Talk:ADEN cannon

(First comment)
My understanding was that the Aden 25mm was cancelled after development had been completed and the bugs ironed out the system and was very much a political decision along with deleting(or non use) of the Eurofighter cannon. It was also designed to be carried by the Hawk 200 light attack aircraft and also as a possible retrofit to various ADEN 30/DEFA gunned aircraft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.8.248.2 (talk • contribs) 13.13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on ADEN cannon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140102201822/http://www.aei-systems.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Aden30mm-Mk456.pdf to http://www.aei-systems.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Aden30mm-Mk456.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:56, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

?Hear Rumours that the Swedes had salvaged some of theirs for ground use
Can anyone confirm? Heard somewhere that the Swedes had used surplus ADEN cannon/equivalents as patrol boat guns but without details or any cite it's a bit of a dead end. Wouldn't be the first time - certainly common during WW2, especially amongst Americans. 82.1.7.156 (talk) 15:47, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Sweden did reuse 20 mm aircraft guns of several models for ground use but no use of the ADEN is known. Its possible it was tried but it is not something which has seen active use.--Blockhaj (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits
I made a precis of the outstanding development issues with the MK213, which was reverted without explanation. So what’s the problem, here? The MK 213 information (which I moved to the MK 213 page) discussed the low muzzle velocity (540 m/s, which was improved to 790 m/s ) and the text here the info on the low rate of fire (750 rps, improved to 1,300 rps) It seems reasonable enough (seeing as ADE and GIAT both spent the next eight years perfecting the thing) to say what some of the issues were. Why the revert.? Xyl 54 (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The MK 213 was never cancelled, it simply wasnt finished in time of the end of the war. It neither had problems with fire rate nor velocity. The ADEN Mk1 fires essentially the same round as the MK 213, the 30x86A (LV) round, making 604 m/s. It was used from 1945 to 1952 when the equally shitty 30x86B (LV) round was introduced with the ADEN Mk2, only improving reliability. C to G cartridges were prototypes for the high-velocity project, resulting in the 30x111J (HV) round in 1954, which was introduced with the ADEN Mk.3 in 1955. 750 rpm refers to the Hispano 404/804, not the MK 213, which fired at 1200 rpm.--Blockhaj (talk) 19:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying: I never said anything about the MK 213 being cancelled; Where did that come from? But yes, you’re right, the rate of fire comparison was with the Hispano-Suiza, not the MK 213; my mistake. OTOH the muzzle velocity stuff is mentioned here, and in the MK 213 article. What I know about this stuff is based on what I’ve read here; if you know more about the subject (different marks, different cartridge sizes, etc) then put it in the article; we’d all be better off for it. Regards, Xyl 54 (talk) 21:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)