Chain gun: Effective engagement ranges?

[Volk.]

Heh. Only just found this post coz I was trying to do some research on the Ka-50s gun. @fargo007 I don't think the 2A42 of the Shark is quite comparable to the M230. Double the mass of the round & projectile, launched at higher velocity. The gun & mounting are far heavier, fired from the centre of gravity.

If I understand correctly the M230 mainly fires M789s as universal AP + HE/I type shells, which are indeed potent (think 5-10 feet kill/lethal radius for standing targets depending on source). The 2A42 shells are dedicated AP or HE/I/Frag. So it carries more stuff dedicated to the task. Of course there's tonnes of stuff in ballistics I don't get in terms of the construction, design & materials that will affect the capability.

But outside of how DCS models infantry suppression/area damage, they're quite different cannons, both in the power, burst length and of course the ability to slew around off-axis and have a second guy do it. Ps. not saying the M230 sucks, just it should work differently and be employed differently.

Just wish there were more detailed sources on this stuff. Like the M230 3millirad thing is clearly not plausible if you go look at footage and compare it against more stable platforms like the Gau-8 (nevermind angle of employment), but seems all the gun stats have an amount of marketing in them.

[fargo007]

8 hours ago, Volk. said:

Heh. Only just found this post coz I was trying to do some research on the Ka-50s gun. @fargo007 I don't think the 2A42 of the Shark is quite comparable to the M230. Double the mass of the round & projectile, launched at higher velocity. The gun & mounting are far heavier, fired from the centre of gravity.

If I understand correctly the M230 mainly fires M789s as universal AP + HE/I type shells, which are indeed potent (think 5-10 feet kill/lethal radius for standing targets depending on source). The 2A42 shells are dedicated AP or HE/I/Frag. So it carries more stuff dedicated to the task. Of course there's tonnes of stuff in ballistics I don't get in terms of the construction, design & materials that will affect the capability.

But outside of how DCS models infantry suppression/area damage, they're quite different cannons, both in the power, burst length and of course the ability to slew around off-axis and have a second guy do it. Ps. not saying the M230 sucks, just it should work differently and be employed differently.

Just wish there were more detailed sources on this stuff. Like the M230 3millirad thing is clearly not plausible if you go look at footage and compare it against more stable platforms like the Gau-8 (nevermind angle of employment), but seems all the gun stats have an amount of marketing in them.

 

No disagreement - I'm only stating what I was told by IRL Apache pilots who also fly DCS. 

[Avimimus]

2a42 is definitely closer to the GSh-30-2 (and superior in some ways) with similar ammunition - a bit weaker than the GAU-8 but a lot more powerful than the M230. It should also have much lower dispersion.

[jubuttib]

On 8/23/2021 at 5:37 PM, S. Low said:

The 30mm (or whatever it is) on the blackshark

It's the 30x165mm on that as well, yes. So the same caliber cartridge as the Hind, Su-25T, Havoc, etc. employ (specific round types might vary), ballistically comparable to the 30x173mm used by the GAU-8/A-10.

On 8/23/2021 at 7:09 PM, fargo007 said:

The Ka-50's cannon is nothing to sneeze at in terms of capability.

 

People who know have remarked that the modeling of the KA-50's gun is very similar to the Apache in many respects.

 

If we get that, I think it shakes out as both realistic, and DCS-useful.

 

Yeah, the Ka-50's cannon is definitely very useful, able to shred the more lightly armored stuff with ease and even destroy MBTs if you can get close enough to land good shots on the rear deck (IIRC). But based on the accuracy specs quoted above and the significantly weaker cartridge it employs, I wouldn't expect the M230 to be quite as effective. From what data I could find on the 30x113mm and 30x165mm cartridges online, the range on the Apache should be way shorter, the armor penetration much weaker, and the accuracy significantly lower as well.

 

This is of course for armored targets, with how weirdly splash damage works at times in DCS I can't begin to guess how it'll be against infantry etc. Should chow down trucks all day long.

Edited August 31, 2021 by jubuttib

[jubuttib]

On 8/27/2021 at 1:23 AM, kgillers3 said:

I don't really comment much on this stuff because it's hard to determine what's confidential and what's not, but I will say it's interesting you guys are comparing different guns that achieve their armor penetration in vastly different ways compared to the apache. If the apache had a high velocity gun it would not be able to use the heat ammo as designed right now due to the liner as wikipedia puts it not being able to form into the proper penetrator.  Tank MPAT rounds achieve this differently but it's still slower velocity compared to the sabot rounds.  Accuracy, at the end of the day it's a area weapon system,  what are the effects you're trying to accomplish.  Are you trying for a point target and you're concerned about collateral damage? Then threat environment pending you'll probably push the target a little bit to lower that dispersion.  Are you shooting BMPs? then a 20/50 round burst will destroy a bmp at 3k. 

Very good point. Though you can't really fit much of a shaped charge style projectile into a 30mm gun. One of the reasons why rifle grenades still exist when there are so many great 40mm grenade launchers (both standalone and ones that attach to another gun) is that you just can't make a very effective shaped charge round with a space that small.

 

From what I could quickly gather online, looks like the standard M789 round is rated for about 25.4mm RHA penetration at 50° and 500 meters. The more modern 30x165mm penetrator rounds should be able to match and even beat that at twice the distance and 60° angles.

 

That said all this discussion has kind of made me even more interested in how to effectively employ the M230 in-game. I originally thought it was more of a surgical tool for close up light and unarmored targets, but now that I know it's more of an area effect weapon it piques my interest in a different way.

[jubuttib]

Hmm interesting. I need to read more about this subject, I've never before heard shaped charge projectiles working worse when at high velocities. At least some modern MBTs (Abrams, Leopard) tend to have really quite high muzzle velocities even for their HEAT rounds.

[S. Low]

The Apache’s gun has something like 90degree swivel left and right, the aiming of the gun can be slaved to your eye, and the sensor overlay is the whole screen not just a crosshair like the shark. 
 

It will kill all the same stuff the shark gun can but do it more effectively and do it at night lol. Whether or not it can pop an MBT at rear aspect close range is irrelevant to me. 
 

edit: oh and they both have about 4km range 

Edited August 31, 2021 by S. Low

[fargo007]

I'm open to be surprised, but I really doubt that the modeling of the M230's ballistics is going to be to such a precise extent that we see truly substantial difference in performance.

[jubuttib]

10 hours ago, kgillers3 said:

They do. But it’s still slower than the sabot. The liner still has to have time to form into the penetrator from the explosion. I mean I’m sure someone will say bs which is fine, I know what I know. Think about the process that happens. Shot - detonator hit - explosion- liner melts very specifically to form a molten penetrator. If the round and space collapse before all of the metal in the liner is melted and formed into the penetrator. Then it won’t be as effective.  It’s how who ever designed the thing so if it collapses faster than it’s described it won’t be as effective and if it lands slower it doesn’t affect its total pen. Also, not higher velocities, but higher velocities relatively compared to solid shot counter parts.  It’s however a manufacturer designed the shell and what implementation to build time so that all of the liner material can be used. The penetration value from heat comes from that second explosion and the forming and utilization of the entire liner. Solid shots utilize the energy only from the initial shot.  

 

Aye, I just haven't ever heard that. The differences aren't always that big (US M830A1 and Korean K280 HEAT-MP-Ts are around 1400 m/s vs. some variants of the M829 family penetrators being around 1600 m/s), and my understanding was that the time it takes for a explosively formed penetrator to form is in the range of hundreds of microseconds, which doesn't sound insurmountable to account for.

 

The muzzle velocities are certainly different, I just always thought that it was mostly because the penetrators tend to be like half the weight of the HEAT rounds, hence easier to accelerate.

 

Clearly more studying is necessary, thanks for your insights!

6 hours ago, S. Low said:

edit: oh and they both have about 4km range 

 

The numbers I've seen quoted have been 4km maximum range (FWIW in-game I never really try to hit anything beyond 3 km in the Ka-50), with about 1.5km effective range for the M230 a bit more for the 2A42. The testing results from the first page though would definitely suggest the M230 is less accurate, if at 2000 meters 9 rounds out of 50 will hit within a 50x50m box. Lower accuracy at range isn't surprising, considering the less substantial mounting and significantly slower projectile velocity on the M230.

 

To my (very limited) understanding the intended purposes of the guns are different as well, with the 2A42 being specifically designed as an anti-armor (if maybe not strictly anti-tank) weapon, and the M230 as a more of an area of effect weapon, so the quoted "effective ranges" could also be for different purposes. As in a heavy machine gun could well claim to have an effective range of 1 km, as could a sniper rifle, but one is "effective for suppression" and the other is "effective for hitting a target". I'm not saying this is necessarily the case for the M230 and the 2A42, just a possibility.

 

Regardless, I'm very much looking forward to the seeing how the gun works in-game.

 

Oh, and you can continuously aim and fire the 2A42 in the Ka-50 by looking too, just not very accurately, hehe.

Edited August 31, 2021 by jubuttib

[NeedzWD40]

Think of the M230 as a grenade launcher rather than a cannon and you're about there. Most of the advantages come from the computer calculations and slew rate, so you'll be able to get on target faster. You may not hit exactly where you want every time, but you're going to have rounds downrange pretty quickly. Don't expect to take on heavy armor with it, but it should be more than enough for APCs and lesser vehicles. The main advantage will be that velocity will have little impact of the armor penetration potential, though the disadvantage is less overall penetration capability.

 

Historically, M134 guns and M129 grenade launchers were the helicopter weapons of choice, before the M197 became standard (thanks to the USMC AH-1Js). From that point, several experiments were conducted such as upgunning the M197 into a 30mm model, the XM188 30mm cannon (at first it was planned to shoot even shorter rounds than the M230), before finally the M230 was standardized with NATO 30mm ammunition. The M2000's DEFA cannons utilize the same chambering and have about the same muzzle velocity, so those are probably a good template for expectations of performance.

 

The 2A42 as a cannon is a superior weapon than the M230 in most respects, though the price paid is a much heavier weight in both weapon and ammunition. It's not really fair to compare the Ka-50's mounting to the AH-64's given the differences in slew rate, sensors, etc. Further, you should have the choice between 300 or 1200 rounds of ammunition, which is quite inviting compared to the 460 mixed rounds on the Ka-50.

Edited August 31, 2021 by NeedzWD40

[S. Low]

I’ve killed light armor and trucks with the shark’s gun between 4000m and 4500m np. Any further and the rounds explode in air. I can’t recall exactly where they air burst… might be 4300. At 4000m+ If you’re hovering low the round dispersion is severe so you end up using a bunch of ammo. But if that BTR needs to die at this range then you can do it with the gun

 

edit: and the hmd continuous fire option for the shark’s gun is present but just not on par with what the Apache does. Crosshair vs flir?

Edited September 1, 2021 by S. Low

[WRAITH]

 

https://youtu.be/nPcZzEqWR5Q

 

The M230 Chain Gun is a 30 mm (30×113 mm), single-barrel chain-driven auto cannon,1,500 m (1,640 yd) Maximum firing range. 4,000 m (4,370 yd) The M230 Chain Gun is a 30 mm (30×113 mm), single-barrel chain-driven auto cannon, using external electrical power (as opposed to recoil or expanding gas generated by the firing cartridge) to cycle the weapon between shots.

 

 

 

[S. Low]

11 hours ago, kgillers3 said:

Are you asking hmd vs flir for the 64 at the end? 

 

Being sort of rhetorical, a crosshair over your eye vs. a full screen FLIR infront of your eye. Not to mention the Shark's gun has very limited traversal, while the apache has something like 180 degrees. They just don't seem comparable to me. 

[Rogue Trooper]

The Apache cannon will certainly not have the range of the Ka-50 or Hind Kannons.... that is for sure.

1.5Km is where it will be most accurate at longer ranges... and even then.... bullet fall will be well dispersed.

The Apache does not have the projectile weight or powder quantity (cartridge size or brass capacity) that the bigger Russian 30 mike mike Kannons have.

The Russian bullets leave the barrel faster and heavier..... they are harder to stop and therefore do much more damage when they do eventually stop against an obstacle like an armoured personnel carrier.

The guys who designed the Hind MI-24P and KA-50, knew what the were doing!

Kannons fixed rigidly to the airframe, on the axis of travel = massive accurate firepower.

 

For the Apache, the cannon (itself) and the 30mm round it would fire were designed specifically for the Apache, it was designed to be a close range weapon that could shoot up to 90 degrees left or right of the airframes nose or direction of travel with minimal effect on the airframes attitude.

Look at the Apache's short cannon barrel, it was designed to fit the low powder load of the round.

The guys who designed the Apache and the Apache's cannon knew what they were doing.

 

I cannot wait to get my hands on the Apaches cannon!

Enough firepower combined with the cannons fast 180 degrees of dispersion..... It is the sort of compromise I can quite happily live with.

 

I would love to see a video of the MI-28 shooting 90 degrees left or right with that big old 30mm Kannon!

Edited September 11, 2021 by Rogue Trooper

[IcedVenom]

On 8/31/2021 at 8:33 AM, S. Low said:

It will kill all the same stuff the shark gun can but do it more effectively and do it at night lol. Whether or not it can pop an MBT at rear aspect close range is irrelevant to me. 
 

edit: oh and they both have about 4km range 

Nice cope.

[fargo007]

The apache's 30mm are also not actuated with a traditional percussion style primer. They are primed/fired electrically.  

 

Truly meaningless to us in DCS but an interesting data point nonetheless that fellow gun knurds will appreciate.  

 

 

[jubuttib]

On 9/11/2021 at 8:12 PM, fargo007 said:

The apache's 30mm are also not actuated with a traditional percussion style primer. They are primed/fired electrically.  

 

Truly meaningless to us in DCS but an interesting data point nonetheless that fellow gun knurds will appreciate.  

 

 

Irrelevant to the discussion (sorry), but I'd wish electric primers would make their way into normal guns too. They won't suit the "apocalypse is coming, I need to be able to scrounge up supplies and load my own ammo" thing that for some reason people stick to, but it WOULD work great for 99% of shooting range and hunting purposes, and could make for absolutely stellar and well adjustable triggers...

[S. Low]

On 9/10/2021 at 10:05 PM, IcedVenom said:

Nice cope.

You a little upset that the Apache’s systems are better than the shark’s?

[IcedVenom]

9 hours ago, S. Low said:

You a little upset that the Apache’s systems are better than the shark’s?

No, but you are because your precious US heli's 30mm isn't comparable.

[fargo007]

The Apache's 30mm may not be as capable from a pure ballistic standpoint, but I have no problem at all finding several dozen videos showing just how great it works on actual places, vehicles, and real people. Truly hours of footage.

 

I can't find even one example of Russian 30mm being used on actual targets but I would love to see it.

 

These were obviously designed with different goals and use cases, so it's not a contest to begin with.

 

The best part:  We're getting them all!  (MUAAAHAHAHAHA)

[WinterH]

Some opinions (which is bad idea but, oh well...):

 

- Operationally, M230 uses only one type of ammo: HEDP, 30mm dual purpose round with both HEAT and fragmentation characteristics. It will most likely not be as effective as 30mm pure HE in dealing with soft targets, it will penetrate as much armor under ideal conditions either.

- It will penetrate 25mms of armor at any distance, unlike a kinetic round. 25mms is quite enough to deal with great majority of IFV type targets it will engage. 

- It can very easily point/target/rangefind/gunlay etc with multiple methods, including just looking at the target. It also has enough ammo to saturate the area even if it isn't mechanically as accurate as 2A42 or GSh-30-2. It can do that a lot easier than Ka-50, and it's not even a comparison between AH-64D and Mi-24P for gunlaying.

- That said, from most of the IRL footage I've seen, as well as implementation in other sims/games (I know, not necessarily the best source), it does seem to have considerable dispersion, and is even called "area weapon system" apparently.

 

The round almost certainly has less ballistic range than either Ka-50 or Mi-24P's guns, but as long as it can hit something, it'll still go through 25mms of armor (depending on the impact angle of course). Probably it will not really be accurate at extreme range at all, but even with robbie tanks it has enough ammo to "throw enough of it until it sticks" as far as I know.

 

Also worth noting that in Mi-24 we don't even have HE rounds at all for now, for some reason, making the gun borderline useless against blobs of infantry sadly. M230 won't have that problem because literally the only round it uses is a "do it all" round.

[Hummingbird]

There is some footage of Mi-28's engaging ISIS fighters with the gun, and if that's any indication, then atleast the Mi28's system is nowhere near as accurate as that on the AH64. 

 

 

[jubuttib]

1 hour ago, Hummingbird said:

There is some footage of Mi-28's engaging ISIS fighters with the gun, and if that's any indication, then atleast the Mi28's system is nowhere near as accurate as that on the AH64. 

 

 

I have been interested in and pretty dubious about the accuracy of the Mi-28 implementation to be honest. The gun at high rate of fire has the equivalent of somewhere around 1 000 lbs of thrust, and it's mounted fully below the helicopter on a turret (which does look pretty hefty at least). I'd imagine it wouldn't be that horrible shooting straight ahead, but slew it sideways at all and you'd probably be dealing with a lot of movement in the heli.

 

EDIT: Are you talking about the one titled "Mi-28 helicopter attacks ISIS / Daesh terrorists"? At some points in the video the dispersion looks pretty tight actually (the lines they're "drawing" are neat, rounds hitting at steady intervals and not veering off of the line), but they're slewing the damn thing all over the shop. =/

Edited September 14, 2021 by jubuttib

[WinterH]

Mi-28's mounting is not nearly as rigid as KA-50, and 2A42 should have plenty more recoil than M230, so I wouldn't be surprised with Mi-28 not being as accurate as AH-64 if that's indeed the case.

 

[Hummingbird]

My immediate reaction watching the video was that the Mi28's gun system lacks a "stabilization/lock on terrain" feature. 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by Hummingbird