Chinese Gatling guns / miniguns

t2contra said:

The problem is that the pilot is likely to empty his magazine in his metal storm before any round could hit the enemy fighter.

Click to expand...

Yeah, you have a point. For instance, MiG-31 fires all its 23-mm ammo just in 1.5 sec. That's why I said "probably".

"nuclear artillery" ?

rmarduk said:

"nuclear artillery" ?

Click to expand...

Nuclear artillery is not a new concept or anything spectacular. Although I am not sure if China field one yet. But US already have working units - the W-series nuclear artillery rounds in the late 1950s.

rhino123 said:

Nuclear artillery is not a new concept or anything spectacular. Although I am not sure if China field one yet. But US already have working units - the W-series nuclear artillery rounds in the late 1950s.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Nuke Cannon?
Actually China fielded some already, and sometimes even arm it with neutron shells.

airsuperiority said:

Nuke Cannon?
Actually China fielded some already, and sometimes even arm it with neutron shells.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

You do aware that EA PSed some American Nuke cannon testing photo, and say this is Chinese, right? rhino123 provided us a good genuine wiki link to the genuine photo.

Aside from the free-and-easy topic of C&C, China tested but never actually "fielded" any Nuke Cannon even at the crazy days of mankind (aka, cold-war) for high-yield nukes are more prefered than only-good-for-looking cannon based ones. And the wiki source above, as it states "nowadays... China... maybe...still using nuclear artillery as an alternative method ...." that proves we the military savvy people are not its intented audience.

Nevertheless, the thread go de-rail from #13, to the topic, IMO gatling style systems are a good looking alternative, only when supply is not a concern, in urban warfare.

If you ask me to choose between platform-mounted 7.62mm gatling gun like #1 post picture, or same platform-mounted 14.5mm "normal" gun, I would prefer later one. To provide support in urban warfare, 14.5mm gun is better for brick-penetration and more versatile choice of munition (incinerate, frag, AP...) - that is if I choose at all. - For I know, TG prefers mortar and RPG all the time.

Awwal12 said:

Sure. Gatling guns aren't the most effective ones in every use except probably the modern dogfighting (where speeds are too high and you still want to hit your enemy with at least 2 or 3 shells). In the ground combat, given the Gatling's weight and ammo consumption per sec, one would always prefer something of true areal action (like an AGL).

Click to expand...

Actually, I have my doubts over gatling guns on fighters. The M61 Vulcan has a spool-up time of around 0.4 seconds. That may not seem all that long to you or I typing away on our keyboards, but to a fighter pilot pulling high-Gs against a skilled opponent, it could be the difference between life and death.

I was told that initially a "shaker" was mounted on 20 mm gatling guns on fighters to open up bullet dispersion as to increase hit probability; gatling was just to accurate! was like strying to hit a mosquito with a needle!

What about something like the Gatling cannon on the A-10? Is that pretty much akin to the AK630?

It'd be pretty cool to see China field an equivalent of the C-130 gunship, it would be useful in conjunction with helicopters for interdiction of armed groups or their camps especially in terrain such as that of western China. Any thoughts?

pendragon said:

I was told that initially a "shaker" was mounted on 20 mm gatling guns on fighters to open up bullet dispersion as to increase hit probability; gatling was just to accurate! was like strying to hit a mosquito with a needle!

Click to expand...

A gatling gun may be too 'accuracy' shooting at fighter size targets, but the same gun shooting at a human sized target may well find its accuracy hugely wanting even without a 'shaker'.

PanAsian said:

What about something like the Gatling cannon on the A-10? Is that pretty much akin to the AK630?

Click to expand...

They are both gatling weapons, but the GAU-8 is a massive monster next to the AK630.

Check out the size of it when removed from an A10.



The A10 is pretty much built around this gun. The AK630 is designed to shoot through unarmored cruise missiles. The GAU-8 is designed to shoot through tanks.

It'd be pretty cool to see China field an equivalent of the C-130 gunship, it would be useful in conjunction with helicopters for interdiction of armed groups or their camps especially in terrain such as that of western China. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Except there are no such armed groups or camps anywhere in China. If there were, the PAP would be able to handle them with ease without the need for anything like the AC130.

The AC130 is only useful when you have absolute air dominance and has completely destroyed and enemy's air defenses and you are faced with a numerically superior foe.

None of those criteria fits with any likely war China might get into, with the only exception being if China struck some deal with South Korea and decided to take over North Korea together.

But that is a remote enough possibility for the PLA to safely ignore it when considering their future equipment requirements, and the PLA has plenty of more practical and urgently needed things than AC130s.

rhino123 said:

Nuclear artillery is not a new concept or anything spectacular. Although I am not sure if China field one yet. But US already have working units - the W-series nuclear artillery rounds in the late 1950s.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

You guys are forgetting the M-29 Davy Crockett Weapon System.
It consisted of a low yield tactical nuclear 'mortar' fired from a recoilless gun for open battlefield engagement.
Can't believe the US Army actually fielded something like this for over a decade before being deactivated!!!