ammo for all other revolvers has used
the more precise electric priming, which does make me wonder if they
were tackling an impossible job.

Are revolver cannon systems not compatible with electrical
primer ignition ? It seems like a lot of trouble just for a specific
round...



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

(Peter Stickney) wrote in message ...
Just the opposite, really. So far, teh only way anybody has been able
to get a high rate of fire revolver to work has been electrical
priming. Percussion primers are rather slower, and not as precise wrt
the timing between whacking it and having the round go off. A 1500
rd/minute revolver has to feed the round, fire it, and
clear the breech in 0.0006 seconds, with no interruptions.

I think your math is a little off here. A single chamber firing 1500
rounds per *second* would have a cycle time of 0.0006 seconds. A
single chamber firing at 1500 rounds per minute has a cycle time of
0.04 seconds, and with a five chamber revolver each chamber needs to
feed/fire/clear once every 0.2 seconds.

Even so, I'd imagine that the problem with revolver cannon is having
the round go off when the chamber is more-or-less exactly lined up
with the barrel; if the maximum misalignment is 1 degree then the
primer whack-to-bang delay has to be repeatable to within 0.0001
seconds.

-jake