7 ms·

Maybe you should also add, that the A-10 can carry 1,174 rounds for its front Gatling (from your link).

• protomyth 11y ago
  The A-10 rounds are a tad bit more effective against insurgents hiding than the rounds shot by an F-35.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    • chiph 11y ago
      It actually does. The 30mm is a heavier bullet (even without taking the depleted-uranium core into account), and the case holds more powder, so it has a higher velocity. Both of which add up to more energy imparted into the target.
    • danielvf 11y ago
      Take a cube, half the size of each edge, and the cube weighs one eighth as much. In this case, the 20% reduction in diameter, while keeping the same shape means the projectiles are less than half the size. In a counter-insurgency role, the A-10 fires roughly 65 13.3 ounce high explosive shells in one second. Roughly 54 pounds of high explosive shells per second. The F-35 is planned to fire 55 6.5 ounce projectiles per second. That's 22 pounds of shells per second. 54 lbs vs 22 lbs is a significant difference. Though, as others have said, it's the ammo capacity that is the major problem with the F-35's proposed gun. Only being able to make one or two guns runs before being out of ammunition precludes any kind of sustained ground support.
      • PythonicAlpha 11y ago
        Exactly. It is the same with artillery or tank ammunition -- a small increase in diameter makes a huge impact.
      • Retric 11y ago
        If you’re shooting tanks then sure it's a significant advantage, but when the target is a pickup truck with a machine gun mounted on the back you don't need that much penetrating power.
        • protomyth 11y ago
          There are walls and other obstacles in the field that a gun designed to shoot through a tank can go through. You do need that much penetrating power to make sure their hidey hole is not safe.
          • Retric 11y ago
            The A-10 was designed for an anti-tank role. So, I suspect there rounds are generally overkill. A smaller round than you might think can penetrate a brick/cinderblock wall. For hardened targets an Air-to-Surface missile can have a lot more penetrating power. In the end some compromise between the two is probably ideal. That said if you’re doing dedicated ground support I think you’re going to want a lot more round than an F-35 is designed for.
        • PythonicAlpha 11y ago
          I am not sure, if you even need 25mmm in this particular case. I would say that with the right aiming even a machine gun will do it. But when you do not look at the penetrating power alone, but the blowing effect, than a bigger round can hold more explosives (of course, I don't know, if the A-10 Gatling cannon can also take explosive rounds instead of the armor breaking rounds). But of course the parallel poster is right: there are several things to penetrate -- particularly when partisans are heavily covered.
          • kosmic_k 11y ago
            A-10 cannot penetrate modern armor with it's gun. It had difficulty with T-72 when it was designed and could only kill them from the rear.
            • 11y ago
    • Gracana 11y ago
      The GAU-12 fires 25x137 and the GAU-8 fires 30x173, so it's more than just a slightly larger diameter bullet: http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/Misc/MILITARY%20CARTRIDGE%20RELATIONSHIPS/MCRel3.jpg http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/Misc/MILITARY%20CARTRIDGE%20R... I didn't dig too deeply, but I found recoil force measurements... 4000lbf for the GAU-12 and 10000lbf for the GAU-8.
  • tsotha 11y ago
    The gun on the F-35 is basically pointless. They didn't even include it on the B and C versions. CAS from an F-35 is all about SDB.