Where is this sourced from?
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Where is this sourced from?
it just looks like M61 gun + 23*115mm ammunition
I don’t know why the PLAAF likes the 23mm x 115 round so much. The Soviet/Russian 30mm round is much superior ammo. And now, if the this chart is correct, the PLAAF apparently developed a high-pressure version of the 23x115 ammo, increasing the muzzle velocity from the 1950s’ 690mps to the current 815mps. Still the muzzle velocity falls far short of NATO 20x103mm’s 1030mps (exactly Mach 3) and the Russian 30x165’s 900mps.
why don't they just use 23x152mm which capable of 980m/s?
The PLA already operates substantial numbers of aircraft using the GSh-23 with the only other major aircraft based gun being the GSh-30-1.
If they were developing a new cannon for J-20, essentially they have the option of developing a calibre compatible with either of those cannons for the sake of ammunition commonality rather than introducing a new calibre.
If that spec sheet truly is for the J-20's cannon, I don't see anything problematic with continuing with the 23x115mm cartridge especially if they have newer variants with improved performance.
Edit: 115
Last edited:
Sorry you mean 23x115?
Using the Russian 30mm would probably make the rotary cannon too heavy and large for the PLAAF's liking, not to mention the excessive vibration that would likely come with it that they need to adapt the airframe to (Remember the MiG-27 with their Gsh-30-6 that would generate excessive vibrations when fired that would damage the airframe) which they might think is not worth the effort, that leaves them either developing a new ammo, using the Chinese 25mm(which I don't think the PLAAF used) or the 23x115mm round.
I think the higher velocity 23mm was a good compromise with more explosive content compared to the M61 while having more ROF compared to the Gsh30-1.
I think the higher velocity 23mm was a good compromise with more explosive content compared to the M61 while having more ROF compared to the Gsh30-1.
Why is a rotary gun even needed? For air to air combat, revolver gun akin to Mauser BK-27, only in a smaller caliber (23mm is likely fine) would seem like a better fit and would be more weight and volume efficient. Air to ground combat might benefit more from rotary gun's higher long term rate of fire, but J-20 should never really be used for ground strafing runs. Besides, 23mm is likely somewhat undergunned for ground attack roles. 25mm at a minimum, but likely a bit bigger calibers still should be prefered.
A rotary gun is just one of various solutions to a cannon intended for air to air combat. Short recoil, revolver cannon, and gatling guns are all valid options, I don't think there is a particular need to lionize one solution over another, given how all of those types are in use for air to air cannons among global fighter types.
The question that is more worth asking is why they chose to go with a new gatling gun design (albeit based off an existing cartridge) for J-20 -- if that specs sheet itself is accurate.
And I personally wonder as to the role that physical geometry, external protrusion, and effect on adjacent fuselage surface may have played in determining their final choice. For example, may it be that they went for a gun design that would be able to meet the parameters for physical dimensions and minimizing effect on adjacent fuselage surfaces while retaining a sufficiently high rate of fire and/or effective calibre, which other cannons (including existing in service gun types) could not?