AC-130J Ghostriders Could Lose Their Big 105mm Guns

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ac-130j-ghostriders-could-lose-their-big-105mm-guns

by PaulHoule • 3 years ago

16 12 3 years ago

exabrial4• 3 years ago

Pretty short sighted to turn a CAS platform into a standoff platform. These need to be distinct platforms for cost efficiency. Standoff weapons are expensive. CAS should be plentiful, cheap, and easy to manufacture.

btw, not a military expert, just a random guy on the internet who watched two wars where CAS was a problem once the skies were settled.

fnordpiglet2• 3 years ago

They do mention there are only 30 of them. Doesn’t sound plentiful?

exabrial4• 3 years ago

30 may not seem much until you compare it to the alternatives. You have two constraints on an aircraft: weight and volume.

A 105mm shell is around $8k/piece, and weighs 15kg, travels at 494m/s. Current configuration can fit 30 of these in an aircraft on a rack, inside the aircraft.

A air-to-ground missile with similar range and speed is the AGM-114. They cost $115k/piece, weigh 45kg, and travel at 445m/s. These must be externally mounted at this time and you could probably carry 8-16 on pylons.

Some variants of the AC-130 carry the AGM-176 which is similar range. These similar price around $115k, weigh 20kg, but I couldn't find their max speed. Given is size and weight, you're also looking at 8-16 between internal and external.

A "slow" "cheap" standoff weapon like the GBU-39/B SDB weight 129kg, costs $40k, travels at a whopping 22m/s. Right now these are externally mounted but the idea is these could be launched off the ramp of an AC-130 variant. You would realistically be able to carry 8 on pylons, not many in cargo space.

AFAIK, USA doesn't really have a fast and cheap standoff a2g weapon.

So yes, 30 is quite a lot of bangs, especially for the bucks. I don't think what is driving this conversation IS bangs however.

I actually think what is driving the conversation about the 105mm is CEP. I couldn't find exact numbers for 105mm, but I'd guess probably it's in the area of 10m-30m which is good enough to hit a building or an enemy position by a road, but really isn't good to support or disrupt an ambush. Both the AGM-114 and AGM-176 have CEPs under 2m (variant depending, but sticking to AC-130 weapons) and the GBU-39/b has a CEP of 1m. The CEP for a 105mm widens at distance, whereas the CEP for rocket powered weapons is fixed no matter the range to target.

meepmorp2• 3 years ago

That would be a shame because having a plane with a fucking howitzer shooting out the side is awesome. Yes, I know they're more vulnerable to MANPADS because they need to loiter and standoff weapons are safer, but it's field artillery shooting at the ground from the side of a plane and that , as previously stated, is awesome.

tekla• 3 years ago

How dare they, please dont take these away from us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQazjMVBMI

KingMob• 3 years ago

Who gives a shit? Why is this even on HN?

chriselles• 3 years ago

It might make sense to maintain a few with the 105mm gun for low intensity conflict against non state actors.

But we seem to be moving at velocity towards a peer or near peer adversary environment.

An AC130H Spectre(Spirit03) was shot down by an Iraqi MANPAD crew when it remained on station after first light supporting USMC units that stopped an Iraqi probing attack in 1991.

When facing an adversary with modern MANPADs(or better) and night vision/thermal targeting optics, Spectre is going to be at risk.

Leave the gunship over the horizon and/or outside of the air defence bubble and launch a swarm of cheap drones.

Drones for command, control, communication.

Drones for surveillance and targeting.

Drones for electronic and kinetic attack.

Launched, and potentially recovered, from the C130 ramp, jump door, and/or retrofittable ejection system like a sonobuoy dispenser in a P3/P8.

Potentially any C130 could be configured with palletised launch/recovery systems as well as palletised drone operator consoles.

C130 configured as an arsenal plane would probably be more capable and survivable than the current Spectre, assuming equivalent flight crew and defensive systems.

meepmorp2• 3 years ago

Tangentially related, there's also the Rapid Dragon system for launching palletized cruise JASSM cruise missiles from cargo planes. They roll the disposable launcher packs off the back, which deploy a chute and drop missiles. You can fit 12 missiles in a C-130, 45 in a C-17.

AC-130J Ghostriders Could Lose Their Big 105mm Guns

Related Stories