Russia's MiG-27 Fired a Cannon So Powerful it Damaged the Aircraft

Summary and Key Points: The Mikoyan MiG-27, developed from the MiG-23 fighter, was designed for low-level ground-attack missions with a powerful Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-30 23mm six-barrel gun.

-While this weapon made the MiG-27 formidable, it also caused significant problems, such as extreme recoil and vibrations that damaged the aircraft's structure and systems.

-Though intended for use in Europe, the MiG-27 was first deployed in the Soviet-Afghan War, where its sophistication proved unnecessary and problematic. The aircraft's design flaws, particularly those related to its main gun, highlighted the challenges of Soviet engineering in harsh combat conditions.

The MiG-27 Had a Big Gun That Causes Some Big Problems

Optimized for low-level strike operations that were anticipated in a war in Western Europe, the Mikoyan MiG-27 (NATO reporting named Flogger-D) was a variable-sweep ground-attack aircraft that proved unnecessarily sophisticated for the war in Afghanistan, where it was first employed in combat. Instead, robust, reliable, and simpler aircraft maintained an edge in that conflict.

Development of the MiG-27 began in the 1960s, based on the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 fighter (NATO reporting name Flogger), but modified for use as a ground-attack fighter.

Modified MiG-23

As the first swing-wing fighter to enter service with the Soviet Union, the MiG-23 wasn't without more than its share of notable issues. It was reported to be difficult to fly and expensive to maintain, while its engines had a short service life. Moreover, it was reported to have an operational range of less than 1,600 miles, while its top speed was just 1,553 mph.

Development on the MiG-27 was protracted, and it ran years behind the MiG-23, even as the aircraft shared major parts of the airframe while numerous subsystems were common to both. However, the MiG-27 was noted for having a simpler propulsion system, and a different nose.

Different Armament For a Different Role

As noted, whereas the MiG-23 was a true fighter, the MiG-27 was developed to serve as a ground attack aircraft. It first entered service in 1970.

For that role, it was armed with a single Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-30 23mm six-barrel gun on its centerline, and for that reason, the MiG-27 and its weapon have earned comparisons to the United States Air Force's Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II.

Though designed for use in Europe against NATO armor, the MiG-27 was first employed in combat in the Soviet-Afghan War where it proved far from effective. Much of the issue could be the design of the aircraft and notably that main gun.

According to "alternative aviation" website Hushkit.net, the GSh-6-30, which earned the nickname "Gasha," was far lighter than the A-10's GAU-8, with a greater rate of fire and a heavier projectile ­ it was very accurate and extremely loud. But it wasn't without problems.

It had a rate of fire of around 5,000 rounds per minute, and was able to expend the aircraft's 300 rounds in just a few seconds – and aviators were trained to fire short bursts of just a second or two to ensure the gun wouldn't overheat.

Firing the gun wasn't for the faint of heart, said Indian pilot Anshuman Mainkar in an interview with Hushkit.net.

"The aircraft seemingly came to a stand-still, engrossed with its target – tracers creating an illusion of morse communication. Smoke and the smell of cordite entered the cockpit, and in a flash it was all over…the airframe shuddered during the trigger pull, and surge was a possibility, hence the exit had to be smooth and deliberate."

Mainkar further explained that when fired, the nearly 12-foot-long gun produced around six tons of recoil that practically shook the aircraft apart. The vibrations were powerful enough that some of the MiG-27s in the Indian Air Force service were found to have cracked fuel tanks, broken avionics systems, and other structural problems.

In other words, the MiG-27 was very much a tried and true Soviet design. It may have gotten the job done when firing at a target on the ground, but it was almost as damaging to the aircraft doing the firing.

Author Experience and Expertise: Peter Suciu

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

Image Credit: Creative Commons.