CM,
Thanks for the correction - absolutely right. The point I was (badly) trying to make is that these days combat aircraft with fully integrated flight and propulsion controls have a much better range of options for handling velocity vector and aircraft attitude so as to point a gun.
Interestingly, in the 1970s trials on F-15, the USAF used a standard 20mm Gatling fitted with a gimballed mounting that allowed very rapid application of gun barrel deflections of around 5 degrees. This allowed an 'inner loop' set of corrections to be applied to the ballistic solution without pointing the aircraft.
It's a fact that development of combat aircraft gun fire control systems in the West has just about stalled over the last 30 years or so. If you look at the sensors now available (e.g. radars that work very reliably down to around 300 yards, excellent high definition EOTS) then add these to modern mission systems computing capability and stir in modern flight controls, then gun systems should be achieving very, very much higher values of Phit than before.
And they are. But not on fixed wing aircraft, but on attack helicopters. The AH-64D gun fire control is an extremely capable system. It's my view that, for all sorts of good reasons, the fixed wing community in the UK have given gun systems a really good ignoring for some while now. Again just my view, but we can't go on engaging the guy in a ditch with an AK-47, or a soft skinned vehicle with a £300K bomb or a £500K Brimstone. The economics will beat us.
Best Regards as ever to all those doing what they have to with what they've got - the lot of every soldier since the start of time
Engines