[Sorry for the delay, folks. Had an interview with Obama’s top defense advisor, former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig this AM…More to follow on that later.]
At the Modern Day Marine Expo, Adamiak explained that the crew chief will use an X-Box-like controller to move and shoot the gun. The GAU-17 (GAU-2 for the SOCOM version) Gatling gun is slaved to a sensor that rolls down out of the Osprey belly when the gun deploys — housing a CCD camera, IR camera and laser range finder.
The gun can track 360 degress, but there is a software-driven safety zone that makes sure rounds don’t blow the rotors off. If the Osprey has to maneuver away from the target and the crew chief can’t hold the gun on the bad guys manually, the system slaves the gun to the point of the last shot, slewing it as the plane moves. The fire control computer compensates for range and angle as well.
There is no capability for the pilot to control the gun, but there’s an auto feature than swings the gun to the barrel forward position, 10 degrees down so the pilot can steer the Osprey onto target. But he can’t fire the weapon, that’ll still be up to the crew chief in the back.
– Christian
Suddenly it just got much more fun to be an Osprey crew cheif!
Can they reload the ammo can airborne when the gun is in the stowed position?
Couple of things occure to me. With the sensor pod seperate to the gun mount you will always get a parallax that you will have to calculate for ( and you need to verify range, very possible but one more thing to go wrong ).
More importantly you have an instant “blind” spot
where the gun get in the way or the sensors view!!! n from this vid it looks like a pretty dam big blind spot. why not just attatch the sensors to the gun mount forward and to the right of the GAU-17 along the center axis ? there is space and it would save on cost as you wouldnt need half the deployment gear and aformentioned funky anti paralax software.
HAHAHA That works both ways too. I just realised why it locks 10 degrees down when forward. Cos if it attempts to fire directly forwards along the line of travel it would shoot its own sencors off ! HAHAHA oh dear not that well thought out really. 2 bid defencive blind spots in two majorly important inflight zones.
Explain this one to me, Benny: why would an Osprey gunner ever be firing straight in front of his aircraft? The purpose of the gun is to shoot at enemy troops beneath it on the ground, not to dogfight with nonexistent enemy aircraft.
So, when this goes on the CV-22 Ospreys AFSOC has, will the aerial gunners be firing it? Or the Crew Chief’s…or even a sensor operator?
Obama’s top defense advisor? Don’t make me laugh. Here’s Obama’s defense plan right from the horse’s mouth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o84PE871BE
The ammo box next to the gun seems:
a) unservicable in flight
b) insufficient in capacity
c) to show a lack of aerodynamics perhaps affecting the handling of the craft
d) all of the above
“…a software-driven safety zone…” Now, why does that have me worried ?
Regards & all,
Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark
Looks like a fun game, would love to play it!
Looks pretty flimsy and “improvised”.
@Ben Oliver: mounting a delicate sensor package to the gun mount would subject it to strong vibrations. and strong vibrations usually wreak havok on sensors…
M
@Marcello Yer figured that would be the reason. This is a real pity I actually really like the look of this system. Mind you if we look at the Remote .50 Cal currently installed on Humvees in active service we can see the tech exists to solve the problem. (http://news.webshots.com/photo/1317545961067546260sUpMbK) admittedly the vibrations of a GAU17 are going to be significantly higher frequency. But that rear blind spot during a hot evac would bother the hell out of me. Thanks for the feedback tho. Ben
I could come up with a bunch of things that could be better if it was a perfect world but what about the things it does offer.
1)Forward fire: Almost no trasport VTOL aircraft transport aircraft in the world can fire forward at all, even on a 10% down angle.
2)Fire bardward as well as left and right: Most transport aircraft can be fired out the side and or back of the aircraft, some can do both but only out of one side and/or rear.
3)System in stabilized: Most weapons fired from transport VTOL aircraft are crew operated manually. A stabilized system should allow for long range, higher acuracy fire.
4)Gun crew is not exposed: Normally the gun crew for a VTOL aircraft is exposed the whole time they are firing. Yes I know that the aircraft is only soft cover but it makes the crew member feel safer and reduces stress that effects performace both long term and short term.
5) Gun is setup so any Gen-X’er will be instantly comfortable with it.
6) New system does not remove the ability to mount a weapon out the rear door.
Looks good to me, and sure beats a Pig and a bungee cord any day!
Didn’t have the chance to see the video earlier, actually with the gun and the sensor in that setup the sensor will have a huge blind spot. some kind of “coaxial” mounting would be much better from this point of view.
on the other hand the problem is so huge that i don’t see how it could have gone undetected, possibly they have a solution we simply don’t see yet…
M
Looks to me that the “blind spot” is the front of the plane. Could be wrong but I believe the sensor mast is behind the gun. If so, the blind spot is not a big issue, as the pilot would line up the shot and the sensor would be useless anyway due to smoke.
The gun itself can be maintained in flight when the gun pod is retracted.
The big issue is that the Osprey cannot haul sling loads with the gun system installed.
That said, I think such a system would be really useful on a AC-130 both as a secondary fire support and as a self defense weapon if slaved to the defense suit(Ah-la R2D2 for planes)
Looks to me that the “blind spot” is the front of the plane. Could be wrong but I believe the sensor mast is behind the gun. If so, the blind spot is not a big issue, as the pilot would line up the shot and the sensor would be useless anyway due to smoke.
The gun itself can be maintained in flight when the gun pod is retracted.
The big issue is that the Osprey cannot haul sling loads with the gun system installed.
That said, I think such a system would be really useful on a AC-130 both as a secondary fire support and as a self defense weapon if slaved to the defense suit(Ah-la R2D2 for planes)
The biggest weakness seems to be that big ammo box on the side. It obstructs sensor visibility and may be too small for some operations. It would make more sense to have a feed going up into the ship.
Also, the visibility behind the ship could be solved with a second sensor pod on the tail section.
But I guess what it boils down to is the price. It’s cool, it doesn’t have too many bells and whistes, it may be the right price.
You guys are my most stolen-videos from blog … with a bullet, so to speak.