"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

:In message , Fred J. McCall
writes
:"Paul J. Adam" wrote:
::I'd like to keep the options open. Come in from above (where the sensors
::can't see you) and see if the downwash takes it out: if not, then donate
::some half-inch Raufoss at 1,100 rounds a minute.
:
:So would I. The difference is that I want to use some 20mm shells at
:6,000 RPM.
:
:And I'd like to give the gunner a larger target and more time to fire -
lus not everyone, not even the USN, has a fast jet in attendance on
:every unit at all times, but many of those units have helicopters.

And most of those helicopters don't have a gun.

:[Paul might want to look up the firing rate for that GAU-16 on the
:SH-60 (slower - only 750 RPM), the ammo supply (100 round can), and
:the intended purpose of said weapon ("anti-surface warfare and
:anti-light armor weapon").
:
:Fred might want to look up the stats for the M3M - 1,100rpm and a
:600-round feed - before making bold, sweeping statements. Not every
:naval helicopter is a SH-60 and not every doorgun is a GAU-16.

Context, Paul. Remember that the context is the claim that a US
aircraft carrier scrambled "2 helicopters and 4 fighters" to intercept
a UAV. Every naval helicopter isn't an SH-60 and not every doorgun is
a GAU-16, but it's pretty much a given that NO Naval helicopter is a
Lynx and no Naval helicopter doorgun is an M3M.

Hint for Paul - Capitalization in this case matters, as does context.

:This MIGHT give him some clue about why
:our opinions about how to do this differ - but, knowing Paul, it
:probably won't.]
:
:Just confirms the narrowness of Fred's mind - if he doesn't think it's
ossible then it can't be done, regardless of whether it's actually
:happening or not.

Just confirms the dishonestly of Paul's mind - nothing he claims as my
attitude above has anything to do with anything I've said. In other
words, once again he lies.

One more time, Paul - context matters.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates