Comments on: How the Osprey Gun Works…

By: kelly H

kelly H — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 23:01:12 +0000

You guys are my most stolen-videos from blog … with a bullet, so to speak.

By: Jeff M

Jeff M — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:04:19 +0000

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.

By: James

James — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 08:06:24 +0000

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)

By: James

James — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 08:03:31 +0000

By: Marcello

Marcello — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:47:12 +0000

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

By: Shamus62

Shamus62 — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:07:32 +0000

Looks good to me, and sure beats a Pig and a bungee cord any day!

By: The Cenobyte

The Cenobyte — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 20:49:39 +0000

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.

By: Ben Oliver

Ben Oliver — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:56:25 +0000

@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

By: Marcello

Marcello — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 13:14:29 +0000

@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

By: Vladimir

Vladimir — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:39:31 +0000

Looks pretty flimsy and “improvised”.