Comments on: Osprey to Deploy With New Firepower

By: Cheney

Cheney — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:14:03 +0000

I think this gun will work great. The 50 may have greater range but the miniguns barrel is more rigid so I think the accuracy would be better, and really they both need to score direct hits.
The interesting thing here is the targeting pod could be equipped with a laser and some small diameter bombs or hellfires added. That would take the firepower much further than adding more/bigger guns. Maybe a new weapon that fires javelin missiles from the underbelly.

By: Patriot93

Patriot93 — Thu, 14 May 2009 02:33:06 +0000

The 20mm may be more suited for light skinned vehicles and tanks but it can also be very effective against infantry in hillsides, dug in, or in small fortifications were the 7.63x51 could not reliably penetrate. But I guess if thats the path theyw ant to go on, let’s see how it works out. If as they say it won;t kill many, then that just leaves more to kill for our guys dismounting.

By: Rick

Rick — Tue, 12 May 2009 19:30:38 +0000

Forgive my imprecise writing. The 20mm cannon on the cobra was designed to penetrate light armor. Just for fun and giggles let me point out that a 20mm sabot round fired into the engine deck from above will kill most tanks. A fact that did not escape the people who ordered the modifications done. The entire aircraft was optimized to kill tanks, not people.
In our current wars there are no tanks to kill. More ‘punch’ is irrelavent when you are talking about unarmored men — You cannot kill someone deader than dead. The miniguns do a better job on people and they are the appropriate weapon for what we are doing now. Later that may change.
BTW: On the more tracer thing — miniguns shooting the standard 1-in-5 tracer mix look like they are shooting a stream of fire. That’s how the mingun armed AC-47’s came to be nicknamed ‘Puff’ as in Puff the Magic Dragon.

By: BritTankie

BritTankie — Mon, 11 May 2009 21:40:44 +0000

Excellent point about tracer by Robert
In my GROUND based experience, more rounds going over you’re head, snapping off rocks and slashing through the bush are a lot worse than less rounds. Less fragmenting rounds I should imagine would be worse but i’ve been fortunate enough to avoid THAT experience just yet. So maybe a 20mm would be nicer, but that means WEIGHT and WEIGHT means less speed, and even less rounds.
And you can’t put guns on the side, because frankly I wouldn’t trust side gunners not to put rounds into the engine as it swings down for hover.
The screen makes it EASIER to come on target, because it adjusts the aim off point for the gunner, all s/he has to do it point and click, it aims it to hit where s/he’s aiming on the ground.
Finally, i was chatting the other day to a Fleet Air Arm pilot who just got back from ‘Stan and apprently the Osprey has AWFUL Hot ‘n High performance, regardless of what the Marines and Air Force say — according to one of the pilots flying it

By: Patriot93

Patriot93 — Mon, 11 May 2009 19:04:52 +0000

Just mount the 20mm from the Super Cobra on the nose and a .50 in the back and sides maybe on the Osprey

By: Camp

Camp — Mon, 11 May 2009 16:23:59 +0000

Rick,
Cobras were fitted with TOWs & Hellfires to be effective against tanks. The 20mm was employed (with AH-1S Upgunned Cobra) to dispatch light armored vehicles & troops in cover. Where as, the 7.62 minigun is primarily effective against troops in the open, has a shorter range, and comparatively less effect.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ0x8YMJrvE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fCkkzSayYQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIM1xQm7ih0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPRA5dCraOc

By: Ed

Ed — Mon, 11 May 2009 14:50:35 +0000

I don’t get why they had to create a new piece of technology just for the MV-22. Couldn’t they just as simply have taken the CROWS and mount that to an osprey? Or did they have to make the package lighter and that is the reason for a new setup?

By: Charles

Charles — Mon, 11 May 2009 13:59:48 +0000

Blackhawks mount the M134 minigun. Did a pair of miniguns per Blackhawk do a decent job in Operation Gothic Serpent? (“Mogadishu”)
Trying to decide if a Mk19 or other automatic grenade launcher system would be of use on the Osprey.
I was also under the impression that V-22 could operate at higher altitudes with less performance losses than choppers. Because of this, Osprey must be mildly armed for self-defense, or a gunship companion be developed, or a gunship variant of Osprey must be fielded. For case one, firepower cannot compromise performance. For cases two and three, gunship cannot be slower or have significantly worse performance than Osprey transport (or the transports will have to slow down for it, etc).
The M2’s are heavy and will have reduced ammunition loads, but the M134 is quite heavy too, and requires electrical power to drive the minigun, etc.
Also; I suspect the Ospreys would be instructed to hold station keeping away from any battle after dropping off troops. The longer range of a M2 would help there, they would have greater standoff range to avoid RPGs, stingers etc.
Another off-topic Q: After a Osprey drops off troops and goes on station, does it go into helicopter mode, or does it loiter in airplane mode? It would probably affect the weapons loadout of the Osprey or gunship variants.

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 11 May 2009 11:37:45 +0000

The cobras were fitted with 20mm cannon so they would be more effective attacking tanks.
As far as the minigun not being being scary enough to keep heads down — this is a link to video of the gun being fired from a helicopter. What do you guys think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RReAI3M1_K0&feature=related

By: Robert Stoner

Robert Stoner — Mon, 11 May 2009 04:57:24 +0000

The MV-22 Ospreys have a very big problem that no one has touched upon. Namely, the Osprey is faster than its dedicated escort, the AH-1W or AH-1Z Sea Cobras.
Since the Osprey is faster, any escort helo gunships will have to leave before the MV-22 to assure they will arrive over the LZ at the same time the Ospreys do. This is the only way the current Ospreys can rely on fire suppot when they do insertions or extractions of their operators.
As currently fielded, the Osprey is woefully deficient in defensive firepower with only a ramp mounted M240 7.62mm machine gun. A fixed forward .50x2, side flexible .50x2, and one ramp flexible .50 would allow the Osprey to defend itself on a hot LZ and defend itself on the insertion or extraction.
I have used both the Mini-gun and the M2/M3 guns in real combat and I can tell you that nothing commands respect like a .50 caliber hammering at you. The Mini-gun is a fine bullet hose, but it lacks range and power; the .50 has a slower cyclic rate, carries less ammo, but it has far greater range and punch. As far as I’m concerned, I’d rather have the range and punch over a short-legged bullet hose.
If you really want to scare the enemy, then equip the Osprey with a loudspeaker and a recording of a Mini-gun firing. The “chainsaw on steroids” sound of the Mini-gun IS terrifying, but the throaty roar of the .50, combined with the punch of its cartridge really keeps your head down.
The .50 (12.7x99 NATO) is one caliber that is truly frighting whether you’re dishing it out to a target (or whether the target is shooing back with a 12.7x108 Russian equivalent).
Another way to scare the hell out of the bad guys on the gound is to load more tracer rounds in the belt than the current 1-in-5 mix. A stream of heavy caliber tracer fire is quite disconcerting to the recipient.