Future military fighters and guns - yes or no ?

On the contrary...I don't believe "modern fighters" need a gun..is that
putting it better...however, the A-10 is classified as an "attack" a/c...and
before retrofits, it's primary weapon was the gun...could use it remarkable
well...and with more variety of PGU 30mm ammunitions than that available to
F-16's or F-15s...bottom line, the A-10 was design to use its gun on a daily
basis...the F boys weren't.

--
Pup
USAF, Retired
Go #88 UPS Racing, Detroit Red Wings,
Ohio State Buckeyes
__________________

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Puppinator" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Puppinator" wrote in message
...

Ok, let me explain a little deeper...the A-10 is the only on
currently
full
up operational that needs a gun....as it is it's primary weapon.

It is? Not from what I have heard about A-10 operations. The Maverick,
along
with various bombs (guided and dumb) seem to be its primary armament,
and
the gun is secondary.

I only know this from working 6 years on the A-10 and it's initial
primary
mission: CAS....but since the A-10 has been multi-roled, those lines
have
blurred. Initially, it was the gun for CAS/Tank Killer roles.

I am getting the distinct impression you are not going to back off from
the
various incorrect assertions you have made in this thread (to wit: only
the
A-10 needs a gun and it's primary weapon is the gun, can't do CAS from
10K,
failure to recognize that even the F-16 has indeed engaged in strafe
operations during both ODS and OEF, etc.). C'est la vie.

Brooks


--
Pup
USAF, Retired
Go #88 UPS Racing, Detroit Red Wings,
Ohio State Buckeyes
__________________