"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"

Richard Casady wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:33:54 -0700, BradGuth
wrote:

Guns can include a 7.62mm Gatling gun, a .50-caliber machine
gun and more,

Don't they make [or at least have developed] a three barrel .50
Gatling that is not all that heavy. Decades ago the French had a 95
pound 20mm intended for use a door gun. It had about a six foot
barrel.

Casady

GE makes (made?) a 50 calibre gatling gun in 3 and 6 barrels.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

BradGuth wrote:
snip

There are multiple species of humans on Earth, with some way dumber
than others. Not all humans are Zion Yids, and not all smart Yids are
Third Reich. Go figure.
-
Brad Guth


So, how long have you been this afraid of Jews?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Oct 17, 8:13 am, Dan wrote:
BradGuthwrote:

snip



There are multiple species of humans on Earth, with some way dumber
than others. Not all humans are Zion Yids, and not all smart Yids are
Third Reich. Go figure.
-
Brad Guth

So, how long have you been this afraid of Jews?

Hitler was actually a fairly good Jewish puppet, much like our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush), and I'm still afaraid of what either
of those two incest cloned *******s have accomplished. Obviously you
and others of your semitic Third Reich kind could care less about the
past, present or future, that is as long as it's semitic dominated.
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 16, 6:51 am, Mike wrote:
Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport
aircraft.

There's little agreement on when such a gun might arrive, but at least
one major defense company is spending its own money to compete for the
job.

A nose gun was considered early in the tilt-rotor's two-decade
gestation but was branded too costly, Air Force requirements officials
said.

The fiscal 2008 supplemental request includes $82 million for
research, development and testing of an "all-quadrant," or 360-degree,
defensive weapon to augment the ramp-mounted 7.62mm machine gun the
Marines use for now.

Navy program spokesman James Darcy said there is no timetable for
finding such a gun, and the search will be bound by finances and the
plodding acquisition process.

"SOCom is looking at a faster turnaround," Darcy said. "But Air Force
Special Operations Command is flying a different mission than the
Marine Corps."

The squadron of 10 Marine-owned Ospreys now in Iraq will be used
largely to transport troops, equipment and supplies. The Air Force,
which handles the tilt-rotor program for U.S. Special Operations
Command, is buying the plane for long-range special ops missions.
While the Air Force's CV-22s are not slated to hit the desert until
2009, the service's Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley is
considering deploying his aircraft earlier.

In September, SOCom announced the search for an "interim all-quadrant
defensive weapon system" for its CV-22 tilt-rotors, with the intention
of flight-testing such a weapon within 120 days of the contract award.

"We both have a requirement for some sort of defensive weapon system,"
said Air Force Lt Col. Chet Treloar, deputy director for mobility and
special operations requirements.

But for the most part, those requirements are intentionally vague, he
said, leaving the door open for industry to be as innovative as
possible. It is not even specified whether the system should be fully
integrated into the aircraft in the future or if a drop-in solution is
the best plan.

"There are advantages and disadvantages to total, permanent
integration," said Air Force Maj. Rob Pittman of the Air Force
acquisition office. "The quick-and-dirty solution that gets the job
done might be the answer."

Pittman, Treloar and Darcy said the requirements are joint Marine-Air
Force requirements and the expectation is that everyone will get the
same weapon. But they added that nothing has been decided except the
requirements.

"There's no competition yet and there's been no selection yet," Darcy
said.

"It's possible that the solution may be different" for different
versions of the V-22, Pittman said. "But we push for as much
commonality as possible."

"I don't think we're there yet" as to what the final solution will be,
Treloar said. "But the Air Force and the Navy and the Marine Corps are
committed to keeping the troops safe. They want to deploy this
aircraft tin a way that is as safe and effective as possible."

BAE jumping the gun

Meanwhile, BAE Systems has been spending its own money to develop the
Remote Guardian System, a turreted, remote-operated, retractable
weapon that could be fielded in the third quarter of 2008 and fitted
aboard the V-22 and other aircraft, said Clark B. Freise, vice
president and general manager of defense avionics for BAE.

"We've been investing for two years and created our own program to
develop the capability," Freise said.

While Freise would not say how much BAE has spent or how much it would
charge per weapon, he did say the price would be low enough to appeal
to the Pentagon and high enough to recoup its investment.

"We spent a lot of money on it," he said. "We found a hole in their
protection, we're covering it for now, and we'll get it back. We'd
rather not say how much we've invested. We have shared with the Marine
Corps what we think it will cost to go into production, and it is
significantly lower than other solutions."

So far, the Remote Guardian has been tested only while mounted on a
Humvee, but Freise said it has fired various U.S. weapons and is
currently cleared to handle 300 knots and four times the force of
gravity. Guns can include a 7.62mm Gatling gun, a .50-caliber machine
gun and more, he said. He said it has an easily upgradeable sensor
suite.

A concern with any 360-degree system, especially a remote-firing one,
is taking a shot at your own propeller or landing gear.

According to BAE, that is not a risk with Remote Guardian.

"The gun will never, ever point at a part of the aircraft. We
integrated the safety keys into the design from the very beginning,"
Freise said.

My God! (are we good at killing innocent hummans, or what?)
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 16, 4:31 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 16, 6:51 am, Mike wrote:





Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport
aircraft.

There's little agreement on when such a gun might arrive, but at least
one major defense company is spending its own money to compete for the
job.

A nose gun was considered early in the tilt-rotor's two-decade
gestation but was branded too costly, Air Force requirements officials
said.

The fiscal 2008 supplemental request includes $82 million for
research, development and testing of an "all-quadrant," or 360-degree,
defensive weapon to augment the ramp-mounted 7.62mm machine gun the
Marines use for now.

Navy program spokesman James Darcy said there is no timetable for
finding such a gun, and the search will be bound by finances and the
plodding acquisition process.

"SOCom is looking at a faster turnaround," Darcy said. "But Air Force
Special Operations Command is flying a different mission than the
Marine Corps."

The squadron of 10 Marine-owned Ospreys now in Iraq will be used
largely to transport troops, equipment and supplies. The Air Force,
which handles the tilt-rotor program for U.S. Special Operations
Command, is buying the plane for long-range special ops missions.
While the Air Force's CV-22s are not slated to hit the desert until
2009, the service's Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley is
considering deploying his aircraft earlier.

In September, SOCom announced the search for an "interim all-quadrant
defensive weapon system" for its CV-22 tilt-rotors, with the intention
of flight-testing such a weapon within 120 days of the contract award.

"We both have a requirement for some sort of defensive weapon system,"
said Air Force Lt Col. Chet Treloar, deputy director for mobility and
special operations requirements.

But for the most part, those requirements are intentionally vague, he
said, leaving the door open for industry to be as innovative as
possible. It is not even specified whether the system should be fully
integrated into the aircraft in the future or if a drop-in solution is
the best plan.

"There are advantages and disadvantages to total, permanent
integration," said Air Force Maj. Rob Pittman of the Air Force
acquisition office. "The quick-and-dirty solution that gets the job
done might be the answer."

Pittman, Treloar and Darcy said the requirements are joint Marine-Air
Force requirements and the expectation is that everyone will get the
same weapon. But they added that nothing has been decided except the
requirements.

"There's no competition yet and there's been no selection yet," Darcy
said.

"It's possible that the solution may be different" for different
versions of the V-22, Pittman said. "But we push for as much
commonality as possible."

"I don't think we're there yet" as to what the final solution will be,
Treloar said. "But the Air Force and the Navy and the Marine Corps are
committed to keeping the troops safe. They want to deploy this
aircraft tin a way that is as safe and effective as possible."

BAE jumping the gun

Meanwhile, BAE Systems has been spending its own money to develop the
Remote Guardian System, a turreted, remote-operated, retractable
weapon that could be fielded in the third quarter of 2008 and fitted
aboard the V-22 and other aircraft, said Clark B. Freise, vice
president and general manager of defense avionics for BAE.

"We've been investing for two years and created our own program to
develop the capability," Freise said.

While Freise would not say how much BAE has spent or how much it would
charge per weapon, he did say the price would be low enough to appeal
to the Pentagon and high enough to recoup its investment.

"We spent a lot of money on it," he said. "We found a hole in their
protection, we're covering it for now, and we'll get it back. We'd
rather not say how much we've invested. We have shared with the Marine
Corps what we think it will cost to go into production, and it is
significantly lower than other solutions."

So far, the Remote Guardian has been tested only while mounted on a
Humvee, but Freise said it has fired various U.S. weapons and is
currently cleared to handle 300 knots and four times the force of
gravity. Guns can include a 7.62mm Gatling gun, a .50-caliber machine
gun and more, he said. He said it has an easily upgradeable sensor
suite.

A concern with any 360-degree system, especially a remote-firing one,
is taking a shot at your own propeller or landing gear.

According to BAE, that is not a risk with Remote Guardian.

"The gun will never, ever point at a part of the aircraft. We
integrated the safety keys into the design from the very beginning,"
Freise said.

My God! (are we good at killing innocent hummans, or what?)
- Brad Guth

People trying to kill you are not innocent. If you actually look at
things, you'll see the idea of avoiding killing civilians is a great
concern to the US, even to where more US troops get put at risk tuhan
might otherwise. Civilians are targeted by the enemy, who would also
kill you if they could.

Modern turreted guns on aircraft, with modern sighting and
stabilizers, can be directed with good precision. Hardy a cluster
bomb, or the terrorist's market place bomb or bombs like were used to
attack Benazir Bhutto's convoy in Pakistan recently. That is
indiscriminate killing, and where you should focus your attention
sometime.

Mike writes:

Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport
aircraft.


Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe already
short of payload...

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

David Lesher wrote:
Mike writes:

Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport
aircraft.


Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe already
short of payload...


and balance

its a side to side prop-rotor configuration

hang a thousand pounds on the chin and see what happens

Vince

Vince wrote:
David Lesher wrote:
Mike writes:

Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport
aircraft.


Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe already
short of payload...


and balance

its a side to side prop-rotor configuration

hang a thousand pounds on the chin and see what happens

It's belly, not chin mounted.

-HJC
Fact correcting Vince is endless fun.

Henry J Cobb wrote:
Vince wrote:
David Lesher wrote:
Mike writes:

Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a
turret-mounted machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought
requirement for a forward-firing defensive weapon and making it
unique among today's U.S. transport aircraft.


Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe
already short of payload...


and balance

its a side to side prop-rotor configuration

hang a thousand pounds on the chin and see what happens

It's belly, not chin mounted.

-HJC Fact correcting Vince is endless fun.

You missed my point
you cant hang it on the chin, they tried and they found that out
it was the original concept even up to 2005.

Also under consideration is a redesign of the V-22’s nose to accommodate
a chin gun, Birkholz said. “It’s all do-able,” he said. “It’s just
expensive.”
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../V-22_Aims.htm

it wasn't doable

you can hang it on the belly at the center of lift,
that is where they put the cargo hook
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ng_M777_lg.jpg


nothing is free

Vince

Looking at the photo, they ahve alre\dy armed the Osprey with a lance - true
grass roots weaponry
"Vince" wrote in message
...
Henry J Cobb wrote:
Vince wrote:
David Lesher wrote:
Mike writes:

Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/

Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT

Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted
machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing
defensive weapon and making it
unique among today's U.S. transport aircraft.


Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe
already short of payload...


and balance

its a side to side prop-rotor configuration

hang a thousand pounds on the chin and see what happens

It's belly, not chin mounted.

-HJC Fact correcting Vince is endless fun.

You missed my point
you cant hang it on the chin, they tried and they found that out
it was the original concept even up to 2005.

Also under consideration is a redesign of the V-22’s nose to accommodate
a chin gun, Birkholz said. “It’s all do-able,” he said. “It’s just
expensive.”
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../V-22_Aims.htm

it wasn't doable

you can hang it on the belly at the center of lift,
that is where they put the cargo hook
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ng_M777_lg.jpg


nothing is free

Vince