Ok, you know what, im sorry. It is past the middle of the night for me and im not thinking straight. I need to stop making the late wt forum trips before bed. It will be better for everyone.
1 Like
ditto
1 Like
Something i am gonna be intrested in , is how well the 27mm Mauser cannon will perform on an actual fighter, the tornado isnt exatly a great aircraft to use them on, guess we gonna see how well it performs in actual fights with the grippen coming
Decently, all bullets are 1025m/s and ballistick are good
Should be around as effective as the Mig-29’s cannon, uses Meningeschoß shells though and they really need to change the gun sound from an ADEN its significantly more powerful. Although it is a development of the Tornado’s gun, it uses linkless ammunition and at least in RAF service, HEHC (High Explosive-High Capacity).
I’m not entirely sure of its high explosive filler though might be significantly lower than that of the 30mm.
I wonder if any of the nations that use it use any FAPDS shells for it, id assume if any germany might.
I did find this thing on Nammo’s website tho:
Any form of APDS shell is generally a bad idea for aircraft (because it means flying through a cloud of your own sabot petals)
Was thinking of FAP rounds not FAPDS, my bad. Looks like it does exist for fighters and in the 27x145mm caliber as well:
This is the reason why it was developped (according to Oerlikons presentation on the subject):
Spoiler
wanna bet they will just end up copy pasting the Tornado ammo belts and giving us those? of course with practice rounds <.<
you already know they will. All efforts to give FAPDS to the Gepard 1A2 as its main AA belt (this was allegedly one of the defining changes from the regular gepard as the rounds increased hit probability and were just safer to use as well) has been refused by gaijin…
iirc they cited “balancing concerns” as one of the reasons, despite the fact it would give it similar pen to that seen on the LAV-AD, which sits at almost the same BR…
I think whats more likely is they just dont feel like doing it, so they wont and never will…
well maybe the fact that not only 1 nation, but britain, sweden, italy would use them as well might actualy get their ass moving to implement it
Exists in both basic FAP / PELE and with tracer as PELE-T, so we wouldnt need the stupid practice shells anymore
Do note that this document mistranslated the 27/85 HPGR 07 as PELE-T, it does not have a tracer element, only the 27/85 SLHPGR 07 does
1 Like
To also get into the IRIS-T vs ASRAAM discussion (just didnt want to miss it)
The comparison of the boost only AIM-9L to the boost-substain ASRAAM or boost-substain-boost-substain (lmao) IRIS-T I have seen above seems iffy, but I sadly dont have any classified thrust curves to argument otherwise :(
But I would want to point out that neither ASRAAM nor IRIS-T have post-launch datalink and, if the following graphics are to be trusted, IRIS-T has ~11km of all aspect lock range. I have my doubts that ASRAAM will look much better in that regard, especially considering that the IRIS’ 2x128 array is much easier to cool than a full 128x128 one.
Graphics
This means in order to use the range advantage of ASRAAM in a 1v1 fight (which would mean headons) would require LOAL shots, which can be evaded or potentially even pre-flared.
Oh and lastly, IIR arrays can be flared after lock-on, but only from the rear and when using spatially distributed flares (as they are called in this research paper, but I also found them called “Special Material Decoy”) to block sight of the plane, the Typhoon can deploy them from the BOL dispensers
2 Likes
Irrc LOAL work purely due to DL. It is not like you fire a missile and tell it to look at that spot. By the time the missile will get in position and try to lock the target it will be gone for a long time. Datalink is what allow the missile to know where to fly and where to look at all time untill it can do it by itself
For IRIS-T thats certainly wrong
For ASRAAM I havent found any source being specific on the rear hemisphere capability. Would love to be proves wrong, but none of MBDA’s releases make any mention of datalink, which I would expect in the section about the sensor cueing
If you look at the 2nd picture you see cued through multiple sensors… Missile by itself does not have them. That is data link
Also word cued gives it by itself
1 Like
So AIM-9G now has datalink because it can be cued by radar? No, it has pre-launch seeker slaving. Programming an INS and cueing the seeker with that would equally not be datalink.
There is nothing indicating that ASRAAM has a module to recieve guidance commands from the launch platform after launch
1 Like
???
Do you have evidence that the ASRAAM doesn’t have the capabilities to cool itself as well?..
1 Like
These are 2 different things. ASRAAM have max range of 50km(i know it most likely will not hit anything at that range). Do you realy think that target will fly in one predicted path? It has to be able to get updates to hit things at that distance. Iirc seeker has around 11km range, what about nearly 40 in between? You throw a guessing game?
ASRAAM has common datalink. It doesn’t even need to receive updates from the launching aircraft, it can receive updates from another aircraft or from the ground…
It really does seem that most people who favour the IRIS-T are just naive of how capable the ASRAAM is.
3 Likes