Guns on fighters?

"Red" wrote:

The R.O.E. will always require visual I.D. Why? Because somewhere there is
always someone with stars on his colar, (or who wants stars on his colar)
that is deathly afraid that someone will screw-up.

Sure, so long as we face only severely overmatched, day-only, VFR-only
adversaries. Heck, we could probably have won every air battle since WWII
with ROE that permitted only pole arms, brickbats, and claws. (None o' that
namby-pamby stuff at hundreds of yards--ya gotta see the blood flow. Pass
me that there halberd and pop open the canopy!)

It was a sad joke in the late '80s, when we were flying 50% of our hours
at night, and the WWNam veterans who provided our Adult Supervision still
trained on the assumption that we'd never *really* get BVR clearance. We'd
always be driving around in two-ships, perhaps working up our ratios to 2:1
or so. Anything more complicated than a bracket violated KISS.

Perhaps it was a self-fulfilling prophecy for the Tomcats in the first Gulf
War. Let the Air Force do all the shooting, and there are fewer Navy
blue-on-blues! Meanwhile, we'll just CAP against the contingency of an
intervention from Mars.

However, there is one great advantage of 20MM contact-fuzed shells, which
still warrants putting them on combat jets. Unbeatable ECCM!

Walt BJ wrote:

(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
But to answer the question- As an aside, what are the thoughts of those who
have been in combat?
Snip:

I've been there and until someone comes up with a genuine Buck Rogers
disintegrator ray or plasma blaster or whatever I'd still want a gun.
Walt BJ

I'll bet those Iraqi helicopters looked pretty disintegrated
after the GAU-8 was done with them.

Joe


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

Aw, gee, OJ, it was just a case of a (serious) memory failure. But
truthfully, I am a wee bit sensitive about RS MacNamara. So sorry if you are
offended.

I'm not sure whether I believe in a devil; but I've come to regard money
rather highly. Seem to have what I need, but not as much of it as I want.
In any event, I am grateful for all the corrections offered to my erroneous
portion of my post, which in contrast to some, was not offered in a mean or
spiteful spirit.


"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message
...
"Jake Donovan" wrote:

SNIP

Shame on you Jake. How *dare* you bring up facts when Lawrence
Dillard is on a roll? Obviously, Larry considers Robert McNamara to
be third only to the Devil and love of money as the Root of All That
Is Evil In The World.

OJ III

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message link.net...
"Eric Moore" wrote in message
om

Have they decided what kind of gun the F-35 will have?

Apparently the GAU-12/U 25mm Gatling, in place of the Bk27 27mm revolver
cannon originally planned. The Air Force gets an internal fitting; the
others have bolt-on versions of some sort or other. I've seen mention of
pods in one of the weapon bays or a conformal gun pack on a centerline
station. I really hope it's the latter.

BTW, the selection of GAU-12 is confirmed in this newsletter (pg 2).

http://www.lmaeronautics.com/product...-35JSFTeam03Su
m.pdf


Why didn't they go with the Mauser Bk-27? Cost escalation? Technical
problems?

"Lawrence Dillard" wrote:

Aw, gee, OJ, it was just a case of a (serious) memory failure. But
truthfully, I am a wee bit sensitive about RS MacNamara. So sorry if you are
offended.

Not offended. It was more bemoaning the distance of time since I was
a hormone-ridden teen-ager, spending my HS years in the DC area and
actually paying attention to things like politics and the military -
being an Army/USMC brat as it were. I knew when the USAF jumped in on
the F4 and why, and that it preceded McNamara's ascent.

I'm not sure whether I believe in a devil; but I've come to regard money
rather highly. Seem to have what I need, but not as much of it as I want.
In any event, I am grateful for all the corrections offered to my erroneous
portion of my post, which in contrast to some, was not offered in a mean or
spiteful spirit.

Mine was just an attempt to make you realize that McNamara was by no
means the most despicable person ever to have served as a President's
cabinet member. That characterization is reserved to Josephus
Daniels. Sorry if it came off as mean and/or spiteful.

OJ III

OJ,

Mine was just an attempt to make you realize that McNamara was by no means
the most despicable person ever to have served as a President's cabinet
member. That characterization is reserved to Josephus Daniels.

Is this a reference to the infamous General Order 19 - the
Prohibition-inspired directive that Daniels promulgated to do away with the
Demon Rum on shipboard? (Never completely worked, though. Many of us will
attest to discrete sessions in certain staterooms with the hair of the dog.)

Of course, without GO-19 and its successors the Brits / Aussies / etc.
wouldn't be able to play the great game of "Get The Yank Drunk" during our
visits to their wardrooms. g

Owl sends.
--

Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"Vegetarian (vej ' i târ ' ee en), n. Amerindian term meaning "lousy
hunter".


"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message
...
[rest snipped]

Is there any reason why a SUU23 gun pod wouldn't work on any Navy
aircraft weapons station that can take a MER?
Walt BJ

Slightly off track but consonant with earlier comments:
Ogden, Josephus Daniels did bad things to the Navy. No booze
(officially)is one item. The infamous Robert S MacNamara still rankles
me more than anyone in recent history. I was reading 'Yankee Station'
where the author was discussing RM and I suddenly became conscious my
jaw was aching. Then I discovered I was grinding my teeth at reading
the same complaints about RM, from a carrier pilot, that we had in the
USAF. What a jerk RM is.
Walt BJ

(Walt BJ) wrote:

Slightly off track but consonant with earlier comments:
Ogden, Josephus Daniels did bad things to the Navy. No booze
(officially)is one item. The infamous Robert S MacNamara still rankles
me more than anyone in recent history. I was reading 'Yankee Station'
where the author was discussing RM and I suddenly became conscious my
jaw was aching. Then I discovered I was grinding my teeth at reading
the same complaints about RM, from a carrier pilot, that we had in the
USAF. What a jerk RM is.

Oh, geez, how your sins live on!

It was a joke, Walt, a joke. With the point that *every* President,
starting with George Washington, has selected some stinkers as cabinet
members. Even if you limited it to SecDefs [or SecWar/SecNav in
pre-1947 days].

Let me state, for the record, gentlemen, that I am not now, nor have I
ever been, a member of the "We Love Robert S. McNamara" club. Not
now, not in 1961 when he was appointed, not in 1968 when he left.

I would want to point out that it wasn't all RM. A *lot* of people in
the White House, up to and including LBJ, took great delight and pride
in micromanaging the VN war, down to the grunt squad and section of
squadron aircraft levels at times.

OJ III

walt- Is there any reason why a SUU23 gun pod wouldn't work on any Navy
aircraft weapons station that can take a MER? BRBR

2000 pound item, poor reliability, worse boresighting. When I flew with them in
the 61st TFS, we said that they wouldn't even hit the nose gear if it were
down, they were so poorly boresighted and bent up.

But it should go onto any hardpoint that would take a dropable weapon, and some
SUU-23s were!!!

I would hope the military has a better pgun pod now.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer