Comments on: More Guns Good

By: Joe LittleBear

Joe LittleBear — Sun, 11 May 2008 16:40:27 +0000

The “Belly gun” is a great idea…It can cover the front, sides and rear…but the topside is the “unprotected area” I suggest that the addition of a couple of upward-firing Sidewinders slung on the sides could take care of that nicely if an overhead radar were added for observation and fire control.…

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sun, 11 May 2008 04:36:35 +0000

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003962.html
Pretty well sums it up.:)

By: TB

TB — Sat, 10 May 2008 05:22:42 +0000

Jeff, pfcem,
When Christian was in Iraq a short while back, he posted some video of the V-22s in action. One of the videos showed a V-22 landing with the engines at a 45 degree angle. I don’t know how fast it was going, but it didn’t do the usual helicopterish slow hover and land. It swept in and stopped on a dime. If you blinked, you would have sworn it was at take off speed rather than landing.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sat, 10 May 2008 03:41:41 +0000

Lew Parker,
Sorry but there is NO WAY you are going to get a C-130 to operate from an amphibious assault ship flightdeck. That is one of the most important USMC requirements.
***
Reader Bob,
Have you spoken with any V-22 users? I thought not. :) They LOVE the V-22 & wish they had it DECADES ago!
The V-22 was NOT rushed into service, not even close.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sat, 10 May 2008 03:34:08 +0000

Jeff Dulin,
No, the V-22 is NOT an UNDERPOWERED sitting duck when it goes into any attempt to drop off or pick up troops. The fact is, despite what the V-22 naysayers would have you believe the V-22 can enter & leave an LZ faster than ANY helicopter. The engine issues with the V-22 ARE NOT do to it being underpowered but to the engine manufacturer not being able to adequitely/cost-effectively keep its end of the engine maintenance agreement. THAT is why the POSSIBILITY of a “new” engine is being considered!
What alternate universe are you from? Show me an A/C system by any service that DID use that ploy (initially underpowered and needs “up-graded” engines) to sell the initial system!

By: ZardTheBard

ZardTheBard — Fri, 09 May 2008 20:07:20 +0000

To the guy who thinks the Harrier should be reassigned as a V-22 armed escort, I don’t think that would work so well. Harrier is not fit to take out the sort of threats that would down this V-22 on approach. Only a helicopter would work to take out the guy on the roof with a RPG before he could hit the V-22. Harrier could drop bombs I guess but so can any other jet. I don’t see the harrier shooting bullets in hover mode, like true lies or something. Not practical. Best thing would be to sell harriers to our allies in the middle east, I think. Small, temporary military base defense aircraft, no airstrip required.
I’m thinking this V-22 is a pretty new aircraft, and we’ll see some significant developments in the next decade. I think the larger an aircraft like this becomes, the less likely it is to be struck down. If a small caliber round were to hit one of the engines it could cause some damage, the engine is not likely to explode but just light on fire and quit providing power. The other engine can take over, so it would take a hit to each engine to drop the aircraft. A hit to the propeller is more likely to cause a crash, I think. One RPG to a propeller would be a pretty serious emergency.
But this is a new generation of aircraft that is “fly-by-wire”, meaning a computer can be programmed to “fix” any situation in real-time. If one propeller loses a blade the plane could adjust, assuming the propeller maintains it’s structural integrity. I’m guessing the propellers are pretty durable. I heard they were made of fiberglass, but they probably have some metal in them.
Check out the phalanx cannon used as an anti-missile system onboard navy ships. It fires a vulcan cannon and shoots down incoming missiles, automatically targeted. This BAE guardian can go the same route. There are sniper sensors that could pick up incoming shots and this cannon could be programmed to automatically fire back within a half a second. It might be possible to shoot down shoulder-fired missiles with it, with an add-on millimeter-wave radar. Radar is getting smaller and smaller, the technology is available today to build a radar as small as a cell phone.
This ship could be LOADED with guns, it could be a very powerful threat in an urban combat sitution, with the strength of three apaches and a load of soldiers to drop. I think a good development would be ceramic armor for the engine nacelles, and a satellite link. If they put two 30mm cannons (same as apache) on each wing and some hellfire missiles, this thing would be scary as F***.

By: Reader Bob

Reader Bob — Fri, 09 May 2008 14:43:27 +0000

So many questions, so few answers about this entire weapon system. Most notable of the questions are coming from the experienced who, one must wonder, if they got the opportunity to voice constructive pro

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 09 May 2008 13:38:13 +0000

I think adding a belly-gun is a fine idea; however, how much will the new armament decrease the payload? Does BAe have a plan to off-set the weight of the new gun by savings weight elsewhere on the bird?

By: Lew Parker

Lew Parker — Fri, 09 May 2008 09:26:22 +0000

Modify existing C130s with 21st century STOL technology that would meet the Marines specifications. That aircraft is stronger, faster, carries a far larger payload, has a superior survivability rate in combat and can be more heavily armed and armored than the V-22, and is far less complicated to fly and maintain. Not to mention that development costs would be far less expensive than continuing with the V-22 program. Properly engineered, with an ultra low stall speed, it could take off or land within a 100 foot roll. When the V-22s stability computers fail, its just an unflyable lump of deadly falling metal.

By: Jeff Dulin

Jeff Dulin — Fri, 09 May 2008 02:15:36 +0000

It appears to me that the V-22 is an UNDERPOWERED sitting duck when it goes into any attempt to drop off or pick up troops. As is usual with EVERY aircraft we have ever purchased, it’s underpowered and needs to be “up-graded” and bigger engines. (Show me an A/C system by any service that didn’t use that ploy to sell the initial system!) In a word, the bitch won’t fly with a combat load and god help it if it looses ANY power during such an operation.
Attempting to hang ANY FORM OF WEAPON SYSTEM, either the proposed BAE one or an M-28 style turret, is nothing but TALK without the Power to make the thing be able to fly!! Guns are heavy and Ammo is worse. Perhaps someone might consider the product offered by that Ausi stack fire weapon system. At least it would be light weight and offer a huge amount of firepower.
SO, we’re back to the same old same old. Unless this thing can be re-engined, which it can, it’s just a good idea that won’t work without a huge additional investment. It’s fast. It flies high; where MISSILES FLY TOO; IT FLIES FAST; ZSU-#? CAN SHOOT IT DOWN and it spends a lot of MONEY making people RICH in the good old Military Industrial Complex! PERFECT!! THE IDEAL WEAPONS SYSTEM! A WORKING BOONDOGGLE THAT IS HIGHLY PROFITABLE!!! WHAT COULD BE BETTER!
Face it: The thing needs gun cover and if the current helicopters won’t do, you’re going to need A-10’s; recall and Arm the OV-10/A-37 or whatever. We used the OV-10 BRONCO” IN VIET NAM, AND IT WAS GREAT!! Good TOT, Good Ordnance Load and the pilot could see what he was doing both before and after the drop! (Unlike a fast mover!)
BUT, isn’t it about time to GIVE THE LOW ALTITUDE, FIXED WING ATTACK PART TO THE ARMY TOO! Like it or not, the Marines are going to be working with those guys, as will the AF people who are on the ground.
It’s time the AF GAVE UP some of it’s TURF (And bloated budget) and went forward into the Space, Intel & UAV stuff that it is and will continue to be so well suited for. It’s time for the AF to move on and mature, rather than sit and cry over loosing some “TURF” that it can easily abandon for the good of our nations defense.
IF, HOWEVER, as someone mentioned, they DO want to ad a under belly weapon system, and you are concerned with crushing it on landing because you want it to be available to fire while on the ground or very close to it, lenghten the landing gear vertical support. Go look at a Heron sometime. Long legs work in some situations.
JD