One of those random facts from the 'net:

The Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II's GAU-8/A machine cannon, when fired, produces
more recoil thrust (45 kN) than a single of the plane's two turbofan engines (40
kN each)...

WTF!

Fire power, literally. That's what I'd call brute force. (Then again, that's
what that whole ugly thing was designed for.)

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 20:52:13 -0400, clipka wrote:

> One of those random facts from the 'net:
> 
> The Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II's GAU-8/A machine cannon, when fired,
> produces more recoil thrust (45 kN) than a single of the plane's two
> turbofan engines (40 kN each)...
> 
> WTF!
> 
> Fire power, literally. That's what I'd call brute force. (Then again,
> that's what that whole ugly thing was designed for.)

Yep, that and flying with giant gaping holes in the wings. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> > Fire power, literally. That's what I'd call brute force. (Then again,
> > that's what that whole ugly thing was designed for.)
>
> Yep, that and flying with giant gaping holes in the wings. ;-)

Or to take any sort of some package in return.

One of the engines blown to shreds? One side of the tail gone? Hydraulics dead?
Half a wing missing? Landing gear stuck? Direct pounding to the cockpit area
with something like a 20mm cannon?

Ouch, rough ride home this time - but why bail out? The thing was designed to
take all that and still make it.

That plane is a real bitch: Made to abuse - and be abused, if the "customer"
insists.

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 10:21:39 -0400, clipka wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> > Fire power, literally. That's what I'd call brute force. (Then again,
>> > that's what that whole ugly thing was designed for.)
>>
>> Yep, that and flying with giant gaping holes in the wings. ;-)
> 
> Or to take any sort of some package in return.
> 
> One of the engines blown to shreds? One side of the tail gone?
> Hydraulics dead? Half a wing missing? Landing gear stuck? Direct
> pounding to the cockpit area with something like a 20mm cannon?
> 
> Ouch, rough ride home this time - but why bail out? The thing was
> designed to take all that and still make it.
> 
> That plane is a real bitch: Made to abuse - and be abused, if the
> "customer" insists.

Yep.  And ugly as h*ll, too.  But quite an amazing piece of 
engineering. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Yep.  And ugly as h*ll, too.  But quite an amazing piece of
> engineering. :-)

Absolutely, it does well deserve its nickname "Warthog". And yes, it's amazing
to read about all the designers thought of.

Only semi-retractable main landing gear? Duh! I thought that was obsolete since
WW2... but then again, if getting beaten up is part of the standard mission
profile, you gotta think of how to land if (or rather, when) the gear is jammed
in the "up" position...

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:29:41 -0400, clipka wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Yep.  And ugly as h*ll, too.  But quite an amazing piece of
>> engineering. :-)
> 
> Absolutely, it does well deserve its nickname "Warthog". And yes, it's
> amazing to read about all the designers thought of.

Yeah, it really is amazing.  (I think that word is overused, but in this 
case, well earned).

> Only semi-retractable main landing gear? Duh! I thought that was
> obsolete since WW2... but then again, if getting beaten up is part of
> the standard mission profile, you gotta think of how to land if (or
> rather, when) the gear is jammed in the "up" position...

Absolutely.  Now I need to find a model for my flight sim. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

clipka <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> The Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II's GAU-8/A machine cannon, when fired, produces
> more recoil thrust (45 kN) than a single of the plane's two turbofan engines (40
> kN each)...

  In order to not to get a misleading picture, a bit of context should be
given: While the recoil is indeed 45 kN, the maximum combined output of the
A-10 engines is 82.6 kN.

  There's a persistent urban legend that the recoil of the GAU cannon is
so strong that firing it for long periods of time would stop the plane.
While the recoil is indeed impressive, it's not, however, strong enough
to stop the plane (but it can slow it down significantly).

> Fire power, literally. That's what I'd call brute force.

  In certain communities the term is "more dakka".

> (Then again, that's what that whole ugly thing was designed for.)

  Ugly? Certainly not. It's beautiful. Impressive. Awesome. :)

  This photo shows the size of the thing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GAU-8_meets_VW_Type_1.jpg

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   In certain communities the term is "more dakka".

That's great. I'll have to remember that for my next RPG session.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   There's a persistent urban legend that the recoil of the GAU cannon is
> so strong that firing it for long periods of time would stop the plane.
> While the recoil is indeed impressive, it's not, however, strong enough
> to stop the plane (but it can slow it down significantly).

I'd never heard that one, but isn't that the gun that's fired out the 
side of the plane while it banks to compensate for the force?

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Chambers <Ben### [at] gmailcom_no_underscores> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   There's a persistent urban legend that the recoil of the GAU cannon is
> > so strong that firing it for long periods of time would stop the plane.
> > While the recoil is indeed impressive, it's not, however, strong enough
> > to stop the plane (but it can slow it down significantly).
>
> I'd never heard that one, but isn't that the gun that's fired out the
> side of the plane while it banks to compensate for the force?

The gun is off-centre, firing forwards, but I don't know about the banking. I
had heard that they tend to fire in short bursts to minimise adverse recoil
effects. I've also heard Warp's urban legend, although never heard it described
as anything but gospel!

You wouldn't need more than short bursts anyway, the rounds it fires are like
small artillery... :-\

I'd also heard that the plane handles very well for such a heavy aircraft.

Bill

Post a reply to this message