Removal Of Autocannon GSH 23 / 30 From The JF 17:--

[DrWatson775]

(Post corrected)

Its the "small" things that count in the end. An additional hard point, more internal fuel, better wing structure, placement of landing gear, position and range of the gun.

The aerodynamics of the gun on the World War II era P53 mustang was better than that of the JF 17 60 - 65 years later. Than you to the Chinese for their help with the Thunder.... but really could no one make this gun placement and position better......

 

[MastanKhan]

Please don't patronize me, it's very rude.

I know exactly what happened, there are plenty of historical records of what happened.

While it is true that AAM were still in their infancy, and weren't very accurate, a similar problem exists today. Anti-AAM systems on modern aircraft limit the already limited ability of AAMs to get a successful hit on a target. Having a canon is good, because once you run out of missiles, you need to be able to defend yourself, if you end up in a dog fight.

Hi,

You asked me if I knew what happened---and I replied that I was old enough to read the newspapers and understand the significance---.

Now if I had asked you if you were old enough to read the news---that---I would say would be patronizing.

The F-35A is also armed with a GAU-22/A, a four-barrel version of the 25 mm GAU-12 Equalizer cannon.

F-22, has an internally mounted M61A2 Vulcan 20 mm rotary cannon, embedded in the right wing root with the muzzle covered by a retractable door to maintain stealth.

The Typhoon also carries a specially developed variant of the Mauser BK-27 27mm cannon.

Hi,

The cannon just did not happen to be there---. A lots of pressure was put on the manufacturer by the vietnam era vets to put the cannon in---.

The designer of the F22 and the F35 had acknowledged that the cannon is redundant for these aircraft---.

It was installed just to satisfy and make the powers to be happy and feel good---.

 

[Jammer]

Disagree. Especially considering the limited airspace Pakistan has to work with, inevitably short range missiles and guns will come into play as bvr shots are evaded you will merge (and not fly into Iran to take another BVR shot ). Guns also come handy in ground support role, much cheaper and effective too, the A-10 warthog is basically a flying canon and is exceptionally effective and is highly regarded and efeectively deployed to this day in the USAF. Missiles are not a slam dunk, every time accuracy is upped countermeasures and tactics are developed to counter. The great minds that build planes and run air forces all over the globe still put guns on their planes to this day, that in its self should be a huge clue.

 

[MastanKhan]

The great minds that build planes and run air forces all over the globe still put guns on their planes to this day, that in its self should be a huge clue.

Hi,

I would say again---the great minds that designed the F22 / F35 did not want to put the gun in these aircraft---. It was due to the pressure from vietnam vet lobby that they were forced to---.

A stealth aircraft made to dog fight in a gun battle totally defeats the purpose of ' stealth ' operation. It puts it in a 50 / 50 odds and it was not designed for that.

 

[Sage]

@MastanKhan I may not agree with you on this bro ...As you are of the opinion that a lot of pressure was put on the F-4 makers ....let me remind you that the pressure was put rightly as the missiles were not as effective as they were ....or probably the way pilots were using it ....in what's so ever case it was its massive gun that came to rescue ...F-4 emerged as victorious because of this added weapon ...or else Mig-21 would've bashed it like anything ...BTW ..what is your suggestion ...let's say if the gun is removed ...what are the gadgets you would want to attach ?

 

[MastanKhan]

@MastanKhan I may not agree with you on this bro ...As you are of the opinion that a lot of pressure was put on the F-4 makers ....let me remind you that the pressure was put rightly as the missiles were not as effective as they were ....or probably the way pilots were using it ....in what's so ever case it was its massive gun that came to rescue ...F-4 emerged as victorious because of this added weapon ...or else Mig-21 would've bashed it like anything ...BTW ..what is your suggestion ...let's say if the gun is removed ...what are the gadgets you would want to attach ?

Hi,

A lot of pressure was put on the F22 / F35 manufacturer to install the gun---and not the F4's---

The Phantom got it due to the poor performance of its missiles.

 

[Khafee]

@MastanKhan you are good at making people chase their own tails. No doubt about that.

1) You said: "Remove the gun from some aircraft, whereas others, would still have them" - I see no issues here in saving 300kg's on some missions. BUT people are still stuck on why every a/c should have them.

2) Chinese high off bore sight missile Vs a canon - IMO this is what this thread should be discussing. How effective would these be in WVR.

 

[Jammer]

Hi,

I would say again---the great minds that designed the F22 / F35 did not want to put the gun in these aircraft---. It was due to the pressure from vietnam vet lobby that they were forced to---.

A stealth aircraft made to dog fight in a gun battle totally defeats the purpose of ' stealth ' operation. It puts it in a 50 / 50 odds and it was not designed for that.

I would be interested to see where you got your information regarding the design team not wanting to put a gun in the F35 and F22.
A stealth fighter is obviously not made to dog fight, however, since the world is not perfect and everything in life is not linear, there can be instances or situations where the F22 and 35 can find itself in a close quarter situation, therefore guns are deemed necessary. It is very very common practice for F22's to practice close quarter DAC with 3rd and 4th generation aircraft from allover the world.

 

[MastanKhan]

@MastanKhan you are good at making people chase their own tails. No doubt about that.

1) You said: "Remove the gun from some aircraft, whereas others, would still have them" - I see no issues here in saving 300kg's on some missions. BUT people are still stuck on why every a/c should have them.

2) Chinese high off bore sight missile Vs a canon - IMO this is what this thread should be discussing. How effective would these be in WVR.

Hi,

That is called " SELECTIVE READING "---they read one line and the brain assumes what the rest is going to be---.

This is what I want to know---how effective would the cannon be---and from how close you have to be behind the enemy aircraft to take it out---would a more powerful aircraft like the Sukhoi allow it to happen or even the Mirage 2k---.

And then how would you chase a faster moving aircraft---to get into the cannon range---!!!

I can say with some kind of guarantee---that as of today---since inception---the Paf has flown dedicated training missions on the JF 17 without the cannon / ammunition load---taking into consideration the effects / benefits it would have on the mission.

Now---what I would really like to know is---what gizmos they have in place of the cannon and its ammo.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Hi,

That is called " SELECTIVE READING "---they read one line and the brain assumes what the rest is going to be---.

This is what I want to know---how effective would the cannon be---and from how close you have to be behind the enemy aircraft to take it out---would a more powerful aircraft like the Sukhoi allow it to happen or even the Mirage 2k---.

And then how would you chase a faster moving aircraft---to get into the cannon range---!!!

I can say with some kind of guarantee---that as of today---since inception---the Paf has flown dedicated training missions on the JF 17 without the cannon / ammunition load---taking into consideration the effects / benefits it would have on the mission.

Now---what I would really like to know is---what gizmos they have in place of the cannon and its ammo.

Mate, you are getting too caught up in paper specs and losing sight of tactics and the nature of aircombat. Removing a canon may give you a few 100kg less weight and an extra hard point thus, on paper, giving you an advantadge but in the real world this would lead to a serious short-coming and would be a liability.

The Su-30MKI has 14 hardpoints, TVC and super manoeuvrability but still has a cannon.

 

[MastanKhan]

A good read.

http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-01/04/content_7437369.htm

 

[That Guy]

Hi,

You asked me if I knew what happened---and I replied that I was old enough to read the newspapers and understand the significance---.

Now if I had asked you if you were old enough to read the news---that---I would say would be patronizing.

"Most of you guys just quote that without understanding and comprehending the changes that the weapons technology has gone thru."

That was uncalled for.

...but if I somehow misunderstood that, my apology.

 

[MastanKhan]

"Most of you guys just quote that without understanding and comprehending the changes that the weapons technology has gone thru."

That was uncalled for.

...but if I somehow misunderstood that, my apology.

Hi,

Sorry my man---di not mean to offend you. My apologies.

 

[That Guy]

Hi,

Sorry my man---di not mean to offend you. My apologies.

Don't worry about it. just be careful with your phrasing, next time.

 

[MastanKhan]

Don't worry about it. just be careful with your phrasing, next time.

Hi,

Don't 'ride' it.