GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
It can and did.
The GAU-8 and it's 30mm ammunition aboard the A-10 is far more sophisticated than WWII era cannon.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It can and did.The 30mm cannon on the A 10 cannot destroy a modern tank
Can the GAU-8 actually penetrate the top or side armour of something relatively modern, like a T-90? Honest question, I really have no idea.It can and did.
I don't think anybody is suggesting the P-47 wasn't well armed, as it obviously was. However, the suggestion has been made that if armed with 4x 20mm cannon, it could have saved weight, and increased its firepower, which isn't a bad suggestion. The problem, is the US built Hispano was notoriously unreliable, so the whole thing remains in fantasy land.I'm pretty sure the P-47 didn't need 20mm cannon. It was well-armed as it was.
Ilyishin tried to modify Il-2 with M-71 and M-82 but results were not satisfactory and there were issues with M-71 production.I will never understand why the IL-2 didn't use any of the really great radials the russians had (1800hp+ on their low octane gas, good reliability, produced up to the 60s by the chinese, so most radial warbirds that aren't western use chinese radials).
Luftwaffe - with cannons? Then we have to define "success". There were German claims that didn't match Soviet loss figures. I really would like to see Ju 87G or Hs 129 (with Mk 101 or Mk 103) test range results, how accurate were they against the tank target?The Luftwaffe had success against Soviet armor by attacking from the sides and/or rear, diving at an angle that defeated the tank's sloped armor.
The A-10 follows that same principle when attacking armor.
That's my argument, 4 Hispano's have the firepower of 12 .50 BMG's with less weight so more fuel or munitions as required, the 20mm packs more punch everyway you look at it. Tank busting - How effective were air strikes during WWII? This is an interesting read about the overall effectiveness of CASI don't think anybody is suggesting the P-47 wasn't well armed, as it obviously was. However, the suggestion has been made that if armed with 4x 20mm cannon, it could have saved weight, and increased its firepower, which isn't a bad suggestion. The problem, is the US built Hispano was notoriously unreliable, so the whole thing remains in fantasy land.
The only tanks the 30mm could take out are the older legacy models, like the Hispano it's good for mission or mobility kills realistically.'There are examples in that link I just shared, including one where a lowly 25mm gun takes a tank out of the fight. If a 25mm can do it, you can bet your depleted uranium that the GAU-8 can do it, too."
Not my words - this guy was from the A-10 community and saw combat in the aircraft and later became an instructor. I think he has a bit more experience here than you or I.The only tanks the 30mm could take out are the older legacy models, like the Hispano it's good for mission or mobility kills realistically.
One shell? Pretty sure not. However, according to wiki, that thing has a RoF of 3,900 RPM, or 65 PER SECOND. AFAIK, modern armor is optimized to protect from few big rounds like other tank's shells. So, I am not sure if it could open a modern tank, but I wouldn't rule it out.Can the GAU-8 actually penetrate the top or side armour of something relatively modern, like a T-90? Honest question, I really have no idea.
I had assumed that A-10's would be knocking out main battle tanks with guided munitions like AGM-65's, and using their cannon to disable IFV or APC's
Luftwaffe - with cannons? Then we have to define "success". There were German claims that didn't match Soviet loss figures. I really would like to see Ju 87G or Hs 129 (with Mk 101 or Mk 103) test range results, how accurate were they against the tank target?
By the way, about Il-2 "tank-busting" accuracy:
Early ww2 airborne tank-busters what-if
Il-2 with NS-37 cannons. Tests on the firing range. Targets were hit in 43% of flights. Hits/ammunition spent = 2.98%. Ильюшин Ил-2 НС-37 Il-2 with ShFK-37 cannons. The estimated probability to hit (not to destroy) the target in one attack: Pz.IIIG 0.04-0.02 Sd Kfz 250 0.09-0.06 In other words...ww2aircraft.net
I'm pretty sure that the tank was defanged. A shell going through a gun barrel has really small tolerances. It would only take a very small burr on the inside of the barrel which almost certainly happened to make it impossible to fire the gun. The shell would probably explode in the barrel
What is the most modern tank the A10 has engaged in combat, export model T72's?.Not my words - this guy was from the A-10 community and saw combat in the aircraft and later became an instructor. I think he has a bit more experience here than you or I.
Information from sites like Chieftains Hatch and below the turret ring say ERA blocks are too insensitive to be reliably set off from small caliber rounds.Also on current tanks with reactive armor, a good hosing from a GAU-8 will leave the primary armor exposed to friendly armor countermeasures against that enemy tank.