In message , Hog Driver
writes
So they only used the bombs when it was a factor of outright
survival--understandable IMO.

Still hardly a persuasive argument why the guns are indispensible. Why
wasn't 20mm able to adequately suppress, deter or destroy the enemy?

Large dispersion from long slant range by crews who hadn't strafed since the
F-15E school house. That isn't the only reason, but it goes a long way
towards understanding why the strafe passes didn't work so well.

Which is one of the reasons I'm not convinced that "a gun on every
aircraft because we might need it for CAS" is a compelling argument.

Again, is that because it is physically impossible to adapt it or
develop something similar? Has analysis shown that it would be
ineffective? Or is it "not in the plan, we just strafe for danger
close"?

Who is to say whether it will be employed on fixed-wing aircraft. 2006
isn't here yet.

And won't ever be a fixed-wing date (later than 2006 for sure), if the
attitude persists that "there's no need for anything better, a strafing
pass will do just fine".

Which tells you much about its lethality, no?

No, it doesn't.

Back when I was an infantryman we trained to keep at least ten metres
between troops; how many enemy troops can you get per pass with a 25m
danger space?

And those are the only options that can be considered?

What do you suggest?

Adapting APKWS for fast movers is one potential, different guns another
(maybe something in 30mm firing AHEAD ammunition? The US is adopting it
for the AAAV and the Germans for the Puma). Really Small Diameter Bombs
with GPS or laser guidance?

Is there a need? Quite possibly so. Is it met by existing systems? Not
fully, it seems. What's the requirement? Something flexible, multirole,
weighing under a thousand pounds (and not too much drag) for several
(four or five) shots, with significantly more lethality and
effectiveness than the M61, preferably without eating hardpoints.
Laser-guided 70mm with multirole fuzes (prox for air targets or
dispersed troops, impact for soft targets, delay for bunkers and light
armour) is one example candidate.

Since this discussion has digressed from best dogfight
gun to why you need (or don't need) a gun for close air support, I'd love to
hear what you have to say about the A-10 and pilots who practice with their
gun for CAS on almost every sortie.

Concerns about survivability in a MANPADS environment, but the A-10's
gun backed by a trained pilot is a much better tool for the task than a
M61 on a F-15. (The A-10 was _designed_ for the job, it would be
embarrassing if it wasn't capable)

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk