Typhoon to get the Mauser [Archive]

Razor61

5th Oct 2006, 11:21

Read today that the RAF will get ammunition, spares and maintenance equipment for the 27mm Mauser which is fitted to the Typhoons in a U-Turn over the Harrier not being fitted with a gun in Afghanistan.
Comes after the Paras (again) mentioned how effective the A-10 was with the GAU-8 when calling in support. And then with the Harrier which comes in using rockets only.

"At a conference last week, Air Vice-Marshal David Walker, the officer
commanding No 1 Group, which includes the Harrier and the newly-forming
Typhoon squadrons, said he had decided to proceed with the Typhoon gun,
buying ammunition, spares and maintenance equipment."

Wader2

5th Oct 2006, 11:23

That was Tuesday's news in the Torygraph.

movadinkampa747

5th Oct 2006, 11:24

Maybe he was reading Tuesdays paper today..............:ugh:

Kluseau

5th Oct 2006, 12:08

Common sense puts in a belated and very uncommon appearance!

How many more times will this same lesson have to be relearned (Lightning, Phantom etc)? Though interesting that this time the driver seems to be the ground attack rather than the air to air requirement. Maybe they'll put in a tilt switch that stops it being used unless there's a distinct nose down attitude to prevent any top guns out there using their guns to supplement their AAMs? That way the powers that be could still lay claim to keeping their heads partly buried in the sand!

GeeRam

5th Oct 2006, 12:33

To be fair, in the case of the Lightning, the early marks (F1/F1A & F2/F2A) had cannon, but some twit decided to remove them from the F.3/F6, only to have to find a way of putting them back in the F.6 at the expense of badly needed fuel:rolleyes:

In the case of the Harrier, and thinking out loud, so excuse this old git of an engineer being not up to speed with current electro-whiz-bang technology, but what about jury rigging a pair of those self contained ex-F4 Gatling centreline pods....one each under a wing pylon....just thinking out loud about the old days of resourcefull adapdation of kit to fit a task.......but I suppose we wouldn't have any of them left in store anywhere now either:(

s.d.porter

5th Oct 2006, 13:08

In the case of the Harrier, and thinking out loud, but what about jury rigging a pair of those self contained ex-F4 Gatling centreline pods....one each under a wing pylon.

I guess the wing pylon and wing attachment would have to be carefully watched/ inspected to look for stress fractures. There must be a hell of a need to disapate cyclic loads. What about the electrical & electronic control systems required to enable that fubctionality.

Your probably right, spec we can just tape the wires along the wing edge.

advocatusDIABOLI

5th Oct 2006, 13:52

GeeRam

Now that would look seriously cool!!! :eek: Possibly like something from the set of 'Terminator'!!!

Might not be able to get airborne though. :hmm: Also, 5 sec of fire, and it would have the 'Hoover' flying backwards! (Like they do at airshows I suppose.....)

Still, would be worth it just for the PR pictures.

Advo

Razor61

5th Oct 2006, 14:17

In the same article it stated that the Paras compared the Harrier and such with the A-10 of which having a '27mm rotory cannon' and proving great air support, which the RAF couldn't provide as they could only salvo a few rockets and not strafe.

Hmm, since when as the A-10 had a 27mm rotary cannon :ugh:

As for it being Tuesdays news, so bloody what? :rolleyes:

Tourist

5th Oct 2006, 14:23

Well what calibre is the rotary cannon on the A-10?

Bigt

5th Oct 2006, 14:28

I thought the A-10 was fitted with a GD GAU8/A 30mm cannon

advocatusDIABOLI

5th Oct 2006, 14:29

30mm.

Advo

Kitbag

5th Oct 2006, 14:30

The A10 uses a GAU 8A 30mm Gatling gun, the rate of fire is impressive but the depleted uranium rounds caused the hippies to show undue concern for the recipients. Personally I don't think contamination with a bit of radioactive dust would be too high on my list of priorities if that thing was being fired in my direction.

DownloadDog

5th Oct 2006, 14:31

It fires 30mm shells, can be depleted uranium for maximum damage.

http://www.military.cz/usa/air/in_service/weapons/cannons/gau8/gau8_en.htm

Razor61

5th Oct 2006, 14:47

Seen a pic somewhere showing the GAU-8 size comparison. The Ammo Drum is nearly the size of a Beatle car they put next to it for the comparison. Pilot only needs to the pull the trigger for a few seconds and the drum is empy.

doesn't the navy Goalkeeper use the same GAU-8 gun for CIWS on some of the RN ships?

dakkg651

5th Oct 2006, 14:56

Proper Typhoons had four 20mm Hispano cannons.

How does the single Mauser compare with these as regards rate of fire?

Looks like this highly agile interceptor will end up moving mud just like its older cousin.

DownloadDog

5th Oct 2006, 14:59

Taken from Wikipedia, reference the Goalkeeper system:

Description

The system first acquires a target using the 2D X-Band search radar, which can track up to 18 targets at once. The engagement radar is then slewed to the heading indicated by the search radar. The engagement radar operates in both X-Band (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-band_radar) and Ka-Band (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ka-Band), this enables the engagement radar to use the search radars signal to find the target quickly without additional searching, also data from the X-Band and Ka-Band return signals can be compared to increase resistance to ECM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECM) and clutter. The engagement radar is also backed up by an optical system.
The GAU-8/A Avenger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger) 30 mm gun, as used by the A-10 Thunderbolt II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-10_Thunderbolt_II) was selected for the system, primarily because although the muzzle velocity and range are similar to the M61 Vulcan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M61_Vulcan) the projectiles are much heavier (430 grams compared to 100 grams). This is critical because supersonic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic) missiles that are damaged may still have enough momentum to hit the ship—the only way to ensure the protection of the ship is either detonate the warhead of the missile or obliterate the missile.
The system's reaction time to a Mach 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_number) sea-skimming missile like the Russian SS-N-22 Sunburn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-22_Sunburn) from automatic detection to kill is reported to be 5.5 seconds with the engagement starting at a range of 1500 m and ending with a kill at 300 m.

Pontius Navigator

5th Oct 2006, 16:23

The A10 30 mm round is the same size as the Aden round but the cartridge is like a milk bottle rather than a 30 mm candle. The training head also has greater mass.

Rather than DU it is possible that the head my have a tungsten/nylon composition.

Phil_R

5th Oct 2006, 17:00

Hi,

Wannabe military publications have always told me that depleted uranium ammunition is designed for its ability to throw a lot of kinetic energy at modern armour systems. Probably not what you'd want to throw at lightly- or un-armoured Afghanistan-style bad guys anyway, you'd have thought?

I think the concern with DU is not so much for the recipient but for more or less anyone who happens to be downwind for the next quarter of a million years.

Phil

PICKS135

5th Oct 2006, 17:03

Couple of Inert A-10 rounds for sale on E-bay

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270035370435&ih=017&category=36074&rd=1

TeBoi

5th Oct 2006, 18:21

Will the broom-handle of the Mauser be flush to the fuselage of the Typoon?

I'll get me coat.:O

Red Line Entry

5th Oct 2006, 19:27

"At a conference last week, Air Vice-Marshal David Walker, the officer
commanding No 1 Group, which includes the Harrier and the newly-forming
Typhoon squadrons, said he had decided to proceed with the Typhoon gun,
buying ammunition, spares and maintenance equipment."

As AOC 1 Gp, Dave Walker will know damn well that HE does not decide to buy ammo, spares and maintenance equipment. This, combined with the "at a conference" bit, makes me think that this is hearsay. The AVM may want the gun to work, but he's too switched on a character to say something stupid like this, especially to the press.

Which leads on to the question... who's the pillock leaking crap to the papers?

Pureteenlard

5th Oct 2006, 20:13

To be fair, in the case of the Lightning, the early marks (F1/F1A & F2/F2A) had cannon, but some twit decided to remove them from the F.3/F6, only to have to find a way of putting them back in the F.6 at the expense of badly needed fuel:rolleyes:
In the case of the Harrier, and thinking out loud, so excuse this old git of an engineer being not up to speed with current electro-whiz-bang technology, but what about jury rigging a pair of those self contained ex-F4 Gatling centreline pods....one each under a wing pylon....just thinking out loud about the old days of resourcefull adapdation of kit to fit a task.......but I suppose we wouldn't have any of them left in store anywhere now either:(
I always wondered why they didn't use the podded BK27 as found on the Alpha Jet to give ammo compatibility with Tornado squadrons. Weight, I suppose.

Pontius Navigator

5th Oct 2006, 20:24

Red Line Entry, I heard the same information from a highly placed source the day before it was printed in the Torygraph. It was at an open source brief. The source also mentioned something else but as that has not surfaced I shall stay stumm.

LowObservable

5th Oct 2006, 21:06

I always thought a 27 mm Mauser sounded like a very small cat....
Yes, the key to the GAU-8/A's destructive power is the farging big cartridge, which together with the long barrels gives it a hell of a muzzle velocity. The idea was a very flat trajectory and low dispersal. The DU ammo puts that energy into a very small spot on the target, and yes, it's more than most things need. It's really for armor.

Pontius Navigator

5th Oct 2006, 21:18

alex_holbrook

5th Oct 2006, 21:27

walter kennedy

5th Oct 2006, 21:40

Pontius Navigator

5th Oct 2006, 21:47

Phil R
Good point - not to mention that it is the TOXIC nature of DU in its powdered form (as some of it would end up after impact) that is so worrying long term - by way of comparison, powdered plutonium is THE most TOXIC substance known to man - it is not the radioactivity that is the main problem.

Whilst looking up Tungsten I came across a reference to DU but can't find it again but WK is right.

On impact DU burns and combines with oxygen to produce uranium dioxide dust which, as he says, is highly toxic.

The radioactivity will also be a hazard if ingested. The good news is the radioactivity will not be fatal.

You will die of toxic poisioning first.

Razor61

5th Oct 2006, 22:25

Here is the ammunition, ordered for the Tornado, which will probably be used by the Typhoon.
http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/index.php?lang=3&fid=3802
The British armed forces have awarded Rheinmetall a €24 million contract for 244,000 rounds of FAP 27 mm x 145 aircraft ammunition. Earmarked for the Royal Air Force's Tornado fighter aircraft the ammunition will be used for training and combat operations alike. It will be delivered in series during the period 2008-2010.

total irrelevent post but...
If that was 30mm GAU-8 rounds, that would arm 180 x A-10s for 1 mission each expending a whole drum of which all 180 aircraft would have a total firing time of just 116 seconds between them at the lower rate of fire and just under a minute of firing between them at the high end of rate of fire.
That taking into account that there are how many in Afghanistan and Iraq at the moment. If my maths is up to date (And seriously, i was/am totally **** at it) then that isn't an aweful lot for in-theatre use. But then, it isn't 30mm Avenger rounds, it's 27mm Mauser and how often do the Tonkas expend cannon rounds in training on the Wash ranges and the cold one up north?

:zzz: :zzz:

Roadster280

5th Oct 2006, 22:38

You will die of toxic poisioning first.

<pedant> Is it not the case that all poison is inherently toxinous? Are "poison" and "toxin" not synonymous? </pedant>

indie cent

5th Oct 2006, 22:57

What if...?

IF the Typhoon gets the ammunition. Would it be beyond the spangle-jet's capability to be deployed on Ops in Helmland?

Ex-GR3 pilots embedded: Strafe/CAS ready(ish!).
The taxpayers get some early payback.
Typhoon gets much reqd PR for "utterly useless RAF".
Capability gap filled. (no gun on harrier:hmm: ).
Short/pcn limited runway no prob (low AUW).
All (Any!) future jets get guns fitted without debate.:ok:
Army get extra aircover. :D (and able to correctly debate strafing skills?!)

Is this blue-sky thinking or am I way off the mark here...?:confused:

Don't mind if I'm wrong, just a thought!

Cyclone733

5th Oct 2006, 23:19

Some years back talking to someone involved in the then Eurofighter project, I enquired about the aircrafts' armour. The reply was along the lines of, at the altitudes the aircraft will operate, ground fire (in the form of AAA) would not be a threat. Will the pilots be happy to join their titanium clad collegues down closer to the ground whilst sitting in their composite aircraft?

Load Toad

5th Oct 2006, 23:42

The GAU-8 can fire HEI rounds - it isn't limited to AP is it?

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/gau-8.htm

TheInquisitor

6th Oct 2006, 03:32

The good news is the radioactivity will not be fatal.
True. DU has a half-life of 4,500,000,000 years (about the same as the age of the earth!) and as a result it's radioactivity is barely more than natural background radiation - a chunk of soil from your back garden is likely to be more radioactive!

(D)U-6 compounds, such as oxides (formed from pyrophoric reactions when a DU round hits it's target, disintegrates and burns), and (D)U-6 fluorides are, however, HIGHLY toxic and very water-soluble.

Tungsten is a good altenative, and is now used in many munition applications. It is more expensive and difficult to manufacture, however.

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU

6th Oct 2006, 06:31

Wow! a genuine 4.5 Billion years. I bet you don't get a guarantee with it though. Here's a thought; if you wrapped a DU round in thick PTFE, thus ensuring Uranium Fuoride on impact, would that make it a chemical weapon?

Pontius Navigator

6th Oct 2006, 06:40

total irrelevent post but...

it's 27mm Mauser and how often do the Tonkas expend cannon rounds in training on the Wash ranges and the cold one up north?
:zzz: :zzz:

Totally irrelevant? I would suggest entirely the reverse. For the Typhoon to use its gun it needs ammuntion. The Tonka uses the same mauser. Diverting Tonka plinkers is the quickest way to get ammunition.

KE is more efficient than HE as it can be used in training without contaminating the ranges and avoids the need to buy special, training-only, ball.

And the last point? Not a lot and certainly no where near the useage by F15 and F16.

bad livin'

6th Oct 2006, 09:27

The use of Phalanx or Goalkeeper against Sunburn would be, at best, blind optimism. You're talking about dividing something travelling at M3+ that's around the size of a bus into thousands of large fragments still moving at around the same speed.

The result is that as soon as as the golly on watch blows their whistle and screams SUNBURN you'd be better getting out of your seat sharpish and making for the disengaged side...as you're going swimming regardless.

TwoDeadDogs

6th Oct 2006, 16:02

Hi all
Just a point about the ammunition supply for the A-10s gun.The gun fires 70 or so rounds per trigger selection.It doesn't just hose them out until the can is empty.The point about armour is valid, though.Be a bit silly to lose a Typhoon to the modern equivalent of a "10-rupee jezail" and then force the ejected Typhoon pilot to beg for mercy with his goolie chit:eek:
regards
TDD

lancs

6th Oct 2006, 17:04

€24 million contract for 244,000 rounds

Jeez. How much does a normal bullet cost...

€24,000,000 / 244,000 = €98.36

Or, €6885.2 for an apparent minimum 70 per trigger press...

Pontius Navigator

6th Oct 2006, 17:13

Jeez. How much does a normal bullet cost...

€24,000,000 / 244,000 = €98.36

Or, €6885.2 for an apparent minimum 70 per trigger press...

Good point, probably the cost of tungsten. This suggests a simple ball round for training but the ability to use near timex operational rounds in training rather than write off.

Why not an FOI request to find the cost of bullets?

Anyway €98 seems cheap when you consider 12 x 28lb Practice Bombs 35 years ago cost £3600.

L J R

6th Oct 2006, 21:21

F***CK THE COST!. If you need to use some rounds to help the lads on the ground, just give it to 'em!

The Jet costs a lot more than that to fly per hour!

advocatusDIABOLI

6th Oct 2006, 22:37

27mm in the CAS environment is extremely effective. The Mauser has a high velocity and is very very accurate. It also has the one of highest rates of fire for a gun of it's type. Fast, wide dispersing Canons were the 'Vietnam' answer, highly accurate, kinetic/point weapons are todays.

Energy transfer is the modern way to 'Blow Something Up'. It might not even need a bullet.

Advo