Aircraft weapons

[thatguy96]

kevineduguay1 said:
Then we have a problem of inconsistancy in the game.
In the USMC OOB weapon number 077 30mm Bushmaster has a Sabot Pen of 12. Weapon number 190 the GAU-8 mounted on the A-10 has a HE Pen of 9.
The problem is that BOTH WEAPONS fire the SAME 30mmx173 DU round. Please explain. The Bushmaster only fires about 250 RPM max, while the GAU-8 spews about 3900 RPM max. While both weapons will hurt you, which would hurt more?

Both weapons have the same caliber, both weapons do not fire the same specific round. The weapons were definitely modeled on the normal ammunition loadout for both. The increased sabot number is no doubt based on the fact that the navy has an APFSDS round (Mk 268 Mod 0) for the Mk 44, that isn't used in the GAU-8/A.

[kevineduguay1]

From what I understand the Navy no longer uses a DU round.

The only inovation between the GAU-8 and the Bushmaster is that the Bushmaster has a built in fuse setter for its HE rounds that the GAU-8 could in no way facillitate. The MK44 was featured on the TV show "Future Weapons" and showed how its HE round could be set to pen so much cinder block and then explode basicly depriving your opponent of their cover. So other that the HE round all others are the same.
30mmx173.

[DRG]

kevineduguay1 said:The Bushmaster only fires about 250 RPM max, while the GAU-8 spews about 3900 RPM max. While both weapons will hurt you, which would hurt more?

Well.. how about the Gau-8 with the 27 HE kill as opposed to the Bushmaster with only 11 ?? Strange that you would ignore that little detail. That 16 point difference is the difference between the two weapons ROF and their affect on soft targets. PENETRATION has nothing to do with ROF though we may take that into consideration.

Don

[PlasmaKrab]

I don't have time to check stats right now, but it still shows up that the PGU-14 has a muzzle velocity of 1067m/s fired from the GAU-8, while the MK268 fired by the MK30 autocannon gets a hefty 1385m/s and is APFSDS, i.e. gets much less drag over its course. Same rounds, are you sure?
While I don't have figures for the US rounds yet (heh), I have racked up a figure of 57mm RAH @1000m/60° for the apparently similar German PMC-287 round. I find this figure hard to believe, but do you think Rheinmetall would publish official figures?

69mm @500m is largely believable for the GAU-8, and allows to kill lots of of miscellaneous AFVs and some tanks in a totally improbable Stuka dive.

[thatguy96]

kevineduguay1 said:
From what I understand the Navy no longer uses a DU round.

The only inovation between the GAU-8 and the Bushmaster is that the Bushmaster has a built in fuse setter for its HE rounds that the GAU-8 could in no way facillitate. The MK44 was featured on the TV show "Future Weapons" and showed how its HE round could be set to pen so much cinder block and then explode basicly depriving your opponent of their cover. So other that the HE round all others are the same.
30mmx173.

Its not a matter of innovation, its a matter of standard loadouts. The Mk 268 Mod 0 APFSDS-T round is not a DU round. The USAF does not use this round, and the MV differences have already been mentioned here.

[kevineduguay1]

DRG,

I have no problem with the HE Kill values, they seem fine to me.

thatguy96,

The bullet is different but the case is the same.

)" This weapon fires standard 30 x 173 mm GAU-8 ammunition, using a side-stripping link developed by The Boeing Company. It can also fire RARDEN and Oerlikon KCB (30 x 170 mm) ammunition by changing the barrel, bolt and aft feed plate."
Found at,

www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_30mm_BushmasterII.htm

The USAF does not use the MK268 round, this is true. The USAF uses a DU round while the Navy doesn't. The Navy felt that they did not need the extra pen power of DU to take out the targets they expected to encounter in their battle environment.

[DRG]

kevineduguay1 said:
DRG,

I have no problem with the HE Kill values, they seem fine to me.

OK.... then why quote penetration stats to me then ROF stats comparing the two weapons ? ROF has NOTHING to do with penetration unless we feel generous and tack on a bit because of a high ROF .

Given the published penetration stats for that weapon are 69mm at 500 yards and we give it a 9 HE Pen because the game only fires at half that range we have therefore already give the weapon a 30% boost in penetration as a compromise which is quite generous considering.

I'm sorry the munition doesn't slice and dice the way you think it should but we have to at least try to stick with the hard facts we know and there isn't any hard evidence to support the type of kill rate you seem to expect from that weapon.

Don

[thatguy96]

kevineduguay1 said:
thatguy96,

The bullet is different but the case is the same.

That the projectile is different and fired out of a different gun have serious affects on the rounds muzzle velocity and other ballistic characteristics, and as a result has a serious effect on the penetration capability of the projectile. That's like saying 5.56x45mm M193 fired from an M16A1 rifle has the exact same properties as 5.56x45mm M855 fired from an M4 carbine.

kevineduguay1 said:The USAF does not use the MK268 round, this is true. The USAF uses a DU round while the Navy doesn't. The Navy felt that they did not need the extra pen power of DU to take out the targets they expected to encounter in their battle environment.

Firstly, DU is not some super metal. Tungsten and titanium have equally good qualities, if not better qualities, than DU. DU was adopted because of its incendiary properties, and because its a byproduct of other nuclear production, making it both cheap and available. It was not picked because it was the most dense material available.

Secondly, the Mk 268 Mod 0's penetrator is likely made of tungsten. Where are you getting this assertion that the Navy doesn't expect to encounter vehicles and ships on the battlefield that would need additional penetration? Especially seeing as one of the Mk 44's prime applications will be as the main gun on the EFV.

[kevineduguay1]

Look up the book by Bill Gunston called,

The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Aircraft Armament
ISBN# 0-517-56607-9

On the A-10 he mentions TWO AP rounds, one tungsten core (AP-T) and one DU (API). These are in addition to the HEI and practice rounds.
The AP-T round would match up very nicely with the 69mm pen figure. The tiny German 28mm sPzB 41 could pen 66mm at 500 meters so why put that monster 30mm gun in any aircraft?

thatguy96,

Tungsten tends to blunt its own tip and even shatter at very high velocities while a DU round self sharpens until it penetrates or runs out of energy and destroys itself.

As far as the EFVs Bushmaster it may indeed be armed with a DU round. But on this Im not sure. Is the LAV 25 armed with DU rounds for its 25mm?
As far as guns aboard ships DU was deemed unnecessary. It was even pulled from the load out for the Phalanx system.

The MK44 may even end up on an improved Bradly!

[thatguy96]

kevineduguay1 said:
Tungsten tends to blunt its own tip and even shatter at very high velocities while a DU round self sharpens until it penetrates or runs out of energy and destroys itself.

I'd like to see some sources on that, seeing as how widespread Tungsten is as a core metal in kinetic energy penetrators. It really seems to be the metal of choice for such things. The only reason DU seems to have been chosen is because it was a cheaper and equally satisfactory alternative, not because it was superior.

In fact, that's exactly what my copy of Gunston's book says, "cheaper and much easier to fabricate" (pg 190). My copy (dated 1988) also only mentions the DU round, not any other type of AP.