Why is JF-17's cannon pointing downwards?

[J-20]

Hi guys, since I don't have the open beta version of the game, I have been reading the quick manual. It says that the cannon of the J-17 is "negatively mounted". Anyone know is there a reason for that?

[Ranma13]

From what I hear (and I have no idea if this is true or not), it was done that way because the assumption was that A2A combat will be done solely with missiles and the gun is just for very specific situations that are highly unlikely to occur, so they tilted the gun downwards so that it can better attack ground targets.

[J-20]

From what I hear (and I have no idea if this is true or not), it was done that way because the assumption was that A2A combat will be done solely with missiles and the gun is just for very specific situations that are highly unlikely to occur, so they tilted the gun downwards so that it can better attack ground targets.

 

Thanks for the reply, mate.

I have also heard similar claims. But that just seems to be a bit odd.

Because 2 to 3 bullet from the cannon can sometimes knock out a fighter plane. But what can a 23mm cannon do to today's ground targets in a realistic environment (with SAMs and AAAs, etc). Even without SAMs, and AAA, it would have a hard time penetrate anything beside supply trucks. And the modern IFV's cannon can very much act like an AAA.

[Ranma13]

Yes, but on the other side of the coin, the chances of getting into a knife fight with guns only is extremely rare. More likely they'll be firing off their BVR missiles, and if they miss, turn tail and return home and let others deal with it rather than get into WVR combat. It's probably more likely to get targets of opportunity on the ground that can be engaged with the cannon than something in the sky.

[shaHeen-1]

Thanks for the reply, mate.

I have also heard similar claims. But that just seems to be a bit odd.

Because 2 to 3 bullet from the cannon can sometimes knock out a fighter plane. But what can a 23mm cannon do to today's ground targets in a realistic environment (with SAMs and AAAs, etc). Even without SAMs, and AAA, it would have a hard time penetrate anything beside supply trucks. And the modern IFV's cannon can very much act like an AAA.

 

The gun also doesn't have any spread which is not useful for A/A. All this may be cus designers know this thing won't catch up to any plane to hit with bullets. Dog fights will only happen if other side wants it. Otherwise it's all missiles.

 

Today's ground targets in "realistic environments" are Toyota trucks and houses as seen through your TGP.

[J-20]

The gun also doesn't have any spread which is not useful for A/A. All this may be cus designers know this thing won't catch up to any plane to hit with bullets. Dog fights will only happen if other side wants it. Otherwise it's all missiles.

 

Today's ground targets in "realistic environments" are Toyota trucks and houses as seen through your TGP.

 

I have watched some videos made by "Growing Sidewinder". He often hides between mountains to avoid BVR missiles and the X band radar of the western fighters. Once enemy goes into the glen to look for him, he would get into a close range combat. And if you showed up behind your opponent, you can save your taxpayer a heck load of money by switching to guns.

 

Do you have the open beta version of the game? Have you tried to do a cannon dog fight? If you have, is it still doable?

[Fri13]

All this may be cus designers know this thing won't catch up to any plane to hit with bullets.[/Quote]

 

You are talking about a cannon that was designed for a fighter, and caliber for AAA, catching fighters flying around at high speed while cannon is stationary on ground.... It is more than capable for "catching planes".

 

Dog fights will only happen if other side wants it. Otherwise it's all missiles. [/Quote]

 

It ain't mutual decision, that is why the whole "stealth" and "anti-stealth" concepts exist, to avoid getting to close combat.

 

No matter what, you will eventually end to close combat, as other party needs to enter the airspace that is defended, and other needs to stay in the airspace to protect it.

 

Today's ground targets in "realistic environments" are Toyota trucks and houses as seen through your TGP.

 

That is just American believe, as they would never go against a competent enemy. And that is mistake if you decide to design weapons, tactics and train personnel to fight against freedom fighters only.

 

23mm is still very effective caliber, as much really as 30mm or so, because point when you need to start using missiles and bombs because target armor or their protected area, it doesn't matter do you have 12.7mm or 50mm, you just can't do it.

 

There are always more APC, trucks etc to shoot than any tanks. For every MBT platoon (4x MBT) there is 12-16x IFV's, 24-36x APC and 1000 soldiers, with 30-60x MANPADS pairs, 12-16x AAA, and likely one SAM.

 

You don't see those visually from far, you can't spot them in FLIR and you can't detect them in A-G radar. They are mostly invisible, as long everyone follows the orders and remembers training. You are there waiting that ground troops spots them, engage them, and gives you coordinates where to drop bombs while dog fighting enemy fighters.

 

And killing everything else than tanks, means that tanks do not advance as it is their tasks to protect and transport infantry.

 

But, Pakistan and China has designed that fighter for their environment, not to some sand deserts without any trees.

[Fri13]

I have watched some videos made by "Growing Sidewinder". He often hides between mountains to avoid BVR missiles and the X band radar of the western fighters. Once enemy goes into the glen to look for him, he would get into a close range combat. And if you showed up behind your opponent, you can save your taxpayer a heck load of money by switching to guns.

 

Those mountain fights are unrealistic if enemy controls those mountains. As the enemy has filled those places with MANPADS and AAA. You do not fly in those places as you get shot down, even if there is a enemy fighter lurking. And you can't go high, as you are easy target to SAM and air superiority fighters.

 

It is very difficult mission, as it is one valley at the time, one ridge at the time that ground troops needs to fight.

[shaHeen-1]

You guys are wrong either in understanding what I said or just talking about tangential stuff that wasn't being referred to. I may or may not be right I never really know.

[Floydii]

In other news, the cannon is belly mounted and canting it up would be physically difficult.

[VC]

In other news, the cannon is belly mounted and canting it up would be physically difficult.

 

This.

 

It may even be that having it perfectly in line with the aircarft would cause the breech to stick out below the belly in an unacceptable way to cause extra drag, or the fire to come too close to the nose for comfort. In any case I assume it's a physical space design issue not any assumptions about role and how it will be used.

[Eldur]

I don't see a point in canting the gun up anyway. There's plenty of degrees of how much you can see below the bore in any jet. The only thing it does is you fly like 5° below your pipper and have to watch very carefully not to crash into the ground while being fixated on the target you wanna strafe. In a dogfight I never ever had to take so much lead that it was of any use. The worst plane in this case, actually is the AV-8B...

[shaHeen-1]

I want a mig 21 variant with cannon in the nosecone XD

[J-20]

I want a mig 21 variant with cannon in the nosecone XD

 

But where are you going to fit your radar then? lol

I prefer those shoulder cannons like the Su-27 and F-15.

[Top Jockey]

I don't see a point in canting the gun up anyway. There's plenty of degrees of how much you can see below the bore in any jet. The only thing it does is you fly like 5° below your pipper and have to watch very carefully not to crash into the ground while being fixated on the target you wanna strafe. In a dogfight I never ever had to take so much lead that it was of any use. The worst plane in this case, actually is the AV-8B...

 

Well, not quite.

 

For instance, I've been flying the Mirage the first time a couple days ago, and in a dogfight the amount of lead one has to pull is noticeably more than in the Hornet; when trying to get a guns solution while in a lead pursuit of the target.

(Against the same enemy aircraft in roughly the same engagement conditions.)

 

This higher amount of lead one has to pull, frequently causes that the gun piper / reticle disappears at the bottom of the HUD, making it very likely to miss the target.

Whereas in the Hornet it doesn't happen so easily.

 

I know, you can say: "its the different bullet velocity and trajectory from Mirage and Hornet different guns", yes it also does play a part in this, but even so a slightly upward canted angle in the Mirage's guns would help in my opinion.

Edited December 8, 2019 by Top Jockey