Projects of mobile machine gun and cannon installations for fighters

The first jet fighters, ahead of the speed of their piston predecessors, they lost in maneuverability. The engines of that time could not provide a sufficiently high thrust-to-weight ratio suitable for conducting a full-fledged air combat. Because of this, attacks by enemy aircraft, including bombers, could fail, because the fighter did not always have time to complete the necessary maneuver. Already in the late forties, the first proposals appeared to solve this problem. In addition to creating more powerful engines, it was proposed to improve the weapon installation system.

AERO X17A

In 1950, the United States created a new range of weapons for fighters. The AERO X17A system was intended for installation on the Grumman F9F-3 Panther fighter, and, as expected, could significantly enhance its combat capabilities.

When developing advanced weapons for the F9F-3 fighter, the American designers intended to maximize the time the target stayed in the zone available for the use of small arms. To this end, it was proposed to install on the fighter a mobile machine gun installation capable of directing machine guns or guns in two planes. Calculations showed that in the dimensions of the Panther aircraft it is possible to develop a turret for large-caliber machine guns capable of firing a target from above, below, right or left of a fighter with an elevation angle of the weapon (relative to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft) to 120 °. The control of such an armament complex was supposed to be carried out with the help of an automated system with a radar sight.

Preliminary design of the new system, designated AERO X17A, showed its great prospects. During an air battle, a fighter with a mobile machine-gun installation would have been enough to approach the enemy's plane for several hundred meters, after which the automatic equipment could independently direct weapons and fire. The dimensions of the firing sector, in turn, allowed the aircraft with the AERO X17A to approach the target from almost any angle and without significant speed or maneuver restrictions. Such advantages of a promising project led to the assembly of a flying laboratory to test a new weapon system.

The fighter F9F-3 (122562 serial number) was chosen as the basis for the prototype aircraft. In accordance with the project, the nose of the aircraft was replaced by a unit of similar size and shape, but with different equipment. Inside the fairing placed four large-caliber machine guns Browning M2 with guidance system. The machine guns were arranged in pairs on two lifting mechanisms, which allowed them to be deflected from the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. To ensure the elevation angle to 120 °, characteristic elongated notches appeared on the fairing. In front of the fairing, between the grooves of the machine guns was a radar sight antenna. Finally, the entire nose cone with machine guns and antenna could rotate around the longitudinal axis, turning the weapon in the right direction.

The electric actuators of the AERO X17A system made it possible to rotate the entire fairing with armament at speeds up to 100 degrees per second and direct machine guns at speeds up to 200 ° per second. To control the rotation of the fairing and the guidance of machine guns should have been a special automatic system, coupled with a radar sight. If necessary, the pilot of the aircraft could use the X17A system as a course weapon, fixing machine guns and a radar sight in a neutral position. The sight in the cockpit performed movable.

Tests of the Grumman F9F-3 Panther with the AERO X17A mobile machine gun installation continued for several years. The mechanical part of the armament complex did not require a long finish. Within a few weeks, the work of mechanics was debugged and the designers of Grumman and colleagues from related firms began testing and refining the control system. First, there were serious problems with the radar sight, and then the shortcomings of the early versions of the control system were added to them.

Work on fine-tuning of electronic systems continued until the 1954 year. By this time, some progress had been made in creating a radar sight, but the weapon control system remained crude and unsuitable for use in practice. Correct determination of the coordinates of the target relative to the fighter, the calculation of the angles of rotation of the weapon and its guidance turned out to be quite a challenge. Despite all the efforts, American engineers were not able to create usable algorithms for the operation of the complex.

Four years of work yielded almost no results, not counting some experience in creating computing equipment for aircraft. However, the AERO X17A system still could not perform its tasks, which is why the project was closed. Probably, the first successes in creating advanced air-to-air guided missiles put an end to this project. The aircraft, armed with the AERO X17A complex, remained in a single copy, and a small number of developments on the project were later used in other projects.

Aircraft "SN"

It is not known whether Soviet designers knew about the American project X17A, but in 1953, OKB-155 began work on their own project of a similar weapon system for a fighter. To increase the combat effectiveness of a promising aircraft, the designers of the bureau A.I. Mikoyan suggested using a mobile unit with cannon armament.

To test the new unit called CB-25-MiG-17 a group of engineers led by N.I. Volkova created a draft revision of the MiG-17 fighter under the name "SN". To install the new weapons complex had to significantly rework the nose of the fuselage. Because of this, the plane lost its characteristic frontal air intake, instead of which it was necessary to use two side ones. In addition, the fighter received a new nose fairing.

The gun installation CB-25-MiG-17 carried three experimental guns TKB-495 (AM-23) caliber 23 mm with ammunition for 100 shells. All guns were placed on a guidance mechanism capable of raising them to 27 ° 26 'and lowering them to 9 ° 28' relative to the axis of the aircraft. Two guns were located to the left of the axis of the fighter, one - to the right. On the nose fairing grooves of a characteristic shape were provided through which the trunks went outside.

The Aist radar sight and the Radal-M radio range finder were also placed in the nose of the aircraft, and the ASP-4HM optical sight in the cockpit. The sight was equipped with a turning mechanism that provided simultaneous tilting while moving the guns. Thus, the pilot could constantly use the same scope, regardless of the position of the guns.

In 1953, the factory tested the aircraft "SN", and in February, 54-th state began testing a new gun installation. It is worth noting that of the 130 flights under the test program of the CB-25-MiG-17 mobile cannon installation, only three used the CH plane. The rest participated in a special way modified IL-28, the dimensions of which allowed to place all the necessary equipment. In 13 flights, a flying lab fired at ground targets. The total ammunition consumption was 15 thousand shells.

The staff of the Air Force Research Institute carefully studied the new cannon mount and noted its high performance. Moving guns made it possible to hit targets in horizontal flight at an altitude of about 100-200 meters without the need to enter a dive. At the same time, however, the angle of elevation of the guns was limited to 9-10 degrees. The fact is that at large angles the ASP-4HM sight occupied a position in which the pilot could not use it. To solve this problem, it was proposed to create an automated gun guidance system at high angles, but this did not solve another problem. Calculations have shown that firing long bursts at high angles of elevation can change the flight path of the aircraft.

According to the results of tests of the SV-25-MiG-17 installation, a proposal was made to build a small batch of SN aircraft with new weapons, but the leadership of the armed forces did not approve it. Probably, the decision of the command was dictated by the specific characteristics of the new aircraft. Having quite high combat characteristics, this fighter noticeably lost to the MiG-17 aircraft in terms of its flight data. The maximum speed of the “SN” was 1058 km / h (60 km / h less than the MiG-17), the practical ceiling dropped to 14500 meters, and the turn time at the height of 10 km increased by 15 seconds. In addition, the side air intakes needed serious refinement. Due to the imperfect construction of these units, the engine thrust decreased, a tendency to surge appeared, and a number of other parameters deteriorated.

In its present form, the gun installation of the CB-25-MiG-17 allowed to deflect the guns only at a small angle, which did not allow to achieve the expected characteristics. This fact and the deterioration of flight data led to the refusal to continue work. Automation control did not develop and all the work on the subject of mobile gun installations stopped.

TKB-700

In the early eighties, Soviet aircraft designers again recalled moving cannon rigs. At this time, a promising system was to become a weapon of a new modification of the Su-25 attack aircraft. Unfortunately, very little is known about the TKB-700 cannon project, but the available information allows us to present its appearance.

At that time, several options were considered for increasing the firepower of the Su-25 aircraft, one of which implied the use of an automatic 45 caliber mm gun. Working on a new theme, the staff of the Tula Central Design Bureau of SOO proposed using a radically new ammunition. To facilitate the gun, as well as to ensure the high power of the projectile, it was decided to make it active-reactive. The shell length of 250 mm consisted of a cumulative warhead, solid propellant rocket engine and propellant charge. The armor penetration of the 45-mm projectile was at the level of 200 millimeters.

Unfortunately, information about the design or method of operation of the gun TKB-700 is missing. It is only known that this weapon could fire at a rate of up to 1250 rounds per minute. Also, the design of the mobile gun mount on which it was proposed to mount a promising weapon, the composition of the guidance system and other aspects of the project remain unknown.

There is information about the testing of a mobile gun installation with a TKB-700 gun on the Su-25 aircraft. According to available data, the rate of fire and the mobile system for setting up the gun made it possible to “put” into a target the size of a tank up to 6-8 shells in one go. The cumulative projectile warhead, in turn, ensured a reliable defeat of enemy armored vehicles.

However, shortly after testing, the TKB-700 project was closed, and the Su-25T attack aircraft received an 30-mm gun. The reasons for abandoning the new gun with an active rocket are unknown. Perhaps, during the tests, some of its shortcomings were revealed, or the reluctance of the customer to refuse existing ammunition had an effect. Anyway, the gun system for the Su-25 attack aircraft based on the TKB-700 gun replenished the list of projects that did not go beyond the testing stage.


On the materials of the sites:
http://airwar.ru/
http://tailspintopics.blogspot.ru/
http://strangernn.livejournal.com/
http://raigap.livejournal.com/
http://dogswar.ru/

Comments

[loft79]

Very interesting article. Thanks.

[mirag2]

Very. I did not imagine that there were such installations.
This is something from a series of impossible things — like our installation under the belly of an airplane block of 77 (?) PPSh.

[Chicot 1]

They didn’t justify ... In the same way, rotary cannon mountings, which take place on attack helicopters, do not justify themselves (contrary to the established stereotype). Beautiful, cool, but absolutely no use. And the fire from them in the vast majority of cases lead only at the rate. All other angles are usually an exception ...

Why and why sculpt all this maharasin? ..

[Eugeniy_369]

Quote: Chicot 1

Why and why sculpt all this maharasin? ..

Well, you yourself answered

Quote: Chicot 1

Nice, cool

[Chicot 1]

This was an exclusively rhetorical question. For the sake of completeness, the picture ...

[Kir]

The proponents of this Pribluda will give you a lot of examples, while forgetting the main thing that the ammunition is not unlimited, and therefore the accuracy is not the last, in which the turn signals are clearly inferior to the cannon mounts located near the center of mass of the machine, and there are also aerodynamic losses.

[spanner]

I'm reading your comments here, and it seems you don’t understand why the cannon needs turning. If I am wrong, explain to me.

[gameover_65]

In the same way, rotary cannon mounts, which take place on attack helicopters, do not justify themselves (contrary to the established sterotype).

Thank God that not everyone thinks so, otherwise the tanks would turn into this:

[SSR]

There is a lot of everything, but what didn’t come in handy then can be used now like - like a missile was thrown off and it turned around in the fall and went to the target by 90 - 180%. Something like this

[gameover_65]

In the same way, rotary cannon mounts, which take place on attack helicopters, do not justify themselves (contrary to the established sterotype).

so what, that the main armament is used mainly only on the course, is it really bad to be able to fire at the enemy without turning the car around?
tanks, too, according to statistics, use the main weapons in 75-80% only at the rate, and now what?
begin to sculpt this:

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

so what, that the main armament is used mainly only on the course, is it really bad to be able to fire at the enemy without turning the car around?

First, calculate the recoil force of an automatic artillery system (for example, the same 2A42). Then, try to mentally apply this force to the helicopter (for example, the same Mi-28N), provided that the trunk is deployed 45 degrees relative to the course (at the same cruising flight speed) and elevation angle from minus 5 to minus 10 degrees ( i.e. the gun barrel is lowered). The rate of fire is high, the queue is short ...
Now tell us how with such an introductory pilot will counter the withdrawal of the car? ..

Quote: gameover_65

otherwise the tanks would turn into this

My advice to you is never compare what you never need to compare ...

Quote: gameover_65

thank god that not everyone thinks so

And here it is a pity that the vast majority will not be free from this stereotype ...

And as if for info:
When using small arms and cannon weapons, the Mi-24P was (based on the experience of Afghanistan) more effective than the Mi-24D and Mi-24V ...
Ka-50/52 have better accuracy when firing from the 2A42 artillery system than the Mi-28N equipped with the same gun ...

PS And for the sake of interest, watch the video on how the Mi-24P behaves when shooting from the GSh-2-30, and how this affects its directional stability. But this is not the lightest helicopter in its class, and the artillery system is stationary ...

[SkyMaXX]

Well, you also compared: the effectiveness of cannon weapons Mi-24P with Mi-24V. The Mi-24P has a 30mm gun, and the Mi-24V has a 12,7mm machine gun, of course the gun is killer. But the Mi-24P is mainly suitable for fighting equipment, but if you need to deal with small infantry groups, then the Mi-24V is better with its movable large-caliber machine gun. At least you don’t need to bathe with numerous approaches, you can just shoot manpower and light vehicles at a low speed of the helicopter, turning the machine gun on the target, and even hang, although it is not recommended in battle. On the Mi-24P it’s impossible to fight like that. By the way, I am always amazed when they show training firing on the Mi-24P, when two people are in the cockpit. And on what’s the operator-shooter sitting there, because if a pilot can shoot both from NAR and a fixed gun, and usually an ATGM Assault is put on helicopters very rarely, so the operator has no work, he gets an extra passenger. Unless to help the pilot as a navigator, as well as look at the sighting station and show and direct the pilot to the target.
As for the Ka-52 and Mi-28N, I agree that the 2A42 on the first shoots very accurately, they say that the 2A42 on the Ka-50 / Ka-52 is the most powerful and accurate 30mm gun in the world. On the Mi-28, the 2A42 advantage is a little lost due to the large spread of shells. But I am not opposed to the rotary gun on the Mi-28, it would be better if they put a much light gun GS-23 or GS-30.

[gameover_65]

First, calculate the recoil force of an automatic artillery system (for example, the same 2A42). Then, try to mentally apply this force to the helicopter (for example, the same Mi-28N), provided that the trunk is deployed 45 degrees relative to the course (at the same cruising flight speed) and elevation angle from minus 5 to minus 10 degrees ( i.e. the gun barrel is lowered). The rate of fire is high, the queue is short ...
Now tell us how with such an introductory pilot will counter the withdrawal of the car? ..

Chicot 1Well, now it’s not the 40s of the last century, when it had to be countered and taken into account.
there are computers and ballistic computers for this, and not only exist, but they are also used. The SLA of the same helicopter perfectly fulfills traverse shooting in short bursts and the accuracy of hitting is no worse than the BMP-2 firing on the move.

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

The SLA of the same helicopter perfectly fulfills traverse shooting in short bursts and the accuracy of the hit is not worse than firing BMP-2 on the go

I repeat once again - do not compare what a priori you do not need to compare. Yes, and it makes no sense to do this ...
A helicopter is not a tank or an infantry fighting vehicle. Even though attack helicopters are often referred to as "flying tanks" ...

Quote: gameover_65

Well now it’s not the 40s of the last century, when it had to be countered and taken into account

What are you saying! .. That is, all those phenomena that acted on aircraft in the 40s of the last century (and even a little later), now, at the beginning of the XNUMXst century, have been completely abolished completely and irrevocably? ..

Quote: gameover_65

there are computers and ballistic computers for this, and not only exist, but they are also used

Give an example of at least one such system, which allows the pilot to easily fend off diversion when firing from an automatic artillery system to the side of the course installed on modern attack helicopters ... Is it on the Mi-28N? .. Or on the AN-64 Apache? .. Or maybe it is present on the Mi-35M? .. Or, say, on the Super-Hinda tuned by the South African? ..

[Alex 241]

Variants of the Russian Air Force

[Alex 241]

Here is an interesting Yak-52bB aircraft with UB-32

[Chicot 1]

Good evening, Alexander ... Have these installations been used in practice in a real combat situation? .. And if so, how effective were they compared to conventional "non-rotating" ones? ..
But the photo of the Yak-52 with the NURS blocks for me personally is almost a revelation. I never would have thought that they tried to hang such serious weapons on him ...

[Alex 241]

Vasily I welcome, the meaning of these installations is firing from a straight flight without diving, the total volley is certainly powerful, especially from four containers, but the pilot also has to sustain a flight in a straight line, otherwise the target will leave. As for the Yak-52, this is the only aircraft that was supposed to be used in Afghanistan as a light attack aircraft, an analogue of the American Skyrader, but the MO refused this aircraft.

[bask]

Quote: Alex 241

Yak-52, this is the only aircraft that was supposed to be used in Afghanistan as a light attack aircraft, an analogue of the American Skyrader, but the MO refused this aircraft.

Hi Sash, but in vain refused. In the mountains where the heights did not allow the turntables to act effectively, I would be just right.
Do you think UAVs will be equipped with strike guns?

[Alex 241]

Hi Andrew, refused because of the lack of booking, about the UAV, most likely not.

[bask]

Thanks for the info ... Sanya.
But screw-motor, such as IL-10, to the missing link between the turntables and turbojet, was obvious.
Now, it is clear that this segment is heavily occupied by BPLs and not only this one.
IL-10 AM-42 is a "flying light assault tank".
It's a pity they wrote off early. In Afghanistan and Chechnya, it would be very useful.

[Alex 241]

Ilyushin residents designed the IL-102 for Afghanistan, but adopted the Su-25

[bask]

Quote: Alex 241

Ilyushin residents designed the IL-102 for Afghanistan, but adopted the Su-25

Thank you for reminding me. I read about this project IL-102.
According to some sources, the IL-102 was superior to the Su-25 in terms of performance characteristics.

[SSR]

Looks serious.

[doctor_alex]

I don’t know what is installed there and what isn’t there, but such a thing as a gyroscope has existed for 150 years, creating a system that fights off any changes in the aircraft’s trajectory that is not caused by the pilot’s controls is simple, even in RC models this system is used, and this gyroscopic system Matchbox.

[gameover_65]

Chicot 1, I understand perfectly well that shooting at the heading is more convenient and accurate

Give an example of at least one such system, which allows the pilot to easily fend off diversion when firing from an automatic artillery system to the side of the course installed on modern attack helicopters ... Is it on the Mi-28N? .. Or on the AN-64 Apache? .. Or maybe it is present on the Mi-35M? .. Or, say, on the Super-Hinda tuned by the South African? ..

Sorry, but you probably misunderstood me.
I'm talking about the MSA (weapon control system) in a helicopter. it helps to direct and hit the target.
since when is the main task of the helicopter to maintain course on the battlefield?
the main task is to hit targets, and the tool is sharpened under this.

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

sorry, but you probably misunderstood me

I get it. Apparently, you do not quite understand the specifics of such an aircraft as a helicopter ...

Quote: gameover_65

I'm talking about the MSA (weapon control system) in a helicopter. it helps to direct and hit the target

Danish education. Let it astound. If only this does not interfere with the overall stability of the helicopter in the air and its controllability. Including retention ...

Quote: gameover_65

since when to keep heading on the battlefield, the main task of the helicopter

And in your opinion, the turntable should be dangling in the air like an x ​​... a hamster in a washstand? .. The concept of "course" has under it the chosen direction of movement. In this and the specific case of the flight ... Including during the meneuvering ...

Quote: gameover_65

the main task is to hit targets, and the tool is sharpened for this

Naturally, destroying targets on the battlefield is the most important task of any attack helicopter. But at the same time, it must also be stable and easy to manage ...
But firing from automatic artillery systems away from the course is precisely the very same control of a helicopter and makes it difficult ...

[gameover_65]

Danish education. Let it astound. If only this does not interfere with the overall stability of the helicopter in the air and its controllability. Including retention ...

Chicot 1that you are attached to this course? in the conduct of hostilities, the direction rather than the course is more important. after approaching the target, to be able to fire at the enemy so that he could not aim, I think this is not bad. Yes, sausages when shooting, so what? when firing from 30mm, the speed even drops and what? no one at a speed of 200 km / h will even think to shoot to the side, but to have such an opportunity at low speeds and with a hang, I think this is not bad. all the more so since the speed of turning the Kamov and the mile is different. therefore, on the spacecraft is a course weapon, and on the MI with a rotary mechanism.

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

what are you attached to this course?

Not only was I attached to him. Everything that flies, swims or moves in any other way is attached to it ...

Quote: gameover_65

in the conduct of hostilities, the direction rather than the course is more important

Direction is a loose concept ... And in any direction they are moving in one direction or another ...

Quote: gameover_65

after approaching the target, to be able to fire at the enemy so that he could not aim, I think this is not bad

Maybe this is not bad. But this is not practicable ...

Quote: gameover_65

when firing from 30 mm, the speed even drops and

Not only does the speed drop, but even at a high rate of fire, the helicopter starts to "peck" ...

Quote: gameover_65

but to have such an opportunity at low speeds and with a hang, I think it's not bad

Do you think that at low speeds or in hovering mode the helicopter becomes immune to the impact of the artillery system? ..

Quote: gameover_65

all the more so since the speed of turning the Kamov and the mile is different. therefore, on a spacecraft, course weapon, and on a MI with a rotary mechanism

The point is the speed of the turn of one or another helicopter, but the Kamov Design Bureau took a completely new step by placing the artillery system in the center of mass of the helicopter. In addition, the rotary mechanism (and it is there!) On the Ka-50/52 has a hydraulic drive, which to some extent dampens vibrations when shooting ...
The Mi-28N rotary installation is located in the bow of the airframe, which by itself already negatively affects the accuracy of the installation. In addition, this installation has electric drives. The clutch is rigid, damping of oscillations (even partial) does not occur ...
These nuances ultimately determine the accuracy of firing and the effectiveness of the artillery system on a particular helicopter ...

[gameover_65]

Here are some examples for traverse shooting. What does not knock them off course?
especially on the Bell UH-1

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

here are some examples for traverse shooting

Perfectly! Almost convinced, if not for one "but" ... Is this a serial device or so, indulged in the archive? ..

[Zerstorer]

I rummaged through the net and found ... This is a 30mm XM140 gun. As I understand it, the distant ancestor of the Apache cannon. Low initial projectile speed and low rate of fire, hence low recoil.

[Alex 241]

There is any return for any, any aircraft gun has a shock absorber that compensates for the recoil, there is even a differential equation for the movement of weapons on the shock absorber, in this case a gun with a rotating barrel unit on a stabilized platform is shown. In the photo below, the GS-23L gun shock absorber.

[Chicot 1]

This is a 7,62 mm machine gun. I originally spoke about automatic artillery systems mounted on helicopters ...
My comment is at 11:37. The one that served as the starting point for our discussion with you ...

Quote: Chicot 1

rotary cannon mounts that take place on attack helicopters do not justify themselves (contrary to the established stereotype)

What is the difference between large-caliber machine guns and small-caliber automatic and mechanized guns do you imagine, or will you have to explain? ..

[gameover_65]

firing around is always a problem.

[Chicot 1]

Quote: gameover_65

firing around is always a problem.

About what from the very beginning I told you ...

[gameover_65]

Alex 241 It would be very interesting to see such a layout for the ShVAK gun

[Alex 241]

ShVAK gun with shock absorbers was installed only in the version of the motor gun.

[gameover_65]

I didn’t understand, but why did my posts delete? Am I breaking a rule?

[gameover_65]

PPC, and here you can not argue with the generals. stupidly delete comments, and leave convenient for an answer

Admins - Bravo!

[gameover_65]

PPC, and here you can not argue with the generals. stupidly delete comments, and leave convenient for an answer

Admins - Bravo!

[Alex 241]

Nick doesn’t delete anything, you just had duplicate messages.

[gameover_65]

I apologize, I didn’t make out the sleep.

The Mi-28N rotary installation is located in the bow of the airframe, which by itself already negatively affects the accuracy of the installation.

excuse me, but what kind of parameter is this "accuracy of the installation"?

[Alex 241]

This refers to the "accuracy" of fire, the accuracy and density of shells hitting the target. The point is that the heavy "tank" gun is installed far from the center of mass of the helicopter, and recoil greatly affects the accuracy of the fire. This is especially noticeable at large deflection angles of the PPU. Reducing the mass of the cannon will significantly improve the accuracy of fire and the speed of rotation of the cannon. They are currently working on this problem.

[studentmati]

Quote: Alex 241

the gun is mounted far from the center of mass of the helicopter, and recoil greatly affects firing accuracy

Sanya, hi! I understand that in addition to the center of mass, the dynamics of the product will also affect accuracy. For such a case, as I understand it, there are gyroscopes. Entered the topic, looking at the helicopter in the parking lot.

[Alex 241]

Of course Sash, I use GSP even on turret mounts.

[gameover_65]

Alex 241, yes, I understand what I mean, it’s me so, to take courage.))
2-3 to the target, the rest to milk. this is true in ground technology.
but only the ground does not work in three planes, and here the face of the perfectly functioning helicopter control system. Yes, and FSUs, that from the work of the gun it blew 5-10 degrees at the rate. What did we generally cling to the gun? a gun is a weapon that is used when there is nothing left!

[gameover_65]

Alex 241, great pictures.
here they have firing from 3-6 thousand rounds per minute, absolutely does not interfere with piloting.
but it interferes with us.

[Alex 241]

[/ Center]

Gauges are different, rifle and cannon.

[gameover_65]

AH-64 Apache with M230 Chain Gun, you can. nothing bothers them. but if the Russians have it, then it’s necessarily feces.

[Alex 241]

The guns, at first glance, are the same on both helicopters: automatic single-barrel 30 mm caliber mounted on turrets with approximately the same firing angles. In fact, the difference between them is huge. The M-230 cannon is designed specifically for the Apache, it is a relatively light gun weighing 54 kg, its rate of fire is 750 rounds per minute. On the Mi-28 mounted gun 2A42, "borrowed" from the BMP-2. This tool is a completely different class. The 2A42 minute salvo is 301 kg, and the M-230 minute salvo is 147 kg. An army cannon is not so afraid of dust and sloppy handling as a specialized aviation cannon, moreover, it is less sensitive to barrel overheating during firing. Reports appeared in the press that firing from the Apache cannon is possible only in short bursts, from 2A42 all the ammunition can be released immediately without any special consequences for the cannon. The use of the 2A42 cannon on the Mi-28 made it possible to sharply increase the firepower of the helicopter, but it caused serious problems. The mass of the cannon mount is about 200 kg, and the recoil when firing is much higher than that of aircraft guns.

The placement of the gun on the turrets led to a local strengthening of the structure (the weight of an empty helicopter is growing). When shooting due to the high recoil momentum and the presence of a shoulder to the center of mass, a moment is created swinging the helicopter, respectively, firing accuracy is deteriorating; This effect is especially pronounced at turret angles close to 90 °. However, representatives of the Moscow Helicopter Plant claim that the accuracy of firing a cannon at the Mi-28 is higher than that of the AN-64A. The Apache’s ammunition has 1200 shells, the Mi-28 has only 250, but to destroy the Mi-28’s target, given the much higher efficiency of its gun mount (3-4 times according to various estimates), less shells are needed. In addition to the cannon, a variety of weapons are suspended on the four underwing nodes of both helicopters. The “main caliber” are ATGMs, the “Hellfire” - for the “Apache”, the “Attack” for the Mi-28. Their number is the same for both of them - 16. Hellfire ATGMs have laser guidance, their use at night is problematic. ATGM “Attack” have radio command guidance, respectively, there are no restrictions on the transparency of the atmosphere when applied, but their guidance system is subject to radio interference. Roughly speaking, horseradish is not sweeter than radish, it is better to have both of them (as is done on the AH-64D, the armament of which includes Hellfires with both laser and radio command guidance).

[gameover_65]

Well, that's why amers on Apache can have a 30mm gun, but on MI-28 it is impossible?

[Alex 241]

And which one is on MI-28?

[gameover_65]

I got tired of saying that weapons with a rotary mechanism in 90% of cases will be used as a course, and being able to shoot to the side is not bad.

[Turkestan]

In my opinion, the article is not complete and actually one-sided. It absolutely does not contain information about movable cannon mounts, for example, such as DB-65u installed on DA, BA, BTA aircraft.