F-4E M61 Vulcan

[Chaffee]

For 1972, 6000 RPM coming from the M61 seems quite good versus the plethora of dual/revolver/gun pods/whatever the F-5 has. 

Like, sawing a wing off > "did I land some rounds maybe?"

Does anything else in DCS prior to the F-14 have a gun that's as effective as the M61 in A/A? How big a difference will this make in the Phantom II airframe? Do dual 30mm DEFAs compete? 

What are your thoughts?

[razo+r]

What do you mean when you say "effective"?

In terms of rate of fire, the M61 is pretty much the most efficient thing in DCS, or perhaps the gunpod of the Mi-8 with up to 12'000 RPM, though it might not be prior to the F-14, and it's 3 guns in one pod and not necessarily for A/A.

In terms of damage per round, pretty much any higher caliber bullet would do I guess, MK-108, NS-37, DEFA...

However, if you want a combination of both damage and volume of bullets, I'd say the M61 is the best of all in DCS.

[Chaffee]

14 minutes ago, razo+r said:

What do you mean when you say "effective"?

In terms of rate of fire, the M61 is pretty much the most efficient thing in DCS, or perhaps the gunpod of the Mi-8 with up to 12'000 RPM, though it might not be prior to the F-14, and it's 3 guns in one pod and not necessarily for A/A.

In terms of damage per round, pretty much any higher caliber bullet would do I guess, MK-108, NS-37, DEFA...

However, if you want a combination of both damage and volume of bullets, I'd say the M61 is the best of all in DCS.

"Effective" intentionally left blank

[Gunfreak]

32 minutes ago, Chaffee said:

For 1972, 6000 RPM coming from the M61 seems quite good versus the plethora of dual/revolver/gun pods/whatever the F-5 has. 

Like, sawing a wing off > "did I land some rounds maybe?"

Does anything else in DCS prior to the F-14 have a gun that's as effective as the M61 in A/A? How big a difference will this make in the Phantom II airframe? Do dual 30mm DEFAs compete? 

What are your thoughts?

F104 also had the Vulcan. Same with F105.

So F4E was far from the first with the Vulcan.

You'll definitely feel the effectiveness of the F4E gun vs F5 or the A4 mod(just two 20mm guns (a slightly upgraded version of ww2 Hispanos) trying to hit a fighter going 600+knots with just 2000 rounds a minute is very hard. (F5 at least has 3000RPMs) I'll be very hard pressed to hit smaller fighters like F5 or MiG21 with the A4 guns. Easier to hit giant tennis court sized planes like F14 or F15.(and you only have 100 rounds a gun)

[WinterH]

This isn't anything unusual or new as far as DCS is concerned to be fair. We've long had many aircraft with Vulcan, and as far as a typical fighter sized target (without a cheesy damage model) is concerned, great majority of avaliable guns perform within the same ballpark imo.

That said, yes, Vulcan is one of the best with great muzzle velocity, insane rate of fire, and ok hitting individual shells.

DEFA is ok too, pretty much all aircraft use it tend to have two of it, velocity is meh but serviceable, combined rate of fire is just over half of Vulcan but individual shells hit a good bit harder.

GSh-23L has roughly similar, maybe a bit better rate of fire compared to 2 DEFAs, shell hitting power vs aircraft should about midway between DEFA and Vulcan but velocity is horrible so trajectory isn't flat and range is shorter. So Vulcan is a good bit better but that's not news. 

MiG-19's 30mms though shoot very flat to a decent range and hit very hard, so it's a match I'd say, even if with very little ammo count.

For air to ground, fire rate and relatively flat trajectory are good, but shells aren't particularly good bs even light armor in DCS at least. But it's still better both A-4 and F-5's guns for this purpose of course. DEFA isn't particularly amazing in armor penetration as far as I know anyway. Maybe only MiG-19's guns are slightly better vs light armor but then it doesn't have much ammo.

I guess purely going with other 70s birds in DCS, yeah it'll be the best gun, but I wouldn't say that'll be an earth shattering revelation anyway also considering we're getting a mostly mid 70s Phantom, by then F-14 and 15 were in existence. Also the F-104 already had Vulcan before the Phantom and it's in dev by Aerges.

[=475FG= Dawger]

The DCS F-5 guns have so much dispersion as to make one wonder if they are bolted down or just rattling around in there. 
 

The M61 will be, in all possible ways, light years ahead. 

[Gunfreak]

2 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

The DCS F-5 guns have so much dispersion as to make one wonder if they are bolted down or just rattling around in there. 
 

The M61 will be, in all possible ways, light years ahead. 

The dispersion does help hitting fast moving aircraft. But hitting ground targets especially small stuff like trucks can be a pain. 

It's actually quite amazing how much easier it is to hit an aircraft with the 2 guns from the F5 vs the 2 guns from the A4.

1000RPM extra and that scattergun effect helps a lot. On the other hand those 2 colt guns in the A4 are excellent at taking out ground stuff. Even if you just got 10 seconds of ammo.

[=475FG= Dawger]

36 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

The dispersion does help hitting fast moving aircraft. But hitting ground targets especially small stuff like trucks can be a pain. 

It's actually quite amazing how much easier it is to hit an aircraft with the 2 guns from the F5 vs the 2 guns from the A4.

1000RPM extra and that scattergun effect helps a lot. On the other hand those 2 colt guns in the A4 are excellent at taking out ground stuff. Even if you just got 10 seconds of ammo.

For those of us with good gunnery skills, I’d prefer all the rounds be grouped on the paper. 

[Ironious]

4 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

F104 also had the Vulcan. Same with F105.

So F4E was far from the first with the Vulcan.

You'll definitely feel the effectiveness of the F4E gun vs F5 or the A4 mod(just two 20mm guns (a slightly upgraded version of ww2 Hispanos) trying to hit a fighter going 600+knots with just 2000 rounds a minute is very hard. (F5 at least has 3000RPMs) I'll be very hard pressed to hit smaller fighters like F5 or MiG21 with the A4 guns. Easier to hit giant tennis court sized planes like F14 or F15.(and you only have 100 rounds a gun)

C and D models carried M61 pods on their wings/centerline also.

[SgtPappy]

Then you had this absolute mf'er

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-story-of-chico-the-gunfighter-the-very-unique-gun-podded-stormy-fast-fac-f-4e-phantom-ii-used-during-the-vietnam-war/

 

 

 

[Trooper117]

Flippin eck!... 

[_BringTheReign_]

21 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

Then you had this absolute mf'er

Alone and unafraid 

[Bremspropeller]

I think we should establish a ground on which we're discussing this topic.

1) DCS vs real world. The DEFAs in DCS don't to diddley squat against AA targets. IRL, one or two hits were fatal against a MiG-21. Compare that to DCS, where the -21 will happily bullet-sponge.

2) What are we talking about with the M61?

ROF? You'll need a finite amount of time for the barrel to spin up and move at BRRRT rate. So while Mr. Electric Motor is getting up to speed, the DEFA has already sent shots downrange at close to it's nominal rate. IIRC, a normal revolver action gun (DEFA, M39, which are both descentants of the Mauser 213 design) will have a ROF-advantage over the Gatling design M61 for the first second of trigger down. After that, the M61 takes over.

Remember that pulling the trigger in the F-5 opens the vent doors first, so your mileage on that "more rounds delivered within the first second"-consideration may vary there. The four M39s on the F-100 should give you full stereo right away.

Dispersion? Well, it helps in hitting something, while it helps missing what you're actually aiming at, at the same time. This may or may not be beneficial.

3) Trigger time? The M61 will have a disadvantage. Maybe only the A-7E won't suffer here with 1000+ rounds to spend.

4) Damage per round. Similar, but highly depending on the modelling of the shells and dependant on the DM of the aircraft at the recieving end.

Edited February 11 by Bremspropeller

[Gunfreak]

Quote

Remember that pulling the trigger in the F-5 opens the vent doors first, so your mileage on that "more rounds delivered within the first second"-consideration may vary there. The four M39s on the F-100 should give you full stereo right away.

If you have second detent on your trigger. You open the vent with 1st and fire with second. It does help a lot. 

Also in a dogfight having the same trigger for missiles and gun is a big disadvantage. In the A4 you have to deactivate missiles or gun depending on what you're gonna use. Now you can bind those to the stick. But in the real one you need to flip switches on the cockpit panel. That dosnt sound very easy to do in a 5g turn while keeping an eye on the enemy.

Even in the F14 it is an disadvantage when you have to select between gun missiles. But at least you can't accidentally fire guns and missiles at the same time as in the A4.

[Trooper117]

2 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

if you have second detent on your trigger. You open the vent with 1st and fire with second. It does help a lot

Yep, that's my set up on an F-5 too...

[Elf1606688794]

5 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I think we should establish a ground on which we're discussing this topic.

1) DCS vs real world. The DEFAs in DCS don't to diddley squat against AA targets. IRL, one or two hits were fatal against a MiG-21. Compare that to DCS, where the -21 will happily bullet-sponge.

2) What are we talking about with the M61?

ROF? You'll need a finite amount of time for the barrel to spin up and move at BRRRT rate. So while Mr. Electric Motor is getting up to speed, the DEFA has already sent shots downrange at close to it's nominal rate. IIRC, a normal revolver action gun (DEFA, M39, which are both descentants of the Mauser 213 design) will have a ROF-advantage over the Gatling design M61 for the first second of trigger down. After that, the M61 takes over.

Remember that pulling the trigger in the F-5 opens the vent doors first, so your mileage on that "more rounds delivered within the first second"-consideration may vary there. The four M39s on the F-100 should give you full stereo right away.

Dispersion? Well, it helps in hitting something, while it helps missing what you're actually aiming at, at the same time. This may or may not be beneficial.

3) Trigger time? The M61 will have a disadvantage. Maybe only the A-7E won't suffer here with 1000+ rounds to spend.

4) Damage per round. Similar, but highly depending on the modelling of the shells and dependant on the DM of the aircraft at the recieving end.

 

Spin up time on the M61 is greatly exaggerated by people.

As you can see, the gun fires almost instanteously, quicker than the F-5 with it's blast doors. 

Pilots are also taught to fire 1 second bursts, which is about 100 rounds.

Dispersion. It's intentional with both the M39 revolver cannons and the M61. When boresighting the M61 you boresight 3 of the 6 barrels and they never boresight to the same spot on the target. The gun is designed to fire with a shotgun effect, in this case, an 8 foot spread  at 1000 yards.

I believe the SUU-23 gun pod is the only one that was driven by an electric motor, the SUU-16 was driven by a ram air turbine that required the aircraft to be moving at 300mph minimum but 400+ was optimal. M61's mounted internally on aircraft are generally driven by the aircrafts hydraulic system.

ROF advantage goes to the M61 almost instantly.

*Edit* Edited for accuracy.

Edited February 11 by Elf1606688794

[Czar66]

@Elf1606688794 Thanks for the two videos above but the last one is ....War Thunder openly arcade videogame. Idk how a footage to that videogame is relevant to anything external of it, unless it was mistakenly referenced.

[Elf1606688794]

1 hour ago, Czar66 said:

@Elf1606688794 Thanks for the two videos above but the last one is ....War Thunder openly arcade videogame. Idk how a footage to that videogame is relevant to anything external of it, unless it was mistakenly referenced.

I've never played War Thunder so I didn't know it was from that game. I'll edit my post and thanks for the correction.

[Bozon]

On 2/11/2024 at 6:37 PM, Elf1606688794 said:

The gun is designed to fire with a shotgun effect, in this case, an 8 foot spread  at 1000 yards.

That is actually quite a tiny dispersion - less than 1/6 of a degree. The platform vibrations in-flight are probably on that scale (a guess).

[Dragon1-1]

By rifle or tank cannon standards it's actually horribly inaccurate (1/6 of a degree is 10 MOA), but for an aircraft cannon, it's just fine. Remember, it doesn't take many 20mm rounds to damage something in a modern aircraft. The big concern is scoring a hit at all.

[Elf1606688794]

8 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

By rifle or tank cannon standards it's actually horribly inaccurate (1/6 of a degree is 10 MOA), but for an aircraft cannon, it's just fine. Remember, it doesn't take many 20mm rounds to damage something in a modern aircraft. The big concern is scoring a hit at all.

With the shotgun like pattern and high rate of fire the odds of scoring a hit increase in the same manner that a shotgun increases your odds. In an actual shotgun, the shot not only spreads out (width) but it also creates what is known as a shot string where the individual pellets arrive on target at slightly different times. The shot string effect is more pronounced with lead shot than it is with steel or other non-toxic shot alternatives.

[Dragon1-1]

Well, Vulcan has the "shot string" effect built in, simply by shooting on bullet after another.  The hard part, of course, is placing your nose so that the cloud of shells coincides with the bandit's flight path. 

[Elf1606688794]

1 minute ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Well, Vulcan has the "shot string" effect built in, simply by shooting one bullet after another.  The hard part, of course, is placing your nose so that the cloud of shells coincides with the bandit's flight path. 

Exactly. 

[Gunfreak]

3 hours ago, Elf1606688794 said:

With the shotgun like pattern and high rate of fire the odds of scoring a hit increase in the same manner that a shotgun increases your odds. In an actual shotgun, the shot not only spreads out (width) but it also creates what is known as a shot string where the individual pellets arrive on target at slightly different times. The shot string effect is more pronounced with lead shot than it is with steel or other non-toxic shot alternatives.

I've found dogfighting with guns be it ww2 or jets, follows the old cowboy action shooting adage "nothing is ever too big or close to miss" 

[Dragon1-1]

Indeed, and particularly in WWII, you can sometimes get funny results if you're shooting from inside the convergence range, causing the target's wings to be peppered with bullets, while fuselage remains intact (or, from tail aspect, the whole burst goes over or under the wings). In such situations it can be beneficial to aim a little off so that you rake the fuselage with at least one set of guns (pity the Spitfire driver who doesn't have the ammo or rate of fire to spray around like that and has to open the range instead). In jets, the guns are typically somewhere close to the centerline, so that problem goes away, at least. It's things like that which make guns only dogfighting fun.