If people like the 30mm gatling gun so much, and the A10 is a bad piece of military equipment, why then don't we mount the cannon onto a tank hull?
If people like the 30mm gatling gun so much, and the A10 is a bad piece of military equipment, why then don't we mount the cannon onto a tank hul...
Isn’t there one of those 30mm cannons in every fighter we have.
Because the high rate of fire is only required on an aircraft due to very short engagement times.
On an IFV a 40mm gives you better pen, bigger HE, more accuracy and longer trigger time due to lower ROF.
Most planes have the M61 Vulcan which fires the 20x102mm, the F-35 has the GAU-22/A firing 25x137mm.
Me on the right.
surprised there isn't a straightwalled necked out version of the 30x170mm for IFVs, like a 40x180mm fatboy edition.
just like the 35mm has a 50mm supershot, there should be a 40mm supershot version for the 30mm.
There literally is a necked out version of the 30x173mm which is currently listed as 40x180mm and called Super Forty in marketing. It followed a similar design history to the 50mm SuperShot.
>the F-35 has the GAU-22/A firing 25x137mm.
why does the F35 have a gun?
you can always use more gun
a gun for a gun
>F-35 has the GAU-22/A firing 25x137mm.
so it really is a flying bradley, right down to the endless waves of haters trying to claim that it sucks
>so it really is a flying bradley
no, Bradleys are used in combat, something that will never happen to the F-35
Shut the frick up vatnik.
>so it really is a flying bradley
Uhh...no? M242 Bushmaster and GAU-22/A are two different weapons, despite using the same caliber.
It's pretty weird that they still put cannons in fighters at all seeing as how there will never be another dogfight where they are used ever again. Sad truth
A full scale peer war might see merges actually happen as everyones radar / SA pages are full of contacts, decoys, EW spoofs ect.
Outside of that it's still useful to be able to offer some CAS BRRRT when the JDAMs are gone.
its an emergency weapon
its also used for buzzing targets on the ground or shooting targets of opportunity like drones or enemy fighters low on energy which is bound to happen in a conventional war
especially since stealth configuration limits a plane to its 4 internal missile bays, it can occasionally be worth it to conserve ammo
its not a big deal, the navy variant doesnt have the cannon because there will never be a target they dont know about, but its not really a hindrance to its mission
They made that mistake with the F4 Phantom. Never again.
The "problems" with the F4 Phantom were entirely caused by the air force putting bomber pilots into an interceptor and telling them to use it as a dogfighter. The navy, who originally ordered the aircraft and who used it as intended, never reported any problems with it.
A fighter with a gun is a fool every day but one
Ukraine is getting a lot of work with their guns shooting down shaheds and the like. Its of dubious use in a high end fight but a workhorse should have one.
From 10 years ago
https://defense-update.com/20141007_bradley_30mm.html
"we"
>the hip bone is connected to the leg bone and that's the way it goes-style of warpigging
fascinating. I don't care you balding goofball.
I think they should make it an infantry weapon. It only weighs like, six hundred and twenty pounds. Get six guys to carry it.
And from 3 years ago.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/06/04/army-putting-30mm-autocannons-more-stryker-vehicles.html
I understand it's not the same as a gatling gun, but we have been putting 30mm autocannons on IFVs and ICVs for a while now. Also, Warthogs are fricking awesome and still have a place on the modern battlefield.
LE EPIC BRRRRRRRRRRRRT GUN POGGERINO
edit: Thanks for the gold kind stranger
edit2: I'm trans btw
They should've slapped one on an M1128 MGS and called it, The Urban Pacification System.
Because the 30mm cannon is what makes the A10 a bad piece of equipment.
But it isn't. Also saying the A-10 is a bad piece of equipment because it isn't going to survive modern air defenses 50+ years after it first flew is kind of a shitty argument.
they did briefly consider it and they did decide "how about no" and we ended up with the Sergeant York which was canned anyway.
>If people like the 30mm gatling gun so much
They dont
>nd the A10 is a bad piece of military equipment
It's not it's fantastic
>why then don't we mount the cannon onto a tank hull?
We have that it's called the Stryker
>It's not it's fantastic
>God bless it!
It's a glorified missile boat. You can like something that's not perfect. I love the F-14, but by the Gulf War they turned it into a guided bomb truck. It would have been better suited without the cannon, without the cannon it probably wouldn't have needed such huge frick-off engines, without all of that it probably wouldn't have been way cheaper and been much more useful in the role it ultimately filled. I'm sure in the 70s a cannon based tank destroyer sounded great, but in practice it was mostly pointless. People meme on the lady who said the B1 filled the role of the A10, but she was close to being right. Only reason they're fighting to keep it in service is because everything else is so expensive.
>It's a glorified missile boat.
I don't think anyone is glorifying it, that's exactly what it is, and to boot, it's cheap, sturdy, requires minimal support and nobody's gonna cry if it suddenly starts getting shot down and has to stop being used
>I don't think anyone is glorifying it, that's exactly what it is
No, it's a cannon platform. It was repurposed as a missile boat. You in your post are glorifying it by saying it's cheap when the entire plane is designed around that gun. Back to the F-14, it would be the same as calling it a fighter/bomber just because they put bombs on it.
Shilka?
>glorifying it by saying it's cheap
It is cheap. It's the cheapest jet to operate other than the MQ drones and it's not even close. It has the longest ezt maintenance phase of any USAF planes. It can take off and landed on 500ft of graded soil. It barely needs supply chain. It runs on kerosene.
>The A-10 when the entire plane is designed around that gun.
So what? Old things can't have new uses that are just fine? Taking the gun out doesn't help anything and it's fun because plane go brrrrrrrtttt hahaha
It could be cheaper. It could be lighter. It could be more capable, except for that gun which is largely ineffective except on friendly forces.
>it's fun because plane go brrrrrrrtttt hahaha
That's not fair! I'm supposed to green text that to make fun of you!
I agree, but it would use up ammo way too quickly so I think instead of a chain gun it should have a single barrel auto cannon. 30mm is a bit too big IMO so the caliber should be downgraded to 25mm. Then maybe we should make it so there's a compartment in the back where we can bus infantry. Oh and it should probably have a good amount of protection so i recommend using some kind of Armor, maybe a modified M113 with a turret or something
A WH 40K'd Abrams with a Vulcan or even a chaingun with a frickhueg ammo storage would be cool and actually have 'some' legitimate value, but it would be considered too dedicated to too few engagement roles and the MIC likes 'jack of all trades, master of none' equipment. And the 'all trades' part has a lot of fine print hidden anyway.
Final excuses would be something about ammo waste or too much firepower if in an urban environment hypocricy.
The 30mm Gatling gun is the most useless part of the entire plane.
It’s not going to take a modern MBT out unless you get lucky and hit the unarmored engine compartment. The front and side armor is too thick.
This thing carries Hellfire missiles that can pop the lid off of most modern armor. Without the weight of the cannon it could carry a few more of them.
>a-10 Frogfoot