Your Nation's Air Force Mark III: Best Korea Edition

[Zhouran]

You can go with something like the M61 Vulcan or GSh-23 instead since both use smaller ammunition than the GSh-301 and BK-27.

Vulcan is actually a pretty huge gun though, regardless of ammunition size.

I thought the Vulcan was small. I know its ammunition drum is quite large since American fighter planes tend to carry more ammunition than their Russian counterparts. There's the XM301, though that got cancelled together with the RAH-66.

Vulcan is fucking massive compared to the GSh-30-1. It weighs 46kg. Less than myself. Even the GSh-23 is a few kg heavier. If I were to redesign it to 27mm, it could probably hit 40kg.

The thing is, the US has always liked having lots of smaller rounds in the air going fast rather than big rounds; see ma deuce on WW2 aircraft and early jets.

I've looked up pictures of a complete M61 Vulcan with its ammo drum and the gun itself doesn't seem that large compared to the massive ammo drum. The BK-27 itself is around a hundred kilograms heavy and 2.31 m long, the M61A2 on the other hand is around 92 kg heavy without feed and is 1.827 m long. The GSh-301 is 46 kilograms heavy and 1.978 m long while GSh-23 is 1.387 m long and 49.2 kg heavy. The GSh-301 could be a good choice based on weight while the GSh-23 is another good choice based on length.

F-15 vs Mig-15 1v1 with no missiles.

Discuss.

That's a difficult one.

Apparently in a WVR dogfight, lighter fighters like the F-16 has an advantage over heavier fighters like the F-15 due to their sizes. The F-16 is said to have the capability to outmaneuver even the Flanker series no matter how supermaneuverable they are, all because of its small size over the massive Flanker.

In Vietnam, the North Vietnamese used the MiG-17 and MiG-19 (Chinese J-6) against American fighter jets and had a liking for the two despite being slower than the MiG-21, their slow speed made them pretty dangerous in dogfights along with their autocannons.

[Connori Pilgrims]

F-15 vs Mig-15 1v1 with no missiles.

Discuss.

Scenario is too simplistic (not to mention improbable, but for sake of discussion will not mind). Are we assuming equal pilot quality? What's the Rules of Engagement? Is it just organic sensors and qualities, or can ground stations or AWACS/AEW play a part?

Assuming equal pilot skill, unrestricted RoE, and organic sensors only with no outside help, its handily F-15, since it can choose where and when to engage at will. Superior turn means jack when you can boom and zoom whenever you wish.

MiG-17 and MiG-19 only stood a chance in Vietnam because of restrictive RoE and they had support from ground control to make up for their otherwise total lack of onboard sensors compared to US counterparts.

[The Akasha Colony]

I thought the Vulcan was small. I know its ammunition drum is quite large since American fighter planes tend to carry more ammunition than their Russian counterparts. There's the XM301, though that got cancelled together with the RAH-66.

I've looked up pictures of a complete M61 Vulcan with its ammo drum and the gun itself doesn't seem that large compared to the massive ammo drum. The BK-27 itself is around a hundred kilograms heavy and 2.31 m long, the M61A2 on the other hand is around 92 kg heavy without feed and is 1.827 m long. The GSh-301 is 46 kilograms heavy and 1.978 m long while GSh-23 is 1.387 m long and 49.2 kg heavy. The GSh-301 could be a good choice based on weight while the GSh-23 is another good choice based on length.

Vulcan looks "small" because its ammo drum is enormous, in part because it needs that ammo due to its rate of fire. F-15 carries nearly a thousand 20 mm rounds, and even F-16 carries just over half this number. In comparison, Typhoon carries only 150 rounds for its BK-27. BK-27 actually weighs only 17 kg without its feed system, which if you're going to compare it to M61 without its feed system and mounting, should be the figure used. M61's size and weight should not be surprising: it is a six-barreled rotary cannon being compared to single-barrel revolver and recoil cannons.

Of course, as an example of the declining importance of guns, F-22 carries less ammunition for its gun than F-16.

[Crookfur]

Anyway, is it alright to use a two-seater combat plane such as an Su-30 or F/A-18F for lead-in fighter trainer roles rather than having to acquire dedicated LIFTs instead?

I'll just use anorexic dwarf pilots to make up for the weight of the cannon!

I actually am going to fit it with GSh-301 though. Or maybe an even lighter modified copy with BK-27 ammo.

You can go with something like the M61 Vulcan or GSh-23 instead since both use smaller ammunition than the GSh-301 and BK-27.

On the trainer thing: it's doable just very very expensive for no real advatage

[Corindia]

I'll just use anorexic dwarf pilots

Okay, real question, why isn't this more common? Especially for spaceflight where cutting down weight is huge

[Taihei Tengoku]

Dwarves are uncommon, anorexics are literally brain damaged. The difference between a 5th percentile pilot and a 95th percentile pilot is a few seconds of fuel.

[Zhouran]

On the trainer thing: it's doable just very very expensive for no real advatage

I thought LIFTs were mainly used for air forces that either have small budgets or are really cheap. Doesn't the USAF lack any dedicated LIFTs, the T-38 Talon would been close but it lacks any armaments and combat capability, which would make it only an advanced trainer.

Dwarves are uncommon, anorexics are literally brain damaged. The difference between a 5th percentile pilot and a 95th percentile pilot is a few seconds of fuel.

And since being anorexic means being unhealthy, you can't have unhealthy fighter pilots. I don't know how North Koreans still manage to have fighter pilots despite nationwide hunger, but I like to imagine Kimmy boy sharing some of his leftover food with the starving pilots.

[Corindia]

I meant dwarf pilots more than anorexic pilots. And while I understand why it might make more sense for mass-produced fighter jets to not use them simply because it might be difficult to raise enough pilots from the dwarf population, why couldn't it work for space-craft or other limited production but highly weight sensitive planes?

[The Akasha Colony]

Okay, real question, why isn't this more common? Especially for spaceflight where cutting down weight is huge

Because of the purpose of getting someone into space.

Aside from the actual flight crew (pilot, maybe commander), the rest of the people who are sent into space are sent there because they have some kind of scientific talent or technical expertise. And being able to select from the broadest pool of talent is particularly important. How many anorexic dwarf scientists do you think would be eligible? This is true even for air forces, which prefer to select a pilot because he's a good pilot, not because he happens to be short.

The weight difference is marginal anyway. A 95th percentile male weighs about 98 kg, a 5th percentile female weighs about 50 kg. The Orion capsule NASA is developing weighs nearly 26,000 kg including all supporting equipment and stores. The weight difference would be well within the already-required safety margins inherent in every man-rated space vehicle.

[Corindia]

Okay, real question, why isn't this more common? Especially for spaceflight where cutting down weight is huge

Because of the purpose of getting someone into space.

Aside from the actual flight crew (pilot, maybe commander), the rest of the people who are sent into space are sent there because they have some kind of scientific talent or technical expertise. And being able to select from the broadest pool of talent is particularly important. How many anorexic dwarf scientists do you think would be eligible? This is true even for air forces, which prefer to select a pilot because he's a good pilot, not because he happens to be short.

The weight difference is marginal anyway. A 95th percentile male weighs about 98 kg, a 5th percentile female weighs about 50 kg. The Orion capsule NASA is developing weighs nearly 26,000 kg including all supporting equipment and stores. The weight difference would be well within the already-required safety margins inherent in every man-rated space vehicle.

okay, gotcha, thank you!

[Iltica]

Just put a tiny one in there, it makes them feel better about it.
Too bad nobody makes 12.7mm rotaries... Or maybe they do idk.

You have 2 options the GAU-19 and the Yak-B 12.7

The Yak-B is tempting, 6,000 rpm in that little thing, but it's only 5 kg lighter than a GSh-23.
It says it didn't have enough penetration for dug-in or lightly armored targets but that's on a helicopter, do fighters commonly use their guns on ground targets anymore either?

[Zhouran]

You have 2 options the GAU-19 and the Yak-B 12.7

The Yak-B is tempting, 6,000 rpm in that little thing, but it's only 5 kg lighter than a GSh-23.
It says it didn't have enough penetration for dug-in or lightly armored targets but that's on a helicopter, do fighters commonly use their guns on ground targets anymore either?

12.7mm or 14.5mm heavy machine guns can do damage on a fighter jet, though not as lethal as an autocannon. As for anti-ground usage of onboard cannons, well probably not since you've got bombs, AGMs and rocket pods, plus precision-guidance is becoming more common. Flying a supersonic fighter jet and trying to shoot an armored vehicle with your onboard gun would be difficult, in comparison, dedicated CAS aircraft like the A-10 are more suited for low-level low-speed gun runs (not to mention, the onboard cannons of the A-10 and Su-25 face down rather than up like with fighter jets).

[The Akasha Colony]

The Yak-B is tempting, 6,000 rpm in that little thing, but it's only 5 kg lighter than a GSh-23.
It says it didn't have enough penetration for dug-in or lightly armored targets but that's on a helicopter, do fighters commonly use their guns on ground targets anymore either?

Lighter calibers like 12.7 mm and 14.5 mm suffer from more extreme deflection (due to wind, etc.) in an ACM scenario and lose velocity much more quickly than heavy 20+ mm rounds. They also have anemic payloads for effects like HEI/SAPHEI. These advantages for larger cannons is the reason why cannons supplanted heavy machine guns in the first place.

This is why the preferred solution has always been to sacrifice RoF rather than caliber if a smaller, lighter fighter gun is required.

[Crookfur]

On the trainer thing: it's doable just very very expensive for no real advatage

I thought LIFTs were mainly used for air forces that either have small budgets or are really cheap. Doesn't the USAF lack any dedicated LIFTs, the T-38 Talon would been close but it lacks any armaments and combat capability, which would make it only an advanced trainer.

Dwarves are uncommon, anorexics are literally brain damaged. The difference between a 5th percentile pilot and a 95th percentile pilot is a few seconds of fuel.

And since being anorexic means being unhealthy, you can't have unhealthy fighter pilots. I don't know how North Koreans still manage to have fighter pilots despite nationwide hunger, but I like to imagine Kimmy boy sharing some of his leftover food with the starving pilots.

To be honest the term LIFT is really just a marketungvterm for the newer generation of advanced trainers that are high performance enough and have the electronics to simulate more of what a fighter pilot would experience in a front line fighter. Weapons capability doesn't really come into it.

In short it's an advanced trainer that you can download a lot of the OCU work onto.

It's a solution that pretty much every major airforce with the budget and space in it's acquisitions schedule for is adopting.

[Zhouran]

To be honest the term LIFT is really just a marketungvterm for the newer generation of advanced trainers that are high performance enough and have the electronics to simulate more of what a fighter pilot would experience in a front line fighter. Weapons capability doesn't really come into it.

In short it's an advanced trainer that you can download a lot of the OCU work onto.

It's a solution that pretty much every major airforce with the budget and space in it's acquisitions schedule for is adopting.

So the entire time the term LIFT is actually just for commercial marketing and not really a military term?

Damn, military-industrial-complex fooled me, but to be honest the term "lead-in fighter trainer" sounds cool though. But yeah I can understand that LIFTs are actually just advanced trainers with the electronics of a fighter jet. The FA-50 from South Korea probably simulates a fighter jet really well due to its electronics, radar and supersonic speed, and I think the USAF might have an interest in acquiring a variant of either the FA-50 itself or the basic T-50 variant. The T-38 Talon is a good trainer, but it is old and it's time the USAF replaces it with a more capable trainer. Though I always asked myself why the USAF didn't replace their T-38s with the F-15B/Ds and F-16B/Ds, although budgetary concern could probably be the biggest reason.

[Crookfur]

To be honest the term LIFT is really just a marketungvterm for the newer generation of advanced trainers that are high performance enough and have the electronics to simulate more of what a fighter pilot would experience in a front line fighter. Weapons capability doesn't really come into it.

In short it's an advanced trainer that you can download a lot of the OCU work onto.

It's a solution that pretty much every major airforce with the budget and space in it's acquisitions schedule for is adopting.

So the entire time the term LIFT is actually just for commercial marketing and not really a military term?

Damn, military-industrial-complex fooled me, but to be honest the term "lead-in fighter trainer" sounds cool though. But yeah I can understand that LIFTs are actually just advanced trainers with the electronics of a fighter jet. The FA-50 from South Korea probably simulates a fighter jet really well due to its electronics, radar and supersonic speed, and I think the USAF might have an interest in acquiring a variant of either the FA-50 itself or the basic T-50 variant. The T-38 Talon is a good trainer, but it is old and it's time the USAF replaces it with a more capable trainer. Though I always asked myself why the USAF didn't replace their T-38s with the F-15B/Ds and F-16B/Ds, although budgetary concern could probably be the biggest reason.

Well the F-16s and 15s would have need a lot more, well everything, from fuel to maintenance plus even with the advent of carefree handling they are very dangerous machines to fly unless you already have a rock solid basis in fast jets.
IIRC the USAF are currently in the middle of choosing thier T-38 replacement:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-X_program

[The Corparation]

Okay, real question, why isn't this more common? Especially for spaceflight where cutting down weight is huge

Because of the purpose of getting someone into space.

Aside from the actual flight crew (pilot, maybe commander), the rest of the people who are sent into space are sent there because they have some kind of scientific talent or technical expertise. And being able to select from the broadest pool of talent is particularly important. How many anorexic dwarf scientists do you think would be eligible? This is true even for air forces, which prefer to select a pilot because he's a good pilot, not because he happens to be short.

The weight difference is marginal anyway. A 95th percentile male weighs about 98 kg, a 5th percentile female weighs about 50 kg. The Orion capsule NASA is developing weighs nearly 26,000 kg including all supporting equipment and stores. The weight difference would be well within the already-required safety margins inherent in every man-rated space vehicle.

Weight is less of an issue than height. Spaceships are cramped. Astronauts are usually on the shorter side of the normal distribution for height (Yuri Gagarin was only 5'2"). This is less of an issue with Shuttle and the new Orion which were designed to fit everyone who isn't a dwarf or freakishly tall, but iirc until the ISS era Soyuz's height restriction was barely the average height for a Russian.

[Iltica]

The Yak-B is tempting, 6,000 rpm in that little thing, but it's only 5 kg lighter than a GSh-23.
It says it didn't have enough penetration for dug-in or lightly armored targets but that's on a helicopter, do fighters commonly use their guns on ground targets anymore either?

Lighter calibers like 12.7 mm and 14.5 mm suffer from more extreme deflection (due to wind, etc.) in an ACM scenario and lose velocity much more quickly than heavy 20+ mm rounds. They also have anemic payloads for effects like HEI/SAPHEI. These advantages for larger cannons is the reason why cannons supplanted heavy machine guns in the first place.

This is why the preferred solution has always been to sacrifice RoF rather than caliber if a smaller, lighter fighter gun is required.

OK, how about a compromise, since the guns themselves aren't really all that heavy by themselves, just put one decent one in and leave it unloaded most of the time unless you think you'll need it for some reason?

[Taihei Tengoku]

Why would you leave it unloaded? That's literally dead volume.

[Iltica]

Because most of the weight is from the ammo, and this still leaves the option if you change your mind.

Another option is to not fit one, but design the plane to have a place where it could be installed.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

This compulsive obsession with aircraft guns is only slightly worse than the compulsive obsession over battleships.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Because most of the weight is from the ammo, and this still leaves the option if you change your mind.

Another option is to not fit one, but design the plane to have a place where it could be installed.

That's even more dead volume.

[Laritaia]

just make a pod

[Iltica]

There is very little distinguishing a removable gun from a conformal gun pod.

It depends on where it is too, there might not be anything inside a LERX or wingroot anyway, depending on the plane.

[Gallia-]

Why would you leave it unloaded? That's literally dead volume.

He should have like three seats so if the pilot wants to look out a different window he can.