How high is safe??

#1
Debate in bar,

How high would you have to fly to ensure that you could not be hit by your own 105 light gun or 81mm round?

Answers on a post card...

My pure guess would be 12,000 for a 81 and approx 20,000 for a 105?

Bob
 
#6
ComeSunt said:
Debate in bar,

How high would you have to fly to ensure that you could not be hit by your own 105 light gun or 81mm round?

Answers on a post card...

My pure guess would be 12,000 for a 81 and approx 20,000 for a 105?

Bob
As I've mentioned else where, if the barrel was set vertical , roughly 29028 feet would be achieved. However they're are limiting factors such as wind speed, air temp and lots of other technical stuff, the main problem being the four foot trench that needs to be dug out so that the breech won't impact the ground during recoil. However the gun cannot be eleveated to 1600mills ( 90 degrees), The maximum quadrant elevation (angle between the barrel and the ground)that is achieveable , when firing in high angle, being 1244 mills (070 degrees). Therefore your guess of 20,000 does seem possible. The minimum Q.E, for shooting from cliffs, is -0100 mills ( -005 degrees).

I've been spammed to tidy up the pamphlet store on monday, will have a look at the firing tables and get back to you.

The Lord Flasheart said:
It would be safer to fly under them. (Unless its 3 Para mortars......)

Am reading a book right now called Chickenhawk ( memoirs of a vietnam huey pilot), he recounts flying under arty shells and his copter rocking as the projectile passed by, most probably due to the displaced air e.t.c. Its a really good read.
 
#7
BeastAppreciationSociety. said:
ComeSunt said:
Debate in bar,



The Lord Flasheart said:
It would be safer to fly under them. (Unless its 3 Para mortars......)

Am reading a book right now called Chickenhawk ( memoirs of a vietnam huey pilot), he recounts flying under arty shells and his copter rocking as the projectile passed by, most probably due to the displaced air e.t.c.
Yeah I remember reading Chickenhawk years ago, good book! Yeah anything flying, fast thru the air will create a wake, or vorticies, which is turbulent air which will make your flight a little bumpier. Next time you are near an airport, look at the aircraft coming in to land, and if they are landing thru cloud you will see the wake turbulence from the wings spin the cloud and create a vortex. Okay.... geeky theory of flight lesson over..... i will get my coat
 
#8
gearupflapup,

Next time you are near an airport, look at the aircraft coming in to land, and if they are landing thru cloud you will see the wake turbulence from the wings spin the cloud and create a vortex. Okay.... geeky theory of flight lesson over..... i will get my coat

Is that the lesson over, or is there just a little more to it?

:wink:



Yeah anything flying, fast thru the air will create a wake, or vorticies, which is turbulent air which will make your flight a little bumpier.
What about things flying slowly?
The maximum wake vortices are produced when the maximum amount if lift is being produced.
That would be during the take off and landing phases with all those flaps, slats, spoilers and airbrakes being deployed wouldn't it?


Wake vortex shed by DLR's research aircraft ATTAS at airport Braunschweig


If you are flying forward, your turbulent air will be behind you, so I reckon that unless you are performing levels turns and fly through your own wake, you wouldn't be making 'your flight a little bumpier'.



Back to the original question'

How high would you have to fly to ensure that you could not be hit by your own 105 light gun or 81mm round?
Do any aircraft actually carry this type of ammunition?
Bit like the Concorde shooting itself down argument methinks! :lol:
 
#9
SilsoeSid said:
Back to the original question'

How high would you have to fly to ensure that you could not be hit by your own 105 light gun or 81mm round?
Do any aircraft actually carry this type of ammunition?
Bit like the Concorde shooting itself down argument methinks! :lol:
I realise you are joking, but 105 are cleared on C130J/K and C17 I think. Pretty sure 81mm are cleared as well. I have this mad idea that one of the US C130 Spec ops aircraft has a 105mm gun mounted in it.....but i may be dreaming.
 
#10
AC130 Spectre.






Weapons;
AC130H: Two M61 20mm Vulcan cannons, one L60 40mm Bofors cannon, one M102 105mm Howitzer cannon.

AC130U: One GAU-12 25mm Gatling gun, one L60 40mm Bofors cannon, one M102 105mm Howitzer cannon.


A world of hurt to say the least.
 
#11
M'learned friend Flash is correct. For any really sad spotters out there (and other FACs, clearly), the major difference in terms of weaponry between Spectre and Spooky is that Spectre has two M61 20mm Vulcan cannons as opposed to a single 25mm GAU-12 Gatling gun in the Spooky.

Both have trainable side-firing 105mm howitzers and single 40mm Bofors cannons.

It's a great piece of kit - what a pity we can't amend our doctrine to buy a couple for the AAC! :)

Edited to add: It couldn't go to the Crabs as they'd never show up.
 
#12
According to Pam 21 the approximate maximum height for 81 using the Mk 4 charge system is 11,000 ft. No idea for the L118, better ask a gunner.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top