![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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Vietnam and far more capable than during Desert Storm I think history shows us that whenever we think that some weapon is obsolete along comes a conflict where that weapon is needed.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' |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
JDupres- 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" BRBR Just like nuclear weapons making the world safe for conventional warfare, long range missiles and the need to VID, makes the gun essential. P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JDupre5762" wrote in message ... 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' .... it is my understanding that naval versions had a gun but the air force did not but was later retrofitted with one. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
B-17s Debut, RAF Wellingtons Bomb & Fighters Sweep at Zeno's Video Drive-In | zeno | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 30th 04 06:20 PM |
B-17s Debut, RAF Wellingtons Bomb & Fighters Sweep at Zeno's Video Drive-In | zeno | Home Built | 0 | October 30th 04 06:19 PM |
Future military fighters and guns - yes or no ? | championsleeper | Military Aviation | 77 | March 3rd 04 04:11 AM |
US (Brit/Japanese/German/USSR) Use of Gun Cameras in Fighters?? | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 3 | July 17th 03 06:02 AM |
Scrambling fighters | John Doe | Military Aviation | 7 | July 2nd 03 09:26 PM |