You proved my point...they were strike eagles...not a/b/c/d model F-15's


--
Pup
USAF, Retired
Go #88 UPS Racing, Detroit Red Wings,
Ohio State Buckeyes
__________________

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Puppinator" wrote in message
...
Of course, should a war come along where the gun
demonstrates
its utility on a regular (as opposed to occasional) basis, the
pendulum
may
swing back the other way again.

Well, AFAIK there has been no general consensus regarding deleting the
gun
armament, and everyone continues to do so. If there was such a
feeling,
we
would expect customers to be deleting them left and right as a weight
saving
and space creating measure (adding that big spine to the Block 60
F-16's
indicates that volume usage is growing critical with that design), but
we
have not seen this happen.

Brooks


Guy

The only fighter that needs a gun is the Warthog. All others, waste of
time
and weight post Cold War.

The SOF types who found their bacon saved during OIF by a Strike Eagle
conducting a strafe, providing *effective* (see that , Paul?) suppression
(see the latest AFM, an article by our very own Steve Davies) would
probably
disagree with your assessment a bit.

As far as the F-15 strafing runs in Afghanistan, that would almost
certainly
have to be Strike and not Air Superiority Eagles.

So? They are not A-10's, now are they?

Brooks