Best dogfight gun?

"Chad Irby" wrote
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

UAVs are going to be really tough gun targets: just look at the size of
them. Aircraft guns aren't a good option, if only because you're going
to need so many rounds per target.

There are a lot of "plane sized" UAVs, and if you think anaircraft the
size of a Predator is a hard gun target, well, you need to compare it to
how hard it is to hit with a cheap missile (low IR signature, low radar
signature).

The "little bitty" UAVs out there are in the "fly past really quick and
turbulence does the job" category...

There really aren't "a lot" of large UAVs. They (and their payloads) are
quite expensive and the number look limited for the foreseeable future. The
Little Bitty UAVs on the other hand look to be ubiquitous. Turbulence might
do the job or maybe not. These aren't ultralights with nil control
authority. If they're flying low enough to prevent recovery, then the
fighter doing the buzz pass is in fair danger of CFIT, especially in combat.

In article ,
"Paul F Austin" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote

The "little bitty" UAVs out there are in the "fly past really quick and
turbulence does the job" category...

There really aren't "a lot" of large UAVs. They (and their payloads) are
quite expensive and the number look limited for the foreseeable future.

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

A lot of modern UAVs are in the 1000+ lb weight class, which certainly
makes them big enough to shoot down.

The Little Bitty UAVs on the other hand look to be ubiquitous.
Turbulence might do the job or maybe not. These aren't ultralights
with nil control authority. If they're flying low enough to prevent
recovery, then the fighter doing the buzz pass is in fair danger of
CFIT, especially in combat.

Just fly around it and get it in trail. If a 727 can knock a Piper Cub
out of the air at a mile or so lead range, an F-22 should be able to
wipe a small UAV out at a couple of hundred yards or so.

And anything that's too small to shoot down with a gun is *certainly*
too small to shoot down with a modern aircraft missile.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:46:54 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:46:54 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big. Certainly
big enough to hit with cannon fire.

Maybe you saw a sub-scale prototype?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:
In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big.

Sure, the span is twice that of a T-37. But Darkstar was only 15 feet long,
which is quite short for a plane of its span, and about half the length of a
Tweet. Between those two dimensions, I could certainly understand
describing it as "T-37-class."

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

In article et,
"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:
In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big.

Sure, the span is twice that of a T-37. But Darkstar was only 15 feet long,
which is quite short for a plane of its span, and about half the length of a
Tweet. Between those two dimensions, I could certainly understand
describing it as "T-37-class."

But that certainly does *not* make it too small to shoot down with
aerial guns, or everyone would be using T-37s as "gunproof planes."

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:02:23 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article et,
"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:
In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big.

Sure, the span is twice that of a T-37. But Darkstar was only 15 feet long,
which is quite short for a plane of its span, and about half the length of a
Tweet. Between those two dimensions, I could certainly understand
describing it as "T-37-class."

But that certainly does *not* make it too small to shoot down with
aerial guns, or everyone would be using T-37s as "gunproof planes."

First you have to find it, though. You can't get a guns kill on an
airplane you can't find in the sky. Guns kills are close-up kills.

The T-37 isn't a low-observables airplane and DarkSpot most certainly
was. Actually, it looked like a cross between the B-2 and the U-2;
the project team got tired of hearing it called the UB-2 fairly
quickly. The Tweet shows up on radar just fine; DarkSpot didn't.

You knew, didn't you, that DarkSpot flew out of Dryden? It was housed
in the building I worked in and it spent a fair amount of time out on
the ramp. I saw it fairly often.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 03:22:08 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:46:54 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big. Certainly
big enough to hit with cannon fire.

You wouldn't be comparing it to the F-22 if you'd ever seen it.
DarkSpot was really short and thin. Gliders have wing spans bigger
than the F-22, too, but no one really compares them.

Actually, the DarkStar-glider comparison isn't a bad one, now that I
think about it. About the same volume and bulk. Same kind of
materials for the airframe, too.

Of course you can hit it with cannon fire. You can hit a cruise
missile with cannon fire, too. You just have to work at it.

I am reminded of the story about the time an ALCM escaped control at
EDW. It went into some sort of holding pattern and AFFTC whistled up
some armed F-4s from George. They came over and chased it around the
sky, as it flew a predictable path without any sort of evasive
maneuvering, for about a half an hour. They took a fair number of
shots against it and missed it every time. The ALCM finally ran out
of fuel and fell out of the sky.

This may or may not be true, and accuracy was probably sacrificed for
laughs by the third time someone told it, but it was widely accepted
at EDW as being a reasonable representation of the events.

Maybe you saw a sub-scale prototype?

Nope.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 03:22:08 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:46:54 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

Darkstar wasn't that big. I used to see it out on the ramp all the
time. It was definitely is T-37 size class at the most. That's
pretty small.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/darkstar.htm

The Darkstar has a 69 foot wingspan, about twice that of the T-37, and
about 50 percent wider than the F-22. I consider that big. Certainly
big enough to hit with cannon fire.

You wouldn't be comparing it to the F-22 if you'd ever seen it.

Actually, I have, and it's still really obviously big enough to shoot
down with a gun.

Of course you can hit it with cannon fire. You can hit a cruise
missile with cannon fire, too. You just have to work at it.

In visual size, the DarkStar (and most of the other "big" UAVs) are
several times the size of a cruise missile, not to mention one-quarter
the speed.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote
"Paul F Austin" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote

The "little bitty" UAVs out there are in the "fly past really quick
and
turbulence does the job" category...

There really aren't "a lot" of large UAVs. They (and their payloads) are
quite expensive and the number look limited for the foreseeable future.

Funny, I keep finding quite large ones. Like the Predator, the
Darkstar, the Global Hawk, or one of several Russian designs that are
basically reworked large cruise missiles or former target drones.

You keep finding_types_of large ones. Take a look at the number of G-Hawks
produced and planned. The payloads (never mind the airframe) are so
expensive that the Air Force treats it as a "high demand-low availability"
resource like Rivet Joint or JSTARS. For cost reasons, it's unlikely to
change. The same seems to be true of Predator. The UAVs that look to be
procured in large numbers are the Pioneer-class machines.