In message om, David
E. Powell writes
There could weight to play with in the tail, or a way to
counterbalance by moving some equipment inside. They modified the
B-17 OK, but they had a lot more relative weight to play with.

There's the problem: the more weight you hang on the airframe, the less
payload you have (which is the point of a transport helicopter).

Also, a turreted MG doesnt have to weaigh 1000 lbs. (Even including
ammo.)

When you put it in a remotely-operated weapon station, the weight goes
right up.

"The basic Mini-Gun is 0.80 m long and weighs 18.8 kg. A typical pintle
installation with one gun and 5,000 rounds of ammunition weighs about
500 kg", to quote Jane's Air-Launched Weapons on the GAU-2A/M134 7.62 mm
Mini-Gun and Armament System - that's for a manually pointed mount.

Wonder what they will hang on there? A .50 or twin .50 could work.
7.62 minigun?

7.62 is okay for suppressive fire against infantry, but if the V-22 is
supposed to be doing any sort of self-escort then it really needs more
range and hitting power (it may have enemy helicopters to cope with, and
certainly wants to engage light vehicles). Something like a M3M .50"
would be a decent compromise between terminal effect and weight.

Don't forget the sighting system, too - if the V-22s are going in at
night then you need to match the sight to the weapon and its range (so
you can identify targets in time to effectively engage them).

As with most engineering problems, it's not that the problem is
insoluble... just that it ends up more expensive in time, money and
capability than it first looks.

--
The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its
warriors, will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done
by fools.
-Thucydides


pauldotjdotadam[at]googlemail{dot}.com