A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WOW - Shots fired at skydiving plane in NY...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 10th 03, 03:20 AM
Buff5200
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default WOW - Shots fired at skydiving plane in NY...

I believe the "minigun" is the chopper door mounted version of the
electric gattling guns.

Arnold was hand holding one in "Predator" and "Terminator II".

The weapon that's as long as your aircraft, throws 6,000/min of death
is the Vulcan Cannon of A-10 Warthog fame.

A mini gun would be the perfect weapon to pod mount on a Cessna.

Roger Halstead wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:54:56 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:



"H. Adam Stevens" wrote:


if my Baron ever gets fixed I think some hard points and a mini gun are in
order


A mini-gun is about as long as my aircraft and weighs a good deal more than
my useful load. I'll settle for a couple of .30 calibers.



Yah, and a Baron wasn't meant for flying backwards.:-)) Those things
blow out over 17 KG of exhaust gas per second, throw out 600 slugs of
over 2# each and spill all that brass (aluminum now) per second.

They had to do a redesign as the early test version kept killing the
engines with the spend propellant gas.



A good craftsman doesn't need a sledgehammer to drive tacks.



I at least like the nail, or tack to stay in the same board.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)


George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel







  #2  
Old July 10th 03, 04:13 AM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Buff5200" wrote in message
...
I believe the "minigun" is the chopper door mounted version of the electric

gattling guns.

No, the Vulcan is a 20mm, the Minigun is .308 caliber.



  #3  
Old July 10th 03, 04:32 AM
Thomas J. Paladino Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I believe the "minigun" is the chopper door mounted version of the electric gattling guns.

Arnold was hand holding one in "Predator" and "Terminator II".

The weapon that's as long as your aircraft, throws 6,000/min of death
is the Vulcan Cannon of A-10 Warthog fame.

The Vulcan cannon is actually the single-barrel cannon on most fighter planes in the US asenal.

The A-10 uses the GAU-8 Avenger 30mm gatling cannon.


A mini gun would be the perfect weapon to pod mount on a Cessna.

Roger Halstead wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:54:56 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:

"H. Adam Stevens" wrote:
if my Baron ever gets fixed I think some hard points and a mini gun are in
order
A mini-gun is about as long as my aircraft and weighs a good deal more than
my useful load. I'll settle for a couple of .30 calibers.

Yah, and a Baron wasn't meant for flying backwards.:-)) Those things
blow out over 17 KG of exhaust gas per second, throw out 600 slugs of
over 2# each and spill all that brass (aluminum now) per second.

They had to do a redesign as the early test version kept killing the
engines with the spend propellant gas.

A good craftsman doesn't need a sledgehammer to drive tacks.

I at least like the nail, or tack to stay in the same board.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)
George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel



  #4  
Old July 10th 03, 05:20 AM
H. Adam Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

get over it
"Thomas J. Paladino Jr." wrote in message ...

I believe the "minigun" is the chopper door mounted version of the electric gattling guns.

Arnold was hand holding one in "Predator" and "Terminator II".

The weapon that's as long as your aircraft, throws 6,000/min of death
is the Vulcan Cannon of A-10 Warthog fame.

The Vulcan cannon is actually the single-barrel cannon on most fighter planes in the US asenal.

The A-10 uses the GAU-8 Avenger 30mm gatling cannon.


A mini gun would be the perfect weapon to pod mount on a Cessna.

Roger Halstead wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:54:56 -0400, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:

"H. Adam Stevens" wrote:
if my Baron ever gets fixed I think some hard points and a mini gun are in
order
A mini-gun is about as long as my aircraft and weighs a good deal more than
my useful load. I'll settle for a couple of .30 calibers.

Yah, and a Baron wasn't meant for flying backwards.:-)) Those things
blow out over 17 KG of exhaust gas per second, throw out 600 slugs of
over 2# each and spill all that brass (aluminum now) per second.

They had to do a redesign as the early test version kept killing the
engines with the spend propellant gas.

A good craftsman doesn't need a sledgehammer to drive tacks.

I at least like the nail, or tack to stay in the same board.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)
George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel



  #5  
Old July 10th 03, 03:51 PM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bob Chilcoat wrote:

Not to mention that the 850-lb recoil thrust would stop that Maul cold in a
few seconds. Can you say "Stall Warning!"?


Ok, I admit to not paying attention, but didn't some thread state that thrust
and horsepower are equivalent? Or a 2/1 ratio? Something like that.

I have a 160 hp engine. I'd be moving backwards shortly after hitting the
trigger.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel
  #6  
Old July 10th 03, 05:27 PM
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pacplyer

One of my last missions in VN. Could hear the super sonic crack of the
bullets going by my bird and saw where they came from so 'zap'.

Had another earlier occasion with 'troops in contact' and an Army
chopper called "Andy" (my call sign) "your taking a lot of ground fire
on the east end of your orbit".This was massed ground fire (every one
firing their rifle) which was tactic the VC started using '67-'68. We
(Air Force) decimated (destroyed) a VC battalion which had been giving
the sector a lot of trouble for years.

Was a war we won every place but in the media.

Big John
Point of the sword




On 9 Jul 2003 00:33:51 -0700, (pac plyer) wrote:

Big John wrote in message . ..
The last time I got shot at I put four 500 pounders on the S-O-B.

Big John



Good for you John, I'll bet they didn't whine much to the liberal
press about annoying aircraft orbits in their area after that. ;-)

Love it!

pacplyer


  #7  
Old July 10th 03, 07:02 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
Ok, I admit to not paying attention, but didn't some thread state that

thrust
and horsepower are equivalent? Or a 2/1 ratio? Something like that.


Nope. Or rather, if some thread did say that, it wasn't correct.

There's no single ratio to convert thrust to horsepower. You need to take
into account the aircraft's speed as well.

I have a 160 hp engine. I'd be moving backwards shortly after hitting the
trigger.


Well, regardless of the conversion, a 850 pound recoil thrust would
certainly hurt your airspeed. Hard to say exactly how much, since it would
depend on how long that 850 pounds of thrust was acting on the airframe.

Seems to me that there's a pretty good chance the force would just tear the
gun from the airframe, or break the airframe. Assuming a structure strong
enough to withstand it, you might find you can't take off with your 160hp
engine.

However you slice it, there's problems afoot with the plan.

Pete


  #8  
Old July 10th 03, 07:57 PM
Bob Chilcoat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I came up with the 850 lb from (probably defective) memory. I worked it out
once based on muzzle velocity, firing rate (6,000 rpm) and bullet mass, to
see if Arnold or Jesse could actually hold and fire a minigun hand held. I
think I ignored propellant mass. IIRC the number was 850 lb. The number
that's more interesting (and accurate because it's quoted in a book I have)
is for the 30 mm Avenger gun in the A-10. That one produces 9,000 lb of
thrust at its maximum rate of 4,200 rpm, which effectively cancels out one
engine! I was thinking about a movie plot once where someone would mount an
Avenger gun in a full sized van (rigidly, firing forward) to use for some
nefarious purpose. Unfortunately, if the van plus gun weighed 9,000 lb, the
acceleration would be - 1 g backwards. Might be a problem...

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
Ok, I admit to not paying attention, but didn't some thread state that

thrust
and horsepower are equivalent? Or a 2/1 ratio? Something like that.


Nope. Or rather, if some thread did say that, it wasn't correct.

There's no single ratio to convert thrust to horsepower. You need to take
into account the aircraft's speed as well.

I have a 160 hp engine. I'd be moving backwards shortly after hitting

the
trigger.


Well, regardless of the conversion, a 850 pound recoil thrust would
certainly hurt your airspeed. Hard to say exactly how much, since it

would
depend on how long that 850 pounds of thrust was acting on the airframe.

Seems to me that there's a pretty good chance the force would just tear

the
gun from the airframe, or break the airframe. Assuming a structure strong
enough to withstand it, you might find you can't take off with your 160hp
engine.

However you slice it, there's problems afoot with the plan.

Pete




  #9  
Old July 10th 03, 08:52 PM
John Galban
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bob Chilcoat" wrote in message ...
Not to mention that the 850-lb recoil thrust would stop that Maul cold in a
few seconds. Can you say "Stall Warning!"?

I'd recommend the XM214 for a Maul. It generates around 250 lb.
recoil at top speed (10,000 rounds/min), but can be quite managable at
lower firing rates. 1,000 rounds/min is only 25 lb. of recoil. The
whole package, including ammo, weighs about 90 lbs.

http://members.shaw.ca/stanryker/tes...t01minigun.htm

Can you say "Very interesting 337"?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)
  #10  
Old July 11th 03, 12:13 AM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



John Galban wrote:

1,000 rounds/min is only 25 lb. of recoil. The
whole package, including ammo, weighs about 90 lbs.


Only 90 pounds? I WANT ONE!!!!!

Pull the rear doors off, mount it sideways in the back, and call me Spooky!

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ Dr. Guenther Eichhorn Aerobatics 0 February 1st 04 08:27 AM
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ Dr. Guenther Eichhorn Aerobatics 0 December 1st 03 07:27 AM
First US Plane fired on? TooPlaneCrazy7 Military Aviation 5 November 16th 03 11:54 AM
Conspiracy Theorists (amusing) Grantland Military Aviation 1 October 2nd 03 12:17 AM
A Good Story Badwater Bill Home Built 15 September 3rd 03 03:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.