All...I was wondering: have there been any guns-only air to air kills by US
aircraft since SE Asia?
As an aside, what are the thoughts of those who have been in combat? Are
guns
on board nostalga, or, are they a practical weapon?

Duke Cunningham will tell you that if his Navy F-4 had a gun he might have got
three more kills in his famous day of fighting when he made ace. While not air
combat there were guns only strafing runs made in Afghanistan during a fight
over a downed helicopter.

While air to air and air to ground missiles are now far more reliable than
during Vietnam and far more capable than during Desert Storm I think history
shows us that whenever we think that some weapon is obsolete along comes a
conflict where that weapon is needed. Often the weapon is not used in its
original form but a good use is found for it.

In regards to combat aircraft guns there might come a time when the combat
arena is so circumscribed that beyond visual range weapons will not be
practical due to the chance of "collateral damage". Then only visual range
weapons could be used and the gun takes on a new importance. Imagine if in the
Balkans one of our opponents (I can't remember whose side we weren't on!) had
put up a decent aerial opposition, would we really have been launching a lot of
long range weapons in one of the most heavily air traveled areas of the world?

As in Afghanistan in a future conflict at the extreme of range for some
aircraft might make it necessary to use every weapon they brought along right
down to the guns when all other ordnance was expended. Not because they could
not loiter in terms of fuel but because it would take too long to return to
base and reload.

The gun will never again be a primary or even secondary weapon but as a
tertiary one it will have its uses and you can never be sure when that will be.

John Dupre'