What's the next smallest cannon size below the 120mm of

Depends on the angle. An A10 can BRRRRT through cold war tanks at even shallow angles but new/current tanks are designed with an A10 in mind.

>>34566921
>An A10 can BRRRRT through cold war tanks at even shallow angles

Even back in the day, this wasn't true.

It can penetrate a T-55 from the back and top, but not anything after the T-62

>>34566712
The step down from 120mm is 105mm.

>>34566921
What >>34567006 said. The A-10 was basically already uncomfortably close to being obsolete if it wasn't already on the moment it rolled out of the production lines. Same as with the M14 for an example.

Addressing OP though, what direction, angle, etc? Front glacis, 105mm like >>34567011 said, but you'd have to use the latest rounds. Even then, it's still a maybe.

File: 20105797.jpg (116KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1024x768px

>>34567011
>The step down from 120mm is 115mm.

>>34567006
i find it hard to believe that a t-72 can TANK through an a-10 pass, post info?

>>34566712
Yes and no.

From (specifically) a SPAAG? Probably not due to the ammunition loaded. Not to say that the tank in question would remain unscathed as it would have taken a virtual sandblasting from the rounds that were designed to explode and fragment to take out extremely delicate aircraft components. (As compared to majority of a MBT)

With a SPAAG, you might be extremely lucky and get a mobility kill by shooting it up from behind, but I would prefer not to bet my life on it.

Now a 35mm-40mm Autocannon using specific APFSDS ammo? From the front, not at all. You might damage it, but it's going to kill you long before you manage to do critical damage to it. At -absolute best- you could destroy the gunners/commanders sights and/or get a very lucky round into the turret ring and jam the turret. (from the front arc)

From the side it's a different story, you have a much better chance with successive rapid shots with APFSDS rounds. It is certainly -not- guaranteed kill territory, but you'll stand a much better chance of damaging and causing a mobility/mission kill. If you can pelt the MBT from the rear you stand a very good chance of killing it (at least mobility kill), but you have to get there first.

How the hell are you going to get around behind the tank to kill it if it is properly supported?

tl;dr: SPAAG, probably not, just piss it off. 35-40mm APFSDS ammo has a good chance of causing critical damage if you can somehow make the shot, and putting a barrage of shots into the same location. (Like getting behind it.)

>>34566712
The Bofors 40mm APFSDS-T will have no issues penetrating the side of a MBT, especially if its Russian.

>>34566712
Well, an 81mm Recoiless rifle with HEDP rounds can crack substantial armor, i presume it could be used for side or top attacks on say a T-80

>>34567118
>i find it hard to believe that a t-72 can TANK through an a-10 pass, post info?
Wow. Are you serious? Are you new? Not being condescending it's an actual question. The A-10 being a flying meme is pretty much the closest thing to common knowledge on this board. Five plus years of f-35 threads will do that to you.

>>34566712

Bofors 40mm, 40CT 40mm and the Supershot 40mm would all cause serious damage to a tank from the side or rear given their rate of fire, so yes.

>>34567185
wow, are you fucking kidding me? i've been here for 7 years and am well aware of flying memes. maybe next time you will respect my posts and i will return that respect in turn. good day sir.

>>34567440
Clearly not, cus that one went straight over your head

>>34566712

This all depends on distance and angle. To answer the question, yes, a SPAAG definitely could destroy a tank, if it were close enough.

>>34567577
I SAID GOOD DAY SIR

>>34566712
.45 ACP

>>34567598
NOT EVEN THAT CHAP BUT GOOD DAY TO YOU TOO MY GOOD MAN, PIP-PIP & CHEERIO!

>>34567118
retard.

File: A10 Thunderbolt II rearm.jpg (3MB, 2648x1624px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2648x1624px

The GAU8 is still quite capable of destroying any vehicle on the battlefield short of a MBT. Even the most modern MBTs might face being mission killed by an A-10. The problem with the A-10 is that its bait for radar guided guns and MANPADS.

>>34567826
Never understood why there isn't some sort of system set up to discord of used casings. I mean it could save a ton of time when rearming and money too.
Do they recycle the used casings? I highly doubt it. It sounds like it'd be a lot more efficient if they had the casings be ejected out of the plane, obviously from a point where they wouldn't hit it, maybe at the bottom?

This way any surviving towel head get thwacked on the head with casings flying at 300km

>>34567937
>discord
discard

>>34567937

>attempt to pull some crazy maneuver
>casing flies into engine and causes damage
>fugg :(((((

>>34567937
It is also to help maintain the COG when firing.

File: a10 coloring book.png (725KB, 1087x1210px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 1087x1210px

>>34567006
>>34567118


pic very relevent

>>34567577
Given that it's a flying meme, isnt it supposed to do that?
Checkmate nigger

>>34566712
It could damage the external equipment, but nothing of that size is going to endanger the crew.
missiles are a much bigger threat.

>>34568377
That was the joke, nigger.

4d checkmate.

>>34566712
A .22 would penetrate and then bounce around inside the tank, killing the entire crew.

>>34566712
Fire enough of anything and it'll eventually penetrate.

>>34567011
The step down from 120mm is 125mm

File: 1467098362831.jpg (49KB, 300x392px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 300x392px

>>34567006
>>34567079
>>34567185
>has no idea how ground attack aircraft work

The gun is meant to kill the crew and if lucky cook off the rounds carried inside via spalling as spall liners were not a thing until the 2000s. You also fail to realize that you don't have to outright destroy a tank for a gun pass to be successful. Getting an immobilization kill by taking out the tracks, or rendering it useless by taking out all the optics is just as good.

I also fail to see how the M14 was obsolete as soon as it rolled out of the productions lines when considering it is still used to this day.

Depends on the ammo used.
M242s can penetrate tanks under certain circumstances using APFSDS or APDST, and those are only 25mm bore.

>>34571127
The M14 is used in niche roles. It was obsolete for main infantry use by the point. It was too heavy and too uncontroable in full-auto. Plenty of things are obsolete basically as soon as they're introduced or very soon after. The Lebel for example while being revolutionary for its time due to the cartridge was obsolete almost immediately due to the tube magazine.

File: jhvjhgvjh.png (41KB, 884x222px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 884x222px

>>34569583

>>34567937
>cover friendlies with BRRRT CAS mission
>kill them all with your casings
bad idea