Stats for GAU-8 Avenger?

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon

There is plenty of combat video of A-10s firing more than six rounds. Sometimes a lot more, if they really want that vehicle dead.

I think what people think of as the "six round burst" is inspired by the tracer rounds fired during the burst, used to guide the pilot's aim.

Ammo conservation would call for a 1-second burst at most per target, which comes out to around 60-65 rounds. (It's entirely possible to "tease" the trigger, firing off about 10-30 rounds by not firing for a full second.) Assuming a tracer round every ten rounds in a belt or drum of ammo, that's about six tracers being fired per second at a target.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

I think what people think of as the "six round burst" is inspired by the tracer rounds fired during the burst, used to guide the pilot's aim.

There's still a big difference between seeing a certain number of tracers and assuming that means the gun is mechanically limited to firing that many rounds.

[chitoryu12]

Originally Posted by gruundehn

Unless something has changed recently, the A-10 fires bursts. Look at the size of the magazine in that picture of the GAU-8 next to the VW. As big as that magazine is, it holds less than 10 seconds worth of ammo. The A-10 was designed to go against mass tank formations - one A-10 (or maybe two) against a large number of Soviet tanks in battle formation. Spraying ammo in sustained fire would run the aircraft out of ammo quickly and let the remaining tanks through. The A-10 attack plan was to fire off whatever missiles were on-board and then follow up with gunfire. The target tanks would not be in close formation like soldiers in the Napoleonic Wars, they would be spread out although probably within sight of each other due to the lack of Soviet radios in every tank. Thus, the A-10 would fire a burst, shift target, fire a burst, shift target, etc. Any rounds that landed between tanks were wasted, the entire gun attack was designed to hit as many targets as possible and get out.

As has been said, the burst firing is the pilot intentionally limiting the length of the burst. There's no mechanical limiter whatsoever like on an M16A2 to prevent the gun from firing more than a few rounds at a time.

However, the pilots do acknowledge the relatively low ammo capacity and do intentionally limit their bursts to short squeezes of the trigger. The sheer power of the GAU-8 is high enough that only a few rounds need to hit a tank to cause severe or fatal damage, so they don't need to dump half their ammo supply into a target.

[Whitestreak]

OK, guys.

I've been following this thread for a bit, and I've an idea.

I have a friend who is a former A-10 pilot and squadron commander.

If you'd like, I'll contact him and ask him a few questions, if we can come up with only a few questions - probably 10 or less.

Of course, if you can get to Sacramento for the Saturday of Memorial Day weekend, I know exactly where Austin will be - the Aerospace Museum of California's Open Cockpit Day. He, and the rest of the volunteers, are always happy to answer questions about the planes they take care of.

[HANS]

Originally Posted by gruundehn

Look at the size of the magazine in that picture of the GAU-8 next to the VW. As big as that magazine is, it holds less than 10 seconds worth of ammo.

The A-10A carries 1,174 rounds. That's 18 seconds at full RoF. Besides, that's an issue inherent in all combat vehicles; they have limited endurance.

Originally Posted by gruundehn

The A-10 was designed to go against mass tank formations - one A-10 (or maybe two) against a large number of Soviet tanks in battle formation. Spraying ammo in sustained fire would run the aircraft out of ammo quickly and let the remaining tanks through. The A-10 attack plan was to fire off whatever missiles were on-board and then follow up with gunfire. The target tanks would not be in close formation like soldiers in the Napoleonic Wars, they would be spread out although probably within sight of each other due to the lack of Soviet radios in every tank.

No. Every Soviet tank since the T-54 has had a radio. This is just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by gruundehn

Thus, the A-10 would fire a burst, shift target, fire a burst, shift target, etc. Any rounds that landed between tanks were wasted, the entire gun attack was designed to hit as many targets as possible and get out.

No. The attack pattern of the A-10A is quite different, as explained in my socond post in this threat.

Really, how you can claim that the thing fires limited, very short (for the RoF) bursts when there are dozens of videos from combat use that show long bursts is quite curious.

Cheers

HANS

[ColBosch]

There's another point: if it only fired six rounds at a time, it wouldn't need multiple barrels.

[gruundehn]

You know, I am beginning to suspect I am getting old. I worked on the A-10A back in 1975-76 and just now realized just how long ago that was - it still seems like just a couple of months ago. I remember that the GAU-8 was limited, and I mentioned that I remembered it being 6 rounds, but I was never able to keep up with the A-10 once I cross-trained to 326XX. I had the security clearance but not the need to know.

My memory of the capabilities of the Soviet tanks comes from when I worked in 100 SRW Combat Intelligence in 1972-73. I think I remember Victor Suvorov in his book The Soviet Army mentioning the need for hand signals due to the inability of the Soviets to produce enough quality radios. But I haven't read his books in years. I also remember, from The Institute of Tactical Research, (they have since gone out of business) a study on why should-held missiles would work very effectively against Soviet armor due to the short distance between the tanks. I can also remember reading from an American source on how American armor stayed close together for two reasons, the limited number of radio channels required the use of hand signals, and mass effect.

The GAU-8 was limited in the A-10A probably due to the need to conserve ammo. It may be that once the pilots were used to the weapon, they were able to limit their bursts without a limiter and thus it was removed. I don't know because, as I said, I cross-trained away from conventional avionics and lost my need to know, even if I worked with anyone who was current on the A-10, regardless of their career field.