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

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...
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!


Think that's cool? Check this out : http://www.saracen.org/

They build these locally. It's pretty amazing to see in action. The
minigun is stowed in the back. When trouble strikes, the sunroof
opens and the minigun is deployed via a scissor-type mount. Just the
thing to get you through that morning rush hour traffic.

The last test I saw, that minigun destroyed 3 cars in about 10 seconds

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

In article , Peter Duniho
writes

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.

What is needed to assess that effect better is
1. The mass of each shell
2. The muzzle velocity
3. Rate of fire
4. Time for shell to accelerate down the barrel and/or effective
muzzle length.

Rapid but short applications of force might shake the airframe violently
rather than stop it in mid air. 3000 ft/sec in 5 ft might only take less
than .007 secs.

As long as the weapon is rigidly fixed to the airframe it is the
momentum change that the airframe feels in terms of velocity.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
David Francis E-Mail reply to
-----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/arm/arm8.htm


You are correct, the GAU-8 is the weapon on the A-10.

However, the Vulcan IS a gattling gun originally used on F-15, F-16,
B-52, ect


Thomas J. Paladino Jr. wrote:




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.

pac plyer

Nope. Was FAC (Air Commander) that day marking targets for the fast
movers. I was low and slow (peddling as fast as I could G), they
were both high and low but fast. My primary job was Director of II
DASC at Pleiku but was able to sneak away and get lots of missions
during the year. When paper work was done I could fly (over 300 hours
with over 200 missions).

Night TET started (1968) I was able to get airborne and provided
control for strike A/C the rest of the night. Left aircraft lights off
on take-off due to firing around the airport and across the runway.
They turned R/W lights on at my call and off as soon as I reported
airborne (lots of tracers but nothing close as they couldn't see me,
just hear engines). Morning fog moved in and had used all of my gas.
Finally found a 'sucker hole' and dropped through and landed with dry
tanks. All in a days work.

The little choppers were like water bugs, flitting all over the place
and right down on the tree tops. Lost a lot way they were operated
(probably hit with rocks or bow and arrow). They operated in pairs a
lot. One would fly low and troll for enemy fire and the other would
stay high in case #1 got shot down. Pretty high risk missions but not
as bad as Air Force and Navy up north.
..
Big John
Point of the sword


On 12 Jul 2003 00:17:08 -0700, (pac plyer) wrote:

----clip----

Glad you made it back in one peice. My neighbor lost a number of
pals in his unit that flew Hughes 500's for spotting. There's a sight
on the net he showed me comemorating the missions. You must of been
flying something really hot like huns or thuds huh?

----clip

Big John,

Did you ever sit on your helment or a frying pan or anything... seems
like to me (having only experienced it on the silver screen) that
controlling could've been one of the most hazardous missions cuz
you're just milling around in orbits waiting for Charlie to pump
something your way.

Enjoy reading your stuff. Keep those hairy tales comming.

pacplyer
baa baa, err, I mean
"wolf wolf" cargo dog

Big John wrote
Some of the war stories get a way off thread. Probably should find a
place where they are told as lots here probably don't like???


Pac sez,

Naw... don't worry about that. The subject was Shots fired at
airplanes..so you're spot on. besides... I suspect if it's that
annoying somebody will say something... Even my Usenet nemesis get
quiet when I tell a tale or two. I interpret that silence as nothing
but acceptance and admiration: LOL! ;-)

The other sight on google: aviation.stories is moderated by a moron.
He only posts a few stories a year and allows left wing political
tripe and dead links to sit displayed forever.... so I say: it's
better in the unmoderated real world.

Since you're a nice guy John, and have considered this for others, I
could recommend a suggestion: the convention was used over at RAH
that when someone goes a little off-topic they post a new thread and
in the title somewhere put "zzzzzzzZZZ" to denote this is about the
infamous Captain Zoom, which most readers are unfamiliar with, and may
not want to read. So maybe we could put in there some where "War
Story" or "warS" or something?

What say you all?

pacplyer
champion of off-topic war stories